Random Freemanesque Babblings II: Back to the Futile

[TheRambler]

What is especially funny about that stop was he clearly had a driving licence and insurance so he wasn't fully committed to the FotLer cause.

You have to start somewhere!

TheRambler

[Burnaby49]

If he had only used the correct form of words, the police would of course have backed down.

TheRambler

Did he accidentally create joinder?

He will have been thoroughly debriefed by his “friend” on the errors he made. The law will also have been thoroughly explained reasons reasons that they can’t make him pay for the return of his car personal conveyance. All he has to do is send this letter (handwritten & wet ink signature) and it will be delivered to him pulled by pink unicorns.

TheRambler

I have been looking around a few FMOTL haunts hoping to find comment on the “incident”. So far there doesn’t seem to have been any reaction.

Please try to use the appropriate terminology. Correct word usage is critical in legal matters. The proper sovereign term for a "car" or "personal conveyance" is an "ecclesiastical pursuit chariot".

viewtopic.php?p=272024#p272024

[Hercule Parrot]

Please try to use the appropriate terminology. Correct word usage is critical in legal matters. The proper sovereign term for a "car" or "personal conveyance" is an "ecclesiastical pursuit chariot".

I demand a like button!

[John Uskglass]

From a Guardian report about controversy surrounding Neil Oliver's show on GB News.

On the same show, one of Oliver’s guests was a man called William Keyte, introduced as a “constitutional expert”, who is a supporter of a fringe campaign group called the New Chartist Movement.

Keyte’s focus is on the supposed primacy of common law over parliament, which has no crossover with antisemitic ideas.

However, the New Chartist Movement website contains articles written by other members and contributors that contain antisemitic-linked ideas. It also features pieces written by David Icke, the TV presenter-turned conspiracy theorist who has claimed that a shadowy cabal controls the world, a familiar antisemitic argument.

Other articles on the New Chartist website include one arguing that the “corporate and banking Deep State, completely supported by the Zionist state of Israel” plans to take control of UK politics, another antisemitic notion. Another argues that the “House of Rothschild” has a pivotal role in world affairs.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2023/ ... y-theories

New Chartist Movement site

https://www.newchartistmovement.org.uk/

[YiamCross]

I'm posting this here as peacekeepers.org.uk has been mentioned in this thread a few months back but I suspect they may be worth a thread of their own.

Their YouTube channel is quite busy though I could only be bothered to listen to a little of this nonsense



which is part 2 of yet another claim that the council tax is a fraud or illegal or some such.

I paused long enough to warn someone who says in the comments that they've cancelled their council tax DD that they could end up losing their house and to reinstate payments ASAP.

Of course the rabble roused and demanded I provide proof as my claim has that burden yet somehow theirs doesn't. I suspect payments will not be resumed and things will get more desperate over the coming weeks and months.

Apparently they have had a victory in court though, surprisingly, no details were given.

They seem to be a part of the increasingly popular belief that equitable law trumps all and equitable law says they don't have to pay. Simple, really. There's a lot of it about but these equitable law practitioners keep their heads down with NDAs to protect their money-grabbing scams and their failures rarely see the light of day. Not like the good old days where they paraded their greedy stupidity in public which is a shame for us as entertainment and as a warning for future victims.

[John Uskglass]

Apparently they have had a victory in court though, surprisingly, no details were given.

To be fair, on the Peace Keepers website, they do provide documentary evidence that Liverpool Council withdrew a Council Tax court case on being presented with the PK's arguments.

https://peacekeepers.org.uk/council-tax ... 22-update/

However, the disputed amount was a whole £15.56, which puts a rather different perspective on things. Presumably the rest of the bill was actually paid. From what I can gather, I suspect the council didn't have a procedure in place to deal with arguments over the legitimacy of CT, and effectively ignored the defendant in the hope he'd go away.

[TheRambler]

Apparently they have had a victory in court though, surprisingly, no details were given.

However, the disputed amount was a whole £15.56, which puts a rather different perspective on things. Presumably the rest of the bill was actually paid. From what I can gather, I suspect the council didn't have a procedure in place to deal with arguments over the legitimacy of CT, and effectively ignored the defendant in the hope he'd go away.

Rather suspect that this was classed as a trivial amount and it was not in the public interest to pursue it. Someone made a pragmatic decision, just don’t bank on getting away with it again.

TheRambler

[AnOwlCalledSage]

Rather suspect that this was classed as a trivial amount and it was not in the public interest to pursue it. Someone made a pragmatic decision, just don’t bank on getting away with it again.

Not going to doxx myself, but I did have something to do with local government finance. These things are both true.

1) A council had a legal obligation to chase every penny of council tax non-payment.
2) Council's also have budgeted a non-collection rate.

A good collection rate is 95%+. In a town/city of 75,000 people 3,750 people are going to "get away with it". This does not mean that there is a legitimate legal reason for non-payment. More of a "can't be arsed"!

[TheRambler]

1) A council had a legal obligation to chase every penny of council tax non-payment.
2) Council's also have budgeted a non-collection rate.

A good collection rate is 95%+. In a town/city of 75,000 people 3,750 people are going to "get away with it". This does not mean that there is a legitimate legal reason for non-payment. More of a "can't be arsed"!

There’s the problem of separating the can’t pay from the won’t pay. Frequently not straightforward as the former can be prey for the

bad actors

. You have to first ask the question; how much worse off will the council be if we pursue the debt? A lot of the time it comes down to picking the least worst option.

TheRambler

[AnOwlCalledSage]

There’s the problem of separating the can’t pay from the won’t pay.

County courts take into account the "can't pays". Strange how the "won't pays" (like EWE's client Michelle Davies) tend to end up in crank corner.

[ArthurWankspittle]

It will cost more than £15 just for a solicitor to look at the paperwork, so not surprising it was dropped.
I'll have to check but I think CT is the anomaly in law as it is the only debt dealt with by Magistrates Court. The "can't pay" v "won't pay" will be decided there and the county court will be used by debt collectors to chase the debt after the Local Authority has passed it on.

[John Uskglass]

I can't help thinking that Liverpool may have unwittingly committed a strategic error on this. I can understand why they may have dropped the case as not worth it for fifteen quid, but they've inadvertently provided 'proof' that the arguments set out in Marc Horn's case work.

Baron Ward's 'victory' is still convincing people that he was right, after all, and Horn's case is superficially more convincing.

Contrast Liverpool's approach with that of the council responses helpfully collated by the Peacekeepers (as previously noted), which directly address FMOTL type arguments and dismiss them in no uncertain terms.
https://peacekeepers.org.uk/council-ta ... responses/

Unfortunately a naïve and/or desperate individual looking at the material presented by the PK on their site is likely to be fooled into thinking they've found a magic bullet. While we may not have much sympathy for them, if numbers of people go down this route, there will be additional burdens placed on local authorities and courts, both of which are struggling as it is.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

While we may not have much sympathy for them, if numbers of people go down this route, there will be additional burdens placed on local authorities and courts, both of which are struggling as it is.

Whilst you are correct in terms of immediate recovery, one of the things they don't tell their dupes is that monthly council tax is paid in arrears. The whole bill is payable in April. A failure to pay in year one will result in losing you the right to pay in instalments. This will quickly negate any "win" and end up in far more serious consequences. A Success!!1 is usually a Pyrrhic victory and the year 2 legal action a slam dunk in the courts.

[SpearGrass]

I'll have to check but I think CT is the anomaly in law as it is the only debt dealt with by Magistrates Court.

No, magistrates' courts deal with a lot of different types of debt. Mostly council tax, obviously, but also child support, and any sum stated in statute or regulations to be "enforceable summarily as a civil debt". There are over 200 different types of those proceedings, including most costs orders. We're talking close to 5 million cases a year. In comparison, the case load of everything else (i.e. crime, other civil proceedings, family proceedings, and tribunals) is about 3 million.

[SpearGrass]

And some debt is dealt with by magistrates' courts in their criminal jurisdiction: non payment of motor tax, television licence, tube and train fare.

[aesmith]

Meanwhile back on the gas/electricity meter swapping scam, some of the victims who've paid out real money to get their meters swapped are finding it catching up with them. On one of the Telegram groups there are at least two who've had the road dug up and their services disconnected. Of course they present themselves as "fighting against the something or other" rather than "freeloaders trying to get stuff for free". I don't know how many have been disconnected, one post suggested around 20, but there are at least enough Octopus customers (or ex-customers) for them to want to start a class action. From the original post in the "let's sue Octopus" group ..

A vulnerable woman has today been subjected to a unlawful disconnection from outside her property. Agents from Haste Ltd claimed the meters (which were located outside the property) were unsafe. They did not inspect the meters and the woman offered National Grid engineers to inspect her instillation for safety but her offer was refused.

National Grid UK informed the woman that energy broker Octopus Energy has instructed them to disconnect from the road and falsely claimed there were serious safety issues.

What are Ofgem doing about these rogue agents who are abusing the most vulnerable people in society? Absolutely nothing…

These companies are acting above the law and if Ofgem are not stopping them then we must conclude that they are condoning their actions…

I must add that the woman had sent notices and informed of meter changes.

This particular lady has a Go Fund Me asking people to pay for her to be reconnected. It's doing quite well ..
https://www.gofundme.com/f/fighting-gre ... -companies

One of the others was kind enough to put up all the paperwork, court orders granting warrants through to the reports detailing "unregistered meter removed" and services disconnected.

[mufc1959]

I see on her Go Fund Me page no mention is made of her having replaced her meters with ones bought on eBay and installed by a bloke someone knows from down the pub. Instead she says:

this time last year I took a stand against corrupt greedy energy companies as I realised how they amass huge wealth on the backs of decent hard working men and women.
My sense of justice drove me to action , I stopped all payment until they could prove to me that they provide energy….they could not.

[AnOwlCalledSage]

The ridiculous thing is that the UK has quite robust protection for people who "can't pay, no really we can't pay" and genuinely vulnerable households, as the recent British Gas furore showed.

What it doesn't allow is tampering with meters by illegal engineers.

[aesmith]

Latest nonsense, they're claiming this is all the fault if their Supplier for not explaining the "correct" way to fit your own meter.

It is clear to see that a massive failing of energy brokers to their customers is the lack of information they provide regarding the rights and regulations to domestic customers relating to owning their own meters.

When customers have informed brokers of meter changes the brokers have failed to provide them with the current requirements for meter ownership or provided them with any alternative dispute resolution in writing regarding the meter changes before applying for warrants.

The burden falls on the broker to ensure that their customers are made aware of any regulations they expect to be complied with before they engage in legal action.

This simple action would prevent hefty court, warrant and reconnection fees which the customer ends up having to pay.

[hucknallred]

What are Ofgem doing about these rogue agents who are abusing the most vulnerable people in society? Absolutely nothing…

They want to complain to Ofgem about their illegal meters & freeloading??