Private parking firms CANNOT fine you Daniel Bostock on the BBC

What occurred to me, was we need some sort of immunity, like diplomatic immunity.

It actually causes no problems as by not being registered you do not need to comply with their rules, its only when you register it that you have entered an adhesion contract with them which forces you to abide by their rules.

By not registering a vehicle it remains YOUR property, register and it becomes THEIR property and you are only the registered keeper. They can come along at any time and lift their vehicle and even sell it.

By not registering a vehicle it remains your property and you have the right to travel under Common Law and nowhere does it state that you need to tax, MOT, and insure anything for your right to travel, if it were the case every pedestrian, horse, bike, or indeed anything else which travels on the queens highway would need to be taxed, MOT'd, and insured.

If the pigs stop you then you already know they are only after getting your consent, and getting you into a contract; you know they operate mainly on assumptions, and will try to get you some way as theres money to be made. You simply make it clear that you aren't going to consent and you aren't going to enter any contract, and your wording here is crucial.

They will refer to your vehicle or a motor vehicle, this is only a term used under statute law, you always use the term "my property" or my private property, or private conveyance and never the term vehicle or motor vehicle, you never acknowledge the terms vehicle or motor vehicle and correct them every time they use it to your terminology.

If they want you out of the private property, you never get out, they will try the trick "you have committed an offence" but how can you have committed an offence under their rules and regulations if they do not apply to your private conveyance as by its very nature it is a private conveyance as you have not agreed to their terms and conditions by NOT registering your private conveyance and changing its terminology to vehicle.

What happens if they do? you video and they are committing the offence of damaging your private property and assaulting you, as well as committing fraud as they have no "reasonable grounds" to even stop you in the first place, so they are now acting in their private capacity while in uniform and on duty. You can now bring a case against them individually, and their employer, the police force.

bimmer wrote:What occurred to me, was we need some sort of immunity, like diplomatic immunity.

No you dont, you only need Common Law.

hi assassin have you got a deregisted car cos i would like to preregister mine one day

In trust.

assassin wrote:In trust.

Have you put your legal name in trust as well?

o assassin i will have to have a look in to a trust because i trust no one only my self

Trust
I wonder if we get secretly watched

We have good members on this site that give great advice and support we can trust , but always remember we are not solicitors always do your own research

andybreck wrote:o assassin i will have to have a look in to a trust because i trust no one only my self

That might be tricky, the whole point of a trust, is to give legal control of your assets (res) to a third party (trustee), you can't be the trustee and either the grantor or beneficiary.

That might be tricky, the whole point of a trust, is to give legal control of your assets (res) to a third party (trustee), you can't be the trustee and either the grantor or beneficiary.[/quote]

The settlor can't be sole trustee, but the the beneficiary can be beneficiary and trustee. Preference in law from what I understand would be two trustees and a beneficiary, then the settlor can be settlor trustee and beneficiary.

If its a vehicle or once in trust your private property you can have someone act as settlor and place it in trust for you and act as trustee whilst you are trustee beneficiary.

I think we're both wrong, according to what I've watched re: Richard Ansah

I'm nearly through his first video, its pretty good, well explained and broken into english, which as he says is unusual. I respect his experience and there its a lot of knowledge that can be acquired, however, there are a couple of points that may be subject to my critical thinking. The DVLA do not own the vehicle, the owner owns the vehicle, the owner is the person who purchases it. You just have to be able to prove it. The registered keeper  can be considered beneficiary and trustee, because they have a responsibility under the laws of the road to perform and make sure the vehicle performs to their standards, they also have beneficial rights to use the vehicle, and if they are the owner they have equitable interests in it. The DVLA maintain the register for contactual purposes if the vehicle is being used on public roads so are trustees and I don't know who receives the tax & MOT but I'd bet its not the DVLA.

Under the Traffic Management Act 2004 and the Transport Act 2000 the person who is liable to pay any Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) issued in respect of a vehicle is its owner.

https://www.trafficpenaltytribunal.gov.uk/owner-liability/

This is a brash statement to make if the DVLA own the vehicle, they would be saying, try it see if you can prove the DVLA is the owner.

The owner of the vehicle is the person who bought it, if you want title then you need the manufactures certificate of origin or MSO (should make it clear this is US)(a receipt is the best you'll get in the UK), this is what the dealerSHIP have when the vehicle is imported, get that and you own the allodial title.

The owner and registered keeper are two different entities, a, is settlor and, b, is trustee, if we are thinking of a basic trust scenario  Neither are the DVLA. However, as I stated in a previous port they like to have two trustees, registered keeper and DVLA.

You can be settlor and responsible for taxes, just read the Chequers estate act. I guess its how the trusts are set up, as Richard said his links were at introduction level.

This is also where the trust we are talking about comes in and restricts liability to satisfy debts, if there is proof the registered keeper dosn't own the vehicle then the bailiff can't take it. A receipt or declaration is proof and creates the trust relationship, registered keeper has responsibility but does not own it, therefore its not a commodity to satisfy the registered keepers unpaid debts.

Hi all

in response to the comment:
This is a brash statement to make if the DVLA own the vehicle, they would be saying, try it see if you can prove the DVLA is the owner.

Totally understand where you re coming from.

trusts is 99% focused on actions or deeds or the spirit of something than it is on what is written - the letter (of the law)

The very fact that one 'registers' the car is an act that constitutes a trust relationship.

If one fails to pay a fine and suddenly another party can fine you or take the car away.. then by determination a trust relationship exits

Please also note that no party need realise they are in a trust and nothing needs to be written down to establish a trust.

so, in my opinion.. all statues at law are just smoke and mirror tools to disguise what's really going on. One can have a modicum of success but equity will ALWAYS supersede statutes and acts where a wrong hs been done and where a remedy is required


So.. Ergo... I believe the DVLA are the government agency who enjoys receiving fines and payments for trustees who fail to perform their duty of making sure their cars are road worthy etc.

Another case in point is that the V% form states REGISTERED KEEPER - not OWNER (beneficial) - a registered Keeper is a trustee or legal owner... the legal owner ALWAYS has the responsibility of payment the BENEFICIAL OWNER always enjoys the USE of the thing or title

Waffle wrote:This is also where the trust we are talking about comes in and restricts liability to satisfy debts, if there is proof the registered keeper dosn't own the vehicle then the bailiff can't take it. A receipt or declaration is proof and creates the trust relationship, registered keeper has responsibility but does not own it, therefore its not a commodity to satisfy the registered keepers unpaid debts.

The registered keeper is the legal owner... At Law that is all that is required to establish liability.

The name of the game is to 'legally' own nothing and 'beneficially' own everything...

As long as one is the legal owner of ANYTHING, mr government can take it as YOU - ALL CAPS NAME is a creation of the Entity known as Government.

A beneficiary or Beneficial owner, only has power in the private capacity and the Lions share of ownership can only be acknowledged in the private. (i.e. broke in the legal world but has full control) Live like a king but a Pauper on paper

Name of the game is if you want to protect it and enjoy it.. get it out of your name and become a beneficiary!

The beauty of trusts is that no one has to believe me...it's all written in black and white.. no more assumptions and presumptions like at law..

The owner and registered keeper are two different entities, a, is settlor and, b, is trustee, if we are thinking of a basic trust scenario Neither are the DVLA. However, as I stated in a previous port they like to have two trustees, registered keeper and DVLA. wrote:

Completely agreed and this is why one must learn to recognise where CONSTRUCTION at law has taken place and how to express the trust (relationship) to correct the records...

obviously pick your fights.. but essentially that's what's going on.

DVLA are pretending to be you - the settlor...
not just DVLA... every corporate fiction that exists are doing that.. they have no choice... after all everything is a fiction.. and fiction has no power ...without your consent or ignorance or it.

by forcing me to register my bike and now the DVLA are the owner, they can give me the money I paid for it or they can show that I am the TRUE owner on the V5.

A bill is on the way to them, let's see what crap they come up with.



Mavrik

[quote="AnsahPhD"]

As long as one is the legal owner of ANYTHING, mr government can take it as YOU - ALL CAPS NAME is a creation of the Entity known as Government. [/quote]

Im glad you've pointed this out. Its something i've been trying to tell others else where. It is all YOU can be, how else would a corporation have the power to throw you from your throne.... They can only do this if YOU are a creature of statute, also termed a creature of the state.

Be the king and own nothing, why would you need to when you have rights of use. This is what I have began to work towards understanding, I have to say Richard, I enjoyed your first video there are a couple of points worth discussing deeper. I'm half way through your second call, its fantastic I have the note pad and pen out, you cover the key points clearly and concisely and its easy to understand, a lot of hard work has gone into this.

I've been trying to unravel a mystery for a couple of months and have just the last few days made sense of it, its within the acts and v relevant to your work, its actually just concluded in deeds, trusts and entailed interests. Quite a breakthrough from my perspective and should open a lot of opportunity to earn rents and profits from your "land" and "property". I'll go through your free webinars in more detail, your shared knowledge will be very helpful.

[quote="mavrik"]by forcing me to register my bike and now the DVLA are the owner, they can give me the money I paid for it or they can show that I am the TRUE owner on the V5.

A bill is on the way to them, let's see what crap they come up with.



Mavrik
[/quote]

The DVLA are trustee as is your strawman, if you have the receipt then this is the proof you are the true owner and as owner of your strawman you are surety for any of the strawmans liabilities, as trustee. The DVLA are trustees and act as settlor, this is for your use of the bike on public roads, they are not your roads. We need to establish the correct capacity in equity to correct our position and protect the strawman from damage and to protect yourself as surety..

Waffle wrote:

AnsahPhD wrote:

As long as one is the legal owner of ANYTHING, mr government can take it as YOU - ALL CAPS NAME is a creation of the Entity known as Government.

Im glad you've pointed this out. Its something i've been trying to tell others else where. It is all YOU can be, how else would a corporation have the power to throw you from your throne.... They can only do this if YOU are a creature of statute, also termed a creature of the state.

Be the king and own nothing, why would you need to when you have rights of use. This is what I have began to work towards understanding, I have to say Richard, I enjoyed your first video there are a couple of points worth discussing deeper. I'm half way through your second call, its fantastic I have the note pad and pen out, you cover the key points clearly and concisely and its easy to understand, a lot of hard work has gone into this.

I've been trying to unravel a mystery for a couple of months and have just the last few days made sense of it, its within the acts and v relevant to your work, its actually just concluded in deeds, trusts and entailed interests. Quite a breakthrough from my perspective and should open a lot of opportunity to earn rents and profits from your "land" and "property". I'll go through your free webinars in more detail, your shared knowledge will be very helpful.

Pretty cool

Waffle wrote:

The DVLA are trustee as is your strawman, if you have the receipt then this is the proof you are the true owner and as owner of your strawman you are surety for any of the strawmans liabilities, as trustee. The DVLA are trustees and act as settlor, this is for your use of the bike on public roads, they are not your roads. We need to establish the correct capacity in equity to correct our position and protect the strawman from damage and to protect yourself as surety..

Why would the DVLA be trustees? They don't want to be the liable party. They want to be the Settlor and tell YOU, the liable party / legal owner/keeper / trustee to pay, because you broke the law.

bimmer wrote:

Waffle wrote:

The DVLA are trustee as is your strawman, if you have the receipt then this is the proof you are the true owner and as owner of your strawman you are surety for any of the strawmans liabilities, as trustee. The DVLA are trustees and act as settlor, this is for your use of the bike on public roads, they are not your roads. We need to establish the correct capacity in equity to correct our position and protect the strawman from damage and to protect yourself as surety..

Why would the DVLA be trustees? They don't want to be the liable party. They want to be the Settlor and tell YOU, the liable party / legal owner/keeper / trustee to pay, because you broke the law.

What law?? Laws are backed by acts and statutes, all of which require your consent. If you keep on accepting their legislation, acts and statutes as being LAW, then you merely continue giving your consent and to play their game...and it is a game. By admitting that you drive any said vehicle, you admit to be driving for commerce and profit, this is playing their game. If you admit to being the STRAWMAN, you play their game. Recognize the STRAWMAN and once again you play their game. Which are you...Man, Woman or Strawman?? Think about this very carefully before giving your answer...and by the way, I'm asking this of everyone who reads the posts of this group.

The trustee has broken the law (Act) if they don't abide by the rules of the constructive trust (Act), it's their rules that they are forcing unto us. They don't need to tell us, but as we think we are liable, there is in fact a trust agreement by default. Just denying the strawman exists, or not consenting and/or fighting yourself, creates a lot of hassle/energy, I'd prefer a gatekeeper, aka a trustee to deal with my legal affairs, who would rebut their allegations of liability.

[quote="bimmer"][quote="Waffle"]

The DVLA are trustee as is your strawman, if you have the receipt then this is the proof you are the true owner and as owner of your strawman you are surety for any of the strawmans liabilities, as trustee. The DVLA are trustees and act as settlor, this is for your use of the bike on public roads, they are not your roads. We need to establish the correct capacity in equity to correct our position and protect the strawman from damage and to protect yourself as surety..[/quote]

Why would the DVLA be trustees? They don't want to be the liable party. They want to be the Settlor and tell YOU, the liable party / legal owner/keeper / trustee to pay, because you broke the law.[/quote]


Thats a good question Bimmer, not all trusts are individual and actually many government type trusts are trusts within trusts, the DVLA are acting as trustees to ensure that you are performing in the correct manner for the government, they have to be trustees to make sure that the "laws" are not broken and if they are then you go to see the settlor in court. They have a different function as trustees than what we do, the rights, title and interests are split, they have a share and so do we.

Another question worth asking is what happens to the DVLA if they don't perform to the governments standards, I;m pretty sure there will be consequences for them too.