Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby Slartibartfast » Sun May 17, 2015 2:27 pm

And so I felt it was time for another safari, penetrating deep into the uncharted wilderness of Sovereign Citizen and Freeman-On-The-Land ideas. This trip has been remarkable - I found an astonishing ceremony being enacted in a digital jungle clearing, which I was able to observe and record in my anthropological notebook.

Firstly, let me set the scene. Most readers will be familiar with the concept of an endowment mortgage. The borrower pays 'interest only' on the capital sum, but also makes monthly payments into a parallel investment which is designed to pay off the capital sum at the end. Many endowment arrangements proved over-optimistic, and it's quite common for there to be some shortfall.

In the episode I now present, the scenario is worse. The borrower hasn't been paying into the endowment at all, and now owes the whole capital sum as he approaches retirement. Rather splendidly, this chap has become the mascot of a multi-tribal coalition which believes variously that banks are evil, UK banknotes are worthless, mortgages are legally unenforceable, the UK is controlled by Jews and/or Freemasons, and above all that nice old chaps shouldn't have to pay back what they borrowed.

And so, when the bailiffs arrived to take his house (after following the correct and lengthy legal processes for several years), a huge crowd of natives assembled to protest this (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2704178/). The nasty cruel bailiffs retreated, but will inevitably come back another day in greater force.

As mentioned, the borrower has become something of a celebrity for the anti's, and so he is being advised by a remarkable collective of "OPCA gurus" (http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/20 ... qb571.html). It would take too long to list them, and break the no-names rule, but my studies indicate that practically every barrackroom lawyer, mentalist and woo-vendor in the UK is now coaching the borrower. As a result his behaviour is becoming markedly strange.

The borrower's final straw of hope was an application for leave to appeal, heard on 1st May (http://www.itv.com/news/central/2015-05 ... -his-home/). This was a rowdy scene, as the tribes came to the court in their colourful ceremonial robes and chanted powerful incantations. A few days later, and the judgement was sent out to the parties. The borrower had unfortunately been unsuccessful. Very sad for him, but it would've made a mockery of all contract law to allow him to 'deny the debt and keep the house'. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-no ... e-32742884)

And so to the scene I observed. Colleagues, I am at a loss to explain this. I rubbed my eyes. The borrower and his friends declared that the judgement had been misunderstood by the media, and was in fact an immense victory for him. They said that the press were deliberately or stupidly misrepresenting it. Stung by this, the local newspaper went so far as to publish extracts of the judgement -

"The points made by Mr C are either without foundation or legally misconceived. Factual assertions about changing the terms of the mortgage are misplaced... The legal challenges raised are misconceived. Permission to appeal is refused. The suspension of execution of the warrant for possession (of his home) is lifted. Mr C was offered the means to repay capital by way of a repayment mortgage, but refused. Although this case is unique to Mr C it is sadly one of many similar cases with which courts deal all the time. It raises no new point of principle."
http://www.nottinghampost.com/Tom-Crawf ... story.html

And now the borrower and his advisors have gone further, explaining that the judgement should not be read literally. It is, they say, written in a special coded language called "legalese" in which words do not have their ordinary meaning. The leading OPCA guru (a legendary bankrupt vexatious ligitant) has kindly 'translated' the judgement and advised that it actually means that the borrower can 'deny the debt and keep the house'. (http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... 60&t=86092)

And so a great celebration was held, with much dancing and rejoicing. Some members of the tribe timorously asked how "Permission to appeal is refused" could be a victory, but they were sternly reminded of their tribal oath of loyalty -

Why on earth would you ask a question like that? I have not had sight of the judgment. T and G have. I repeat. If they are happy, so am I. I hardly think success would be reported by T, whose home is at stake, and who has had sight of the judgment in full, if it was anything other than a success. Most people who take the video of T and G at face value are absolutely delighted at the result. If you prefer to believe the mainstream media and doubt the reporting of G and T or their abilities to comprehend the judgment then that is entirely up to you.

And so it seems that the mental pygmies of OPCA will adopt the Ostrich position, and still be celebrating their victory while the bailiffs are changing the locks. It is a mass delusion on an extraordinary scale. There's an excellent OPCA-skeptics messageboard which follows these antics closely (http://www.quatloos.com/Q-Forum/viewtop ... 47&t=10330) and even their expert anthropologists cannot explain or interpret this.

Truly strange things are happening out there. I will try to do a few more Sunday morning explorations, but I fear falling into the hands of this savage tribe. If I am not heard from again, please take care of my family.
"Judicial tergiversation is not to be encouraged"
User avatar
Slartibartfast
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:06 pm

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby shootist » Sun May 17, 2015 4:44 pm

The Great British Nutter. The country would be the poorer without them. And their rarely seen silent partners, the occasional police officers who believe them. It's a wonderful world.
"I do not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death my right to be offended by it."
User avatar
shootist
 
Posts: 3171
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2013 9:40 pm

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby Slartibartfast » Mon May 18, 2015 10:49 pm

Slartibartfast wrote:And now the borrower and his advisors have gone further, explaining that the judgement should not be read literally. It is, they say, written in a special coded language called "legalese" in which words do not have their ordinary meaning. The leading OPCA guru (a legendary bankrupt vexatious ligitant) has kindly 'translated' the judgement and advised that it actually means that the borrower can 'deny the debt and keep the house'. (http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... 60&t=86092)


The full judgment has now been released - it doesn't look like any sort of victory to me. Perhaps my ability to understand simple, clear English is preventing me from 'reading between the lines', but I'd say this judgement describes a total defeat? https://docs.google.com/document/d/13a9 ... a29Dc/edit

As a poster on the Quatloos site remarks : "the only way it could have been clearer was if the Judge had written across the pages in big red crayon MR. C YOU HAVE LOST YOUR CASE MOVE OUT OF B&B'S HOUSE."
"Judicial tergiversation is not to be encouraged"
User avatar
Slartibartfast
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:06 pm

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby atticus » Tue May 19, 2015 11:40 am

I have just been looking at the getoutofdebtfree.org forum. If ever proof was needed of the existence of a parallel universe, it is to be found there.

Unfortunately slarti's link to the full judgment (which I read this morning) no longer works. The document appears to have been removed.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby atticus » Tue May 19, 2015 12:06 pm

I think that the rift in the space-time continuum that allowed me to visit that other universe must have healed itself.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby dls » Tue May 19, 2015 1:03 pm

It is re-assuring that you were banned. You naughty infidel.

At least they demonstrate that the ability to believe six impossibly stupid things before breakfast is not necessarily and exclusively associated with religion.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 11789
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby Slartibartfast » Tue May 19, 2015 6:20 pm

atticus wrote:Unfortunately slarti's link to the full judgment (which I read this morning) no longer works. The document appears to have been removed.


Yes, they are desperately trying to stop the judgement being seen, but copies are being proliferated - this link works at time of posting - https://infotomb.com/cixyk
"Judicial tergiversation is not to be encouraged"
User avatar
Slartibartfast
 
Posts: 3745
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 5:06 pm

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby 3.14 » Tue May 19, 2015 6:49 pm

I have now added my comments to that thread. :)
Hide in the noise. #hackerwisdom
User avatar
3.14
 
Posts: 2041
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 2:58 pm

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby atticus » Tue May 19, 2015 10:05 pm

Excellent user name!
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Another Expedition to the World of Freeman Law

Postby atticus » Tue May 19, 2015 10:10 pm

Some stonking analysis here: http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... 75&t=86284

THE COMPELLING PUBLIC INTEREST FACTS BEHIND THE UNLAWFUL COURT SESSIONS ON TOM CRAWFORD'S CASE

PRESS RELEASE - in the Public Interest


Tom Crawford's case is a great teaching tool, because it is a Classic example of how mis-reporting is being relied upon by criminals operating in a gang to conspire to steal the Crawford's family home by abusing the Court process and pulling the wool over everyone's eyes - without a shred of evidence to rely upon! This reduces the entire debacle in HMCTS and beyond, to a brazen act of Public deception, specifically, "a fraud on the Court and on the Crawfords" who are NOT deceived. So what are some of the actual RELEVANT FACTS on the Crawford case which the Media haven't yet examined?

In the 4th paragraph below, are 10 critical facts which preclude the Crawford's from being divested of their home lawfully, and which demonstrate that "Judge" godsmark was, alas, sitting in fraud without lawful jurisdiction or right of audience, having evidently abandoned his Oath of Office, engaging instead in perjury and an unashamed Abuse of the Court Process - along with the solicitors on the case (Walker Morris) and, of course, the originators of the scam - being Bradford & Bingley a 100% Government owned firm, who nominated themselves a 2nd lifeline by the inappropriate creation of UKAR (United Kingdom Asset Recovery) when banks like Bradford & Bingley collapsed by their own dead weight, snatching people's financial holdings with them which forced those robbed of their money to 'write this theft off', and yet prolonging the false "debtors" by creating the UKAR money-laundering vehicle intended to try to legitimise the unprovable and non-existent "debts".

But first, here is my truth review of UKAR (UK Asset Recovery) which I will share with you:
United Kingdom Asset Recovery are a despicable organisation with no morals, set up as a HOLDING COMPANY by a bankrupt "government" (bankrupt morally, financially, intellectually, spiritually) to scoop up illegal revenue for themselves, by abuse of position: all UK banks, supposedly "too big to fail" have failed miserably leaving a nuclear trail in their wake, saddling the People of Britain with their toxic legacy of uncontrolled DEBT through a fatally flawed Monetary system controlled by Rothschild, the infamous satanist behind the global economic collapse - which is entirely orchestrated.
UKAR have forced all those who invested their liquid assets in Bradford & Bingley and other failed "banks" to abandon their holdings and FLEE, but have dishonestly co-opted with the Government to given themselves an illegal 2nd lifeline with a conspiracy to force the alleged "debtors" or alleged "Borrowers" to stay on their hook, under their death-grip (mort-gage) with this money laundering vehicle called UKAR to implement this! Disgusting Corporatization which violates our human rights - be gone with you, for you are nothing more than scoundrels and financial opportunists who are parasites on the People of England. Financial hyenas like UKAR are NOT welcome here.

From the information I have gleaned on this case, here are10 critical facts in the Crawfords favour (not yet truthfully reported by the mainstream Media, who've failed to investigate the material facts) - if anything needs correction then I invite Tom Crawford to intervene, so this email is being copied to him accordingly....

1. The Crawfords believed they had a "mortgage" some 25 years ago from Bradford & Bingley, of some £41,000 or so. They repaid this no less than THREE TIMES over the ensuing 25 years, without realising until 18 months ago that they had apparently been duped into an "unconscionable bargain" - because it turns out they have never been given any Terms & Conditions and do not have any enforceable Mortgage Contract!

2. This means that the 100% government-owned Bradford & Bingley was engaging in practices which are now condemned and prevented through the introduction of much later regulation like The Financial Services Markets Act 2000 and other rules which go beyond the (rather ambiguous and limp-wristed) mere 'Mortgage Code' which was in force in 1986. Due to the lack of checks & balances back then, the Crawfords fell prey to predatory lending practices, so common amongst the Banks, particularly those which were 100% Government owned.

3. With there being no valid paperwork in place for the alleged "loan" which resulted in an INVALID charge being placed on the Crawford's property, using illegal means, due to non-compliance with the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and the Power of Attorney Act 1971 and non-disclosure of the "lenders" Terms & Conditions, meant that the Crawfords never had any 'right of redemption' of the said "loan"! Yet a 'mortgage' is defined by its 'right of redemption' (as with the game 'Monopoly', remember?), and so with this 'right' being in absentia, the Crawfords legally never had any mortgage!

4. Despite this, due to the lack of protective legislation to the Public and those labelled "borrowers" at the time, the Crawford's acted IN GOOD FAITH and repaid 'loan interest' without realising they had no obligation to pay anything, in effect, because of the invalid and unconscionable way the whole transaction had been badly and dishonestly set up, creating a total liability for the Crawfords and an unconscionable bargain. This is how Bradford & Bingley amassed an unwarranted sum approaching £150,000 in "interest only payments" which were tantamount to financial fraudon an alleged "borrowing" which involved an invalid paper trail that was procured from the Crawfords' own asset in the first place..namely, the Bradford & Bingley did not 'lend' the Crawfords ANYTHING but instead, created a book entry and issued CREDIT, misnamed "money" on their signature being misused!

5. Unfortunately, when the unethical 'interest' had been paid to the value of some three times the original alleged "loan", Bradford & Bingley, amidst the new and tightening legislation with financial fraud becoming a huge Public issue, acted in dishonour, by fraudulently CONVERTING the alleged "loan" into an "overdraft" - namely, they took the CREDIT that had been issued on paper illegally some 25 years earlier, and dishonestly changed its status into a false financial instrument that could NEVER be repaid - because no contract has ever been in existence. So what ought to have occurred is the 'loan should have been expunged there and then, and all of the 'interest' ought to have been repaid.
But instead, the ailing Bradford & Bingley co-opted with the Government, to create a money-laundering vehicle of "UKAR" (UK Asset resolution) parading as a means of 'helping customers with their loan and mortgage issues" so as to keep the illegal asset-stripping alive: in other words, a complete scam!

In this way, UKAR became the new "owner" of the (valuable, in their eyes) 'debt', and without checking in to the background nor putting right any of the foregoing errors and fraudulent irregularities, they conspired to issue a Money Claim on line during 2014 or thereabouts!
This "MCOL" false claim resulted from the false 'overdraft' the 'lender' had created through the illegal conversion of a 'debt' which was never validated or compliant with Law in the first place. It was around this time that the guilty parties became very apologetic to the Crawfords and bought them champagne and flowers, instead of explaining that the remedy they were entitled to receive was a full refund of all interest wrongly paid, and eradication of the original alleged 'debt' due to non-compliant paperwork and no enforceable contract.

6. However, with there being no Consumer Credit Agreement validly procured nor in place for the "overdraft" which was foisted upon the Crawford's, the MCOL could never stand up in Court, as any Civil claim in HMCTS requires the Law of Contract to 'prove' the case and win it, but this is impossible with there being no contract in existence for either the original 'loan' nor, indeed, for the subsequent fraudulent loan conversion into an Overdraft! Therefore, the MCOL was invalidly brought by Walker Morris solicitors - who have never complied with Part 31 Rules of Disclosure of the Court, despite being asked to do so: they, too, are in dishonour and abusing the Court process.

7. A further hallmark of fraud exists in the INVALID ISSUANCE of the MCOL, brought against the Crawfords in 2014: that of no proof of debt - the Government, under the facade of 'Bradford & Bingley' trading name back in 1990 or thereabouts, had done a mere book entry of issuing 'credit' against the Crawford's name and secured it invalidly against their asset (family home) - which denotes that the Promissory Note was not valid nor could be validated - because a charge can not be put on a property without a valid DEED, and in addition:
* the Deed has to be accompanied by a valid bi-lateral CONTRACT which must contain the Terms & Conditions of the loan within its wording in one document and executed in front of them at the 'exchange of contracts stage'.
* the Deed must also bear two independent witness signatures, and the original of this along with the original Contract, forms the original Promissory Note. Without these things all in place, no valid transaction has taken place.
* The above is the Law and is mandatory under the Law of Property (Misc Provisions) 1989 Act, Sections 1 & 2.

8. Astonishingly, District Judge Godsmark failed to detect ANY of the foregoing. Instead, he focused on the repayment vehicle (an endowment) which in no way can exonerate the missing vital steps referred to above. It is also questionable whether there has been any compliance at all with the Bill of Exchange Act 1882, which requires that any charge placed on a property via a valid Deed, must have received 'consideration' and a fair exchange (something of value for something of value). This, too, is thrown into serious question. In this way, it can be reliably deduced that DJ Godsmark was sitting in fraud and dishonour in HMCTS, by turning a blind eye to the compound fraud and multiple irregularities which he made no apparent attempt to correct.

9. Tom Crawford rightly drew to the Judge's attention the fact that the "claim" had never been validly issued, because it had never been PAID for! this means there are NO PROCEEDINGS - because with no valid issuance, the claim can not proceed and so there are no proceedings.
Moreover, the false 'claim bore NO COURT SEAL (a mandatory requirement under the Ministry of Justice Civil Procedure Rule 2.6), and NO SIGNATURE ON THE 'STATEMENT OF TRUTH' - which the judge weakly tried to get around by asserting it was "a money claim on line" !
The dishonest solicitors, complicit in this abuse of the Court process, showed a barrister present in the Court room the White book that stated that a home could be repossessed via an MCOL without any pre-action protocol - but quickly departed when it was pointed out to them by the erudite barrister that it was "subject only to STRICT CONDITIONS, none of which had been met!" This sums up the mindless manner in which this INVALID claim has been peddled through HMCTS. The fact that the Judge then took the unprecedented RISK of compounding the hot water he is already clearly steeped in, by REFUSING the Crawford's RIGHT OF APPEAL against the fraudulent and invalidly brought, unsubstantiated "claim" speaks volumes about the state of play and sheer CORRUPTION which has infiltrated HM Courts and even the police forces and Professions. Integrity has been thrown out of the window.

10. To add insult to injury, DJ Godsmark abused his position, by violating Tom Crawford's Article 6 right to a "fair hearing". He did this by refusing Mr Crawford's perfectly reasonable request to be represented by the party of his choice and nomination, but the Judge (illegally) refused this - evidently because he was not acting in accord with his sworn Oath of Office and instead was there in a PRIVATE capacity (a rescue operation for the avalanche of financial deficit created by the profligacy and reckless lending of the 1990's and earlier). Mr Crawford has been suffering symptoms of inevitable stress with 'blanking out' and many of us even witnessed him explaining this, but DJ Godsmark coldly ignored his plight and refused his request: this created an inequality of arms.
The excuse for a 'judge' ran out of the Court room NO LESS THAN THREE TIMES, evidently his conscience was pricking him too hard, and events that occurred exacerbated the reminder to the judge's conscience that he was not acting lawfully in his manner of handling the case. Had he done a deal behind the scenes with UKAR - the 100% Government Owned HOLDING Company and therefore 100% CONFLICTED to have brought the false "claim" in the first place?
I herein rest my case.


Finally, I will just say this: is anyone else noticing that something is terribly wrong here, with literally hundreds of billions of pounds being wiped off Bank balance sheets, yet not a single criminal prosecution for theft or robbery in sight, all aided and abetted by the illegal protectionism of the UK 'Government' ?
This plays out in the financial and Economic Marketplace where by there were apparently over 48,000 illegal repossessions bought last year against victims of the Corporate takeover by the giant behemoth financial institutions of the likes of Bradford & Bingley, or a house taken every 20 minutes, through abuse of position leading to people's loss (a criminal offence under Section 4 of the Fraud Act 2006) and nothing practical yet being done about this sorry state of affairs?

I speak with a certain authority and from first-hand experience, because I, too, am a victim of Serious Organised Crime by the State, only through a different financial institution - Bank of Scotland (previously known as "HBOS") who also engaged in predatory lending without passing the money for the false charges they took on properties using void deeds and in violation of the Bill of Exchange Act 1882.
In my and my sister's case, I have been literally wrestling against the corruption in HMCTS for the past EIGHT AND A HALF YEARS, and have been denied a fair hearing and denied any disclosure of a debt, amongst other things. These happenings are plainly, an abomination!
The BBC timidly took the lid off my case on 3 March 2014 without explaining that none of us ever received a penny in 'loans' nor any access to the said 'loans', but were helpful at least in exposing how the HBOS Head Auditor, Fraser Mackay, was at the helm of the heist of $233 million of which more than $2million has been stolen from my family members and we've been robbed of our peace of mind for 14 years and stressed out for nearly 9 years with invalid proceedings involving EVERSHEDS solicitors as the s.p.v. to the bank (special purpose vehicle) - latterly, the dishonest rogue solicitor Tim Pyle has rapidly FLED, without a trace! The claim continues to languish in the courts as I continue to patiently await the removal of no less than THREE illegal and invalid 'charges' on our home, by the Property Chamber.

Nick Wallis: Bank of Scotland investigation
becarefulwhatyouwishfornickwallis.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/...Cached
Posted by Nick Wallis at 15:09. ... I believe it was designed by HBOS and implemented by broker introducers but, ... Inside Out Bank of Scotland investigation transcript.

IMHO, Britain is no longer a safe place to purchase or own property, nor to have or bring up children, because the corruption issues of the Crown Corporation which governs all of the atrocities which include child-trafficking, land and property grabbing by the State and bogus "bankruptcies" as a means of illicit debt collection, all stem from the abuse of the registration process at HMLR, HMRC, HMCTS etc. I hope this provides some useful insight into the REAL goings-on. You can view my posting from a few days ago on 'Eviction the fraud of the Bank' Facebook Group site, which will doubtless give you even more understanding into the Government's 'war against its people' going on in Britain today.

Yours truly

[Name deleted]
founder - ONE VOICE ACTION GROUP
'One Voice' action group






'One Voice' action group
"let's become One Voice, and let's make that voice be heard" Founder of 'One Voice Action Group'
View on http://www.one-voice-action-group.com
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 18651
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Next

Return to Human Rights Law

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron