Academic paper: The Dead Sleep Quiet: History of the OPCA Phenomenon in Canada - Part II

[DNetolitzky]

Hi everyone,

I thought I would just drop a quick note that I have a new paper scheduled for publication in the Alberta Law Review in spring 2023. The article reviews what happened to the Canadian Detaxer and Freeman movements, post 2015. A preprint is available here:

https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... _-_Part_II

One thing I've stressed is the key role that Quatloos played in the downfall of the Freeman movement and its leaders, not to mention this is one of the few places one can find useful information and tracking, online, for pseudolaw stuff. That's another way of saying that putting together publications like this would be much, much more of a challenge if it were not for all your extremely useful (and snarky) information and commentary.

So thanks so much, and I hope you find the article interesting!

Donald Netolitky

[eric]

Just had a chance to skim over it quickly. Further incentive for me to make a post regarding Kevin Kumar's latest escapades where his business has transitioned from a real estate scam to a legal, but somewhat unethical, front man for non-traditional lenders for unsecured debt.

[Burnaby49]

A quick comment at midnight with a bottle of wine in me. Add to that that I'm only on page 14 and I'm your classic uninformed critic.

Donald writes;

"There is a Stargate near Hope, British Columbia"

Well, that's grand Donald, but precisely where "near Hope"? As a local I could, with a little more specific information, check it out in a pleasant summer day trip while hitting a few craft breweries in Chilliwack and Abbotsford with my drinking buddy. The information is rock-solid reliable since 'Spirit Warrior' Glenn Bogue himself confirmed its existence. But Hope is in the middle of a wilderness of forest and mountains. At my age I'm not up to tackling that without a GPS reference within a mile or two of a road and a pub.

[The Observer]

Just had a chance to skim over it quickly. Further incentive for me to make a post regarding Kevin Kumar's latest escapades where his business has transitioned from a real estate scam to a legal, but somewhat unethical, front man for non-traditional lenders for unsecured debt.

I checked out his United We Stand People site and I think he is pursuing illegal activity. One link is for "How to Pursue Your Birth Certificate Bond" and how this gives you a "share" in the Corporation of Canada. Another link purports to advise how your loan debts are a fraud perpetrated on you by lenders who "sold" your debt and still are collecting from you. The website offers "assistance" from their "agents" who will help you confront lenders and collection agents. Nothing new under the sun here in terms of what Kumar is peddling - but I think it crosses the line from being just unethical to fraudulent and illegal.

[eric]

To be honest with you I believe that Kumar's latest business venture uses all that United We Stand stuff simply as a marketing tool and spread his whacky theories. He's an arrogant SOB out to make money and there's not much money to be made from the poor souls who are in hock up to their eyeballs. I will get into it in detail on Monday (or whenever the rain starts so I can't work outside) but here is how he makes his ill gotten gains. The unsecured loan business is largely unregulated in Canada, so long as it's not a payday loan, the principal before administration fees is less than 10 K$, just keep your APR below 35% and you're good to go. At that rate, on a five year loan, the lender in less than three years has made the principal back. Therefore they are very amenable to lump sum payments of less than the principal after a couple of years to settle the debt, ignoring all this "proof of ownership" birth certificate securitization theory. Kumar gives me the name of the borrower, I buy the debt at 50% or so of the principal, flip some cash back to Kumar as an "administration fee", and the original borrower makes payments to me, but with a new, lower principal. I've seen it in practice, I paid out one of these loans for a person where the original lender accepted less than 50% of a three thousand dollar loan principal after three years. It's all perfectly legal, somewhat unethical, but it's hard to make a claim of predatory lending practices stand up in court. Will post links to appropriate videos by Kumar's son outlining the theory as I get to it.