Using Maxims

Understanding Maxims is crucial to dealing with many things, debt collectors and banks are among them, it is also crucial to understand that debt collectors and banks try every trick they can to force you into situations which give them control by forcing you into situations detrimental to you.

Maxims should be included wherever possible as they control the Judge and this controls the court, if you can, always include case law (precedents) along with your maxims and always cite cases only from higher courts such as the High Court or Supreme Court. When used correctly a maxim has immense power so only use maxims applicable to your case and don’t simply include a maxim because it sounds good, so what is a maxim.

Statement of Principle
Truth and Reasonableness
A Rule of Equity
A system that compliments Common Law

Maxims are not actually the law as they are the principles on which the law is built and any case law is built upon these maxims and this is the reason they are so powerful, no judge can ignore the foundations of law.

In equity acts inpersonum is a maxim which means someone must act in person, which means someone must sign their letters of claim so they accept liability, they cannot get someone else to do this for them, so unsigned letters of claim are evidence of acts inpersonum and are evidence of fraud. If they use a solicitor they are not acting for themselves, is the solicitor going to issue an affidavit stating they have full knowledge of this case based on first-hand experience? Basically they won’t as they cannot and you can tell them to do one, and backed by a maxim of law.

When they ignore your three letters they are not going into a case with “clean hands” and this means you must go in with clean hands, irrespective of how many convictions you have. You must enter a case with clean hands, so do so. Many solicitors and barristers try to discredit you from using any dodgy past you have and it is irrelevant as long as you enter a case with clean hands and this is an enforceable rule of law which a judge cannot ignore. In addition to this they are ignoring three lawful maxims:

Failing to follow Pre Action Protocols
Failing to follow Rules of Evidence
Failing to follow Pre Trial Discovery

By failing to follow these three maxims they are entering the case with dirty hands and failing to follow the law and where there is right there is remedy, so they have wronged you and given you remedy by their own actions, omissions or failures.

Whenever you use a maxim you must quote it correctly and NEVER shorten, abbreviate, or paraphrase it so always quote the whole maxim in its entirety. Find the correct maxim and verify it using a law dictionary or similar. Never use legal or lawful texts written by others as the author could have abbreviated it themselves to condense it; or a publisher could have shortened it during editing.

Always remember a solicitor will never tell you what they don’t want you to know as they want to win and if they can railroad you they will, stick rigidly to the process and don’t be deceived into doing something which will weaken your case. Examples of this are "to contact them by E-mail and they will send you documentation".
E mails are not currently classed as “served” in English law and they will stand up in court and state you were never served and put you in a position of dishonour and win their case by showing you have dirty hands and by being untruthful, don’t fall for their dirty tricks. This is why we always deal only in writing as a solicitor knows they have to sign documentation, and will, and expect to play on your ignorance, usually they will win as most people are ignorant, remember they have experience and you don’t.

This is why E mails ae a no no and why solicitors use this trick.
Only deal in writing as this gives you proof of claim.

Now we will show a few examples of maxims along with a brief explanation:

Causa patet – this means “the reason is obvious”. If a claimant fails to send the requested documentation in your three letters they have failed to adhere to Pre Action Protocols, Rules of Evidence and Pre Trial Discovery, and by failing to adhere to them causa patet informs the judge of their failure and the reasons for your claim or counter claim or affidavit are obvious.

Chiragraphum non extans praes umitursolutum - which means “with no evidence the debt is presumed to have been discharged”.
They have failed to send you documentation as requested in your three letters, broken the above requirements of pre action protocols, rules of evidence, and pre-trial discovery, so by failing to disclose them they have put a court in a position of only finding for you and discharged any alleged debt.

These two maxims alone work well together and generally see off most debt collectors, but what if as they claim, they pass it to their solicitors, a typical threat in which solicitors send you documentation stating that by responding to them that you are contracting with them. Firstly, this is in a jurisdiction in which a solicitor cannot act as it is Lawful and not legal and most debt company solicitors profit hugely from this and their greed is their downfall, so they take the risk for profit.

Contractus ex turpi causa vel contra bonos mores nullus est - which means “a contract founded on a wrongful consideration or against good morals is null”. As third party interlopers they are trying to force you to contract with them, against your will, and this is immoral. Solicitors cannot act in Lawful jurisdictions and this is also unlawful and immoral.

Culpa est immiscere se rei ad se non pertaini – which means it is the fault for anyone to meddle in a matter not pertaining to them. So, solicitors cannot act in such matters as they cannot have first-hand knowledge of such matters as only the plaintiff and defendant have first-hand knowledge. Therefore you are politely telling these interlopers to F*CK OFF and stop meddling in your private affairs, there is also the issue of a debt company passing your personal details on to another party without your consent which breaches GDPR 2018 or General Data Protection Regulations, and this is a claim for unlawful actions. This, if needed; can be followed with:

Decephs, non deci pientibus – which means “The law helps persons who have been deceived, not those deceiving”. Already we have seen unlawful and procedural failures, solicitors trying to meddle in your private affairs, and both are trying to deceive you along with their paperwork which is your evidence of this. You could also add, if required:

Cuique in sua arte credendum est – which means – “everyone is to be believed in his own area of expertise”. Only you and the debt company are considered to be persons of expertise, hence why the individual dealing with this issue/claim must deal with it. By passing this onto another company such as solicitors, they are have no expertise in this matter and are deemed as third party interlopers with no voracity in the matter.

Is this all equity? Yes because equity extends not only to money, but tangible property which has an equitable value, why do they try to clamp your car and seize other assets? Because; they all have an equitable (financial) value.

I like to finish with the killer:

Actore non probante, reus absolvitur – which means if a plaintiff does not prove his case, the defendant is acquitted.

If we move on a little and we follow the basic rules; we can use a maxim or several maxims, and we can substantiate this with actual case law and introduce actual case law to substantiate our claim and further reinforce it. An example is:

Pondlife Scum and Co has made several claims against me claiming I owe them £1000, I conditionally accept the claim upon production of evidence validating the debt.
Having sent several requests for production of validation of claim Pondlife Scum and Co have not sent any documents to evidence their claim in contravention of the law of properties act 1925; and Supreme Court ruling; see (Van Lynn Developments V Pelias Construction Co Ltd 1968) Where Lord Denning M.R. said “the debtor is entitled to view the sale agreement to ensure that the assignee can give good discharge under the contract”.

Now you have quoted Maxims of law and included case law (precedents) from the Supreme court which is the highest court, and no lower court such as High Court, County Court, or magistrates court can overrule this as only another Supreme Court judge can overrule it. You have provided the court with the maxim/s and case law to substantiate it, which is why this is so hard hitting and effective in dealing with debt and banks.

There are some simple rules to follow in drafting such letters:

Keep it short and concise.
Use only one verb and pronoun per sentence.
Keep it flowing in logical order.
Keep it grammatically correct.
Check everything from the spelling of lawful maxims to your own spelling.

Now you have the tools to hit them hard and it doesn’t matter if this is used in the form of a letter or Affidavit as, by sending them you are creating your correct paperwork and obtaining their own paperwork showing clear evidence of fraud by failing to follow the basic laws pertaining to debt collection. In retrospect it will often cost the debt company or bank more to hire a barrister qualified to deal with this matter, than the amount they are claiming.

Do you have to use these maxims? actually no as you can ignore them or some of them; you can use your own maxims or add maxims to them, but always follow the cardinal rules of remaining concise and accurate with maxims and never include too many, or those which are not relevant to your particular matter.

Law dictionaries provide useful maxims but there are lists of maxims online as well as case law and downloading a list of maxims and their jurisdiction is easily done, so do it and check their voracity in your specific case; never put lots of maxims in your documentation as I have seen pages of irrelvent maxims in paperwork and this puts any judge against you as you are forcing him to read irrlevent paperwork and taking up his time.

List of useful maxims, this is not a full list as it is merely a selection.

Ab initio – From the beginning, from inception, from the first act.
Actus ciriae niminem gravabit – The act of a court shall prejudice no man.
Ad hoc – for this special purpose.
Ad valorem – to the value of, or based upon the value.
Actori incumbit onus probandi – The burdon of proof lies with the plaintiff.
Actus reus[/b] – a guilty deed or act.

De facto – existing in actuality, especially when contrary to, or not established in law.
De minimus non curat lex – the law does not concern itself with trifles.
Delegatus non potest delegare – a delegate himself cannot delegate, a delegated power cannot be further delegated.

[b]Ex post facto – after the fact.

Falsus in uno falsus in omnibus – false in one aspect is false in all. False in one thing is false in all.

Ignorantia facti excusat – ignoraitia juris non excusat – Ignorance of facts may be excused but not ignorance of the law.
Ipse dixit[/b] – he himself said it.

Lex non cogit ad impossiblia – the law does not compel a person to do that which he cannot possibly perform.
Locus standi – the right of a party to appear and be heard before a court.

Nimo debet esse judex in propria sua causa – no man can be judge in his own case.
Nullus commodum – no man can take advantage.

Per incuriam – by mistake

Qui facit per alium facit per se – he who acts by or through another, acts for himself.

Res integra – an entire thing or an entirely new or untouched matter.

Suppressio veria or suggestion falsi – concealment of truth or a statement of falsehood.

[b]Ubi jus ibi remedium – there is no wrong without a remedy.

Volenti non fit injuria – to the consenting no injury is done.

Here are a whole lot more:

https://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/bouvier/maxims.shtml

Mr Blue will be busy moving them into the law section.

Templates for writing an affidavit are available online and you can fill the form in online, you select your options in a template and the document is filled in for you; you then print it off and have it witnessed as you sign it and any commissioner for oaths or notary public can do this for you.

Rocketlawyers and Lawdepot are two options.