Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access (NOROIRA)....where did these bizarre notices come from ??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3293 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

With over 16,000 visitors viewing the following thread it is proof that there is a huge public interest in these notices...and yet.....almost all debtors are not told the reason why they should display (or ‘deploy) these notices....what they are intended to achieve...what to do if they are ignored....or most importantly; whether such notices are effective.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?392005-Removal-of-Implied-Right-of-Access-notices.....CIVEA-advises-bailiff-companies-to-IGNORE-the-notices

 

Enter the words 'Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access" into Google and you be directed to various websites with an interest in Freeman on the Land movement. There are many such websites including , Get out of Debt Free, Freedom Rebels, Fmotl (Freeman on the Land), Eureferendum, tpuc (The Peoples United Community) , and others. With the notable exception of websites advising about TV Licensing, the notices are rarely ever recommended anywhere else.

 

This thread is not intended to criticise any of these ‘movements’ (Freeman on the Land or others) and if offence is taken, it is certainly not intended.

 

On 6th April bailiff law as we have known it for over 100 years will dramatically change. Under the new regulations, enforcement agents will not be rendered a trespasser. Also...and this is vitally important..... from 6th April 'wrongful' levies will no longer be deemed 'illegal'. Instead, they will be merely 'irregular'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

When did the first ‘Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access’ appear on the internet?

 

In 2009 the first such notice appeared on the FMOTL (Freeman on the Land Movement) and the wording from the original notice was as follows:

 

 

NOTICE OF REMOVAL OF IMPLIED RIGHT OF ACCESS

 

DATE ( 2009 )

 

I hereby give notice that the implied right of access to the property known as xxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx [ postcode here ]has been removed in respect of the following:

 

Any employee, or agent or principal or any other person acting on behalf of the CORPORATE COURTS, and ( insert whatever or whomever is sending the bailiffs)

 

Any employee or agent or principal or any other person acting as third party AGENTS for/or on behalf of the CORPORATE COURTS ( or whomever) and the CORPORATION known as COUNTY COURT BAILIFFS, ( enter here whomever it is ) and:

 

Any POLICE OFFICER who is acting for the CORPORATE POLICE and not acting for and on behalf of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 11 and her people as expressed in the oath of office of all POLICE men and women.

 

Please also take notice that the land known as England is a Common Law jurisdiction and any transgression of this notice will be dealt with according to Common Law.

 

 

 

By, christian name here, ( Agent)

( christian name here ): of the ( surname here) family

 

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE , i.e all natural and Inalienable Rights Reseved

 

Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely ( christian name ): of the ( surname) family, as commonly called.

 

Response to this notice should be forwarded within 3 days of receipt of this notice to the postal address known as, your address here [ postcode here]

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who was the 'author' who drafted the original Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access (NOROIRA)?

 

The above Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access was drafted by a gentleman by the name of Mr Mike Dobson (or; to use his Freeman on the Land ‘strawman name’) Mike:of the clan Dobson him . This was confirmed by him on 23rd February 2010 when responding to a question on the 'Freeman Ireland' forum (link below):

 

http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/implied-right-of-access

 

As you will see Mr Dobson (Mike: of the clan Dobson) displays a copy of the original Notice of Implied Right of Access on the forum and in his post he states the following:

 

 

'Hello all

 

This is a slightly amended version of a copy of my original which I am pleased to say has found its way all over the internet!! Many people have used it with success.

 

I wrote the original over a year ago after a conversation with John Harris.

 

It was used to scare of Bailiffs from the council and it certainly works. You must put a copy up at the boundary of your private estate and the public access way/street.

 

If they come to your door, politley inform them they are trespassing and they have 60 secs to leave before you call the Police!

 

Worked for me on more than 5 occassions!!!'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the Notice of Implied Right of Access really work?

 

The simple answer is NO.

 

The notices were a failure and this is confirmed by Mr Mike Dobson further in his posts when he states as follows:

 

 

 

'It didnt end here though!!

 

Next stop, Leyland Magistrates for a show down which ended in 4hrs in the cells!!!

 

 

His next post is very interesting:

 

 

"It is a very long story Billy! It was only my second time in court, they didnt even get to my persons case!! I will be doing a full write up of what happened very soon, I believe it will be of help to some people.

 

"All I will say for now is that I didnt contract, they didnt get fingerprints or DNA, which they wanted, and I was actually told to leave the court when I was dragged back in at the end of the day!! If anyone is unsure about all this freeman sovereignty stuff it certainly aint me after what happened that day" !!!

 

"Its all contract, the courts are Admiralty, the World is Bankrupt but if you know who and what you are you will always be the highest authority in that court house"

 

 

 

Of far greater importance is this comment:

 

 

"Eviction by Sheriffs is a bit different from TV Licence men or debt collecting Bailiffs"

 

"If you have Sheriffs on your land trying to evict it will be because they will, or should, have an order from the court which you will have consented to at some point"

 

 

Further evidence of the failure of the 'NOROIRA' is demonstrated by his following comment on the Freeman Ireland forum:

 

 

"I recently found out through a friend that the Magistrates of Lancashire and the Judiciary of England know all about me now so I am preparing my return to England after a retreat in Scotland.Ha ha, I cant wait!! There are many eager people wanting to learn and I guess I have a duty to teach the things I know" !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is John Harris?

 

The poster; Mike Dobson confirmed in is post that he had written the original Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access in 2009 following a "conversation with John Harris".

 

Given that these 'notices' are supposed to have some legal effect it would be expected that they had been 'drafted' at a Solicitor. This is not so.

 

John Harris is a prominent figure in the British Freeman on the Land movement and he is founder of the ‘Peoples United Community website; tpuc.org

 

More about him here:

 

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/John_Harris

 

 

According to the above link; John Harris Harris has some rather amusing misunderstandings of etymology. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology

 

 

 

For instance; he claims that the reason we are taught to spell in school is because words 'cast spells' (presumably magical legal ones) and that if we fail to perform this is why we get exSpelled !!

 

 

Also, according to the above link, John Harris believes that the word 'Church' comes from the word coerce, thus revealing the true nature of religion. Absolutely anything beginning with the syllable 'con' must be a con. Such as; CONtract, CONtrol and CONstitutional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Due entirely to the internet, the Notice of Implied Right of Access went 'viral' and started appearing on the Freeman on the Land movement's favorite media outlet; YouTube and in 2010 first appeared on the Get out Of Debt Free forum.

 

Over time different websites introduced their own changes to the notices most noticeably; by adding a clause imposing a fee (typically between £500 and £2,000) against the bailiff/police/agent/dca etc if they chose to ignore the notice. Despite extensive research there are NO REPORTED CASES of a debtor receiving such a payment.

 

In 2013 (5 years after these odd notices first appeared on the internet) another equally bizarre notice started to appear on a handful of sites along with the instructions from the websites to 'deploy the NOROIRA'

 

Yet again, these notices appear to have been drafted without any legal assistance and are completely useless. Typically they state the following:

 

 

Removal of Implied Right of Access

 

 

Take notice that any visit to this property on or after xxxx by yourselves, your agent, or those otherwise acting on your behalf or on your instructions stating either verbally or in writing, an intention, unlawfully or by force, or guile (and other than by express invitation) to enter these premises and remove property, will result in the arrest of the agent or person concerned for attempted burglary under Section 9 of the Theft Act 1968.

 

Steal shall mean any removal or attempted removal, or intention to remove, any property in which you have no lawful Title or property therin.

 

I reserve the right to produce a copy of this Notice to the Court in future proceedings.

 

 

 

PS: It is not surprising that once again; there are NO REPORTED CASES of any arrests by the police for attempted burglary (under Section 9 of the Theft Act 1968) if a bailiff/debt collection agent ignored such a notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to note is that there is no connection between UK Column and Brian Gerrish and FMOL. UK Column's pet hate is Common Purpose a sinister pseudo charity that infests government, police and local and national government. Most Likely Capita is also infested with Common Purpose graduates.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing to note is that there is no connection between UK Column and Brian Gerrish and FMOL. UK Column's pet hate is Common Purpose a sinister pseudo charity that infests government, police and local and national government. Most Likely Capita is also infested with Common Purpose graduates.

.

.

I have not come across these names before. I will do some checking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

.

.

I have not come across these names before. I will do some checking.

 

They are fairly well known. This is getting into politics which is dangerous ground. There are conspiracy theorists, who make claims about different types of state control. Common purpose ( a training company) are apparently a sinister organisation who train people to develop ways of controlling member of the public, for the common good of society. In short, they are training up control freaks, who work together to take away the freedom of people.

 

It all feeds into the same narrative. People who no longer think they are living in a country, which guarantees certain freedoms as a basic human right.

 

I have some sympathy. If you are a car driver these days, there seems to be more and more powers given to various authorities to make it as difficult as possible to enjoy travelling around the country.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

What astounds me is that people actually believe this can work. Then when it fails, they believe the muppets on the other forums claiming that the authorities are 100% wrong.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

What astounds me is that people actually believe this can work. Then when it fails, they believe the muppets on the other forums claiming that the authorities are 100% wrong.

 

It can't where there is a statutory right of entry or a court warrant, it can only work on Random Callers, and actually a sticker issued by police to display in a window in a "NO Canvassing or Cold Calling Zone" is a form of NOIROIA, which in theory removes the right of access of cold callers, and even TVL without a warrant. In general they are useless for the purposes some websites say they are for.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats my point. We all know we can kick doorstep collectors out, but theyre trying to say you can do this with bailiffs. And that Mr xxx of the clan xxx nonsense.... It's like theyre living in a dreamworld.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats my point. We all know we can kick doorstep collectors out, but theyre trying to say you can do this with bailiffs. And that Mr xxx of the clan xxx nonsense.... It's like theyre living in a dreamworld.

 

They are sadly mistaken, as for keeping bailiffs out the notices are useless

 

I predect there will be some inpromptu interpleading, by the bailiff when they turn up at the wrong address in April and beyond in an area the police won't go into and seize the wrong neighbours car and are pleading inter-alia for the local thug whose car they levied not to break their legs, and to please replace the wheels back on their Berlingo

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, the power of the internet lead to a further Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access featuring very heavily on websites mainly associated with the Freeman on the Land movement. These notices started appearing in 2013 and the difference between the original notice was that this 'version' relied upon various supposedly helpful 'case law' such as:

 

Knox v Anderton

 

Lambert v Roberts

 

Armstrong v.Sheppard and Short Ltd

 

It would seem that the author is these newer notices failed to bother to read the case law to ascertain whether in fact they were applicable. I will write more on this later this morning.

 

PS: Suffice to say...the stated case law was hopefully flawed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Uncle Bulgaria.

 

Very interesting indeed. The subject deserves a thread on its own.

 

This is indeed very common and much is said about it, or in sympathy with it, on a bailiff section of another well known consumer site, predominantly by an ex-policeman. Here are some links for reading:

 

http://www.cpexposed.com/brian-gerrish

 

http://www.ukcolumn.org/author/brian-gerrish

 

http://www.ukcolumn.org/

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Purpose_UK

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7929210.stm

 

There is LOADS about this, and it is not FMOTL related, but is equally dangerous in my opinion when people see it in everything because they've almost been brainwashed by the whole concept.

 

Sorry TT to highjack the thread for one post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

coughdrop.

 

A new thread is almost certainly needed regarding ukcolumn. Yet again, this is another 'movement' with very very close links to the Freeman on the Land. As an example, Brian Garrish is closely associated with another 'movement' by the name of Lawful Rebellion. And so too is......John Harris (see post number 5). A reminder is here:

 

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/John_Harris

Link to post
Share on other sites

Staying with the Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access, as outlined in post 15 above, around January 2013 another 'version' of these notices appeared on a Facebook page and appeared to 'go viral' with sites associated with the Freeman on the Land and other movements. The difference with this notice is that is stated supposedly reliable 'case law'. The applicable notices state the following:

 

A debtor can remove right of implied access by displaying a notice at the entrance. This was endorsed by Lord Justice Donaldson in the case of Lambert v Roberts [1981] 72 Cr App R 223 - and placing such a notice is akin to a closed door but it also prevents a bailiff entering the garden or driveway, Knox v Anderton [1983] Crim LR 115 or R. v Leroy Roberts [2003] EWCA Crim 2753

 

Debtors can also remove implied right of access to property by telling him to leave: Davis v Lisle [1936] 2 KB 434 similarly, McArdle v Wallace [1964] 108 Sol Jo 483

 

A person having been told to leave is now under a duty to withdraw from the property with all due reasonable speed and failure to do so he is not thereafter acting in the execution of his duty and becomes a trespasser with any subsequent levy made being invalid and attracts a liability under a claim for damages, Morris v Beardmore [1980] 71 Cr App 256.

 

The only problem for the poor debtor was that the case law stated here was NOT applicable and has proven useless. I will outline each case later today and provide details of where these notices originated from.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What has to be remembered is that information on those particular websites and FMOL, should not be regarded as applicable at all, to the situations encountered on here, they are at best unlikely to work, at worse case could cost a debtor very dearly indeed.

 

They can be useful to see what is going on in the world of the conspiracy theorists, as sometimes they do come up with something worth knowing about, if not actually using

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Facebook of itself can be corrosive to a debtors case, as if they post up on there the bailiffs will be on also, look at the Marstons bailiff caught slagging off debtors on there.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

coughdrop.

 

A new thread is almost certainly needed regarding ukcolumn. Yet again, this is another 'movement' with very very close links to the Freeman on the Land. As an example, Brian Garrish is closely associated with another 'movement' by the name of Lawful Rebellion. And so too is......John Harris (see post number 5). A reminder is here:

 

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/John_Harris

 

There are some interesting YT vids featuring speeches by John Harris. There are claims that birth certificates are a legal fiction. Because it is a legal requirement for parents to give their child a full name and if they don't then the parents will get fined. Once the child is given a name, they are then on government systems for the rest of their lives and subject to state controls. This is why on the FMOTL videos showing bailiff visits, they refuse to give their names. They simply say something like, I am John of this manor. They refuse to be recognised by the name given on their birth certificates.

 

Not sure we need to give FMOTL or other similar groups any publicity on CAG. There are people who view their videos on YT and believe that what is said is legally correct. As with anything there is some truth, but really it a bit of a con. Some of these FMOTL people earn a living from what they are doing and I expect when they go on holiday, their passports have their legal fiction names !

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

UB it is something worth knowing about, if only to help when someone comes on here in dire straits having followed what they found, only to see it made things worse imho, as wee need to know to advise a better way forward.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A great thread tomtubby and truly informative.

 

I for one can advise that we disregard these notices on a weekly basis and carry out enforcement as commanded by the writ.

 

Despite many supposed fines and requests for quantities of silver (yes really) and the associated threats with non-payment it will come as no surprise that we have never paid any of them and nothing has ever come of them.

 

These templated notices and subsequent fines/demands are a waste of everybody's time and effort and usually get filed in the bin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UB it is something worth knowing about, if only to help when someone comes on here in dire straits having followed what they found, only to see it made things worse imho, as wee need to know to advise a better way forward.

 

This is where it could get really confusing to people. Have you noticed that FMOTL and similar, often very old pieces of legislation or case law. Why do they do this ? It is to confuse the hell out of even legal experts, who are completely baffled by what these people are saying. When parliament has produced new legislation over a long period of time, it often replaces previous laws and removes loopholes. But to then try to explain why a previous act of parliament or a case precedent no longer applies, can be very difficult.

 

All you can say is that courts will apply the latest legislation and recent most relevant case precedents, as the law in the UK has developed over hundreds of years. When bailiffs or anyone acting on behalf of a public recognised body, they do so using legislation passed by parliament. Parliament has mucked up with TV licencing, as they have never authorised Capita to be able to visit private households. Therefore the NOROIRA will work, provided the household has written to BBC and/or Capita. But anyone authorised by parliament or a court would have rights to visit private households. This would include Police, postmen, council employees or agents acting for them, emergency services, energy companies, HMRC employees, process servers and bailiffs. There will be legislation for each of these, but I will leave that for experts to run through. I probably could, but it would take many hours to research this.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...