the link.

Need help and support? Post here and we will do our best.

Re: the link.

Postby pedawson » Sun Jun 26, 2011 2:14 pm

awt wrote:i only posted here because i wanted some help. The section called Help Wanted drew me in.
Newmannewy states that none knows 100%.... Thats for sure!
My gripe is when some people "know what they know" and they are even prepared to make presentations,videos, dvds etc to get the word out to people, when questions are asked , for enquiries to be made, and proof asked for so that research can be redirected towards the target. proof in black and white is essential, so that people don`t end up in Court for "trying out a theory"

As i have said before i am bat and balling a bailif company again. I thought i had "won" some months ago when i billed them for admin and harrasment and they immediately sent the warrant back to the Court.
It may be an error on their behalf that they are back on my case. I reckon the may have bought a load of debts without first checking the names.
Although i am confident i shall pull through on this one and come out smelling of roses. But all i wanted is more ammo, just in case they have taken the case against me back on, after doing their home work by reading up on statutes etc.

shame no one could help out. all the best, alan: of the Turk family

Whoa! Whoa!
Hang on a minute, the guys on this forum are in the same boat as you they require information to get them through many situations and in some cases very little can be given as 'BLACK AND WHITE'.

When you started out on your quest against the bailiffs, you did so after doing your own research, I hope you didn't just take someone's word for it.
The statutes, although designed for the authorities state clearly what can and cannot be done. and in many cases supply remedy. If not all.

Debt is a classic, you cannot owe a debt twice. if the debt is paid it is extinguished. If someone buys something it comes with guarantees, debts are commodities. Contracts are NAILED and set in CONCRETE, every tiny detail is noted and if one signs the contract one agrees, however if one does not sign a contract one is NOT liable to the conditions in the contract.

BLACK AND WHITE. if you signed the document / contract that your debt would be sold then you are still liable, that is, to the original creditor, if however that creditor does a deal and settles your account, on their books, but give the purchaser a debt, the purchaser has bought a debt - it has nothing to do with you it is their purchase, Frankly I wouldn't purchase someone else's debt without asking the one that owes it if they would pay me back.
(contract)
All this IS in black and white and I am surprised you don't know this.

CONTRACT LAW - buy the book, it is too convoluted to just write in a FMOTL forum topic, we just pick the bits that are relevant to the point. And in your case it is the point that if you have a contract stick to it, or if you haven't a contract you don't need to comply to anything that the alleged contract stipulates.

Namaste, phil;
Don't be surprised to discover that luck favours those who are prepared
User avatar
pedawson
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: the link.

Postby newmannewy » Sun Jun 26, 2011 3:33 pm

[quote="pedawson"]
Debt is a classic, you cannot owe a debt twice. if the debt is paid it is extinguished.quote]

I been thinking about this.. If all money is debt - then how can we pay a debt with a debt ? A double negative :thinks: . Does the double negative go onto the national debt or something.. Where does it get settled if debt can not pay off a debt because it causes twice the debt.

If u have a hole and u attempt to fill the hole by digging out the same amount again u end up with a hole twice the size :thinks:
http://www.thebigwakeup.co.uk - My own personal site dedicated to helping newbies wake up and see the bigger picture.
Feel free to pass comment, point out my failings & or generally critisice - (It's a working progress)
newmannewy
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2010 2:25 pm

Re: the link.

Postby Freeman Stephen » Sun Jun 26, 2011 4:04 pm

still no mention of what is wanted in black and white or what will be acceptable as "proof" by the poster who has backed off without giving these after initially accusing some people of promoting falsehoods.
User avatar
Freeman Stephen
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:07 am

Re: the link.

Postby pedawson » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:07 pm

newmannewy wrote:
pedawson wrote:Debt is a classic, you cannot owe a debt twice. if the debt is paid it is extinguished.


I been thinking about this.. If all money is debt - then how can we pay a debt with a debt ? A double negative :thinks: . Does the double negative go onto the national debt or something.. Where does it get settled if debt can not pay off a debt because it causes twice the debt.

If u have a hole and u attempt to fill the hole by digging out the same amount again u end up with a hole twice the size :thinks:


It says 'DEBT' on the notes you use. 'I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of ...'
It is a promise to pay the receipt you have been given. Why would anyone 'promise to pay' if they already had done?
And what do they mean by 'POUND'?

If you spent more on goods than you earn and borrow more to buy more goods and pay the interest, wouldn't you want to borrow more to buy goods and pay the interest?
britain (not, Albion) is attempting to increase its revenue through what they call austerity measures; raising taxes, reduce spending etc. However this is NOT to reduce the debt we are in, it is to reduce the growth of the debt we will be in.
I call it bankruptcy, but this is a misnomer because countries cannot become bankrupt for obvious reasons - read that as you will.

There have been two noticeable 'bankruptcies', one just after the war; and South Africa delivered tons of gold for us to pay back debts and in 1974 (ish); remember we changed the currency, the old one was no longer viable. not that this is what they told us but no matter what is said it is true. The OLD currency was the world standard; much as the dollar is now, countries would only accept british currency. After 1974 countries would only accept dollar.

So the hole you talk about is getting bigger, we are further in debt than Greece, however we have the means to maintain it, for now. Our so called government are setting 'austerity' measures - DOES THE WORD 'AUSTERITY MEASURES' Ring any BELLS?
We are being TOLD, if we do not reduce the national debt, or as we are doing reduce the decline into further debt we will not get any further loans. Who is telling us this? IMF so the hole is being managed but is still getting deeper.

Just as a matter of interest, when you pay your council tax, or income tax YOU are putting more DEBT into the pot that the UK has to manage. If you were bankrupt, you would be lessening the countries deficit. By A4Ving you would be paying back and reducing the countries debt.

summing-up; to use DEBT notes means there is only debt to be traded and why is debt traded? Because we are in DEBT, we cannot pay our debts - you will receive a £20 (Debt NOTE) in return for a £20 (Debt NOTE) from the bank of england. In fact, I would discourage going to the bank of england to do this you will be asked to leave in no UNcertain terms. It has been done.

Namaste, phil;
Don't be surprised to discover that luck favours those who are prepared
User avatar
pedawson
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1124
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 6:17 pm

Re: the link.

Postby Freeman Stephen » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:41 pm

that whole pound thing is silver by weight of sterling quality. its in black and white in the book wealth of nations by adam smith - noted father of economics by the powers that be. you can also find evidence of treachory by the kings decree in the 1925 gold standard act. by then the debt in silver was made payable by an equivalent value of gold to ease trade with gold based currencies.
User avatar
Freeman Stephen
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:07 am

Re: the link.

Postby awt » Sun Jun 26, 2011 5:58 pm

yawn, yawn, bloody yawn...i`m in the know as far as i know.! i am a freeman and therefore am free.!
just tell me what i don`t know and then i will pass it onto all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

answer me this.....how come a bailif company "bit the bullet" sent the distress warrant back to the court, but then resent it to me.

Well they haven`t actually resent it as all i have is a NOTICE..........nothing wet signed.....just threats.

Why do you think they are coming at me again after i billed them last time for £62,900.
awt
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:36 pm

Re: the link.

Postby treeman » Sun Jun 26, 2011 6:05 pm

awt wrote:yawn, yawn, bloody yawn...i`m in the know as far as i know.! i am a freeman and therefore am free.!
just tell me what i don`t know and then i will pass it onto all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

answer me this.....how come a bailif company "bit the bullet" sent the distress warrant back to the court, but then resent it to me.

Well they haven`t actually resent it as all i have is a NOTICE..........nothing wet signed.....just threats.

Why do you think they are coming at me again after i billed them last time for £62,900.


Your attempt at baiting is becoming tiresome, either give more details of your claims or take your controversy elsewhere.
I'll make no subscription to their paradise.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted
User avatar
treeman
 
Posts: 2821
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: On the Land

Re: the link.

Postby awt » Sun Jun 26, 2011 6:21 pm

hi treeman , what claims of mine are you refering to?
awt
 
Posts: 26
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:36 pm

Re: the link.

Postby Freeman Stephen » Sun Jun 26, 2011 6:29 pm

:puzz:

that x y and z are lying to you about ?????

you want something in black and white you claim and if you read the thread its already established that you wont accept anything as proof. so where does this lead?
User avatar
Freeman Stephen
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1387
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 12:07 am

Re: the link.

Postby treeman » Sun Jun 26, 2011 6:36 pm

awt wrote:hi treeman , what claims of mine are you refering to?


You bring nothing to the table but demand to be fed.
I'll make no subscription to their paradise.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted
User avatar
treeman
 
Posts: 2821
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: On the Land

PreviousNext

Return to Help Wanted

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron