there's a very good reason why i dont, and the reason is touched upon by happyfeet24 on the four corners thread. i dont want to irresponsible people doing this, its for people who act responsibly to find out and do for themselves with their own understanding. i think its a bit of cheek to ask me why i do something, which i dont have tell why, i then explain, you then argue with me saying that my opinion is rubbish, and then say that im preaching! no wonder judges are giving you your gonads on a plate lol so the judge looks in his file, sees a default judgment made by a notary public in your favour. the DCA are in contempt of court, and you say the judges order you to pay? there's either something seriously wrong in what you are doing, or there is something seriously wrong with the judges. btw, what happened to your signature text?

i think you've been listening to the 'authorities' too much. you know, the corporations you're very happy to give your power away too.

so the judge looks in his file, sees a default judgment made by a notary public in your favour. the DCA are in contempt of court, and you say the judges order you to pay? there's either something seriously wrong in what you are doing, or there is something seriously wrong with the judges. btw, what happened to your signature text?

tell me how it can go to court when she has accepted to pay on proof of a contract?

i hope website owners have insurance then. ok, so the information i gave to happyfeet24 in regard to the DCA demands for money how much is it going to cost her if she decides to use it? £1 for recorded delivery? lets say she didnt do anything and just ignored the demands, how much will it cost her when she's taken to court?

individual is a person. you'd be better to try researching whether human beings can.

im not here to give legal advice, im here to share info. are you here to give legal advice? i've already posted links. thats not what i asked. so did you and the team or whoever else on here support them in going into court in dishonour(if there was any) and raising controversy?

refusing to inform is a bit different to claiming to have no knowledge of who drove. how can you inform on something you dont know? on the EU ruling, yes who can argue that a DRIVER forfeits rights. a driver is someone who acts in commerce on the roads.

would you like to explain, or am i to assume that its a ****take? if it is ****take, is it a usual habit of the site team to do so, particulary with new members? i take it this case didnt go to well. did you support the defendants going into court in dishonour(if there was any) and controversy?

so what happens if they do not know who drove the car? they are prosectued for not knowing?

corporations cannot get out of statute law. thanks for the sarcastic emoticon btw.

the one above is to be sent to the DCA. that particular situation, and with other driving offences could be very difficult to get out of as the car is registered in your person. you could claim that you dont know who was driving, which would mean they would try to get you to pay the fine. at that point you would send that notice. a funny story that a policeman told my bro-in-law was that, to put it in a nutshell, the police went chasing after 3 lads in a car, the car had gained some distance on police, but the police eventually caught them when the car had stopped. they went to the car and all three lads were sat on the backseat. the police asked who was driving and they said they didnt know, none of them gave their name and there was nothing the police could do. im not condoning irresponsible behaviour, but these days the 'authorities' are acting that way all the time and are screwing the people for as much as they can get.

statute law and common law are seperate. e.g. there is no statute that says you cannot murder. and there is no common law that says are required to income tax. you are always under common law, until you consent to a statute which then overides it. the dvla, cannot take from you a privately owned car because they have no right to it. it would be stealing. but they can take a registered vehicle because they have right to it. just like the social services can take your children because you registered them at birth.

ok. lets see if we can use our creative imagination to come up with notice that you can send them. [ADDRESS] [DATE] Re: NOTICE (ok here put in the title of the notice they sent you, demand for payment etc) - Issued [date] Notice of Discharge of... (Demand of Payment) To [address] You have apparently made allegations of that I owe you money. You have apparently made demands upon me to pay the money allegedly owed. I do not understand those apparent demands and therefore cannot lawfully fulfil them. I seek clarification of your document so that I may act according to the law. Failure to accept this offer to clarify and to do so completely and in good faith within 10 days will be deemed by all parties to mean you and your principal or other parties abandon all demands upon me. I conditionally accept your offer to agree that I am [your NAME in capitals] and that I owe £......., upon proof of claim that there exists a signed two party contract between us, and that if you can prove that said contract exists, you make presentation of a bill of exchange for the aforementioned amount. Proof and presentation must be sent via registered mail to: [ADDRESS] no later than TEN (10) days from the date of original service as dated by way of Royal Mail recorded delivery service. Further demands for payment thereafter by you or any third parties will be seen as a breach of Section 1 of The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 if you fall into dishonour by failing to respond within the ten days. Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity [signature] so basically, its quite simple. all you are doing is disharging their offer for you to pay them by making a counter-offer to pay on condition. its just negotiation, which any judge will have assumed to have been undertaken by the 2 parties before entering court. DCA's have no contracts with the persons they demand money from and cannot enforce those demands if you conditionally accept. if you receive no reply, you can then go to a public notary and get him to send a copy of your notice with his own. if that is ignored, the PN will send the same one last time. if it ignored again, the PN will make a default judgment in your favour, an estoppel. if the DCA take you to court, you can file the estoppel into the evidence file of the judge, and it all goes tits up for the DCA

then i can only say that 'lunacy' is working for people using it, not just in this country, but those countries England gave the common law to. finding loopholes is an area that is very legit and i applaud all who use that method, hence i why i started this thread. imo, the signature box is a loophole that probably could never be filled.