Edward William Ellis, Common Law QC

[aesmith]

EWE seems to think he's well and truly off the hook now, openly raising claims for his clients even for example in this child protection matter ...
https://equitygovernance.uk/wp-content/ ... 01-eng.pdf

[AnOwlCalledSage]

EWE seems to think he's well and truly off the hook now, openly raising claims for his clients even for example in this child protection matter ...

I think he is, hence my previous comment about Barnet Crown Court's reason for refusing his submission being wrong. His restraint order lapsed in February. He may be in contempt of his suspended sentence, but he is not breaching a GCRO/CRO. His contempt case and request for a larger more encompassing restraining order is not going to be heard until sometime later in April.

I don't want this to be interpreted as political but suspect the Attorney General is completely incompetent.

[Pottapaug1938]

EWE seems to think he's well and truly off the hook now, openly raising claims for his clients even for example in this child protection matter ...
https://equitygovernance.uk/wp-content/ ... 01-eng.pdf

I used Google Street View to check out EWE's address. I wonder if his flat is the one with the Union Jacks in the window....

[Hercule Parrot]

I don't want this to be interpreted as political but suspect the Attorney General is completely incompetent.

This happens again and again, with all of these fruitcakes. They're allowed to waste absurd amounts of scarce court capacity and force innocent others to spend money on legal advice & representation. E&W courts could learn a lot from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I don't want this to be interpreted as political but suspect the Attorney General is completely incompetent.

This happens again and again, with all of these fruitcakes. They're allowed to waste absurd amounts of scarce court capacity and force innocent others to spend money on legal advice & representation. E&W courts could learn a lot from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta.

It's not the court capacity that I'm thinking off. EWE was referred by the Court of Appeal to the AG in November for contempt. A cursory glance at the civil restraint order lists would have shown that his order was due to expire in February. This is not him wasting scare court capacity. It's pure incompetence on behalf of the AG, when she's not making up excuses for why her chums can break the law. The England and Wales court system is in disarray. It's not EWE causing it. He's just a symptom.

[Hercule Parrot]

It's not the court capacity that I'm thinking off. EWE was referred by the Court of Appeal to the AG in November for contempt. A cursory glance at the civil restraint order lists would have shown that his order was due to expire in February. This is not him wasting scare court capacity. It's pure incompetence on behalf of the AG, when she's not making up excuses for why her chums can break the law. The England and Wales court system is in disarray. It's not EWE causing it. He's just a symptom.

Perfectly fair point. As I approach retirement, it's shocking to reflect upon how the justice system has changed during my brief and inconsequential tenure. Although there have been many positive reforms to address discrimination and delay for example, and to give victims a degree of participation, the overwhelming theme has been devastating 'austerity' cuts. CPS, HMCTS and other services have lost 30-40% of their budgets. A real 'spending power' loss of 50-60% after accounting for inflation. As described superbly in The Secret Barrister's books, the impact of this is grave and pervasive.

But I will not excuse the judiciary from responsibility. They have a duty to protect and prioritise their court's resources in the public interest, even more so during scarcity, and a whole armoury of 'inherent jurisdiction' for that purpose. I believe that the Albertan approach was introduced to some extent because their own courts were overstretched and could no longer tolerate the costly antics of OPCA idiots.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

[longdog]

Eddie gets the brush off from The Court of Appeal who, I think it's fair to assume, are probably getting a bit fed up with his shit by now.

Dear Sir/Madam,

The Master of the Court has asked me to inform you of the following;

“Applications for permission to appeal and appeals must be commenced in the Court of Appeal by filing an appellant’s notice on form N161. Please find an appeal pack enclosed. You will also need to file a copy of the order that you are seeking to appeal, grounds of appeal and the issue fee or a completed application for fee remission.

Please note that only legal representatives may conduct litigation on behalf of another. If you do not have a legal representative you must correspond with the court and sign your own documents for filing.”

In other news... British Gas seem to have been perpetrating all manner of frauds too so he's jumped straight to applying for a contempt of court ruling before there's even a case.

https://equitygovernance.uk/wp-content/ ... 01-eng.pdf

It looks like a standard SNAFU by BG who do this sort of thing a lot. If he wasn't so delusional he'd do what I did when they were trying to bill my mother for gas she hadn't and couldn't have possibly used (she didn't have a gas supply). Simply say "I'll see you in court when you try to sue. Good luck with that".

[AnOwlCalledSage]

It would appear that rather than go on a speed awareness court, Mr Sood has followed the pied piper's tune into the magistrates court.

12th April Mr Sood tried the "no jurisdiction" approach to exceeding the speed limit by 8mph.
19th April Magistrates gave him 3 points, a fine, victim surcharge and costs.

[longdog]

Yes... Another victory....

Grateful Thanks to Citizen Mr Sood for use of the Excess Speed Fraud Appeals as Election Fairness Test Cases and his signature on one of them.

I see there are two new incomprehensible appeal documents screeds and I'm not sure if it's my imagination or not but they seem to becoming even more incomprehensible over time. I get the feeling that even Eddie is struggling to keep track of the way all of his 'cases' are intertwined.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

I see there are two new incomprehensible appeal documents screeds and I'm not sure if it's my imagination or not but they seem to becoming even more incomprehensible over time. I get the feeling that even Eddie is struggling to keep track of the way all of his 'cases' are intertwined.

But they are all intertwined.

The TL;DR is:

He's convinced the courts are corrupt. Every failure is proof that he is correct. Desperate people end up convinced by his legalistic gobbledegook, "provide" their cases as proof for an imaginary future Royal Commission Inquiry and falling for his assertion about them becoming protected witnesses/whistle-blowers by doing so.

What is different about Eddie from our usual Freemans (he's published enough to implicate himself as one) is that he doesn't appear to be grifting. He's entertaining us all for free!

[longdog]

I thought the Royal Commission already existed if only in the imaginations of Eddie, The Princess and possibly Lee Can't.

[MRN]

It looks like a standard SNAFU by BG who do this sort of thing a lot. If he wasn't so delusional he'd do what I did when they were trying to bill my mother for gas she hadn't and couldn't have possibly used (she didn't have a gas supply). Simply say "I'll see you in court when you try to sue. Good luck with that".

Horrible confession: that sort of thing (company SNAFUs in general, I did not read the specific complaint) is the closest I ever come to genuine sympathy with the SovCits.

Too many rounds dealing with companies whose "policy" is: "If you mess up, you owe us, with interest. If we mess up, you still owe us but if you spend a full day on the phone with us and do our billing department's job for them, we'll eventually refund you your original sum. The interest we made holding your money illicitly for six months is all ours".

I have a fairly good batting average due to having worked for many years as a customer service rep and thus having honed both I Used To Do Your Job, I Totally Get What You're Dealing With and Canadian Attack Politeness to fine and deadly points.

But still. When I consider how many less-confident or less-clued up people companies screw over because they simply have no business interest in NOT making errors that benefit them, the temptation to send them a letter that says "So it turns out that MY policy in these cases is to board, storm, and take no prisoners but a million smackers might cool my wrath" is sometimes nearly overwhelming.

[longdog]

Too many rounds dealing with companies whose "policy" is: "If you mess up, you owe us, with interest. If we mess up, you still owe us but if you spend a full day on the phone with us and do our billing department's job for them, we'll eventually refund you your original sum. The interest we made holding your money illicitly for six months is all ours".

This is why I don't pay bills by direct debit. I'd rather be in the position of them trying to get money out of me than me trying to get my money back off them.

I long since stopped getting into pointless 'computer says...' arguments with utilities etc about bills. If they fuck up and I know I'm right they get one phone call and a follow up letter. If I can't get through in under five minutes they just get a letter and the gist of it is "If you're 100% sure you are right, and you're not, you can sue me. If not you can get stuffed, I don't want to hear anything about it again and anything short of a summons will be ignored".

So far it has a 100% success rate.

[MRN]

Too many rounds dealing with companies whose "policy" is: "If you mess up, you owe us, with interest. If we mess up, you still owe us but if you spend a full day on the phone with us and do our billing department's job for them, we'll eventually refund you your original sum. The interest we made holding your money illicitly for six months is all ours".

This is why I don't pay bills by direct debit. I'd rather be in the position of them trying to get money out of me than me trying to get my money back off them.

Oh, absolutely, but then there was the time the car rental people charged us for insurance (on a LONG rental) when we had specifically and repeatedly declined it (due to having alternative cover).

Took me six months of calling them and repeating the same thing to get that money back, three months of which was after they said they'd refund us but before they actually did.

I am pretty sure the plan was to try to wait me out, and at some point they just realized that either they could repay us or me saying chirpily "Hi, I'm back again, let's just review the situation to date..." could become a permanent part of their Monday-morning routine, and suddenly "found" the problem. Which was that someone at the rental place had ticked the box for insurance and I can't prove this but it was NOT ticked when we accepted that car.

I felt pretty smug until I realised that at my normal hourly rate I was still behind the eight-ball on that one.

Anyway. This is off-topic except as an example of how sometimes I am abruptly reminded just how close I can mentally get to going full "But what if I DID make the rules, you sons of sea-cooks? What if we did this MY way and made it YOUR problem?"

I'd like to think I was never going to go in a sov-cit direction, but it does give me a bit of insight into how they keep finding victims...

[longdog]

Oh, absolutely, but then there was the time the car rental people charged us for insurance (on a LONG rental) when we had specifically and repeatedly declined it (due to having alternative cover).

Took me six months of calling them and repeating the same thing to get that money back, three months of which was after they said they'd refund us but before they actually did.

I am pretty sure the plan was to try to wait me out, and at some point they just realized that either they could repay us or me saying chirpily "Hi, I'm back again, let's just review the situation to date..." could become a permanent part of their Monday-morning routine, and suddenly "found" the problem. Which was that someone at the rental place had ticked the box for insurance and I can't prove this but it was NOT ticked when we accepted that car.

Something similar happened when I bought a car on credit and somebody ticked the 'yes' box for payment insurance after I had signed. It got resolved soon enough when I simply cancelled the direct debit after the first payment and told them they could either correct the (entirely accidental and not at all underhand) mistake or I'd take the car back and sue them.

After that I became somewhat paranoid and would write 'NO' next to a yes box for any of the unwanted extras on any forms. Ah... I can still remember those dim and distant days when I used to sign forms on.... What was it called? That thin, usually white stuff that's made from trees....

[longdog]

It's now been a full two weeks since Eddie's last post to his blog.

I wonder what's happened.

[hucknallred]

Get your claim in on the Dead Pool thread.
EWE or JP next?

[NYGman]

I have had EWE for the win for a while now. Seems to just outlive everyone though. I am betting he will be back.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

He took nearly a month's break a year ago. I suspect that if the cumulative effects of the warnings when he was ejected from court several times in February and March have made him a little more circumspect. Unlike a lot of the other idiots who follow his nonsense, he does know when to back away.

Unfortunately, unless he posts the date himself, the way that court listings go means that we will have only about 12 hours warning of his contempt hearing. I've been checking every day for the last month.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Given the poor man's health issues he could be plugged and plumbed in to a hospital bed and not able to communicate.