NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby IamallthatIam » Fri Jul 31, 2009 11:58 am

Lmao , on second thoughst i am not sure there's room for a broom handle seeing as they have all got there own heads up their arses anyway! :rotfl:
Invito beneficium non datur - A benefit is not conferred upon one against his consent.
I DO NOT offer legal advice
- "I just say what I say because everyone is entitled to my opinion!" -

- Saffi Elder (Aged 7)-
User avatar
IamallthatIam
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1044
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:36 am

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby MikeThomas » Fri Jul 31, 2009 12:32 pm

Angie, I stand corrected! :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
We are the people our parents told us NOT TO PLAY WITH
User avatar
MikeThomas
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Llanharan, South Wales

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby MikeThomas » Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:11 pm

Well, Ive almost come up with a serious letter for Bridgend Magistrates. Opinions and addendums please ASAP as I need to get this off tomorrow at the latest.

Here it is, for your perusal:

In care of:
XX, XXXXXXX XXXXX
Llanharan, Pontyclun
[Near] CF72 9PY
August 4th, 2009

Re: 620900439907 dated 24/07/09

NOTICE OF REAFFIRMATION OF LAWFUL ESTOPPEL

To:
David of the Richmond family
The Clerk to the Justices
Bridgend Magistrates Court
Sunnyside
Bridgend
CF31 4AJ

Dear Sir;

The enclosed paperwork was delivered to the address at which I dwell.

It was addressed in the name MR MICHAEL THOMAS

I have been led to believe this signifies that the paperwork was addressed to a legal fiction known as a PERSON, which is, in point of fact, the name of some CORPORATION, a matter I asked you to clarify in my Notice dated 7th July, 2009, and which you failed to address in time or in substance, thereby granting me Lawful Estoppel by Acquiesense.

It is My Understanding that it was lawful for me to send you the previous Notice.

It is My Understanding that I could and did provide, within that Notice, time for objections to be resolved honourably on both sides.

It is My Understanding that it is lawful for me to assume that, since you have not responded in substance (to the best of my knowledge) I have your tacit consent (by acquiescence) to the statements I made/Proofs I requested, which now stand as My Truth, in Law.

It is My Understanding that it is now possible for me to assume that, since the proper time for your objections has expired, I have gained a lawful estoppel by your acquiescence.

It is My Understanding that I have acted in honour at all times, since you have not objected to what I said.
It is My Understanding that it is now possible for me to point out that you must henceforth cease and desist from all and any activity regarding this current matter, or that any further communications from you will be considered to be unlawful harassment, and can be disregarded by My Self without dishonour.
We are the people our parents told us NOT TO PLAY WITH
User avatar
MikeThomas
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Llanharan, South Wales

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby huntingross » Tue Aug 04, 2009 12:58 pm

Hi Mike

Isn't tacit consent the same as acquiescence
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby MikeThomas » Tue Aug 04, 2009 1:08 pm

Yes, it is the same HR, but it sounds like I know what I'm doing(I hope!!)

Any ideas on attaching a 'fee schedule'?
We are the people our parents told us NOT TO PLAY WITH
User avatar
MikeThomas
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Llanharan, South Wales

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby Freeman-B » Tue Aug 04, 2009 6:04 pm

"Isn't tacit consent the same as acquiescence"

Not EXACTLY, as I understand it

"Tacit acceptance" may be implied by "acquiescence", but not vice versa. "Tacit acceptance" is the legal status of the matter AFTER "acquiescence", is it not?

:peace: :love:
B
He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice. Einstein
Banking doesn’t “involve” fraud...banking IS fraud. Tim Madden
Freeman-B
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:04 pm
Location: Scotland/France

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby Freeman-B » Tue Aug 04, 2009 7:48 pm

By the way, I meant to add Mike - apart from the name on the summons, there are numerous other issues, the address, the stipulation of a "vehicle" (I imagine you have a private conveyance) and the title of "Mr".

and get those NOTICES recognised in law ASAP - they will be what shows that THEY are in dishonour, not you

:peace: :love:
B
He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice. Einstein
Banking doesn’t “involve” fraud...banking IS fraud. Tim Madden
Freeman-B
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 455
Joined: Tue May 19, 2009 2:04 pm
Location: Scotland/France

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby MikeThomas » Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:14 am

Thanks Freeman B! As far as I'm concerned they are already in dis-honour by comitting fraud in their replys. I mean two letters that were obviously typed and sent out the same day! Do they think I came down with the last shower?

I shall send them my lastest Notice and work out a fee schedule and wait for them to ignore it or tell me that 'legal arguments' must be presented to the court. I seriously thinking of going to court on the 3rd September but I feel I may get angry and declare a 'state of war' between two soveriegns. Right now I'm quite prepared to go to jail, rather than cow down to these upstarts who's only purpose of being is to collect money for war criminals and a corrupt monarchy!
We are the people our parents told us NOT TO PLAY WITH
User avatar
MikeThomas
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Llanharan, South Wales

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby MikeThomas » Mon Aug 10, 2009 4:01 pm

Here's the final draft, going to the courts tomorrow:


Re: 620900439907 dated 24/07/09

NOTICE OF REAFFIRMATION OF LAWFUL ESTOPPEL

To:
David of the Richmond family
The Clerk to the Justices
Bridgend Magistrates Court
Sunnyside
Bridgend
CF31 4AJ

Dear Sir;

The enclosed paperwork was delivered to the address at which I dwell.

It was addressed in the name MR MICHAEL THOMAS

I have been led to believe this signifies that the paperwork was addressed to a legal fiction known as a PERSON, which is, in point of fact, the name of some CORPORATION, a matter I asked you to clarify in my Notice dated 7th July, 2009, and which you failed to address in time or in substance, thereby granting me Lawful Estoppel by Acquiescence.

It is My Understanding that it was lawful for me to send you the previous Notice.

It is My Understanding that I could and did provide, within that Notice, time for objections to be resolved honourably on both sides.

It is My Understanding that it is lawful for me to assume that, since you have not responded in substance (to the best of my knowledge) I have your tacit consent (by acquiescence) to the statements I made/Proofs I requested, which now stand as My Truth, in Law.

It is My Understanding that it is now possible for me to assume that, since the proper time for your objections has expired, I have gained a lawful estoppel by your acquiescence.

It is My Understanding that I have acted in honour at all times, since you have not objected to what I said.

It is My Understanding that it is now possible for me to point out that you must henceforth cease and desist from all and any activity regarding this current matter, or that any further communications from you will be considered to be unlawful harassment, and can be disregarded by My Self without dishonour. This will also activate the enclosed Fee Schedule.


"Bridgend Magistrates Court” is a private company, actively trading. As a sovereign Human Being I am not obliged to accept any services anyone or any company may offer, and I do not accept the services of your company. I am not obligated to accept the services of any Court for the simple reason that they are simply private companies, actively trading.


It seems you want me to contract with the court for the services of adjudication, and I do not consent to this.

I accept no benefits or privileges of the court. I waive all benefits and privileges of the court, and as a consideration I relieve the court from it’s duty to perform.

I hold you on your honour to place this notice, and my previous notices in the public realm and not in your private files. I also demand that you place these notices into the Magistrate’s or Judge’s evidence.

For your convenience, copies of all Notices are enclosed.


Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity,

Michael: of the Thomas family

WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved

Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely Michael: of the Thomas family, as commonly called





Fee Schedule

"Subsequent to the receipt of this letter you are hereby Noticed that any further letters I may need to send will be charged at £500 in gold/silver, per letter. This sum includes all perusal and research costs, and other sundry activities that may take up my time in order to formulate responses “



Any last minute tips/advice ?
We are the people our parents told us NOT TO PLAY WITH
User avatar
MikeThomas
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1640
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Llanharan, South Wales

Re: NEW 'HEARING' AFTER ESTOPPEL

Postby free_spirit » Mon Sep 14, 2009 9:44 am

Any further developements on this?

J
WAKE UP PEOPLE OR ELSE ON YOUR DEATH BED YOU WILL BE THINKING, WHAT THE F**K WAS ALL THAT ABOUT
User avatar
free_spirit
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 267
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 7:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Court summonses only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron