Michael (of Bernicia) Waugh, UK bankster-buster

[longdog]

The guy is so fundamentally dishonest it's hard to tell what is and is not based in some sort of reality.

[John Uskglass]

Remember how he to claimed documents not served on his on his missus

Reading the transcript from the hearing, it was Waugh's father who put forward that argument. Waugh junior was not actually a party to the case, although one could be forgiven for not realising that given the way he has sought to present it subsequently.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2117.html

44 & 45

However, speaking of spouses, this may be relevant to current matters or may be coincidence.

Waugh's original, now deleted, post regarding his daughter was made on 3 October. On 10 October, a woman who had been a director of Waugh's AFP company resigned, having been in post since 2016. She was also a co-director with Waugh of a now dissolved company, BTC Portfolio, which was registered to an address in Newcastle, which she also gave as her address. This address was also given by Waugh when AFP was set up.

Streetview shows the property as having a similar appearance to the property where Waugh filmed his 'Dystopian Homesteader' video in June, and the satellite view shows similar garden features and footprint.

I've kept the details vague so as not to doxx her, but all this is publicly available if you look for it.

[SpearGrass]

If Waugh doesn't have parental responsibility for the child, he isn't automatically a party to care proceedings. That would arise if he wasn't married or civil partnered to the mother and isn't named on the birth certificate or has otherwise gained parental responsibility under the Children Act. Given Waugh's record of complying with legal requirements, that's quite likely.

The court could subsequently join him as a party and normally should. However he would have to engage with the proceedings for the court to do that. Given Waugh's record of complying ....

If he's married to the mother, he's a party whether he likes it or not. The court can revoke a father's party status only in extreme circumstances (e.g. the child in the proceedings was 13, and wanted nothing to do with father after he'd raped her), but such cases are very rare.

Legal denialists will often deny that the proceedings are valid and therefore they can't be a party to them (e.g. Hannah Badr). But such denials don't change the legal position.

Of course it could be that these aren't care proceedings, but normally parents with parental responsibility are parties to anything involving their children. The trouble is that trying to determine reality through the fog of Waugh's account is probably doomed to failure.

[aesmith]

I've just noticed that he emailed out his initial post about his child, now removed from his website. On 4th October he emailed an update, claiming he'd got his £25k in donations. Or maybe £25.00 since he wrote lower case letter "o"s, not zeroes. Either way the very very totally best KC should have been roaring into action by now.

In just one day, we hit the target of £25,ooo, to pay the costs of hiring the very best KC
...
Therefore, all being well, the very best KC available should be appointed within the next 24-48 hours and then the application can be filed without any further delay.

[longdog]

I think the chances of him raising £25,000 from his followers is between slim and none.

[John Uskglass]

I think the chances of him raising £25,000 from his followers is between slim and none.

Unless one of them is a Mr V Putin of Moscow

[hucknallred]

Waugh's AFP company

I notice there is still a £4,000,000+ hole in the latest accounts.

[longdog]

I see the great man has posted a poem to his daughter.

To save you the trouble I can summarise it in one word... 'Vogon'.

[John Uskglass]

I see the great man has posted a poem to his daughter.

To save you the trouble I can summarise it in one word... 'Vogon'.

More William McGonagall. I'd say:

Spending every day in your company has always been a tremendous hoot,
So thank God you were home-schooled, from the day you were bald as a coot.

The fact that it is accompanied by a photo of her, and her name is given feels like skating on thin ice, but even if it is lawful, it can't be the act of a responsible parent, especially if you take Waugh's claims about how he's targeted by Dark Forces at face value.

[longdog]

McGonagal was better than that.

To be fair even Wordsworth could come out with some hysterically bad poetry when he'd been giving the laudanum a bashing... Or smoking daffodils or whatever it was the frilly-shirted ponce was up to ...

This Thorn you on your left espy;
And to the left, three yards beyond,
You see a little muddy Pond
Of water, never dry;
I've measured it from side to side:
'Tis three feet long, and two feet wide.

[hucknallred]

The fact that it is accompanied by a photo of her, and her name is given feels like skating on thin ice, but even if it is lawful, it can't be the act of a responsible parent, especially if you take Waugh's claims about how he's targeted by Dark Forces at face value.

I know we should only deal in facts on here & not speculate..... But, given the info on the AFP Ltd directorship, the fact he said this has caused a separation from Mrs. O'B & that he always puts a very dubious spin on all his tales, I think we can whittle it down to Mrs O'B having had enough of his antics has upped & left with the daughter, possibly due to SS sniffing around.

[John Uskglass]

I think we can whittle it down to Mrs O'B having had enough of his antics has upped & left with the daughter, possibly due to SS sniffing around.

I suspect that strictly speaking there isn't a Mrs O'B. After all if you won't recognise the state's authority and therefore you don't register your child's birth, why would you get married?

As Speargrass pointed out:

If Waugh doesn't have parental responsibility for the child, he isn't automatically a party to care proceedings. That would arise if he wasn't married or civil partnered to the mother and isn't named on the birth certificate or has otherwise gained parental responsibility under the Children Act.

Who among us can say hand on heart that they don't feel even a bit of schadenfreude at the idea that Waugh's posturing may have well and truly bitten him on the arse?

Tempered, of course, with the acknowledgement that there's a child involved who, what ever the rights and wrongs, is going through a difficult time.

[John Uskglass]

He's back on TwitX, but just reposting stuff from O'Dearme/Rogue Male.

Nothing new on his website.

His 'comedy club' seems to have died.

[hucknallred]

More very dubious ramblings on his daughter situation, it seems clear the mother has some access and he doesn't. Also a very dubious tale of how he got her a passport.

https://www.thebernician.net/superior-g ... -the-state

Wayback link as he'll inevitably delete it

https://web.archive.org/web/20231207174 ... the-state/

Superior Guardianship Rights Belong To Parents Not The State
A little over thirteen years ago, for the purposes of not allowing the state any possibility of making a claim that it has jurisdiction to interfere in the life of my newly born daughter, I created an administrative process that established by declaration that her mother and I were in possession of Superior Guardianship Rights, which were bestowed upon us by the Creator of All That Is at the moment of conception.

When the process was served upon the Registrar of Births & Deaths for Newcastle City Council, they initially attempted to pretend that the declaration was of no consequence and that the mother of every child, whether she is married to the father or not, is always legally obliged to register the birth of their child.

Moreover, the Registrar also took the position, as did social services and the Family Court, that the father only has parental rights if they are registered as such on a birth certificate.

Nevertheless, I gave the Registrar the opportunity to prove that the Creator did not bestow upon us Superior Guardianship Rights in a Notice of Conditional Acceptance, which also promised that birth registration would transpire in the event Newcastle City Council could demonstrate that to do so would be of tangible benefit to my daughter.

Abject Failure To Rebut
Needless to say to those who have followed this story since it began in the spring of 2010, when I documented the process as it happened upon various forums and my old website, freetheplanet.net, the Registrar did not have a hope of rebutting the Declaration of Superior Guardianship Rights and instead elected to threaten us with legal proceedings if we continued our refusal to register the birth of our daughter.

However, the unreasonable threat was entirely without any substantive argument and merely focused on the purported disadvantages they alleged my daughter would experience if her birth wasn’t registered.

Namely, that she would not be eligible for a free state education, free medical care, state benefits or a passport. Whilst I realize that not everybody would be able to so this, we stated clearly that we did not see any tangible benefits for our daughter in accepting those badly disguised offers of state interference in her life.

Passport Application
Nevertheless, within just a few weeks of her birth, I filled out a passport application for her, formally naming myself as her father but without enclosing a birth certificate.

Initially, the application was refused, on the somewhat predictable and spurious ground that no passport could be issued without a birth certificate for my daughter being supplied to the Passport Office.

However, undeterred as I tend to be in such circumstances, I telephoned the manager of Durham Passport Office and explained to her my daughter was automatically entitled to a passport by virtue of being born to British parents, each of whom were in possession of British passports which proved this was true.

Timeout At Durham Passport Office

Sounding more than a little perplexed by this proposition, the manager told me that she would have to take legal advice before responding but she promised to get back to me at the earliest opportunity.

Shortly afterwards, she was true to her word and called me back to confirm that the passport could be issued if I provided her with the following items:

My daughter’s NHS number, which was issued upon her C-section birth in the RVI maternity wing.
A letter for the family doctor, confirming that she was indeed born on a certain date, at a certain place and that she was living at the family home.
Passport Issued, Precedent Set

Once I’d obtained the letter from our local GP, who was more than happy to assist, the items were dispatched to the manager of Durham Passport Office and my daughter’s first passport was issued.

I knew from the outset of creating the administrative process used to establish Superior Guardianship Rights that it had the potential to prevent children being unlawfully taken into care and to have them returned to their parents if they are taken.

However, I honestly never even imagined a scenario in which I had any chance of losing custody of my beloved daughter, with whom I have spent more time than any other living soul, having been a stay at home Dad from the day this world was blessed with her delightful presence.

Nevertheless, thirteen years later, my daughter was taken unlawfully from my custody by social workers and police officers, who relied upon demonstrably false and malicious allegations against me to do so, without establishing that my daughter was at significant risk of serious harm, which renders taking her from my custody entirely unlawful.

Almost three calendar months since my daughter being denied any form of contact with her father, for the purposes of preventing me from taking sole custody, I have news of significant progress to report.

Court & SS Implicitly Recognise MOB’s Superior Guardianship Rights

Both the court and social services have implicitly recognised my God-given Superior Guardianship Rights by eventually acquiescing to my unequivocal parental right to see the court papers, without being registered as father or being made a party to the proceedings.

This historic and unprecedented result concurrently means that there’s nothing preventing my daughter from returning to my custody in our new home on the North-East coast before Christmas.

It also emphatically affirms that she should never have been taken from my protection and care in the first place, as I have been arguing from the outset, yet I am still being denied all forms of contact with her.

Another Message For My Daughter
Therefore, with lawful excuse, until unrestricted contact is resumed, I will continue to communicate with her publicly on this blog.

Hello Ren,

It’s been three months since I had any direct contact with you and the only consolation is that our separation is now on the brink of coming to an abrupt end.

That’s right, my lovely, the court and the social workers have finally been forced to concede, albeit through gritted teeth, that I have the right to see all the court papers and to apply to have the Interim Care Order set aside – an application which will be filed within the next three days, so you should expect the unexpected.

Thus far, they have done all they can to prevent me from seeing a copy of that order because they already know that I need it to make the application to set it aside and return you to my care in our new family home.

In other words, Ren, I’m excited beyond measure to tell you that I have now established beyond doubt that you should never have been taken from my custody in the first place and there is no legal impediment preventing you from returning to my custody at the earliest opportunity.

Until that joyous day when we are reunited and I give you the biggest hug this world has ever seen, to make up for all the hugs we’ve missed over the past twelve weeks, never forget how much I love you and that there is nothing I wouldn’t do to make sure you live the life you were born to live.

Love,

Dad X

[John Uskglass]

This historic and unprecedented result concurrently means that there’s nothing preventing my daughter from returning to my custody in our new home on the North-East coast before Christmas.

And thereby hangs a tale,one suspects...

The address he was previously associated with has not gone on the market.

Presumably he expects his acolytes to have forgotten that on 5 November he told them:

Moreover, the court and social services have no evidence justifying keeping my daughter in care and my legal team is confident I will obtain custody within the next 4 weeks at the latest.

[longdog]

He's still choosing to make the whole thing about him, him and him isn't he?

This all starting to look like a very ordinary but messy divorce or whatever the equivalent is for unmarried couples. If I were to make a very wild guess I'd say the relationship has broken down and O'Bonkers is just being a dick about it hence the involvement of social services. It's notable that in this post there's effectively no mention of the mother. A bag of gravel, ten kindness credits and whatever Re I have left say the mother now has full custody.

[Albert Haddock]

By addendum to above, I have just serendipitously noted another case involving Mortgage Five Zero. Significantly, this dates back to June 2018, and MFZ have remained involved throughout the disastrous litigation. Their "client" Mr Kehinde Odukoya has lost his family home, and earned an ECRO.

https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk ... h/2023/441

Being the cause of several people getting CROs seems to be the only thing at which Mortgage Five Zero is successful.

Another ECRO for the pile. Mr Jason Campbell's numerous attempts at "Waugh-Law" have been laughed out of court:

47. According to the Skeleton Argument of Mr Jason Campbell, filed with the Bundle lodged at Court on 15 September, the essential point relied on is again that the decision in the Helden case is wrong or can in some way be distinguished and marginalised. The point seems to be that the Company should not have been forced out of business by an incorrect decision of the Court of Appeal which will be shown to be wrong if it can only be revisited. Thus at para. 9 of his Skeleton Argument, Mr Campbell says: “Delays in receiving justice is not down to the Company, instead a judgment in the Court of Appeal that misinterprets the law.”

48. This submission is misconceived and must be rejected. To put it bluntly, the law on the point is what the Court of Appeal has said it is. The Company’s continued operation cannot be justified on the basis that a decision of the Court of Appeal is wrong. There is no reason whatever to doubt the decision in Helden and it must be accepted as correct, and a business whose function is to exploit the contrary proposition, and to provide false hope to vulnerable consumers who are already likely to be in financial difficulty, is plainly not in the public interest. That is what Deputy ICC Judge Agnello thought and she was obviously correct in her assessment.

49. I conclude that the proposed appeal has no real prospect of success and that there is no other compelling reason why the appeal should proceed. The Company’s application for permission to appeal is therefore dismissed. I certify it as totally without merit.

.......

67. The upshot is that I have no doubt that an ECRO should be made against Mr Jason Campbell. The overall pattern could not be clearer: the many applications referenced above and in the attached Annex all show that he is incapable of taking no for an answer, when it comes to the Company’s misguided argument based on s. 2 of the 1989 Act. I will impose an ECRO on him for the maximum period of three years. To the extent necessary I will join Mr Campbell as a party to Appeal CH-2023-000093 for the purpose of doing so.

https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk ... /2023/2654

Another one here: https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2023/3087.html

[John Uskglass]

Another case summary!

This relates to Rosie Copeland, who you may recall Waugh cheering from the sidelines as she 'repossessed' a property in Bury St Edmunds which was fraudulently stolen from her by the evil banksters and corrupt courts.

We'd actually had mention of her case before, as for part of the long and involved proceedings, she was assisted by her sister, Elizabeth Watson, previously mentioned in dispatches.

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2020/1441.html

viewtopic.php?p=284860#p284860

Replies to Waugh's tweets suggest things have not gone well for Ms Copeland.

https://nitter.net/tarynabell/status/17 ... 93137145#m

Listing from the auctioneers.

https://online.auctionhouse.co.uk/lot/details/108838

Note Following the property being taken into possession on the 15th of November 2023 the Seller has advised that there have been two successful break in attempts from the evictee, which included a group of 15 to 20 people. Subsequently the property is now being guarded by four security guards, CCTV and shuttering.

[longdog]

In reply and on the second day of the hearing, she referred to the domineering nature of her sister which was a contributory factor to her stress, and that she took over completely and wrote the letter of 5th August 2018. She referred to her bullying nature over a long time even to the extent of physical abuse at home. None of this was set out in evidence on 1st November 2018 or in evidence since then or even in submissions in opening the appeal.

Ouch!

[John Uskglass]

The wheels of justice ground extraordinarily slowly in this case!

The central point is that the respondent did not receive the monthly payments due under the 59 Southgate Street mortgage. The mortgage has not been paid for the last 12½ years.