Subject: General Rebuttal Letter
From: Veronica
Date: 17/3/14 4:38 pm
To: undisclosed-recipients:;

Folks,

I'll be sending a separate e-mail about the events in Crown Court last Friday morning.

However, one of the things I created over the weekend (in Derby) ... was another version of a rebuttal letter to 'most things' ... e.g. Penalty Charge Notices, etc. etc. etc.

I referred to it during my Presentation in Milton Keynes, on Sunday.

I offered to send a copy out to anyone who requested it, so I attach it to this e-mail.

As usual, it does not delve into any 'specifics' ... but simply rebuts (just about any circumstance) based on the Bill of Rights 1689.

I was asked if it had 'some kind of track record'.

Well, one answer is that "It could probably be taken as a 'condensation' of the arguments I used in my 'Council Tax Saga'".

Of course, the other answer is that "The point is bleeding obvious!". Particularly since it contains a quotation from information readily available on the Government Legislation Website.

I suggest it is used as it stands ... in other words:

1. You need to put 'an address' at the top, just in case they send you a letter 'admitting it was a mistake'. (Let's face it ... they can get your address from the DVLA at the click of a mouse).

2. DON'T wet signature it! Simply send it back PRINTED "Peaceful Inhabitant" or "Man/Woman of Peace".

3. Place their address at the bottom ... to signify they are 'below' you.

4. Whatever they initially respond will be Robotic Statements of Statutory Bollox (RSSB). The first time you could respond by saying:

Dear Sirs,

I write in reference to your letter of the <date> which comprised nothing other than Robotic Statements of Statutory Bollox (hereinafter referred to as RSSB).

In honour (in order to retain clean hands) I am extending your period of grace, and giving you one last chance to sign the Affidavit, which I enclose - in case you mislaid the original.

You now have seven (7) days to either sign it or to admit your mistake in writing.


Yours sincerely ... etc ... as before

And let's see what happens!

Oh ... by way ... the FIRST time this "Affidavit" technique was used ... 'They' won in the end ... BUT ONLY BECAUSE THE CAR IN QUESTION WAS A COMPANY CAR! The Company paid ... and then deducted it from the Employee's salary.

If it had been a private car, 'They' would have been well and truly fucked (I assure you). (It went to 3 letters back & forth before they wrote to the Company ... in desperation!)

Vxxx