TREASON


Channel's geo and language: not specified, not specified
Category: not specified


Similar channels

Channel's geo and language
not specified, not specified
Category
not specified
Statistics
Posts filter


Implied Rights of Access.pdf
91.9Kb
Remove Implied Rights of Access Letter


Vulnerable Person

Don't give the bailiff any evidence of vulnerability, give it to the 'AUTHORITY' that has instructed them if you want to evidence vulnerability.
What TYPE of "debt" are they attempting to collect?
A Vulnerable notification will STOP a REAL BAILIFF with a HIGH COURT WRIT:
https://sites.google.com/view/vulnerable-letter/home

But 'bailiffs' acting for the Council or LOWER "courts" will continue in spite of Vulnerable notification.

For things like COUNCIL TAX, there is no COURT ORDER, so they don't have any authority to take anything.

For PCN's, they act on a WARRANT issued to the Council by the TEC (technically unenforceable by a sub-contractor)

For Court fines (these CAN be executed by sub-contractors) they can as a LAST resort force entry, so is best to deal with the Court and ask for a 'means test'.

In ALL cases it is better to deal with the Authority who has issued the COURT ORDER and not the sub-contractor who is adding on fees.
Always try to deal with the ORGAN GRINDER and not the MONKEY.

https://sites.google.com/view/monkey-organ-grinder/home


🤬🤬🤬 Ian has been removed off FB 🤬🤬🤬
Lucky I got everything 🖕🏼






Forward from: TREASON
CLEARFIELD Doctrine
Text in photo Download
https://t.me/itsTreason/173
Join
https://t.me/itsTreason




Forward from: TREASON
text.txt
9.6Kb
#Speeding #Fines #PCN
Download PDF
Join
https://t.me/itsTreason


Forward from: TREASON
#Speeding Fines #PCN
Speeding Fines and PCN
Download PDF
https://t.me/itsTreason/163
Join
https://t.me/itsTreason


Forward from: TREASON
LEGITIMACY OF DPE/BILL OF RIGHTS 1689
For the avoidance of any doubt in the following matter it is very useful that the Houses of Parliament Transport Committee Press Notice (04/2005-06, 9 August 2005) refers to "parking fines". There can be no argument.
If the Committee, the public, the Bulk Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court and the legislators consider parking penalty charges as fines then the attempted justifications put forward by local authorities that it is not a fine but an "excess charge" or other play on words, it is clear to all that what we are dealing with here is a fine.
Therefore, I wish for the Committee to now consider and address the legality of DPE itself in light of the following.
As no doubt members will be aware, on 21 July 1993, the Speaker of The House of Commons issued a reminder to the courts. Betty Boothroyd said: "There has of course been no amendment to The Bill of Rights . . . the House is entitled to expect that The Bill of Rights will be fully respected by all those appearing before the courts."
There is a provision in the Bill of Rights Act 1689 which states:
"That all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of a particular person before conviction are illegal and void."

https://t.me/itsTreason


Forward from: TREASON
#ParkingFines 👇🏼
https://t.me/itsTreason/142

https://t.me/itsTreason


TRUSS CANT BE TRUSTED

EMAIL HER AND LET HER KNOW:
👇🏼
elizabeth.truss.mp@parliament.uk

https://t.me/itsTreason


Forward from: TREASON
Is the class now getting whats happening !
CORPORATE TAKEOVER...
by illegal means
Ok there is nothing stopping we all from moving to establishing our own representative
parliament as the
SOVEREIGN PARLIAMENT
and THAT WILL HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW....
we canwait until the rightful monarch comes along
....Wrap your heads around it but DONT DELAY !!!
Ian x
Learn more here:
https://t.me/itsTreason


Forward from: TREASON
The Act of Settlement is Founded on Natural Law 🌱




Forward from: TREASON
Picture 4


Forward from: TREASON
Picture 3


Forward from: TREASON
Picture 2

18 last posts shown.

68

subscribers
Channel statistics