Understand The Paperwork

Understanding the system is crucial and the first thing we have to understand is the pecking order of law as a higher form of law is superior law while anything below it is inferior law, so what does this mean? it actually means that inferior law does not trump superior law and this is the reason that legal precedents set in a higher court such as the High Court are binging on lower courts such as Crown or magistrates courts.

To understand the pecking order of law we will look at the highest three forms of law in order of superiority and the highest for of law is:

Natural Law

Natural law is easily understood and as simple as "if it rains you get wet" and refers to natural occurances in life, therefore we could conclude that "if its icy in winter the ground will be slippery" is natural law as ice is a natural occurance and when its icy its slippery, so nothing difficult to understand.

Next in the pecking order is:

Commercial Law

Commercial law is simply 10 maxims and understanding Commercial law maxims and their meanings is crucial as this dates back to pre Roman times and has never, and never can be changed or altered and understanding commercial law is the way to success, I will explain later.

Maxim 1 - A workman is worthy of his hire.
In simple terms this means "thou shalt not steal" which relates to the bible, Exodus I believe. This simply means that if you employ comeone you pay the agreed price.

Maxim 2 - All are equal before the law.
In simple terms this means that nobody is above the law.

Maxim 3 - In commerce truth is sovereign.
This means if someone doesn't tell the truth or lies then they have no claim and that any claim they make is invalid.

Maxim 4 - Truth is expressed in the form of an Affidavit.
What this actually means is that no valid transaction can occur in commerce unless someone states this is TRUE, CORRECT, AND COMPLETE, so what does this actually mean?
Affidavits can come in many forms such as an invoice, bill, or simply a claim which can be written or verbally, and anyone making such a claim must accept liability for its voracity, as a company is a dead entity it cannot make a claim leaving only another human being to make the claim. To make a claim someone somewhere has to have made a true ledger or true accounting to support their claim and must sign the claim and accept liability for their claims, irrespective of any claim made against you for any debt.

Maxim 5 - An unrebutted claim stands as truth.
Simply put, you always rebut their claims otherwise it stands at truth.

Common Law
In simple terms common law is merely judges trying to use common perceptions (misconceptions) and put them into law, does this really matter? NO because Commercil Law is superior to common law and cannot override it.

Both Natural Law and Commercial Law CANNOT be abrogated and this is proven by the fact they have remained unchanged for thousands of years and no judge can overrule them as they are absolutes.

Lets connect the dots here, why play in Government Acts and Statutes when they are inferior law, go straight to superior law and play in commercial law as this always trumps them and NO judge will even try as the liability would be horrific in more than just monetary terms.

Lets begin with claims:

Joe Bloggs gets a demand from a debt company claiming he owes them £2000 which will be reduced to £1000 if he pays within 28 days.
Maxim 1, have you hired him? no, then you dont have to pay him
Maxin 2, you are both equal before the law and always remember this.
Maxim 3, are they telling the truth?
Maxim 4Truth is expressed in the form of an Affidavit, now we look at their claims, who is making this claim, oh a company which are a dead entity and cannot make claims, they send a letter on company headed notepaper proving this letter is rom a company who cannot make a claim, who has signed this claim, Dopey Debt Collections LTD, no signature so who has done the ledgers for their claim and where is the accounting, oh no accounting, finally nobody has signed the letter so nobody is accepting liability so straight away it is an invalid claim due to procedural impropriety.
Maxim 5, you contact them and rebut their claims on the grounds of proceedural impropriety so they cannot stand as truth.

They cannot provide accounting so never will, meaning their claim is not true, correct and complete and note the complete and we can translate this to incomplete which means invalid claim.

They try for a CCJ, remember Commercial Law is superior Law and an inferior court cannot overrule Superior Law so respond to the court and remain in superior law and as no Judge from an inferior court can overrule a superior law, you win.
You need your copies of your paperwork, namely the letter of rebuttal and the letter only stating commercial law and the Judge finds for you on the grounds of procedural impropriety.

If we continue with commercial law it becomes interesting and gives us grounds to attack them and totally undermine their claims and allegations.

Maxim 6 - An unrebutted affidavit becomes judgement in commerce.
This is crucial and the reason we rebut their claims, they send a letter claiming you owe them XYZ then it becomes judgement if it isn.t rebutted. Always rebut anything they claim if it is untrue because if you don't it will stand as truth and truth becomes judgement, against you.
This is simpler than many people think and you ask basic questions, have they provided full accounting, has someone signed it and accepted liability for their claims, and have they the authority to issue any summons? if not then their claim is not true, correct and COMPLETE, this means no claim exists. (will deal with authority to issue summonses later)

Maxim 7 - For any matter to be resolved it must be expresed.
This is a crucial maxim as it is your time to express everything, and I mean everything, if you forget something and try to add it in later you are the one not meeting the criteria of true, correct, and complete as you have admitted it is not complete and have claimed it is, instant black mark from the Judge which may be crucial come the verdict.
Sit and think, write every small detail down, go over it time and time again until its correct and list everything down, spend the time to get it complete.

Maxim 8 - Whoever leaves the battlefield first loses by default.
Translated this means they have to rebut everything in substance and deal with it point for point, fail to rebut a single point in substance then they lose. This can become absurd and someone may claim their neighbour has a 1" todger and to rebut in substance by sending a photograph of the member with a tape measure alongside it!!! sound absurd? actually, while this is an extreme example, be under no illusions they will be equally as devious in trying to rebut in substance.
Fail to follow it through and you leave the battlefield, forget to send a time sensitive document and you have left the battlefield. Today we dont have pistols at dawn, we have courts and commercial law and the battlefield becomes the judge judging the affidavits.

Maxim 9 - Sacrifice is the measure of credibility.
This simply means the more you stake on your claim, the more credibility you have. Most people have heard gamblers say they would bet their house on the outcome of something and exactly the same thinking applies, if you are correct you will stake everything on your claim, including your home.

Maxim 10 - A lien or claim can only be satisfied through a counter claim rebuttal, point by point by counter affidavit, resolution by jury, or payment.
This is where claims become interesting as something called sub judice comes into play and often a judge will defer a decision until another outstanding case is heard. In many cases you may be charged with something and submitted an affidavit, in which case a judge will defer until the decision of another court is reached. Nerfarious lawyers try to use this by using the decision of a lower court to influence the decisions of a higher court, so be aware of it.

In this next segment we look at improprietary and this can take many forms, in most cases this will be procedural impropriety and is mainly dealing with local authorities issuing summonses.

Our first port of call is the court itself as under law only the Queen and Parliament can sanction a court of law, this immediately means any administrative court is illegal and has no jurisdiction to act and to give this legitimacy they have to get you to consent to being the "Person" as by default you are consenting to them acting.
When it comes to our old favourite the Northampton County Court Bulk Centre it cannot be legal or Lawful as it isn't sanctioned as a court, therefore it has no magistrates or Judges, so cannot issue any warrants against anyone, if they do its fraud and they give you the evidence, its very name tells you it is acting as an administrative court.

So how do they use this deceipt?

Basically they try to get you to consent by engagement, they send paperwork out addressed to the "person" and its a numbers game as if 80% of people respond it means 80% of the cases are ripe for cash extraction and they do this in several ways.

They hire a court for a morning, afternoon, or even a full day and this comes with a magistrate so they are employing someone, the magistrate acts under his/her private capacity and not in their public capacity and the HMCTS charges for this service, last time I looked it was £750 for the room with magistrate and £4 per stamped and signed summons.
Think about this for a moment, if you employ a builder to build your garden wall then YOU are employing the builder to work for you, its exactly the same principle for a council hiring a court, they are employed by the council to work for the council, therefore it is a biased and unfair procedure and they have lured you into it.

Or

They issue the summons themselves, no council is a court and if only a court can issue a summons they are actually guilty of a criminal offence of impersonating a court and anything they issue is unlawful and is invalid, but, it raises the threat levels to force most people to pay.

So what do we do? forget arguing and go straight for the fraud jugular, they often issue documentation which has several sections on it and you always tick the section marked Procedural Impropriety or similar as by default if it is incorrectly issued it is not a valid claim and you have nothing to answer.

What is this, basically its nothing more than a business arrangement between two companies, firstly its a business arrangement between the council and local magistrates court, or secondly an arrangement between the council and a partner company, What is this? councils often set up other companies to administer certain functions and one would be parking, several councils club together and form a new company which works solely for them to administer their parking tickets and this deflects away form the council, they often work for a county council and all the borough councils within it.

What authority do they have? actually none to issue a summons and many may claim they work with the local courts or that the clerk of the court has authorised them to do this, actually only the Queen and Parliament can sanction a court so any clerk has exceeded his authority if this were true, which, in most cases is a lie to cover up their fraudulent actions. Its a business arrangement designed to con and dupe as many people into thinking they have to pay.

assassin wrote:this immediately means any administrative court is illegal and has no jurisdiction to act and to give this legitimacy they have to get you to consent to being the "Person" as by default you are consenting to them acting.

Exactly assassin, no different to utility Co(s) 'using' thier own 'courts' to issue warrants of entry for gas & leccy.

if 1 happens to find 1 self in a situation:

they will ask what is your name or are you.....?

I will reply to your question shortly, but keep this question in mind, does the Judiciary have evidence contrary to the following?

I am the benificiary of this constructed trust here today! - at that point it probably descend into a right farce.


(2014)

Using commercial law has two benefits if using Affidavits, firstly it is both non judicial and pre judicial so no judge can or will act in the matter, and its the highest form of law apart from Natural Law so no lower courts Judge can rule in the matter as lower courts are bound by the precedents of the higher court, but often ignore them because generally they are narcicistic beings who think they are above the law. They soon find they aren't, had 2 tribunal Judges sacked this year already and another one to be sacked, he doesn't know it yet.

Why do I never lose with parking tickets? because I challenge the authority of those issuing it and they know I have them by the short and curlies and don't want people knowing this so they can continue their revenue collecting from the unknowing public, usually by accepting procedural impropriety or withdrawing the case. Why?

If I publicise the methods I use then they would lose a lot of revenue so lets do some maths; our (alleged) Local Authority issues 102 PCN's per day according to official figures, they start as £35 if you pay promptly and that equates toa minimum £3570 per day of revenue and as many are not prompt payers this means many pay £70 which increases their daily revenue stream, now multiply this by 365 to work out their annual income.

If they settle with me and pay my trust £3,000 compensation they are still in profit by £570 minimum, so do they lose the majority of one days income and collect on the other 364 days? of course they do. Its always down to money and profits. Sure, they pay their agents 15% of this and they employ thugs to issue the tickets, and they run another company to administer this but these are all legitimate companies who offset any business expenses against tax, so in reality a company costs nothing to run.

Just to back up assassins excellent thread,this just out;



Maxims can be found here;
https://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/bouvier/maxims.shtml

Great explanations, @assassin, especially about the maxims of commercial law. How can we all have been so dense and debtor-minded for so long ??
Just as well you keep your methods private, the government would go broke (again!)

Thanks Urchin.