unable to verify your request for payment

[consumerpada]

Good question, and a good point, it was addressed to MY NAME ( the strawman). What does that tell us......

[huntingross]

Having just checked the forms, 4.1 definately is for companies....6.1 and 6.2 I'm a little hazy on....

Insolvency Act 1986

Form 4.1
S123 - "(1) A company is deemed unable to pay its debts—"
S222 - "(1) An unregistered company is deemed "

Form 6.1 and 6.2
S268 - It only mentions debtors

Ah....the Introductory text states

An Act to consolidate the enactments relating to company insolvency and winding up (including the winding up of companies that are not insolvent, and of unregistered companies); enactments relating to the insolvency and bankruptcy of individuals;

[consumerpada]

I got a reply from te court today, from what appear to be a miss (somebody)

It reads,

Dear sir,

Further to your letter dated 11 August 2009 a copy of which I have enclosed for easy reference.

If you wish to have the statatory demand set aside plase find enclosed the relevent Court forms to do so. There is no court fee to submit these forms to the court.

Please note this form needs to be sworn by a court Officer or a solicitors office.

Yours faithfully,

Enforcements and Bancruptcy section.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

My reply,

Dear Miss ( name)

Further to your letter dated the 14th August of which I have enclosed a copy.

It is NOT my intention to dishonor the court can you assure me that it is not your intention to dis-honour my family in this matter?

I have made my wishes perfectly clear. You are in receipt of my notice which now bears the court stamp. The notice was also sent via recorded post, there is no doubht that you have received it AND you have it in your possesion.

The notice I sent you was signed by my own hand and is sealed as the original document. IT IS A STATEMENT OF TRUTH, if then the court requires a special appearance from myself in order to validate the notice then the court is at liberty to request as such. If I were to attend court on the matter I would read the notice word for word, be very assured that the notice signifies my word.

I do not recognise your suggestion that I should now re-attend the matter and seek a THIRD party to somehow validate my own notice. If it needs to be attached to your paper work there is no reason why that can not be done in your office.

I am the author of the notice and it is I who can validate it should the court find that MY SEALED SIGNATURE is NOT good enough in this matter that relates to myself and my private business.

I do not intend to waste MORE time AND money dealing with a DEMAND from and fraudulent COMPANY. Especially when I HAVE ALREADY wasted much time and MONEY dealing with the same.

You appear to be asking me be to take further action when it is my wish to set this matter aside of which now you are fully aware.

You indicate that there is no charge to 'submit' the courts own paperwork back to itself thank you for that information, is it free the get a document sworn by a solicitor or by the courts?

If the original notice is not relayed to the judge or magistrate, be assured that I have recorded these communications, should I need to rely on them at a later date.

Please see that the notice is put on the judicial record. As is my wish.

For and on behalf of the family trust.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

more or less the get the drift...

[huntingross]

Spot on CP....they have this insistance that our 'truth' requires validation....I'm having a similar issue with the Clydesdale Bank.

[consumerpada]

any hoo...

I think I have a case of purjury before me, how can I prove it. ??? mm..

How to deal with a person who has no soul, through a 'natural human person' who happens to be working for the first person. Considering common law, keeping the peace. The company has no remorse, it's ruthless in it's intent to get to the 'money'. I still find it creepy though, that non-people have so much 'apparent' control over 'real humans'. It would quite literally take the food from your family dinner table, as you sat down to eat.

I first heard about creatures with no soul over 22 years ago, the were described as mud-flyers by the ancients of mexico. They latch on to you like leech.They are with you for life, sucking on you. Not only would they lie, but they would cheat and steal to get what they want - remember, we are not talking about natural people, we are talking about the COMPANY not the common men and women who work for them. (work FOR them)

How do you learn to 'see' these non-humans, what could we call them? in-organic visitors, financial predators, money-mosquitos, legal-leeches......call 'em what you like....

a. They only appear on paper.
b. They can only speak to you through an 'actual man or woman'
c. They can never sign their own name.
d. They can not swear an oath.
e. They can never make a speacial appearance in court.

Further to my conversation as above. With said unscrupulous company.

Letter:

Dear sir,

"We have retrieved original contract from the original creiditors archive, and verified it with our own in house solicitors. Please find enclosed"

...

They have sent 'printed' copies each page stamped by their 'in house' solicitors. " we hereby certify this is a true copy" (there are no credentials of the person signing each stamped page)

Still there is no invoice. Still no accounts of exchange.

Fistly. I don't accept nor will ever, copies verified by a companies 'in house' solicitors. Now that they have admitted to having the originals. I will offer at my own expense, no cost to them.

a. I visit to their offices, when I see the originals that they claim to have, I will consider them verified. OR

b. At my cost I nominate a third party to attend their offices and verify the originals. OR

c. A court hearing where (named individual man) presents the originals for verification OR

d. It's a straight case of lying, purjury, the letter the sent me is signed by hand, but it is the COMPANY initials (with a typed name of the person that made the mark.)

In any case I will also add, once the originals have been properly verified, I completly expect the remaining two requests to be fulfilled, that is an invoice and account.

I am simply operating in my own interests. Something that no other can do.

....these guys..jeesh.. can't turn your back on them for 10 milliseconds.....

[huntingross]

Indeed, turning your back is not to be recommended, but you do appear to be making progress CP.

[Freeman-B]

Class CP - if they wish to play then let them know that you intend to join the party!

Having just checked the forms, 4.1 definately is for companies....6.1 and 6.2 I'm a little hazy on...

Sorry to be a pain, but this is the "word" that most annoys me - "definately" - it is from the root "finite", therefore, "definite", how difficult is that?

Apologies for singling you out, it was not my intention, but why can't people simply check their splleing (intended!)


B

[consumerpada]

So as it goes, this company ( not their solicitors as promised) has ....claimed now...?? to have the originals from archive.....sent them to me stamped with 'in house solicitors.' signature on every page...

so I reply..

(Also I indicate that settlement can still be reached IF they disclose whats going on...a bit of fishing there)


........................................................................................>

Request for Original Documents

Dear A Smith,
(August 2009)

Thank you for retrieving the original agreements from your client. Unfortunately our terms and conditions do not allow us to accept the validation from your ‘in house solicitors’. Not only are they not independent but more importantly they have not been contracted by the trust

• I can personally verify the documents
• I can contract a third party to verify the documents


Once the documents have been properly verified, we can no more contend that the originals are not present.

However. If

You are still using ‘digital copies’ as originals then it is best that you disclose that now and we can negotiate a settlement asap.

We are familiar with the policies and practices of the financial industry and that generally the original documents are destroyed in favor of digital copies. May I remind you that no permission has been given to destroy the original documents, which are essentially the property of the ‘debtor’


me (august 2009) Authorized signature

..............................................................................................................

[the trojan]

yes
you are my hero this week,
you have a lovely manner

[consumerpada]

yes
you are my hero this week,
you have a lovely manner

thank you, you're too kind...