Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeeeeees! Well done on your victory!  👏
    • Hearing held today in court. I attended in person and Evri had an advocate attend on their behalf to defend their position that my contract is with Packlink and not with them. I also provided a copy of Evri's terms and conditions which explains that a contract is entered into when a parcel is sent with Evri. The judge pointed this out to the Advocate and agreed there is a contract between me and Evri under the Ts and Cs. The judge explained that while Packlink are responsible for organising the delivery of the item, it is Evri who are responsible for handling the goods and delivering them, and therefor Evri has a responsibility to handle the goods with reasonable care and skill. So am pleased to say the judge found in my favour. Hearing lasted about 75mins. Evri has been ordered to make payment within 21 days. Also nice to meet @jk2054 in person.
    • Good morning,    I just wanted to update you on the situation.    I have visits piling up with my current employment and they need doing before I finish at the end of this month.  I am moving to Wiltshire in 3 weeks for a new job helping care homes with their Dementia patients. I tried to work it out and at a guess I will be doing about 20-25,000 miles a year. So need a vehicle that can cope with that mileage, my old car would have done it easy but 🤷‍♂️ I have taken out a loan and got a friend to find me a reliable car that can cope with the miles and hasn't been written off in the past.   I phoned Adrian flux to see if I could use the last months insurance on a new car I have bought, the girl I spoke to phoned Markerstudy and asked them but they said no, my new car doesn't have any modifications.    I had an email from someone who saw one of my appeals for information, they live near the site of the accident and know a nearby farmer who has a security camera at his entrance that catches the traffic and specifically registration plates as he has been robbed before. They said they would reach out for me and see if he still has the data. Unfortunately it wont catch the scene of the crash.   The Police phoned me and said they were closing the report I made, even if they found footage of the vehicle at the time I said the actual incident would be my word vs theirs.  My first response was I am sure google maps would show that they turned around at that location which would verify my version of events, but upon reflection I do understand, I have seen people doing make up with both hands while driving, eating from a bowl steering with their knees and veering all over the place. I am sure some of these people go off the road and claim that someone forced them off.    Markerstudy phoned me yesterday to say that my car is now at Copart, the £80 tank of Vpower diesel was emptied on entry to the site for safety reasons, which I get but it sucks.  It is awaiting being assessed and shouldn't be too long, which is a relief.  I am really glad things do not seem to be going the way of the other stories and they seem to moving quickly.   However I was informed that my car was a structural write off before I bought it - this destroyed me, I was almost sick.  and this is going to affect any offer of money - after hearing the first statement this didn't affect me.   They need to wait for the assessor to check it over but it is highly likely to be written off and the maximum they can offer is £2300.  I was desperate for a car as I was working for an agency at the time, no work no pay, and did not do a vehicle check because I didn't know about them.  The seller did not tell me that it had been structurally written off, he told me that it had the front wing damaged while parked and was repaired at an approved repairer.  Markerstudy records state that it was sold at auction, no record of repair at an approved repairer.  I bought it bank transfer with hand written receipt.    It gets worse.    It turns out my airbags should of gone off. For some reason they are not working. I think we can figure out why.  If I had hit that car head on and had no airbags.    Some good news.    I can arrange a time with Copart to go and take my stereo equipment and any personal items that are left in the car only. I cant live without music and need quality sound, my speakers and amps are Hertz and JLaudio, (no I am not a boy racer with booming subs, I am an audiophile on a budget) I was really worried I wouldn't get them back so this is a huge relief for me. It is stuff I have built up over years of saving and collecting. Everything to do with the vehicle and mods I have declared need to stay to be assessed.   The accident has gone as a fault on my record, I have to remove 2 years NCB which means I still have some to declare which is good.  So it appears at this point that it may be resolved quickly, not in the way I was hoping, but not as bad as I presumed it was going to be based upon that tow truck drivers attitude and behaviour and the horror stories I read.   I am not going to buy the car back and try to make money with all the parts on it, I don't have the time or energy.   I may need an xray on my back and neck.  The whole situation has left me feeling physically sick, drained and I need it done.   The lesson learnt from this  -  My conscience is 100% clear, my attitude to safety and strong sense of personal responsibility - A rated tyres even if on credit card, brake fluid flush every year, regular checks of pads and discs, bushes etc, made avoiding what I believed to be a certain broadside collision possible.   Get a dashcam (searching now for the best I can afford at the moment)  -  Research your insurance company before you buy  -  Pay for total car check before you go and see a car and take someone with you if you are not confident in your ability to assess a vehicle.      Thank you to everyone here who volunteers their time, energy and information, it is greatly appreciated.  You helped my sister with some advice a while ago but we weren't able to follow through, she is struggling with long term health conditions and I ended up in hospital for a while with myocarditis, when I got out and remembered it was too late.  I am going to make a donation now, it is not a lot, I wish I could give more, I will try to come back when things are on a more even keel.    Take care
    • It seems the solicitor has got your case listed for this “appeal” but not for the Stat Dec(SD). You need to ensure you can perform your SD on the day. If you are able to make your SD in court, the situation you are in now is more straightforward than if you made your SD via a solicitor. You have been convicted of two offences (and two were dropped) via proceedings of which you were not aware. The way to remedy that is to perform an SD. No appeal is necessary (nor is it available via the magistrates’ court). If you are able to make your SD this is how I see it panning out: You will make your SD to the court. The court must allow you to make it as it will have been made within 21 days of you discovering your convictions. You will then be asked to enter pleas to the four charges again. At this point you should plead not guilty to all four but make the court aware that you will plead guilty to the speeding charges on the condition that the FtP charges are dropped. The prosecutor will be asked whether or not this is agreed. In my opinion the overwhelming likelihood is that it will be. If it is you will be sentenced for the two speeding offences under the normal guidelines. In the unlikely event it is not accepted,  the speeding charges will be withdrawn (they have no evidence you were driving). You have no viable defence to the FtP charges and so should plead guilty. This will mean 12 points and a “totting up” ban (as you have already suffered). You can present an “Exceptional Hardship” argument to try to avoid this (explained below).   Because of this, I don’t see any need to make an argument to ask to have any ban suspended (pending an appeal to the Crown Court) unless and until you are banned again. The only reason I can think the solicitor suggested this is to secure a (Magistrates')  court date. I was surprised when you said you had an appointment so quickly; a date for an SD usually takes longer than that. However, if you can use it to your advantage, all well and good. I can’t comment on the argument that the two speeding offences were committed “on the same occasion” as I don’t have the details. That phrase is not defined anywhere and is a matter for the court to decide. It’s an interesting thought (and only that) that such an argument could equally be made for the two FtP offences. If the requests for driver’s details arrived at your old address at the same time, with the same deadline for reply, it could be argued that you failed to respond to hem both “on the same occasion” (i.e when the 28 days to respond expired) and so should only receive penalty points for one. Hopefully you won’t need to go there. I think you have information about avoiding a “totting up” ban. But here’s the magistrates’ latest guidance on "Exceptional Hardship" (EH) which they refer to: When considering whether there are grounds to reduce or avoid a totting up disqualification the court should have regard to the following: It is for the offender to prove to the civil standard of proof that such grounds exist. Other than very exceptionally, this will require evidence from the offender, and where such evidence is given, it must be sworn. Where it is asserted that hardship would be caused, the court must be satisfied that it is not merely inconvenience, or hardship, but exceptional hardship for which the court must have evidence; Almost every disqualification entails hardship for the person disqualified and their immediate family. This is part of the deterrent objective of the provisions combined with the preventative effect of the order not to drive. If a motorist continues to offend after becoming aware of the risk to their licence of further penalty points, the court can take this circumstance into account. Courts should be cautious before accepting assertions of exceptional hardship without evidence that alternatives (including alternative means of transport) for avoiding exceptional hardship are not viable; Loss of employment will be an inevitable consequence of a driving ban for many people. Evidence that loss of employment would follow from disqualification is not in itself sufficient to demonstrate exceptional hardship; whether or not it does will depend on the circumstances of the offender and the consequences of that loss of employment on the offender and/or others. I must say, I still do not understand what the solicitor means by “As a safeguard we have lodged the appeal and applied to suspend your ban pending appeal due to the time limit for being able to automatically appeal without getting leave of the Judge.” When they speak of “leave of the judge” I assume they mean they have lodged an appeal with the Crown Court. I don’t know what for or why they would do this. It seems to follow on from their explanation of the “totting up” ban. If so, I’m surprised that the Crown Court has accepted an appeal against something that has not yet happened. But as I said, i is no clear to me. Only you can decide whether to employ your solicitor to represent you in court. If it was me I would not because there is nothing he can say that you cannot say yourself. However, I am fairly knowledgeable of the process and confident I can deal with it. That said, I do have a feeling that the solicitor is somewhat “over egging the pudding” by introducing such things as appeals to the Crown Court which, in all honesty, you can deal with if they are required. I can only say that the process you will attempt to employ is by no means unusual and all court users will be familiar with it. I can also say that I have only ever heard of one instance where it was refused. In summary, it is my view that it is very unlikely that your offer to do the deal will be refused. If it is accepted, you may be able to persuade he court that the two speeding offences occurred "on the same occasion" and so should only receive one lot of points. Let me know the details (timings, places, etc) and I'll give you my opinion. Just in case your offer is refused, you should have your EH argument ready. Whether it's worth paying what will amount to many hundreds of pounds to pay someone to see this through is your call.  Let me know if I can help further.    
  • 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
      • 161 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

How do I unregister my car?


pleasuredome
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4123 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

does anyone know of a way to unregister a car with the DVLA without claiming to have scraped it?

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Export it or scrap it. The whole idea of continuous registration is that a car can't be "lost" from the database as long as it exists in the UK.

:!:Nothing I post should be taken as legal advice. It is offered as an opinion only.:!:

 

This warning is in my signature because I'm not organised enough to remember to type

it in every post.

 

And you're considering trusting me????:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

if i return the reg document declaring it scrapped, is there an obligation to actually scrap it or can it be claimed as salvage?

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you declare scrapped they will never issue another registration document for it, so you can never put it back on the road.

 

Overseas posting by any chance? ;)

Edited by Spunkymonkey
speeling again

:!:Nothing I post should be taken as legal advice. It is offered as an opinion only.:!:

 

This warning is in my signature because I'm not organised enough to remember to type

it in every post.

 

And you're considering trusting me????:eek:

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you "self scrap" they will require proof that it has been scrapped or dismantled. You'll have to ask them what the minimum actions required would then have to be done to satisfy them. One famous story was a guy who sent them a video of the car being crushed by a tank.

 

You may want to keep the bits of the car for future projects, so it is understandable that you may not want to destroy the vehicle.

 

Exporting the vehicle is the only other way I know.

 

When you report a car stolen, the DVLA get notified, and they (should) ammend the vehicles register to remove your responsibility to it. But it remains on the register. You can and should - protect yourself by writing to DVLA to have them "remove your interest" in a vehicle that has been stolen. Which makes me wonder if you can legally "remove your interest" in a vehicle not stolen but remains in your possession, I suppose you theoretically can, but it would probably leave you open to prosecution under VERA for keeping an unregistered vehicle.

 

There is something in law about a vehicle without gear box or with engine in such a state that no prospect of vehicle being made mobile (and no intention of owner to put it back on the road) is no longer a motor vehicle.

Smart v Allan 1962

 

Which could help you.

Edited by Wig
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you "self scrap" they will require proof that it has been scrapped or dismantled. You'll have to ask them what the minimum actions required would then have to be done to satisfy them. One famous story was a guy who sent them a video of the car being crushed by a tank.

 

You may want to keep the bits of the car for future projects, so it is understandable that you may not want to destroy the vehicle.

 

Exporting the vehicle is the only other way I know.

 

When you report a car stolen, the DVLA get notified, and they (should) ammend the vehicles register to remove your responsibility to it. But it remains on the register. You can and should - protect yourself by writing to DVLA to have them "remove your interest" in a vehicle that has been stolen. Which makes me wonder if you can legally "remove your interest" in a vehicle not stolen but remains in your possession, I suppose you theoretically can, but it would probably leave you open to prosecution under VERA for keeping an unregistered vehicle.

 

There is something in law about a vehicle without gear box or with engine in such a state that no prospect of vehicle being made mobile (and no intention of owner to put it back on the road) is no longer a motor vehicle.

 

Which could help you.

 

what im trying to do is remove their interest from my car without trying to create an estoppel.

 

when you register anything, you hand over what ever it is to another party. this is why if your car is found on the road without licence duty then the dvla can tow it away and scrap it. in reality dvla own your car with your consent.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're trying to do what in the USA some people theoretically think, that because they are constitutionally allowed the right to free travel, that right overrides the laws that require them to register their motor vehicles.

 

We in the UK have the same laws requiring all motor vehicles (which are not exempt) to be registered. We don't have a constitution to give us the same theoretical hopes that they have in the USA. I'll bet you won't actually find any Americans who go through with this idea.

 

Unless you remove the engine and have an intention to never use the vehicle on the road again, you will not be allowed to unregister the vehicle.

 

Just out of interest

There are vehicles that are exempt from continuous registration, vehicles which have been stored off road - untaxed, prior to the SORN laws coming into effect (something like 1995) are exempt from SORN regs & fines, unless they subsequently become taxed - or voluntarily SORN'd again, then they have to from that point on be subject to SORN regs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Statute law applies to PERSONS.

 

Statute laws regarding 'motor vehicles' applies to 'motor vehicles'.

 

The questions that you need to know the answers to according to law are:

 

1. who or what is a PERSON?

 

2. What is a 'motor vehicle'?

 

if i describe 'cherries' as round red fruits, does that mean all round red fruits are 'cherries'?

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he is trying to unregister his car so that he thinks then he wont have to tax it to run it on a road.

 

I suspect he has been taking lessons in law and thinks he has found a loophole to exploit

 

 

Thanks for that flyingdoc. A none starter I guess then! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

i dont THINKi wont have to pay 'vehicle licence duty', i KNOW i wont have to.

 

there are foreigners who have been here in england for years who have driven their cars without ever registering them, who have to pay no vehicle licence duty.

 

the dvla says that after 6 months they MUST register their car with them. in legalese, the word 'must' is equivilant to the word 'may', and there is no obligation to do anything in which you 'must' make application for.

 

every englishman has a lawful right to travel freely on the queen's highways. you have the right to own and use a private conveyance on the roads as long as you are not acting in commerce.

 

a driver is someone who acts in commerce; a vehicle is a conveyance used in commerce; a passenger is someone who pays. anyone acting in commerce has to register their vehicle and pay duty on it and apply for a licence to drive the vehicle.

 

did you claim to be acting in commerce? by making an application for vehicle registration, driver's licence etc, just like i did, you did claim that.

 

hence the reason why i want to unregister because i am not acting in commerce.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that flyingdoc. A none starter I guess then! :D

 

thats a cracker. it must be the way you tell them :D

 

seriously though, if YOU believe it to be a non starter, then so be it for YOU.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with that....

 

and interestingly the Northamptonshir police are cracking down on just the drivers you are talking about - see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-consumer-issues-media/175739-checks-target-foreign-vehicles.html

 

however I would be interested to know what statutes you are relying upon

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with that....

 

and interestingly the Northamptonshir police are cracking down on just the drivers you are talking about - see http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-consumer-issues-media/175739-checks-target-foreign-vehicles.html

 

however I would be interested to know what statutes you are relying upon

 

Officers can seize vehicles if they have been in the UK for longer than six months and are not registered with the DVLA, Pc David Lee said.

"After that period it must be taxed, insured and go through an MOT if it is older than three years," he said.

 

officers who seize privately owned cars are acting unlawfully. what they will try to do is get the owners to consent to statute law, which if the owners do, will mean they will have to go down the route of registration, licences etc. if the owners fail to consent, the police will have no choice but to give the cars back.

 

if they ever tried to take my private car, i'd sue them. but i would inform the police and the dvla from the start what the status of my car is and myself in regard to it, so that there would be no problems.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think that the polices power to seize vehicles at roadside are in contravention of the human rights act - right to a fair trial, and would love to see someone take this on.

As a law student i would be very interested in your arguement for your point of view - what statutes are you demending on?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think that the polices power to seize vehicles at roadside are in contravention of the human rights act - right to a fair trial, and would love to see someone take this on.

As a law student i would be very interested in your arguement for your point of view - what statutes are you demending on?

 

the police can seize vehicles because the vehicles were registered. the dvla have rights to that vehicle because of registration, and the owner gave the dvla those rights by applying and subbmiting volunterily, although the owner believing he was obligated to do so at the time on the basis of hearsay or someone in 'authority' saying that he 'must'.

 

i'm not using any statute, i'm using the common law. statute law overides common only when you consent to it, in other words its a contract, which is the reason why the police will ask you if you 'understand'. so i have to be particular about if and when i use statutes.

 

edited to add: everything the policeman said was true in the quote. imo, this article is being used as propaganda to intimidate people into applying for vehicle registration. the police could seize a private car, but they will know they are running a huge risk in doing so.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry but I have to say that is complete an utter rubbish. Statute law is just that - its law and it applies to you whether you consent or not.

 

a statute is a legisaltive rule of society which is empowered by law.

 

a society is a group of people joined together by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal.

 

do you belong to 'society'? do you know the name of that 'society'? were you obligated to join that 'society'? are you free to leave that 'society'?

 

statutes act on the PERSON. a PERSON is a legal fiction, a coporate entity. do you believe yourself to be a PERSON or a Human? do you have an obligation to act on behalf of the PERSON?

 

why does the policman ask you 'do you understand?'. why does he need evidence of the PERSON?

 

why does the customs officer ask for your permission to search through your luggage at the airport, to take swobs, to smash items if they believe it to be concealing drugs? if it was the law and mandatory there would be no reason to ask.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah I was misunderstanding - I thought we were talking about reality not exostentialism.

 

A Person is not a legal fiction - there is a tried and tested definition of what is termed a Legal or Natural Person (legal person may be a company) and statutes apply to them whether or not they consider themselves to be part of the society.

 

I am all for challenging the system, for fighting for and championing the ever diminishing bundle of rights that the individual has, but pardon me for saying that your mantra actually makes no sense, and is of no real value in such a forum as this.

 

You cannot challenge the system from without as you appear to be attempting. How, for instance, are you going to get a court to uphold your claim- when part of your claim is that the very statutes that the court relies on for its authority are fictions.

 

whilst these debates are interesting and entertaining, most people come here for hard, factual and reliable advice. not philosophy.

 

oh an by the way - by CHOOSING to live in the UK you are CHOOSING to be part of the society and therefore bound by the laws of the country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah I was misunderstanding - I thought we were talking about reality not exostentialism.

 

interesting that i keep witnessing this exostentialism in reality because they keep asking for my consent.

 

A Person is not a legal fiction - there is a tried and tested definition of what is termed a Legal or Natural Person (legal person may be a company) and statutes apply to them whether or not they consider themselves to be part of the society.
a PERSON is not a Human, its not anything that exits except on paper. thats fiction.

 

but pardon me for saying that your mantra actually makes no sense, and is of no real value in such a forum as this.
pardon me, but was it not you who took the thread off topic by asking me WHY i was doing this?

 

How, for instance, are you going to get a court to uphold your claim- when part of your claim is that the very statutes that the court relies on for its authority are fictions.
the statute needs to be consented to. if there is no consent how can it possibly be enforced? the court's authority doesnt come from statute, it comes from common law and the soveriegn.

 

oh an by the way - by CHOOSING to live in the UK you are CHOOSING to be part of the society and therefore bound by the laws of the country.
ANYONE choosing to live in the England comes under the law and customs of england as sworn to by the soveriegn... anything else, they contract to. statutes are not laws, that are really coporation rules empowered by law through consent. its starts off as a BILL and then becomes a statutory INSTRUMENT. its commerce!

 

whilst these debates are interesting and entertaining, most people come here for hard, factual and reliable advice. not philosophy.
again, you took the thread off topic asking me why. and if it were all so easliy rubbished as nonsense why havent you answered any of the questions i raised on consent? do you believe those in 'authority' ask you out politeness? lol imo, the reason why you dont address this is because you cant. you have belief system to defend and you prefer to keep that intact than realise gravity of what it all means. thats your philosophy, and good luck to you with it.

 

you cannot beat a system in which you empower it by your consent.

"... all legal obligations arose from FREE CHOICE - which, if it was not expressed, must then be implied"

 

P.S. Atiyah, Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract

Link to post
Share on other sites

A police officer asks if a person understands because courts have accepted that the wording of the caution is understood by most people, but also accepts that there may be some who need to have the meaning explained in a different way, therefor they are asked 'do you understand'.

 

In the case of the customs officers, they can have the authority to search, but asking is just being polite and it is a lot easier to do things with consent . If the person refuses they can search anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

its starts off as a BILL and then becomes a statutory INSTRUMENT.

 

it starts of as a bill and becomes an act of parliament... and acts of parliament are laws and laws are enforceable with or without your consent.

 

Yes there are times when authorities ask for, and require consent, but there are, equally times when consent is not required or asked and no amount of protestation that you do not consent will prevent that law being enforced upon you.

 

statutes are not laws,

 

plain and simple - but 100% wrong....

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4123 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...