Michael (of Bernicia) Waugh, UK bankster-buster

[TheNewSaint]

How's he even getting bookings or reservations at this point?

[Arthur Rubin]

You can see the masses racing to book their tickets for the latest round of TGBMS cinema screenings on May 3 at the following link.

https://www.ourscreen.com/profile/anarcho-film

With 3 days to go (tickets need to be booked by the 28th April).

Venue Attending Still needed

Islington 14 32
Streatham 4 29
Belfast 10 50
Birmingham 4 34
Manchester 4 43
Liverpool 4 32
Cardiff already cancelled
Glasgow already cancelled

I can't find the number attending on the website, but Belfast still needed is down to 34.

[aesmith]

All canned, not enough ticket sales for any of them.

[NYGman]

I guess after talking about it so much, people realized it is all BS, and didn't bother to buy a ticket....

[aesmith]

On the other hand a different link shows it going ahead in Belfast .. https://www.ourscreen.com/screening/48332 and yet another shows more slots with a week or so to run .. https://www.ourscreen.com/film/the-grea ... ge-swindle

Pretty amazing if 58 people have paid for Belfast, when none of the other showed more than 5 or so sold.

[John Uskglass]

Strangely, although it says that 58 people are going, if you click through to 'Whose Going' there are only a dozen names.

https://www.ourscreen.com/screening/48332

I suppose they may have bought multiple tickets, but I suspect some sort of glitch.

[aesmith]

I see that random third parties can create their own screenings. For example picking a random city, cinema and date it advises me that at least 71 seats will need to be sold at a price of £4.99 each. Doesn't sound a great idea, with no commitment apparently needed from the person sponsoring the screening.

[notorial dissent]

I keep wondering if he gave it away for free on the innerwebs if he'd get any more takers?

[aesmith]

More of the same although referring to Northern Ireland this time ...
https://www.facebook.com/michael.oberni ... 4750416751

Seems the magic bullet is still something to do with deeds ..

You should have seen the look on the face of one of the spies when we presented the little-known NI equivalent of section 1 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, which renders every mortgage deed void and illegal in the absence of the signature being properly witnessed.

Hope everyone's signed up to the bandwagon ..

The Next Steps PDF download is currently being finalized and will be sent to everybody on the TGBMS Mailing List as soon as it is available, which, with a fair wind, should transpire this coming week.

[TheNewSaint]

The Next Steps PDF download is currently being finalized and will be sent to everybody on the TGBMS Mailing List as soon as it is available, which, with a fair wind, should transpire this coming week.

If his audience can be asked to book a movie a week in advance with no commitment that it will be shown, I guess they can also wait 10-14 days for a PDF file consisting of things HE wants THEM to do.

[Gregg]

Hasn't some court somewhere agreed that indeed a signature must be dated to be valid, but also found that the remey for ones missing said date is to have someone add it?

[longdog]

Hasn't some court somewhere agreed that indeed a signature must be dated to be valid, but also found that the remey for ones missing said date is to have someone add it?

I think that's pretty much the general attitude that the courts take towards minor procedural, typographic or clerical errors in the civil sphere.

In FootlerLand an error on the part of a bank in getting a mortgage borrower to sign the paperwork means a free house for the lucky punter. In the real world a judge would just say "Sign it or I'll sign it or your behalf".

[Burnaby49]

In FootlerLand an error on the part of a bank in getting a mortgage borrower to sign the paperwork means a free house for the lucky punter. In the real world a judge would just say "Sign it or I'll sign it or your behalf".

Here in Canada it's a very common belief amongst sovereigns that if they refuse to plead at trial, either guilty or not guilty, the court has to let them go. Sadly for that belief judges have statutory authority to make a not guilty plea on a defendant's behalf when they refuse to plea. But they stil keep trying.

[grixit]

[Gregg]

Well, everything except expert common law internet legal advice.

[aesmith]

Hasn't some court somewhere agreed that indeed a signature must be dated to be valid, but also found that the remey for ones missing said date is to have someone add it?

He seems to be punting two arguments here, one is that if the deed isn't witnessed it's not valid. That will be very very unusual as the standard documents all have the witness section. His own was an anomaly, and as you say the court corrected the issue and found the loan agreement still to be effective. The other argument is to do with dates, since the mortgage deed is signed and witnessed prior to the actual transfer of ownership. So it's either dated at a time that the borrower does not own the property, or the date is added later. I'm sure that's been through the courts probably more than once, but I don't know the actual cases.

[Footloose52]

Hasn't some court somewhere agreed that indeed a signature must be dated to be valid, but also found that the remey for ones missing said date is to have someone add it?

He seems to be punting two arguments here, one is that if the deed isn't witnessed it's not valid. That will be very very unusual as the standard documents all have the witness section. His own was an anomaly, and as you say the court corrected the issue and found the loan agreement still to be effective. The other argument is to do with dates, since the mortgage deed is signed and witnessed prior to the actual transfer of ownership. So it's either dated at a time that the borrower does not own the property, or the date is added later. I'm sure that's been through the courts probably more than once, but I don't know the actual cases.

All the mortgage deeds I've been involved with in the UK banking system which related to the primary mortgage were completed undated, sent to the solicitors dealing with the purchase and then dated on purchase completion. Second or subsequent mortgage deeds were dated the day they were signed.

[notorial dissent]

Hasn't some court somewhere agreed that indeed a signature must be dated to be valid, but also found that the remey for ones missing said date is to have someone add it?

I think that's pretty much the general attitude that the courts take towards minor procedural, typographic or clerical errors in the civil sphere.

In FootlerLand an error on the part of a bank in getting a mortgage borrower to sign the paperwork means a free house for the lucky punter. In the real world a judge would just say "Sign it or I'll sign it or your behalf".

In the US, there is almost certainly a clause tucked away in every mortgage/loan/DOT/deed called errors and omissions or something to that effect, basically to the effect that if there is an error or omission in the document(s) that the bank/lender has the right to correct it. It is supposed to be explained at the closing, and it certainly was at every one I attended, and as I recall there was something that was initialed saying we had been so advised. I can't believe that the UK is deficient in this little CYA addition to their documents.

[longdog]

The other argument is to do with dates, since the mortgage deed is signed and witnessed prior to the actual transfer of ownership. So it's either dated at a time that the borrower does not own the property, or the date is added later. I'm sure that's been through the courts probably more than once, but I don't know the actual cases.

I'm pretty sure I've seen this come up as one of those hopeless "I want a free house" applications to the ombudsman where it was explained to the applicant that the document clearly said it only came into effect once the sale had gone through.

It's hardly unusual for written, signed and dated contracts only to come into effect once everybody had done all the things the contact was an agreement to do... That's rather the whole point of a contract... "I agree to to give sum A to person B when they deliver item C."

[notorial dissent]

In the US, at least on real estate purchases, there is a rescission period, which means x number of days, 3 or 5 I don't remember which now, during which you can change your mind, if you don't, then the money becomes real and the agreement becomes affective. Otherwise, just so much waste paper. Also, there are deeds that don't come in to effect unless a string of events happen or don't happen. I 'm sure that historically similar things can be found in the UK.