Ken Thompson - Film-maker to the SovCits

[notorial dissent]

A hard hitting factual documentary about the deception individual or families resident to the UK live under every day, from Corporate business, Government, and Law Enforcement within the program we question the oath Police officers and magistrates swore when they join the service, we show that its just a myth to get a fair and meaningful hearing at magistrates court.

FFS. It would help if he could at least write comprehensibly.

Still wouldn't make up for his overwhelming LACK OF TALENT.

[He Who Knows]

Ken Thompson wrote:
Asking for a friend ?
Is there any statute of limitation period
Police can attempt to prosecute on an
Alleged speeding ticket?

What's the betting that "a friend" is actually Ken?

[Siegfried Shrink]

Tell him not to worry about alledged tickets, it is the real ones that cost money.

[notorial dissent]

Tell him not to worry about alledged tickets, it is the real ones that cost money.

And that may get you thrown n jail if you don't pay them.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Ken Thompson wrote:
Asking for a friend ?
Is there any statute of limitation period
Police can attempt to prosecute on an
Alleged speeding ticket?

What's the betting that "a friend" is actually Ken?

He's a lazy bugger isn't he. A quick Google will tell him it's 6 months to lay the charge as it is for all summary offences... unless you've been lying about, say, who was driving in which case the CPS can fill their boots!

[He Who Knows]

Ken's up to more shenanigans - trying to catch out Interserve and the DVLA ...

Ken Thompson: Discovered yesterday the contractor Interserve used for the probation service use "Skype" phone numbers. No clear land line to connect them to a building

Bill Thompson: Do you have time to forward me the letters for the DVLA yet ken ?

Claire Thompson: Oh I've just had a Letter from the dvla no idea how to deal with it I'd really appreciate seeing your letter too if possible. Ate wanting a fortune for me as vehicle was allegedly spotted when sorned off the road

Bill Thompson: Never sorn a car by doing so you agree to there rules

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Claire Thompson: Oh I've just had a Letter from the dvla no idea how to deal with it I'd really appreciate seeing your letter too if possible. Ate wanting a fortune for me as vehicle was allegedly spotted when sorned off the road

Bill's not wrong this time! Never declare SORN, unless it is genuinely off the road. Driving after declaring SORN, carries a higher fine than simply driving without road tax

Driving Without Road Tax:
Fine up to £1,000 or 5 times the annual road tax fee, whichever is the greater amount. You may also be liable to pay back duty.

Using a Vehicle When Declared SORN:
Fine up to £2,500

If you don’t pay your fine on time your vehicle could be clamped or crushed, or your details passed to a debt collection agency.

[Siegfried Shrink]

If you don’t pay your fine on time your vehicle could be clamped or crushed,

I know what they are trying to say,(clamped and removed and possibly crushed if not reclaimed) but what happened to literacy?
As far as I know Russia is the only country where vehicles are actually picked up off the streets with a crushing grab and piled in the back of a lorry, presumably on the way to a scrap yard.

Why are all the people called Thompson? And how is it that all these fools say 'there' for 'their'?

[Pottapaug1938]

SORN? Whuzzat?

[SteveUK]

You're stating your car is no longer used on the public road, and as such, tax, insurance and the mot (annual safety check) are no longer needed.

[daltontrumbno]

SORN? Whuzzat?

Statutory Off Road Notification, Tells the DVLA that the car is not being used, so exempt from tax.

[Hercule Parrot]

To add to above, SORN is a splendid logic trap for scofflaws.

If you own a car in UK, you are required to pay road tax on it. And the tax payment system automatically checks online that the vehicle has current insurance and an MOT certificate of roadworthiness. Police now have thousands of ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) cameras, some at major junctions and others on mobile vehicles. Non-compliant cars will be stopped and seized, in addition to criminal charges.

So the dimwit solution is to SORN the vehicle. Then you don't need tax, insurance or MOT. Problem is, the ANPR cameras will still alert if the car is seen on a public road, with basically the same penalties. Some people try it anyway, and some get away with it for a while. If you're a hard to trace gypsy/traveler or an Eastern European visitor, it may be cheaper to pay occasional fines and lose occasional cars than to be legit. But for most people trying to evade the regulatory system will end badly.

[NYGman]

Then you don't need tax, insurance or MOT. Problem is, the ANPR cameras will still alert if the car is seen on a public road, with basically the same penalties. Some people try it anyway, and some get away with it for a while. If you're a hard to trace gypsy/traveler or an Eastern European visitor, it may be cheaper to pay occasional fines and lose occasional cars than to be legit. But for most people trying to evade the regulatory system will end badly.

From what I have heard, this is where cloned plates are used and I have been told that some are not even close to that of the original cars registration. Since camera ticket follow the licence plate, simply applying someone else's plate to your SORN car seems an easy way to evade the crusher. Unless you do something stupid and actually get pulled over. With more reliance on cameras and less on physical enforcement, and pulling over speeders, the odds reduce for being caught.

[Hercule Parrot]

From what I have heard, this is where cloned plates are used and I have been told that some are not even close to that of the original cars registration. Since camera ticket follow the licence plate, simply applying someone else's plate to your SORN car seems an easy way to evade the crusher. Unless you do something stupid and actually get pulled over. With more reliance on cameras and less on physical enforcement, and pulling over speeders, the odds reduce for being caught.

Yes, that's true. The scoundrels continue to find cracks in the system, and cloned plates are one such. But technology adapts too, and I'm told that networking of ANPR systems makes it increasingly likely that a cloned plate will be identified and stopped. It will never be entirely solved of course.

[hucknallred]

Another trend I've noticed in the UK is people not fitting the front number plate at all, it just sits on the dashboard.
Presumably the excuse if stopped is that it fell off...
However, I think this trend is employed by otherwise legal drivers/vehicles to avoid being flashed by speed cameras, or that other scourge of the UK, the private parking co. with their ANPR cameras at retails parks & supermarkets.

[Gregg]

As far as it goes, those caught deliberately cheating by using cloned plates should get swift and ruthless justice....cars got fake plates? Fine, the car is now property of the Crown,
"Thanks for the gift, Liz"

Car parked illegally with no front plate properly affixed, fine, subject to towing and you have to come both fix the plate but establish proper ownership, insurance, etc...as well as be made aware that the next time, its even more a pain in the ass.

Playing games with these cheap scofflaws only encourages them, its a play off the broken window theory.

[Siegfried Shrink]

I find the way police ignore mangled number plates that appear to spell a name rather irritating.

[TheHallouminati]

Here's Ken on Neelu Berry's FB telling "troll" Martin Jury he needs to follow the Rekha Patel case (he can't spell her name) to find answers about Neelu Berry.
He then puts Adam Mustafa right telling him about the fake paperwork, the "curupt land registries" and the impending legal challenge.
Wonder if Ken will be called as a witness in December, he's in court more times these days than Rekha Patel and Neelu Berry put together

Ken Thompson: It's clear you have not been following the Rehka Patel case

Adam Mustafa: https://youtu.be/biOI_gLpnSw

youtube.com
Extraordinary moment woman takes back home after eviction - Daily Mail

Adam Mustafa: Your right @Ken
The eviction order, which Miss Patel - a maths teacher at Glossopdale Community College - contends is not valid, was over a debt of £72,000 in legal fees and court costs which she refused to pay.

But Miss Patel, who was forced to move in with her parents in Stalybridge, has now fulfilled her promise to take back her beloved home.

She admits it was by force, and that police were called - but insists she is in the right.

She said: 'We got back in but someone called the police and they turned up.

'But I showed them all the documents to prove that I was the rightful owner and they wished me well and left.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Derbyshire-maths-teacher...

dailymail.co.uk|By Daily Mail
Defiant maths teacher breaks back into her OWN HOME after eviction

Ken Thompson: Where or who told you she has taken back ger house? I was until recently one of the directors of a company that owned the property. It now has been stollen even from our company via curupt land registries. There is clear proof it's illegal fake paperwork and a legal challenge is now taking place. But be under no illusion Rehka is NOT back in her home

Adam Mustafa: I couldn’t find any more information apart from what I’ve posted, it also mention about waiting for a hearing regarding the sale of the house

[TheHallouminati]

Ken's in trouble AGAIN

Ken Thompson - To give a Statement declaration (Stat Dec ) in a court do we first have to give an oath or swear on the bible ? To make it legitimate ?

Ian Surman - Yes I've done one you have to swear like giving evidence and it's under penalty of perjury

Ken Thompson - What if within the text it states it can be classed as perjury is that not different?

Ian Surman - Ken Thompson I don't think so can not sure what point you making elaborate aren't you saying the same as me

Ian Surman - Ken Thompson no Ken it's not different it's the same it will be in the text it will be on the document because you're swearing under oath under penalty of perjury so it needs to be on the document

Ken Thompson - Oooo ok

Ian Surman - Ken Thompson what's it for Ken if you don't mind me asking if you don't want to put it on here p. M. Me or if you don't want to tell me I'm quite happy with that

Ken Thompson - I'll pm you

[longdog]

Ken's in trouble AGAIN

Ken Thompson - To give a Statement declaration (Stat Dec ) in a court do we first have to give an oath or swear on the bible ? To make it legitimate ?
<snip>

And not one of them mentions affirming rather than swearing as has been a thing in English law since The Quakers Act of Sixteen Hundred and Bibbly Bib.