... has (apparently) moved inexorably closer by one small step ...
thanks to the works of those dedicated to protect themselves, and
The ramifications of this apply to virtually everyone.
I've sent out e-mails before about the "Registration Gap argument"
which ... fundamentally by pointing one Statute against another ...
results in the pure Common Sense argument that Banks & Financial
Institutions put 'the cart before the horse' when creating a
Which means that, in Law (AND in "Legal") every mortgage is
(And so it should be ... for the very simple reason that anyone with
a mortgage pays for the property - IN FULL - by means of the
Signature they make when establishing the mortgage. Yes ... I
know ... some people have a problem understanding that! But it's
absolutely true once you understand THE ILLUSION of 'money'!)
All arguments based on THE ILLUSION of 'money' have failed to
impress any Star Chamber so-called 'Judges' ... who see it as their
duty to uphold the (utterly corrupt) system ... thereby ensuring
that "civilisation doesn't fall apart" ... as if any UTTERLY CORRUPT
SYSTEM could ever be called "civilisation"!
"Civilisation" is actually the Non-Aggression Principle via The
But I digress.
Arguments appertaining to THE ILLUSION of 'money' have invariably
been 'bounced out of the Star Chamber' on the basis of "Having no
merit" ... their favourite window-dressing for "We can't
argue with you ... because we don't have any rebuttal ... just do
as your are told ... SLAVE!"
Then, unfortunately (for them) the "Registration Gap argument" came
to light. Which (in summary) says "There's no LAWFUL mortgage in
existence, until the Charge is registered at the Land Registry"
...and "Without a LAWFUL mortgage in existence, the Bank has no
right to lodge a Charge with the Land Registry"
A wonderful "Catch-22" ... if ever there was one!
Now ... you may say ... that it should be easy-peasy for 'Them' to
suitably adjust the wording, so as to remove the "Catch-22"?
Well ... no ... you see ... the problem is that the wording was VERY
CAREFULLY arranged in the first place ... and 'adjusting it' would
let far too many cats out of far too many bags.
And the point is that Appeals AGAINST granted Possession Orders ...
were lodged on the basis of the Registration Gap argument ... and
'They' suddenly discovered that these Appeals couldn't be dismissed
as "Having no merit". Simply because it was only necessary to
quote the wordings of two of 'Their' meat & drink Statutes back
And, not only that, it's now got to about 'one stage just below
Supreme Star Chamber level'. And is STILL being held as a
valid argument, 'to be resolved'.
Now ... Appeals are NEVER granted UNLESS there is a 'reasonable
prospect of success'.
And one of the most senior Civil Star Chamber so-called Judges has
pronounced on this issue ... which (in summary) can be stated as "Errrrr
... yes ... there is something to be resolved here!"
This puts all the 'lower level' Star Chamber PSYCHOPATHS in a bit of
a bind. 'Coz they dare not go against this Most Very Important
So-Called 'Judge'. (Apparently one of these plebs did try, and
'nothing was heard of him ... subsequently'! As in "Shut up
fuckwit ... you don't disagree with His Worship the Most Very
Important So-Called 'Judge'!!!").
Which means that now, anyone with a beef (i.e. so-called Possession
Order) can now quote this Most Very Important So-Called 'Judge', and
get an Appeal almost certainly granted ... well 'certainly granted'
is probably more likely ... since someone on this list did just that
today (on behalf of someone else) ... and will ... we
believe ... repeat that next week, in his own case.
Let's be crystal clear, here. If these Appeals go through VIRTUALLY
EVERY MORTGAGE IS NULL & VOID.
Which means that:
(a) You own your own home free & clear
(b) Everything you paid, in monthly payments, is owed back to
you PLUS interest (but that's 'taxable', of course!)
(c) Bayleafs will not have a lot to do, from then on ... and those
who engaged in 'violence' of any kind CAN be prosecuted for their
CRIMINAL ACTIONS ... because they will have had NO JUSTIFICATION whatsoever
for what they did (even though, in Law, they never had any
justification anyway ... by their own rules)
There was one more thing that has been discovered. Just about the
only thing (apart from the above) that can seem to overturn a
Possession Warrant is 'oppression'.
If you have been subjected to 'oppression', you can use that to
overturn such a Warrant.
In the case quoted, a Council Tenant was being evicted. He rung up
the Council to discuss it, and was told the person concerned was not
there, and would not be there the following day. He was evicted the
day after that. He won his Appeal on the basis of "Not being
given a reasonable chance to discuss, and thus - possibly -
avoid the Possession Warrant" ... and that was determined to
be 'oppression'. (Whoooaaa!!!)