Jump to content

nuke em

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by nuke em

  1. MamaG1 , i have come along way since my first posts here in Oct 2007, for a start i now know that all Mortgages are fraud in factum, on the basis that the "lender" did not provide any consideration for the so-called mortgage CONtract. Basically you created the funds when you signed which they then "lent" you!!! ie they lent you your own credit!!!!.. straight up fraud!! my remedy revolve around commercial liens & estopple
  2. There is no treaty between the USA & The uk for debt collection, anyone they try and get to do it in the usa is a chancer/interloper and should be told where to go ( canada, germany & Aus do have treaties however)
  3. For ANY contract to be lawful it must comprise the following: A) FULL DISCLOSURE by both parties. Neither party can later claim 'you should have known' if it was not specifically declared at the time of making the contract. – Theevin Banks Plc bank did not provide full disclosure, B) A CONSIDERATION offered by both parties, this being the subject of the exchange. It must be a sum of money, or an item of value. Both parties agree that their CONSIDERATION is worth (to them) the other party's CONSIDERATION. As you now know, Theevin Banks Plc did not provide anything of value, I did! C) LAWFUL TERMS & CONDITIONS for the contract, to which both parties agree. These do not exist, as you are now well aware! D) 'Wet' SIGNATURES of both parties. This means hand-written SIGNATURES, as made by two human beings – A “wet” signature was never given by Theevin Banks Plc!
  4. I know Charlie, & i know you know, i have seen many of your dropped hints in other threads :D!, still i battle on, not so much on this forum anymore, just dont have the time nowadays. .. if you know where i'm at! I think during 2010 more people will wake up from their slumber, esp as we move into the mother all of ( planned) financial crashes most of will ever see .. February & March are going to be very interesting! & yes i know that challenges under the CCA also work as well ...Nuke em
  5. Pinky, when you say you are debt free, do you mean this: I Pinky had any or all of the following : -Credit Card(s), Personal Loan(s) , Mortgage(s), HP Finance and other debtor/creditor based loans etc, which due to a change(s) in my personal circumstance i was unable to, or due to information i subsequently found out about CCA stuff & other info, decided/choose not to pay. Then OC's started to try and reclaim those "monies" from me using various legal& illegal methods but due to my endeavors & strategies those debt have now been cleared & /or paid back a lesser amount in F&F settlement , in some way. So that all the account(s) previously held would under UKGAAP accounting rules be demonstrated to have zero balances. This is the understanding of both Pinky & all/any OC(s) in question and Subsequently, ****** DCA’s were passed some/all of my “accounts” and they attempted to extract using various legal& illegal methods, money out of me , however due to my endeavors & strategies those debt(s) have now been cleared in some way so that under UKGAAP accounting rules, all the DCA(s) in question regard those accounts are now also at zero balance. This is the understanding of both Pinky & all/any DCA(s) in question. -Pinky, Is this you?
  6. shinobi101 , dont go around bringing extra info/ facts to research/discuss on this thread, you will get hammered! lol
  7. Actually , obviously you don't! Here is a good quote "The ultimate ignorance is the rejection of something you know nothing about and refuse to investigate" - couldn't have put it better myself
  8. @Pinky69 - No one asked you to read 'em @Vjohn82 - Yea, or you could research & fight 'em back @PriorityOne - Denial is not just a river in Eygypt!
  9. Sarnie/Fuzzybobble, Re Above & Sarnie's post, that is all i ever get on this here, most just dismiss or try and make it out to be a big joke 'cos they just wont'/can't understand and they certainly wont do any research! they are very quick to post, never bothering to spend time to do their own research. If they did they would be SHOCKED as i was 18 months ago when i started to get into all of this. all i can say is that my methods work for me!
  10. Check out how many Business Entities have CCJ's against them, banks fair enough but if the rest were really Local Authorities/gov depts etc why would they have CCJ;s ? The Hall of Shame Hall of Shame | www.tpuc.org
  11. Hefty - i think you need to get out of your zoo cage once in a while,the exercise will do you good.! Of course you wont find them under Companies House 'cos they are not a Limited or Public Liability Company, doh , However if you look in Dun & Bradstreet for example, you will find under D_U_N_S number 22-549-8526 you see the entry:- Ministry of Justice Selbourne House 54-60 Victoria Street London SW1E 6QE Line of BUSINESS ----- Government Department ( Note how i cleverly made the word Business big so you wouldnt miss it) It also states They are Trading as- Asylum Immigration Tribunal, Magistrates Courts, Public Trustee Office etc ONLY BUSINESSES have D & B numbers, whether they are a limited liability, public liability ( Plc), based in this Country & or anywhere in the world, or another type of business entity... BUT THEY ARE ALL for-profit businesses ALSO YOU WONT WANT TO BELIEVE THAT Alistair Darling is t/as the Labour Party ! BR THE LABOUR PARTY Also Traded as DARLING,ALISTAIR, xxxxxxxx EDINBURGH, xxxxxxx , GB Or that the Department of Transport t/as Driver & Vehicle Licensing among many many others ! Plus the United Kingdom is also Corporation, check it out !!! ( at d & B , NOT AT COMPANIES HOUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) Or that the M.O.D t/as the Bank for International Settlements ! ( BIS) Shocking! But it's all true! Whether you feel this is right or wrong is not relevant, but what is relevant is the fact that these businesses are very irresponsible with your money – so the question is – why are you still paying them? Company; an institution created to conduct business; Business; a commercial or industrial enterprise and the people who constitute it. plus Check out this link if you ever needed any more proof that the Court system is nothing more then a revenue generating business: Information About... If you are 'unsatisfied with the SERVICE you can complain to the CUSTOMER SERVICE UNIT BTW: When was the last time you were ordered into Asda to do business? This is their Home Page: Her Majesty's Courts Service - Home Have a good look at 'Justice' in this coporate country! EVERYTHING IS BUSINESSS & CORPORATE , Everything!, get used to it, research it yourself before you type the posts !, it makes you look silly! Its all about the money Master- OUT!
  12. Lets get the "Cheeky Girls" back to perform for DCA's , they're the cheekiest bunch around! THat will sort them out
  13. The other process they def don't like is the "commercial injury" route against them, which involves gaining estopple & the placing of a commercial lien against them. i will have the first of my liens against them maturing with a month. Then i become the creditor with my superior ( ie higher value) claim! .....Assuming of course that i wanted to take it into the Public ie a court which i will not be doing, it will all be kept in the Private...which is where it is now also check this out http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/242278-recd-summons-court-its.html#post2702036 and this one http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/175668-how-credit-cards-bank-16.html#post2737419
  14. More info is available here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/242278-recd-summons-court-its.html#post2702036
  15. It is a fast track operation to get as much out of you as possible , in the quickest , most efficient time . just as any Business would do. All courts whether County, Magistrates or any court that does not have an jury operates as a defacto court under admiralty law, and its all about Honour & Dishonour. You can not plead not guilty/deny the charge in an Admiralty Court, if you do you are in dishonour , sols know this but they earn their money by dealing with controversy, so that is why they cause them many times by telling their "client" to plead NG/deny the charge. The correct way to plead under admiralty is Guilty TO THE FACTS, that way you stay in honour. You only plead guilty to the facts. therefore the facts must be established. Of course as you now know that these defacto courts are nothing but a private for profit operation, you might not want to CONTRACT with them in the first place, see my post here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt-issues/175668-how-credit-cards-bank-16.html#post2737419 Courts that have a jury are courts dejour and operate under Common law ( which are much better for the people, that's why Blair wanted to do away with them as much as possible when he was PM)
  16. Notice of Unloved You, Davefirewalker are hereby Noticed that you are now unloved! By The System! If you fail to respond to this Notice within 7 days, you will be summoned to appear at the private for profit "Unloved Court" where we will administer justice by getting you to give us your money. Trickery abound!
  17. listen to them, you will learn a lot, Yes i have rebutted a few invitations from "courts" ( which is only the MOJ are doing business as... xxxx Court ) i have 2 methods that seem to work, One is simply to put a sticker over the address on the envelope rec'd saying No Contract Return to sender and pop it back into the post box after all a Summons is an offer to contract with a legal fiction ie not a human. if you answer their offer to contract you create the joinder they need between the you human and your legal fiction (name). A summons can only be served on a legal fiction not a human. A subpeona is used for a human So when they write to you as JOHN DOE all in caps, they are addressing the legal fiction. same if they address you as Mr, Mrs , Miss ?????, the fact they are using a title also means they are addressing the legal fiction the second method is to is make the Judge/Magistrate part of the litigation process, whereby as they are now part of the process you are entitlted to ask for the Justice's roll number, their oath of office etc listen to the audio in this link, Maurice explains it very well, although from the angle of the CSA ( another massive fraud) , his given court examples are a good shining light to more knowledge. He also explains the power in affidavits !, well worth a listen You will learn for example that the private for profit mag courts take 8% as "commission" on all liability & judgement "orders" , so it not really hard to see who benefits in this on-going [problem] Lawful Rebellion | Dead Beat Dad’s Says Affidavits Work listen to the audio !| ps do not use statutory declaration of true name, you are entering back into their world!, use affidavits!
  18. THe first para came from another thread from last year..... @legalpickle: "Whilst I sympathize with all who get CCJ's from Northampton CCBC - and indeed any court - I disagree that the CCBC is in any way biased to Claimants."- Incorrect, Northampton CCBC & all County Courts are private-for profit companies doing business as trading names of the MOJ.These defacto "courts" operate under admiralty law where under the honour & dishonor system, there is only one (honourable) way to plead when charged , that is to admit or plead "guilty", anything else is considered dishonourable. A Little history.... Under Admiralty law, ( Think olden times & ships here, because nothing has changed) the Claimant is considered to be the "officer" and the defendant is the party considered to be the lowly "rating" upon whom a "charge" has been bought. NOW going back to olden times, when a Officer bought a charge against a rating on a ship, it was ( and still is) presumed that an "Officer" does not lie, therefore the rating ( defendant) MUST be guilty, therefore one must plead Guilty! in an Admiralty Court. There is no other pleading in a CC or a Magistrate Court that will keep you in honour for that matter, they all operate under the same Admiralty Law. So, regardless of what you think you know or have been told by a Lawyer (remember Lawyers need to work in or cause the controversy, otherwise they don’t work & don’t get paid. Hence they will often tell you to plead Not Guilty, as it them who quite often enters this plea knowing the Controversy it will cause, even if were never taught at law school the historical reasons behind it) So,defacto courts are biased for the Claimants,( Officers), they were set up that way. However just because we should plead guilty (or admit) doesn't mean we can’t have our day or win, how so? To stay in honour, a defendant should always plead Guilty, but Guilty to the facts! So, Mr. Nuke em, the Claimant ( Mr. bad bank Credit card Co) states that you owe them 3000 pounds. Do you admit or deny the claim? I write back, "I conditionally accept that I owe the alleged debt subject to the following proofs of claim.. and then i list the proofs required, something like this 1. A legally enforceable original credit agreement signed in blue ink by the Authorised Representative for Nuke em. 2. Verification of the balance due in the form of a true bill 3. Validation of mr Bad Bank CC Co’s valuable consideration pertaining to the alleged debt, in the form of the actual accounting of its losses. 4. Proof of claim that any and all previous credit agreements were not vitiated when mr Bad Bank CC Co failed to provide validation and verification of the alleged debt, or a legally enforceable credit agreement, pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and the House of Lords ruling in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) 5. Proof of claim that mr Bad Bank CC Co is not in multiple breach of the Office of Fair Trading’s Final Guidance on Unfair Business Practices July 2003 (updated December 2006) and so on ...if req'd But the point is this,i have stayed in Honour, i have given (conditional) acceptance subject to proof of their claim. There are many other facets to this as well, for example if you are not ( choosing to ) contract with a private for profit Court in the first place. Remember a summons is really only offer to Contract... It helps if you look at a County Court & a "Judge", who is really just an administrator of the Company, (Bless their little egos, most of the lower level judges do not know they work for a private for profit Corporation, they think they work for the State) as a Company looking to offer you benefits/services So, do you want their benefits/service?, actually I would imagine most of the time, no you don’t, so you dont have to enter into a Contract with them, & dont get them involved with your private commercial affairs. So, a DCA says you owe them 3000 pounds, forgetting for a mo all the issues about Valid CCA, transfer of alleged debt from OC etc, what benefits/services to you are you going to get out of going to a private for profit Court? -where the only honourable way is to plead guilty? -err None, Not if you are the defendant! So here are my Golden Rules Firstly, I now don’t go to court, ( Unless I am the Plaintiff) I don’t enter into Contract with them, I reserve all my rights and I wave their benefit/privileges - I do this because I know what I am doing & yes it was scary the first time I decided not to Contract with a private for profit court. Now it's no problem. It’s only fear & your conditioning, which is part of their game Secondly ( Or Firstly if you agree to enter a contract with a private for profit Court), I would plead Guilty to the Facts, subject to proof(s) of the claim.i have done this many times in the past,i have not had a judgment entered against me nor to I have any CCJ's & Thirdly, although I am not legally trained, I would not use a lawyer in a defacto Court, I would not want to have the STANDING of an imbecilic Child in a Courtroom (which is what you are in Admiralty when you have a lawyer enter a plea on your? behalf. I am a sovereign man and I do everything under my own unlimited commercial liability. All lawyers, Judges, officers,etc have limited liability due to to the commercial nature of their employment/work, put simply my unlimited liability our ranks their limited liability. In a battle of the BONDS I win always! ( all Judges , Lawyers etc have to be BONDED, they are bonded in the private sector through commercial companies who issue these bonds upon payment), they all have a limit, although the limit varies from Judge to Judge, Law firm to law firm, lawyer to lawyer). Most Companies who issue these bonds will only allow 1 claim against that bond, after a claim then the bond won’t be renewed, or will get canceled on the spot (think of car insurance, not quite the same I know, I realize you can have multiple claims but a Judge for example can't..., you have 1 claim, then no one will insure you, then you can’t drive on the roads). No Bond = No Employment. A Judge, Lawyer, Law Firm without a Commercial Liability Policy (bond) in place cannot operate on the SEA of Commerce. & i have fun with BONDS! There is much more to all of this, it’s all out there in plain view, research is required.... BTW, Courts with juries ( Court DeJour) operate under Common Law, i.e. the law of the Land & not the law of the sea, ie admiralty. "The ultimate ignorance is the rejection of something you know nothing about and refuse to investigate"
  19. seriously man, do some more research... you are (still) way behind the curve !
  • Create New...