May 23, 2014 7:35 PM

No big deal :P

Pete, thank you very very much.

Why ? :/

That is LEGAL ?, Scott ?

You can use the person you happen to have, to invoice....I'll try to post an INVOICE made by the SOLE authorized Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST, it will take a few minutes... :)

:)

Would you notice them of the lien after the default or just lien and sent them a copy or no copy even?

Just lien and send them a copy ??!!....that would be the actual NOTICE

I have a nice Bill I have sent to a debt collection company after I nicely sent them 3 letters or Notices asking to provide information which of course they did not do. That was sent in September and they still have not paid. I think I sent 2 Bills. I'll have to get back to them on why they are so late in paying.

ok thanks

That's the best I can do (image quality)

Oh, it went out not too bad !! :D

If they do not contest, or rebut, or challenge your CLAIM.......you have to invoice.... :)

And IT'S NOT MY FUCKING FAULT !!! :D

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Any question ?, I have 10 minutes 8|

"If they do not contest, or rebut, or challenge your CLAIM.......you have to invoice....:) Done, zero challenge in the persons mail box (with grace for the holiday), Invoice too all 4 parties next up. As Scott said invite them all

Et voila !! :)

I so LOVE that accounting shit :D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJcCf4wqe2k

Each Party (City Clerk, Granite Claims, METZGER and VEGA) get an invoice under separate registered mail #'s. Does the invoice # match the registered mail #? or do I start a series #

I use the date, as

Today would be 230514 If I make another one, it would be: 230514-2, and 230514-3, and so on.....

Tomorrow it would be: 240514..... :D

When you have one that looks like: 230514-26, you know it's a PROFITABLE day :D

you just answered my next question :)

I know :P

26 claims in 1 day :)

26 INVOICES, not CLAIMS :P

yes, Invoices (y)

You can end up with 33 invoices for one claim :D

Nothing prevents you to send them an invoice that says, OH, I FORGOT, you fucked my pants on that day, so here is an invoice for $80.00 for my pants :P

Description Price Units Amount

CRIMINAL ASSAULT $5000.00 ea 2 $20000.00

ARBITRARY ARREST $5000.00 ea 1 $5000.00

DETENTION/INTERROGATION $1000.00 ea 2 $2000.00 (per hour for each officer)

FORCIBLE CONFINEMENT $10000.00 per 1 $10000.00

5000 x 2 = 10,000, just saying :/

then the price just went up, inflation you know.

Ha, ok :/

whats your value for criminal assault? Millions I'm sure :) best admin and all

At least $50,000.00 I think it's fair !

I am not really the best admin, you guys just sucks, that's all :D

Just think about what could be charge to the person you happen to have in your pocket, if you would have used it to do the same as they have done to you ;)

my hamster brain is slowly coming out of freetard confusion.

Yeah, like most of you guys :D

It gets really costly when you have good reasons to BELIEVE that they have wage war on you, and/or the person you happen to have.

This kind of shit can be very expensive :D

had I spit on them and waived my arms around like a semi-evolved chimp (as claimed) they would hold me for at least 25000.00 bond if not more. Assault Police is serious business.

They spitted on you ? :-o

Spitting on me 1ea. $25,000.00

Violation of the INTEGRITY of the person I have. $25,000.00 Violation of the LIBERTY of the person I have. $25,000.00 Violation of the LIFE of the person I have. $25,000.00 Violation of the SURETY of the person I have. $25,000.00

:P

You can't fuck around with the INTEGRITY of a PERSON, if the ADMINISTRATOR of that person is a little bit sharp, you'll end up in big problems :/

Metzger claims I spit in her face, Vega claims I was waving keys around in my hands

I claim bullshit, had I done either I would have been crushed.

Every Human Being has the right to the LIBERTY of his person, the SURETY of his person, the INTEGRITY of his person, and the LIFE of his person.....you can't fuck around with this shit, unless you are a slave... :(

Pete. re FINAL Notice. Being the third Notice would it be beneficial to make it the THIRD and FINAL Notice?

No.

You send all this registered mail, so they know it's the third, or second, or whatever :/

Ok, thanks. We just need to clarify.

Love this

What do you LOVE in this ? :/

The truth

And you are 100% sure it's true ?

Maybe I am just a "Delusional Preacher" ? :D

Like this fraudster :P

May 16, 2011 Delusional preacher Harold Camping says May 21st to be the Rapture and Judgment Day — Caller asks Camping: “On May 22nd, do they [contributors to Family Radio who believed this hoax] get a refund?”

If you and Scott say it's true then it is

Hey Pete, there is a province # for Ontario do you know it?

What ? :-\

the inscription number you use, you once said the first # is the province #

You'll find this in the registration number of the birth certificate...

ok

but why would you need this ? ....I am curious :-D

for the invoice

Quebec is 04

WHY ?

What does it have to do with the invoice ?

So, in looking at this "claim" shit...

Basically when a corporation offers you a BILL, they are looking to borrow your credit. As any value for "money" comes from the credit/time of the people, this company must need a loan, correct?

comes from the credit/time of the people: No, from Men and Women :P

Right.

I see it as : The corporation offers a DEBT, and they WISH you will BUY that debt with MONEY OF ACCOUNT.

They are offering DEBTS that was ALREADY BOUGHT by them.....

CRA per instance, they are sending this debt to a person, and are COUNTING on the SOLE authorized Administrator of that PERSON, to be completely ignorant and to BUY back that public debt.

It is the same as if PIERRE DAOUST the person, would BUY BACK debts sent to SFC INC, and would PAY with MONEY OF ACCOUNT sitting in a PIERRE DAOUST'S bank account somewhere....

If ever PIERRE DAOUST is doing this, that would be a LOAN, and/or INVESTMENT made in SFC INC.

Who has to file a T5008 information return? every person who makes a payment to, or acts as a nominee or agent for, an individual resident in Canada for the disposition or redemption of a debt obligation in bearer form; and

nominee n. 1) a person or entity who is requested or named to act for another, such as an agent or trustee. 2) a potential successor to another's rights under a contract. Example: In a real estate purchase agreement, Bob Buyer agrees to purchase the property, but provides that title (legal ownership) will be granted to "Bob Buyer or nominee," so that Buyer can sell his rights to another person before the deal closes, or because Buyer is really acting for someone else. 2) the executor proposed by a person in a will is a nominee until officially appointed by the judge after the testator (will writer) has died, and the will is submitted for probate (administration of the estate). 3) a person chosen by convention, petition or primary election to be a candidate for public office. (See: executor, agent)

Entity

A real being; existence. An organization or being that possesses separate existence for tax purposes. Examples would be corporations, partnerships, estates, and trusts. The accounting entity for which accounting statements are prepared may not be the same as the entity defined by law.

So a SOLE authorized Administrator is an ENTITY, :)

I am the "real being" Sole authorized Administrator acting as an ENTITY for PIERRE DAOUST 1196604XXXXXX :D

I understand that applying for a SIN number authorizes "many others" the use of that number (attached to BC Bond).

Or should I say: disposition (dis-pa-zish-an), n. (14c) 1. The act of transferring something to another's care or possession, esp. by deed or will; the relinquishing ofproperty <a testamentary disposition of all the assets>.

I applied for that SIN number, I was 16 :/ an ILLEGAL age for entering into contract :(

Should I NOTICE CANADA about it ? :/

Dear Canada HUMAN resources,

Just to pin point that when I have filled this APPLICATION, I was 16, and I have all the good reasons to "BELIEVE" it was an ILLEGAL age to enter in a LEGAL contract.

Thanks Sole Authorized Administrator for 26X-XXX-XXX :D

If ever you would like to make a NEW contract, which would be a LEGAL one, because NOW, I am over 18, please send ALL terms and conditions regarding this CONTRACT, I will read them all, and then I will send you MY thoughts about it :D

You see, if you look at a remittance, it resembles a cheque. It seems to me that it is payable to your PERSON, not the other way around.

Debt Obligation in Bearer Form: Debt obligation — A fixed obligation to pay money or some other valuable consideration. Bearer form — An instrument is in bearer form if its terms say that it is payable to the bearer, or to cash, or if it does not indicate a payee.

Scott, am I waaay off here?

When I am finished ADMINISTRATING a Bill of Exchange, it's indeed, a CHECK......

The DRAWER, the one that made the check is PIERRE DAOUST

The Surety, Bank, Drawee, is Bank of Canada (That is WHY I have this Bank of Canada rubber stamp, to make sure the bank is well identified on the face of the instrument.)

And the Payee, beneficiary, the one that has the OBLIGATION to present this check to the bank, is HYDRO-QUEBEC, CRA, QRA, City of Montreal....or who ever started this Bill of Exchange, and sent it to PIERRE DAOUST......

The DRAWER and the BENEFICIARY can be the same PERSON though :D

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!

Lets say PIERRE DAOUST goes to the grocery store to buy some food, and decides to PAY with MONEY OF ACCOUNT (credit card)

It is OBVIOUSLY the SOLE authorized Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST that will have to do this, so, as a good administrator, I will keep the receipts for this.

But “legally”, who bought these consumable products ? PIERRE DAOUST did, and PIERRE DAOUST has a SURETY at a bank, which happen to be Bank of Canada”.

So me, as a good administrator, what prevents me to DRAW a check to PIERRE DAOUST (beneficiary), from PIERRE DAOUST’s account at Bank of Canada, which account, happens to have an UNLIMITED credit limit ?

This seems to be pure ACCOUNTING :D

:D

Not my fault !! :(

And that's only MONEY OF ACCOUNT, so who should gives a fuck ?

I have good reasons to BELIEVE that some folks are eating BIG STEAKS, as we speak, bought with MONEY OF ACCOUNT directly took from PIERRE DAOUST's account in Bank of Canada :(

They even have "CHAUFFEURS" :(

Hellosss !!! :/

There is 7 sureties available in my HOUSE :-o

You must also use the T5008 information return to report dispositions or redemptions of debt obligations in bearer form by individuals resident in Canada. Debt obligations in bearer form include commercial paper and banker’s acceptances.

Banker’s acceptance — A draft payable at maturity drawn by a creditor against a debtor. Banker’s acceptances are short-term credit instruments that are commonly sold at a discount.

Banker’s acceptances and commercial paper are examples of debt obligations in bearer form that are not usually traded publicly. Debt obligations in bearer form include debt obligations payable to the “bearer” or to “cash.”

include commercial paper and banker’s acceptances.

So it EXCLUDE everything else ?

I wonder if this is another way banks "make" so much money?

Here is what I am THINKING of doing....

1). Make a grocery for PIERRE DAOUST.

2). Have PIERRE DAOUST use MONEY OF ACCOUNT to PAY for that Grocery.

3). Create a Bill of Exchange, the SAME way HYDRO-QUEBEC creates theirs....with PIERRE DAOUST as a drawer, "CASH" as a beneficiary, and Bank of Canada as the Drawee....

4). Complete that Bill of Exchange, to turn it into a check.

5). Send that that check to Bank of Canada, with the receipt, with some CONSIDERATION (a certified copy of PIERRE DAOUST's birth certificate.)

6). INSTRUCT Bank of Canada to send payment to the order of "CASH", at PIERRE DAOUST's legal address.

:D (Thinking out loud !! ) but it completely makes sense in my brain ! :D

Bank dosen't really MAKE so much money, they mostly KEEP so much money, because of IGNORANCE of the crowd :(

:D

Pete, I think that is exactly right! Well...I don't know about exactly, but I think it is how it is supposed to work, yes!

Well, it makes sense, yes ? :-\

Yes!

The ACCOUNTING transaction is the Bank Notes for the RECEIPT. Somehow (and I am not sure exactly how) I KNOW we can REDEEM that RECEIPT for CREDIT ON ACCOUNT.

Since we are the CREDITOR and a BANK, it only makes sense....

I am not the bank, I am the "money" inside that Bank :-D

And the person I happen to have, owns the bank :-P

Not my fault :-(

I just got an idea. If my corporation gets a CONTRACT for say a $30,000 installation, upon execution, it has the RIGHT to lien the property based on the CONTRACT (I think its called a MECHANICS LIEN...). So, wouldn't we be able to lien BEFORE generating an INVOICE to protect our interests in an established CONTRACT? Does this make sense?

What you've done Neil Friesen, only the GOVERNMENT can do it, STEAL from others is government's business, so now, the GOVERNMENT wants what's theirs, plus interest and penalties.....

Make no mistake, you will PAY.... :P

By today's date, and the date of your court case, you might have seen us as your LAST HOPE, and thought we might come up with a MAGICAL BULLET to get you out of this shit, unfortunately no, we have none of these "MAGICAL BULLET".

The BEST you could do is tell the justice you agree to GIVE BACK what you've took from these strangers.......The nice back yard you have is, in REALITY, someone else's efforts/time.....

That is ALL I have to say on this, if someone else see it different, take the lead.......but if you LIE, you are banned :P

Oh fuck, ....wrong thread :D

From a Christian Walters paper:

"If you didn’t express it to be a trust from the beginning, here it was a trust because there is no money, and everything has to be a trust. When you go to the grocery store to buy groceries you think you are paying for something with Federal Reserve Notes, and that is just your purchase, you aren’t purchasing anything. You are forming a trust. The same way at the gas station when you buy gasoline for your car. You aren’t buying gas, you are forming a trust. Everything today has to be a trust. We are forming hundreds of trusts a day probably in some cases."

And the RECEIPT is the evidence of the transfer of the corpus! Your TIME! :-D

hahahaa....then he says this:

"Now, if they give me an offer that comes in the mail in an electric bill I’m going to treat it as a trust. It’s an offer for a debtor-creditor relationship only if you don’t know that it is a trust. I’m going to express it as being a trust by forming the four elements necessary. I am going to have intent, purpose, parties, and specific res. I’m going to turn that offer into the specific res. I’m going to return it to them as the special deposit under trusts."

Maybe I should have my self a new rubber stamp that says: In "ME" we TRUST. ? and add that sucker on every Bill of Exchange I have to COMPLETE ?

:D

“valuable security” includes (e) a release, RECEIPT, discharge or other instrument evidencing payment of money;

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-1.html#h-2

“trustee”

— fiduciaire —

“trustee” means a person who is declared by any Act to be a trustee or is, by the law of a province, a trustee, and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, includes a trustee on an express trust created by deed, will or instrument in writing, or by parol;

I "WISH" you accept the powers of the TRUSTEE in here today, dear your honor ! :D

This all reminds me; a couple years ago, I was walking out of a grocery-store, there were some young girls asking for donations for their skating-club. Except, they weren't asking for 'money.' They were asking for people as they walked by, if they could have their RECEIPTS they just got from grocery-shopping. I stopped dead in my tracks as soon as I heard what they were asking for, gave them my receipt, and have always wondered since, what was the purpose of them asking for the 'RECEIPT' of all things... :/

Now you know.

:-D

Gold nugget alert!

*nuggets :P

Whoa

How many can actually understand what just happened? Talking about joining the dots, hellos!!

* "connecting" the dots :D

:D

I'm telling you, banks KEEP money because of ignorant folks, but even when the ignorant folk is no longer so ignorant, they really keep doing all they can to still KEEP it ! I think ME gonna need an ex parte order to get through with this... Might as well go to the grocery store now !

You need to INVOICE them ;)

They've been invoiced ! Said they would contest any claim for fees and charge the PERSON for their own fees ;) I said the invoice is not for fees, it covers only the VALUE of that INSTRUMENT you decided to keep against the law. Since then, they never replied... June 5 they will be getting a PAST DUE ACCOUNT NOTICE.

:)

Starwalker Ad Infinitum, the world has enough dreamers, just saying :P Everybody is sleeping for fuck sakes !!!

not evrryone

thanks for the add to the group. i hope i can help expand the awarness of people and my sucesses with notices and leins will inspire peeps to revoke concent and send notices/claims, breaches of trust ect....

Oh boy.

You know that in order to DREAM, you MUST be at sleep, right ? :/

daydream. amd it is man not boy :-p

If you can "expand the awarness of people," just like you can type, I guess there is very little "expansion" actually occurring. Hahaha!

So you came here to HELP US. Really? This is going to be interesting... for a little bit. Haha!

Are you here to makes us DAY dreaming ? :D

OK, go, share your biggest SUCCESS with us, we are listening :)

He has had "sucesses with notices." He has actually dated, and scored with notices, very successfully? That should really "inspire peeps" around here, hahaha!

Let him share Mackximus Minimus, lets shut up and listen to Starwalker :)

I'll turn off the bullshit-o-meter then, sorry.

This is all Scott Duncan's fault!

Please Starwalker, share !! :/

Peremptory Notice.

Starwalker Ad Infinitum, be advise that if you do not come back here in the next 15 minutes, with your BIGGEST success story, I will have all the good reasons to BELIEVE that you are a SALESMAN, who wants to sell us bullshit.

And I will ban you from this group.

With all my Love.

Authorized Administrator for The Tender for Law.

*tick tock*

3 minutes :/

Gone :P

Case closed! :D

<<About Starwalker

Whereas it is my understanding legal fictions lack a soul and cannot exert any control over those who are thus blessed and operate with respect to that knowledge as only a fool would allow soulless fictions to dictate ones actions

I love the sun

I am not afraid, I am not alone, I am happy Freeman on the land!! No room in my heart for violence. Blessed are the peacemakers No Social insurance number aka slave ID # Vaccine Free Sovereign free will being

I understand that regulation is force, and do not permit force in my peaceful dealings with others.

I understand that taxation is theft, and do not accept the theft of my property by anyone.

I understand that coercion is fraud, and do not approve of fraud under any circumstances.

I understand that force, theft, and fraud have no place in the market, and thus I will accept only voluntary exchanges based upon mutual self-interest.

Quote: FRAUD " An intentional perversion of truth for the purpose of inducing another in reliance upon it to part with some valuable thing belonging to him or to surrender a legal right. A false representation of a matter of fact, whether by words or conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed, which deceives and is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. Anything calculated to deceive, whether by a single act or combination, or by the suppression of truth, or by suggestion of what is false, whether it be by direct falsehood or innuendo, by speech of silence, word of mouth, or look, or gesture. A generic term, embracing all maltofarious means which human ingenuity can devise, and which are resorted to by one Individual to get advantage over another by false suggestions or by suppression of truth, and includes all surprise, trick, cunning, dissembling, and UNFAIR way by which another is cheated. BAD FAITH " and " FRAUD " are synonymous, and also synonyms of dishonesty, infidelity, faithlessness, unfairness, ect."

A Sovereign Free-man does not have to register, apply, beg, pay or be governed to exercise their God-given, claimed, natural, common-law or Constitutional rights. I am a Sovereign Free-man who operates with full responsibility(sui juris) and not a child of the government. I do not see the need to ask permission to engage in lawful and peaceful activities, especially from those who claim limited liability.

This Sovereign is guided and directed by the Creator's will and its unwritten Universal Laws that are known to all beings in all jurisdictions and dimensions. The Creator's laws to protect the free-will of humanity is in full force and effect. The love for Earth, humanity and all beings protects the sovereignty of this Universe. The Light that governs this Universe by the Creator's Will is the eternal wisdom of love and freedom to understand that no one or no thing can harm any thing or any one with weapons of any type in the Name of Peace. And so it is written, read and understood by those who know that change is inevitable and long overdue in the name of Freedom for humanity by the stroke of the pen and Peace for Earth and our Universe.

I am a Functional Sovereign. Acting peacefully within community standards, does not breach the peace. [To breach the peace one must, without others’ permission, greatly threaten the safety of others, impede on the rights of others, or act in a disturbing, riotous manner in the presence of others.] I intend to exercise my right to live free without malice aforethought, ill will, vexation or frivolity, without corporate dictate, acting in the full capacity as the Creditor for the Copyright Trademark CAPITALIZED ARTIFICAL NAME “D A FUGGE in any style of cause.

Therefore be it now known to any and all concerned and affected parties, that I, Known as douglas, a Sovereign Free-man do hereby state clearly specifically and unequivocally my intent:

To peacefully and lawfully exist free of all statutory obligations restrictions and maintain all rights at law to trade, exchange or barter.

To travel peacefully and lawfully within the geographical area commonly referred as Earth by whatever means I deem necessary.

To be a Steward of the land and waters of the geographic area of Canada and the Commonwealth including the land, which I claim.

To Live in peace, honor all my relations, protecting our earth for the future generations, with love in action and the most Devine intentions.

Notices served to Corporations, or persons acting as principals or agents for said Corporations, retain legal validity, effectiveness, and authority of any established Claims and/or Understandings and/or Intents, without prejudice, if positions or persons holding certain positions of the said Corporations are replaced, succeeded or changed in any way

Corporations are legal fictions and require contracts in order to claim authority or control over other parties. Legal fictions lack both a soul and sentience and cannot exert any control over those who are thus blessed and operate with respect to that knowledge

Trespass or any transgression(s) against me, my family or anyone under my care that is or are perpetrated by any members of Fraternal organizations, any members of a Masonic society or group and/or having sworn one or more secret oaths to any Masonic society or group, any Society and/or organization, Firms, Corporations, Barristers, Solicitors, peace officers, government principals, agents or (just-us) justice system participants, criminal violations are set at a $6M debt to each perpetrator per infringement.

NOTICE IS TO AGENT AS NOTICE IS TO PRINCIPAL. NOTICE IS TO PRINCIPAL AS NOTICE IS TO AGENT

“All rights reserved, Copyright Trademark name infringement fee is $6M (Six Million) hard lawful currency per Trespass against the Corporate BUSINESS NAME. Documents assessed for taxation, arbitration without my written consent will be deemed as a trespass against my family Name and I reserve the right to issue the debt, lien the claim and foreclose without further Notice by the Named author “Douglas-Allen : Fugge”, Agent, Creditor, Secure Party, Natural Man, author of the Copyright Trademark Name Claim for the Copyright Trademark autograph for the” DOUGLAS A. FUGGE” in any style of cause.The Liability for infringement and Judgment(s) and/or Order(s) made against my CAPITALIZED BUSINESS NAME is $6M (Six Million) per infringement. The Remedy is provided with a contract to claim the debt, process a lien and proceed with a foreclosure on tangible and not tangible assets without further Notice.

Note - Natural: free, unaffected, N. Baily, Universal Etymological English Dictionary, 1713, Natural: 4.c. Not produced or changed artificially, not conditioned, 5. Characterized by spontaneity and freedom from artificiality, affectation or inhibitions. 9. Established by moral certainty or conviction: natural rights, 10.a Related by blood, American Heritage Dictionary, 1994, Third Edition. Man releases Douglas from the Joinder, “person” created by the Canadian Justice System and Black Law’s 4th Edition to define “individual” to include artificial persons, 1968 and “person” defined by the Excise Tax Act Chapter E-15, Part IX Goods and Services Tax as; “a corporation or other organization of any kind”. Man: The male of the Human Race, N. Baily, Universal Etymological English Dictionary, 1713>>

*sigh*

:D Peremptory Notice. :D

Harpooned a Free-Dumber, huh? :D

Nice catch :D

This "peremptory" word has been sent registered mail to a PERSON I happen to administrate. so I stole it :-P

YOU DID NOT STEAL! You copied.

http://youtu.be/IeTybKL1pM4

So there :P

I took it off the document, with a pair of scisors......literally, and send it back with a "peremptory" notice, saying we do not accept peremptory DEMANDS... :-\

I also sent a "peremptory demand", demamding a signed guarantee that says SFC Inc won't violate a PERSON's right to private life before we do business... :-D

I have an OATH on that shit...fuck... :-(

Not my fault if there's a Quebec Charter.....they should scrap that thing...... :-D

Has anyone ever sent the remittance voucher from Cra with the stamp Pete talks about and successfully stopped them from harassing further?

I did it BEFORE they started HARASSMENT, I am TAKING CARE of stuff, before it gets into "Harassing mode".

It's been 7 months now, never heard of this since....

I also administrated 2 from QRA.....same thing...

How did they harass and what did you do to silence them

They NEVER harassed, can you read ? :/

Forgive me. Read it wrong. Thanks

*SIGH* :(

I will post all questions here from here on

great thread, thanks Pete

John Greco looky here and read everything, twice.

Starwalker Ad Infinitum didn't produce any "successes"!

...go figure!

SURELY there must be SOME!

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freeman_on_the_land#Freeman_successes

Hmmmm... nope.

Lots of FAILURES though! :D

I like the tumbleweeds :D

It was better than a blank space :D

I just read that whole article. There are some things in there we KNOW to be true:

"Birth certificates There are three main beliefs about birth certificates in freeman mythology: The government uses them to create your strawman and legal person to which all your legal responsibilities, debts and liabilities belong.[31][24] As a form of registration, they transfer ownership of an individual to the state. This is what allows the state to seize your children if you don't play by their rules.[31] They are financial instruments or birth-tracking bonds (a.k.a. live birth bonds) that are sold by the government and then traded on the sea of international commerce, using you as security (an idea taken from the redemption movement)."

"Freemen claim the government secures the value of its fiat currency using its own citizens' birth certificate "bonds.""

Pete Daoust will happily explain about your "PERSON". It's not his fault. :D

"The government uses them to create your strawman and legal person to which all your legal responsibilities, debts and liabilities belong."

No. They simply made a SURETY BOND which you are the HOLDER of...

...and FUCKING "STRAWMAN"! Seriously! Strawman=FREE-DUMB SHIT!

"As a form of registration, they transfer ownership of an individual to the state. This is what allows the state to seize your children if you don't play by their rules."

NO. Only the CHILD is. Once adulthood is attained, you USE the PERSON. I recommend ADMINISTRATION... again,... ask Pete.

"They are financial instruments or birth-tracking bonds (a.k.a. live birth bonds) that are sold by the government and then traded on the sea of international commerce, using you as security (an idea taken from the redemption movement)."

WHAT? WTF is a "live birth bond"?

Show me the LEGAL RULE supporting that claim! If it's a BOND, there MUST be LAW supporting it. LEGAL=ACCOUNTING AND SURETY. Those who say otherwise ARE LYING TO YOU and MEAN YOU HARM.

So, basically NONE of that is true.

Hellosss !!!.....fuck, I have a forklift to repair :/

HOLDING of HAVING.....as the SOLE authorize administrator for the PERSON, Am I "Holding" or "Having" this surety bond

I know you choose your word with extreme caution Scott, I am NOT trying to change the word you used.....I am just trying to know if I, as the administrator, can decide to HAVE that surety bond instead of HOLDING it :)

Maybe I am wrong here, but it seems EVERYONE can "Have", and only PERSONS can HOLD.....

I am just picky with this HOLDING stuff versus HAVING stuff......

As the ADMINISTRATOR, would it be more advantageous to HAVE that surety bond ? ....instead of HOLDING it ?

TO HAVE. These words are used in deeds for the conveyance of land, in that clause which usually declared for what estate the land is granted. The same as Habendum. (q.v.) Vide Habendum; Tenendum.

TO HOLD. These words are now used in a deed to express by what tenure the grantee is to have the land. The clause which commences with these words is called the tenendum. Vide Habendum; Tenendum. 2. To hold, also means to decide, to adjudge, to decree; as, the court in that case held that the husband was not liable for the contract of the wife, made without his express or implied authority. 3. It also signifies to bind under a contract, as the obligor is held and firmly bound. In the constitution of the United States, it is provided, that no person held to service or labor in one state under the laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in consequence of any law or regulation therein, be discharged from such service or labor, but shall be delivered up on the claim of the party to whom such service or labor may be due. Art. 4, sec. 3, Sec. 3; 2 Serg. & R. 306; 3 Id. 4; 5 Id. 52; 1 Wash. C. C. R. 500; 2 Pick. 11; 16 Pet. 539, 674.

You use it in those contexts.

You've answered your own question. I was PRESUMING estates, but since it's bullshit anyway, the point is moot.

Ok, now that the tumbleweeds have left the building... :D

Let's get back to the Remittance vs. Cheque resemblance. Does this part of the Bills of Exchange Act have something to do with that?:

47. Where a bill is drawn or endorsed by any infant, minor or CORPORATION having no capacity or power to incur liability on a bill, the drawing or endorsement entitles the holder to receive payment of the bill and to enforce it against any other party thereto.

So as say, utility companies are operating in bankruptcy, they do not have the power to incur liability on a bill? Would that be correct?

No :P

When SFC Inc receives its Hydro Bill......the only option I see for SFC Inc is to cut a check...and HYDRO will cut SFC's service if SFC Inc don't PAY.

The way I get that article 47, is a MINOR and/or a CORPORATION, can't complete a bill of exchange sent by a utility company, they can't be the DRAWEE, and/or the DRAWER, and/or the BENEFICIARY.....

For a MINOR, its LEGAL guardian would have to administrate the debt, by supra protesting it......

Maybe I could SUPRA PROTEST for SFC Inc as well, not too sure on that one.....

That's the way I get it, but I may be waaayyyy...in the bushes with that :D

No capacity or power on acting as DRAWER, DRAWEE or BENEFICIARY....

If you want to get the gas bill discharged from BEVERLY's surety, BEVERLY will have to be the DRAWER "AND" THE BENEFICIARY, same for Gail..

Have BEVERLY pay these bills with money of account, create a Bill of Exchange with BEVERLY as a drawer, BEVERLY as the BENEFICIARY, Bank of Canada as the DRAWEE, maybe a new rubber stamp for "cosumable goods", send all this to Bank of Canada, INSTRUCT them to send payment to BEVERLY.....something like that :-D

^^^ Wait....what? Where is this coming from?

:D ha!

:-D

My brain, sorry....

Pete Daoust is a bit farther ahead in his understanding, Chris. That's why he can produce the right answer. ;)

I understand that. And I REALLY want to catch up. But I am having some blocks. I am not sure why I can't grasp it. And......It is PISSING ME THE FUCK OFF!

Ok, so if I create a Bill to Pete (creating a liability), I have supplied the remedy being the Valuable Consideration of my time in creating a graphically stimulating mock-up of Pete's Law Dictionary, correct?

Ok, forget that. The remedy is required in the public bankruptcy for payment, not for private. Pete and Bev are not bankrupt.

I think I need to look into this bankruptcy stuff a little more, yes?

No

Ho no, the day dreamer is here again ! :-(

same here Chris Evan, i also have trouble grasping a lot of this. pisses me off too :(

What is it you can't grasp ? :-\

Ask away! This is the place.

how to get to think the way you do

Ho!

there's lots of info here but sometimes i get trouble fitting it together

Laurent VH, don't forget to answer the question posted: "What is it you can't grasp ?" Pete is always "going somewhere" when asking questions.

especially when i start translating to dutch

well for starters money or "legal tender" i don't fully understand it

I don't grasp how BEVERLY can be the BENEFICIARY and DRAWER

i mean if i had to explain legal tender to someone i don't think i could

like different currencies?

Chris Evan, if CHRIS has a bank account a BANK OF AMERICA, and a bank account at ING BANK.......can CHRIS write a check from its Bank of America account to the order of CHRIS and deposit that check in CHRIS account at ING Bank ?

NO.

Chris is AMERICAN, and you are presuming an American can read/write. :D

There is that ! :-D

Sorry, I digress your lesson, Pete Daoust! Forgive me!

Do, carry on!

Chris Evan !! :-\

Hurry up Chris Evan, I have a fucking forklift to crash and burn o_O

I just got here!

Got it

<<Pete Daoust: When I am finished ADMINISTRATING a Bill of Exchange, it's indeed, a CHECK......

The DRAWER, the one that made the check is PIERRE DAOUST

The Surety, Bank, Drawee, is Bank of Canada (That is WHY I have this Bank of Canada rubber stamp, to make sure the bank is well identified on the face of the instrument.)

And the Payee, beneficiary, the one that has the OBLIGATION to present this check to the bank, is HYDRO-QUEBEC, CRA, QRA, City of Montreal....or who ever started this Bill of Exchange, and sent it to PIERRE DAOUST...... May 24 at 3:13pm — Unlike · 1 Pete Daoust The DRAWER and the BENEFICIARY can be the same PERSON though

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! May 24 at 3:17pm — Unlike · 1>>

<<Pete Daoust: Lets say PIERRE DAOUST goes to the grocery store to buy some food, and decides to PAY with MONEY OF ACCOUNT (credit card)

It is OBVIOUSLY the SOLE authorized Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST that will have to do this, so, as a good administrator, I will keep the receipts for this.

But “legally”, who bought these consumable products ? PIERRE DAOUST did, and PIERRE DAOUST has a SURETY at a bank, which happen to be Bank of Canada”.

So me, as a good administrator, what prevents me to DRAW a check to PIERRE DAOUST (beneficiary), from PIERRE DAOUST’s account at Bank of Canada, which account, happens to have an UNLIMITED credit limit ?

This seems to be pure ACCOUNTING>>

<<Pete Daoust: Here is what I am THINKING of doing....

1). Make a grocery for PIERRE DAOUST.

2). Have PIERRE DAOUST use MONEY OF ACCOUNT to PAY for that Grocery.

3). Create a Bill of Exchange, the SAME way HYDRO-QUEBEC creates theirs....with PIERRE DAOUST as a drawer, "CASH" as a beneficiary, and Bank of Canada as the Drawee....

4). Complete that Bill of Exchange, to turn it into a check.

5). Send that that check to Bank of Canada, with the receipt, with some CONSIDERATION (a certified copy of PIERRE DAOUST's birth certificate.)

6). INSTRUCT Bank of Canada to send payment to the order of "CASH", at PIERRE DAOUST's legal address.

(Thinking out loud !! ) but it completely makes sense in my brain ! May 24 at 3:58pm — Unlike · 4 Pete Daoust Bank dosen't really MAKE so much money, they mostly KEEP so much money, because of IGNORANCE of the crowd>> Chris Evan

ok...I need to think on this.

Thanks

THINK !!!!! :O

Yes....burn into my tiny protoplasm

watch money as debt pt iii over a few times

try to think, schitsophrenia, and wich one are we talking to/about now. one thing can be multiple things at different times applicable.

:-D

likewise that is why a paper should have defigned specifically what it's purpose and/or intent is supposed to be at the earliest convienience [at the top].

CHARTER (fishing and/or otherwise) : NOTICE : TREATY : CONSTITUTION : TRUST : AFFADAVID(T) : BILL : INVOICE : OATH : WILL : LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT : RECIEPT : ETC. non-negotiable ... without recourse ... governed by the rules and guidelines of common law ... this note [however fake] subjects the bearer to legal tender obligating the holder to accept everything bad that could occur because of it.

CHRIS is the slave, which is the full, and sole responsibility of the owner. The owner is not Chris, the Man. Chris can only administrate for the owner. Chris is NOT the slave. Why is Chris, the Man, paying for stuff for CHRIS, the slave? :/

Since it's THEIR system, and it's not Chris's fault, many of those expenses for CHRIS, may be fairly returned to the real creditor, Chris the Man. He is the one to put his TIME to pay for all that stuff for CHRIS. And we know Chris is NOT a slave.

With the RECEIPTS, and some CONSIDERATION, the Federal Reserve Bank, in our case, may act as the drawee for a Bill of Exchange that the SOLE AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR for CHRIS will create, and present to the Federal Reserve Bank, since CHRIS is also payee, and it's the OBLIGATION of the payee (it's NOT payee, but BENEFICIARY, please not this correction) to present this to the the bank that holds the surety. And all this it's not Chris's fault! :D

Pete Daoust, is this correct ?

It's beneficiary, not payee :-P

Sorry, you are right. I made a mistake. Thanks, Pete!

Let’s say Chris the MAN went to the grocery store and got a RECEIPT for goods, that RECEIPT is a proof of DISBURSEMENT in an ACCOUNT in which EVERY SINGLE FUCKIN CENT was DEPOSITED in exchange for Chris the MAN’s time sweat and blood.

That RECEIPT is a VALUABLE SECURITY. Its VALUE is the AMOUNT which it PROVES has been paid.

Let's say the RECEIPT has a $100 VALUE. If you can PROVE CHRIS EVAN has a VALUE of $100, then CHRIS EVAN’s SURETY must be AT LEAST $100, right ?

Let’s say CHRIS EVAN used $100 of MONEY OF ACCOUNT which was DISBURSED from his checking ACCOUNT”

Chris the MAN is the one who worked his ass, time sweat and blood, to give CHRIS EVAN that value. Chris the MAN is the Sole Authorized Administrator for CHRIS EVAN. Chris the MAN has the right to CHRIS EVAN’s SURETY. What’s Chris the MAN gonna do ? Act like a slave ?? Why would he do that ?

You are the creditor. Without you, there's no MONEY. The Birth Certificate is an UNLIMITED CREDIT LIMIT. Your signature gives VALUE to ANYTHING you sign. You can GIVE VALUE and you can CREATE MONEY !

From an administrative point of view, it only seems like a logical decision to send that VALUABLE SECURITY over to CHRIS EVAN’s SURETY, which isn't you, so it can do what it’s supposed to do !

Now the scary part : It all seems to make sense”

And you know what they say : ALWAYS KEEP THE RECEIPT :p

The only thing I don't get is when Pete Daoust says “CASH as a beneficiary”..?

"...I stopped dead in my tracks as soon as I heard what they were asking for, gave them my receipt, and have always wondered since, what was the purpose of them asking for the 'RECEIPT' of all things..."

Scott Duncan: Now you know.

And ultimately- a "valuable security" would need to eventually be 'redeemed,' correct Scott?

Re: Will Bed: The only thing I don't get is when Pete Daoust says “CASH as a beneficiary”..?

Have you ever written a cheque, where on the top line, instead of writing a 'name' as the beneficiary, yo have made the cheque out to 'cash?'

Then, when the cheque is presented at the bank, instead of the corresponding amount being entered into an account, the cashier hands back cash across the counter in exchange for the cheque.

That's the mechanics as I comprehend it.

Re: Chip Douglas: And ultimately- a "valuable security" would need to eventually be 'redeemed,'

The holder may redeem it, sell it to another party for a percentage of its face value (negotiate its value with a third party), gift it to a third party, deposit it as an asset into a corporation (adding to the paper value of the company), deposit it into a trust as a trust asset....

Ultimately, the holder in due course may claim the value, or do what we all used to do up until reading this thread: burn it, shred it or bin it in which case the value would not be redeemed.

Iv heard of notaries could you get one to help inforce your claim ? iv heard a sheriff will inforce these but its all I know as im pretty new at this n don't know where you'd get one.

Stuart Stone I actually never did that or heard of that... To get cash, I would always debit the account once the cheque was deposited...

So I guess it's time to contact Bank of Canada and ask them about the proper procedure for a PERSON to redeem some of those receipts...

Stuart Stone, have you ever made a check to the order of "CASH" ?

I did, so I am thinking, what prevents me from creating a Bill of Exchange with these three parties:

DRAWER: PIERRE DAOUST DRAWEE: BANK OF CANADA BENEFICIARY: "CASH"

With these paid bills, for example, these GROCERY bills to back it up....this is where I got this THINKING from....

Pete Daoust that's creating a liability. Wouldn't you have to offer the remedy as we...as in a discharge date or something??

Or could you cancel it via restrictive wording on an instrument...?

I have no idea what you are talking about, Chris Evan :(

Yes Pete Daoust I have, when I needed to give a mate payment but didn't have available cash & we weren't near a cash machine/automatic teller.

But I haven't yet tried by creating a Bill of Exchange, however it makes logical sense.

The mechanics of the process appears to be the same as transferring 'money' from one account to another by way of cheque eg: from Bank account A to Bank Account B, but instead drawing it as cash

Pete. By requesting CASH are you not creating a liability?

Chris Evan, the process is more likely converting money of account to money of exchange

Yes. I know.

No, they will still send a piece of paper, made to the order of "CASH", and I will EXCHANGE that piece of paper for whatever I want.... :/

ANYBODY will be able to DEPOSIT that thing.....

I never done this neither, but will find out for sure :)

Ahhh...OK. I get it now

Scott Duncan " you only need cash when you are spending it. All other times its a liability"

That's EXACTLY it !!!!....The cash received, already been spent.. :)

All I need is a CREDIT card.... :D

For several months now, I know that Government MONEY is made to be used by PERSONS, not me, so it's THEIR money......well, so be it !! :D

I "ONLY" have the RIGHT to this person's surety :P

Or maybe I should just give POWER of ATTORNEY to Roguesupport Nx on this shit.... :D

Send ALL the bills to Scott :D

the commercial dealings of the man? :/

Me, as the SOLE authorized Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST, I give power of attorney to ABC Inc to ADMINISTRATE all commercial stuff for PIERRE DAOUST.....

I just went to court house with friend who is paying his traffic fine

Clerk: payment will be $600 Me: $20 is fine Clerk: no full payment is required Me: then your refusing payment. Bills of exchange then puts you in dishonor and discharges the debt please make note of that Clerk: your right... $20 is fine

Now could this work with the debt my person has with Manitoba hydro or will they simply cut my hydro off?

They could cut off JASON's hydro. But, why would you want to do that, when you know the surety has unlimited overdraft powers? Who cares if it is a 3 million public debt, if the responsible party is NOT Jason, the man? :/ Just administrate! :D

I want to.. Just heard of others who have tried that with hydro only for the fuckers to cut off

Jason, you lent $600 to someone, and now that someone owes you $600, would you accept $20 to settle the debt? :/ A yes, or no answer.

No

It's a PRIVATE DEBT, not a public debt, remember.

OK

Good answer. Then, that is why you most honour your contracts. If you are not planning on paying back, do not get into contract. And if you are an administrator, you must administrate! :D

So administrate hydro like I would Cra... Stamp the back

Only if it's a PUBLIC DEBT, yes you may administrate the debt, via it's surety.

OK. For some reason I thought Cra and hydro was public... But it's private. Then what is a bank loan and can that be done in the same fashion

Jason, CRA and hydro are most likely PUBLIC debts. Please check.

OK

Hydro has 96 on bottom right corner on remittance voucher which means it's public correct?

I have a question for Admiral Scott Duncan, or Captain Pete.

In a private debt, if my person has no access to any form of "payment" or "monies", may the SOLE AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR make an offer to settle the account by using his/her TIME as the only thing of VALUE he/she posses?

Let's say my person has a private debt with a bank. My person is broke. It/he cannot keep my end of the bargain. Now my person owes the bank $20,000.00 May I offer my time, at an hourly rate, to settle the account?

"Dear Vampire's Bank:

My person does not have any money, nor will it have access to money any time soon. Fortunately for us, I have something of VALUE to offer: my time!

So, I may offer my TIME at a rate of $1,000 an hour, to settle the debt of my person. I am ready to go clean, or throw the garbage out. Let me know when can I start settling the account.

SOLE AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR for ME"

:/ ?

If slavery it's really abolished, this should work.

They may accept your offer for your time, but they may very well also counter offer on what the value of your time is for them...

Another thing Scott recently responded to me with regarding a question i had:

"RECEIPT=PROOF-OF-TITLE"..... would you "ask" the BANK OF CANADA Will Bed, or would you give them INSTRUCTIONS, DIRECTING them on what it is you WISH for them to do for you?...just wondering

Lets assume what you are telling it's real, Will. If that is the case, NO ONE has the AUTHORITY to decide how much my time it's worth. MONEY steals that from us. It steals the ability for US to decide how much out time it's worth, if we do not control that "money."

If slavery it's over, they cannot dictate how much VALUE my time it's worth. And of course, the VALUE of MY TIME is NOT subject to negotiation.

Please, someone tell me I am crazy! :D

If slavery is over, then they would not try to block anyone from discharging their debts against this Security-of-Person THEY say we have the right to. However...maybe they are blocking "anyone," because only the Beneficiary has the right to access it. And maybe, the Beneficiary, has yet to be ASCERTAINED in their/the Government's eyes?

Where do you get that from, Chip? Did you learned that here? I must had missed that post. :/

<<Receiver's certificate

A debt instrument issued by a receiver and serving as a lien on the property, which provides funding to continue operations or to protect assets in receivership.>>

Mackximus Minimus you are totally right, but they WILL want to negotiate on what it's worth anyways.

You cannot come here and tell me your time is more valuable than mine if we were both to accomplish the same task in the same amount of time...

If you say "Hey I'm gonna mow your lawn for 1000$/hour" and they have a guy already doing it for 20$, they won't accept your offer...

What can you do for me which is worth 1000$/hour ? Then we can talk. Because if your time is worth 1000$, go work for someone else, load up that wallet and come back when you can pay me ;)

Chip, I'd NOTIFY them of what I wish to do, but I couldn't INSTRUCT them on doing something which I don't know yet what the proper procedure is... So I'd tell them that I wish they disclose the complete proper procedure or tell me where I can find all that info or prove me it cannot be done...

Deduction. I do not have the right to MACKXIMUS MINIMUS' 'security,' the same as you would not have the right to CHIP DOUGLAS' 'security.' And the Birth Certificate is certainly not just made out in Bearer form, it specifically identifies the 'person' who is entitled. Stephen Harper has his own person named STEPHEN HARPER. Not even Stephen Harper is entitled to the person named to CHIP DOUGLAS.

So Will, if they REFUSE my offer, it means it has been ACCEPTED! Refusal of payment IS ACCEPTANCE! :D And it's not my fault! Plus, you may pose theories on how expensive my janitor fees are, but I KNOW that it only belongs TO ME to decide! :D I am NOT a slave! :P

refusal is dishonour, which discharges the debt.

<<You cannot come here and tell me your time is more valuable than mine if we were both to accomplish the same task in the same amount of time...>>

Oh yes, I can! :D If I would be a slave, I could accept your theory, Will. But, fortunately, NO ONE EVER AGAIN will tell ME how much my time is VALUED or worth. :D

Chip, does deduction equals to "pulling stuff out of your ass"? :/ Because it sounds that way.

<<“WHOEVER CREATES THE LIABILITY MUST PROVIDE THE REMEDY”>> :D

I hear you Mackximus Minimus, but them not accepting your offer does not mean they would be REFUSING it, presenting a COUNTER OFFER would not be refusal... I'm just not sure how long that ball game would last...

My guess is you initially both agreed on the value of 1$... I just see it as if they never agreed that YOUR TIME is worth 1000$/h, it's hard to come up with that and not respect / change the terms of the initial contract...

6 years ago I had a $55000 loan at a credit Union... I sent them a letter saying I'll gladly pay if you can provide me the original document signed by me and the banker... Prove I'm the debtor... Prove you're at a loss if no money gets deposited into loan. Loan got discharged just last year v no letters back... No phone calls and kept my car

“Oh yes, I can! If I would be a slave, I could accept your theory, Will. But, fortunately, NO ONE EVER AGAIN will tell ME how much my time is VALUED or worth.”

Well, from a contract pt of view, I think the value of your time would have to be established up front in order to be recognized as such under that specific contract...

You are not a slave, but the other party in a contract isn't your slave neither... Forcing the other party to take a LOSS based on terms they never agreed to sounds like you are the one in dishonour...

Jason Lerato that's what I'm trying to prove with the car loan paper claim I've got going...

In that case, you didn't dishonour your obligation ; You actually exposed THEM *probably* selling / cashing in on the mortgage / paying it off and still trying to screw you to get it paid twice...

If you have a private debt that you can't pay off, instead of coming up with "hey, you know what, my time is worth 100 000$/h" I think you're always better off trying to take advantage of THEIR failure to respect their contract obligations...

The bank went silent after that letter

Will, for some reason deep in my mind, I KNOW nobody has the authority to dictated how much VALUE my time has. I think is a dirty little secret in the wide open. The VALUE of our time. Government/bankers/currencies are there to LIE about our VALUE.

How can, after creating a liability, and offering a remedy, my person can be in dishonour? :/ That does not make sense.

I think you are thinking like a submissive slave. Please don't take offence, Will.

Actually, I'm looking at this as a guy who's PERSON's never been employed, it's always been doing business based on private contracts...

If someone came up one day saying "hey that amount I owe you, I can't pay man sorry I'm broke, so how about I mow your lawn next week and we call it quits, my time is worth 1000$/h and I owe you 800$, and I'd appreciate if you could just refund the extra 200$ but as a consideration I'll graciously forget it.." I think I'd get ready to administrate the shit out of this guy's ass for 800$ worth of my fun ;)

Ok, WIll. I see you still BELIEVE in AUTHORITIES outside of yourself.

Let me ask you a question, then: Who is going to decide how much VALUE is my time worth, and where do they get the authority from?

If you can answer those questions, you may be up for a surprise.

Who is going to decide who much VALUE my time is worth? The government? The banks? A group of strangers called "experts"? Men in magical robes, and or with magical badges? Who do you BELIEVE has any authority to decide that for ME, and WHERE does that alleged authority derives from?

Only you decide what your time is worth, and I'm not going to challenge that. But anyone else also has the RIGHT not to contract.

In that case, you say you already have contractual obligations to honour.

Going back to my example. If the other guy said upfront : "Hey Will, btw my time is worth 1000$/h let's put that down just in case" I would have no problem living with his offer to mow the lawn for the balance... But we never agreed on what his time is worth... Turning the situation over, I wouldn't feel honourable walking up to some dude and telling him "Hey man sorry I can't pay you the 5000$ balance owed on that contract, but my time is worth so much that I just can decide to not fulfill the contractual obligations we both agreed on...

I don't think BELIEVING in AUTHORITIES outside myself has ANYTHING to do with HONOUR. The terms and conditions of a contract ARE LAW. Everyone has to obey the LAW.

You cannot re-write LAWS to which you agreed as you see fit as time goes by... This is PRECISELY why we all hate the system.

I don't wanna let them abuse ME, but I'm not gonna start abusing others by doing exactly what I wouldn't want done to ME...

Will, I have a very specific case.

It's a private debt with a bank. Party A is the Person. Party B is the bank. Party A takes a loan from Party B, and promise to pay back in X of money, in X amount of time.

Some years later Party A gets into a financial hardship, and cannot continue making payments to Party B. Party B can only ascertain that Party A owes some money. Party B CANNOT obligate party A to pay in a one and only specific way, that would be ILLEGAL. There was no prior negotiation about how Party A would get the money to pay Party B. There was no negotiation about how much VALUE does Party's A TIME was/is worth.

Since TIME is MONEY, Party A makes Party B an offer to settle the accounting with TIME, which is MONEY. Isn't MONEY also just a measurement of our time? But by exchanging our time for a currency, we LOOSE CONTROL of how much VALUE our time is worth. They give us NO OPTIONS. And they know it.

Am I the only one that can see this? :/

Will, why can PERSONS sometimes settle the accounting in COURT with COMMUNITY SERVICE HOURS? :D I am not crazy! The difference in this case is that the COURT decides how much VALUE your time has. And it was ALL VOLUNTARY! :D

What are PRISONS? Persons called to ACCOUNT and cannot pay, and then the Men accept the charges by paying... with their TIME! :D

I KNOW I am on to something here.

Actually Mackximus, you promised to REPAY

Yes, Beverly!

Money is a measurement of your TIME x your EFFORTS...

You cannot be sitting on the couch, breathing/wasting air, and claiming your time is worth 1000$/h.

I'll keep playing the flipside here : When you contracted that loan, you both agreed on what the PERSON's reimbursing capabilities were. That was based on the PERSON's job earnings, which is based on your TIME x your EFFORTS... So they have a pretty good idea of what your TIME is worth based on the agreements of that contract...

If you made sure to tell them upfront, HEY Here's what my time is worth, just so you know... Then they couldn't refuse or negotiate your offer...

I'm pretty sure COMMUNITY SERVICE HOURS aren't accounted for at a 1000$/h rate... Call the municipality and ask them, Hey how much is the guy who's mowing the grass is paid ?? And you'll get an idea of what the fine is... But I also have reasons to believe they sentence to COMMUNITY SERVICE so that it has a psychological effect over the MAN who administrated the PERSON outside their rules :)

Will, I am pointing out something BIGGER here. Look at what you are doing, you are defending THEIR fraudulent system. It's CRIMINAL to let strangers decide how much VALUE your time is worth, without your consent. They have a MONOPOLY.

That is part of the slavery programing. Men, and women have LOST any sense of self worth, self VALUE. They believe "entities" or "experts" should decide how much VALUE their time is worth. That it's bullshit.

I can tell you how much the guy mowing the grass is getting paid!!! :-D

Scott Duncan, or Pete Daoust, please call me crazy if I am.

No I'm not defending THEIR fraudulent system. You BOTH agreed to SPECIFIED terms and conditions when you contracted together !

I'm just defending the basics of what contracts are for. You are dealing with a bank, I'm dealing with clients and suppliers.

Are you saying if we agree on the value of what is to be exchanged, you can come up and force me to accept something I didn't agree with before you have fulfilled your obligations ?

You BOTH agreed on the repaying capabilities of your PERSON. If the PERSON CAN NOT possibly repay, and it's an EMERGENCY, used the SURETY ? Or expose them if they can't give back the promissory note !

I know what I'm worth. You know you know what you are worth. But my PERSON also has the right NOT TO CONTRACT with yours if the terms aren't agreed to !

*sigh* :/

Um, back to the original post, before you guys waste more time you don't get back...

Wouldn't it be an Affidavit of Claim? for Breach of Contract?

Affidavit? Why? I have never gotten an Affidavit from the IRS. I have gotten Bills, Statements, Notices to Levy and/or Lien, etc, but never an Affidavit

And the IRS' procedure seems to hold up in Kourt.

Because if they DON'T rebut the affidavit, then it becomes truth in law...

Notice of Breach of TRUST.

Avis d'abus de confiance :D

yeah Berta, I know. But an Affidavit is a Kourt document, not a commercial document.

COURT IS COMMERCIAL! OMD!

Think about it like this....you sell something to someone and they aren't happy, so they write you an Affidavit? No, they send a complaint, if nothing, a Bill of Particulars (Invoice), Statement, Default, Lien

Notice of Breach of TRUST :/

forget it.

:D

Will Bed, I KNOW I am up to something! :D

<<... It may be difficult to hear, but you're programmed to be a useless, sack-of-shit. If you should produce any VALUE, the government is there to lie to you about that VALUE, and to trick you into thinking you owE THEM for being VALUEable.>> Scott Duncan

I'm with you on this. BUT I still cannot see how you could force the other party to accept terms which you declared AFTER the contract was made and which they did not approve at the time the contract was enacted... If you can figure something out, I'll be glad to listen and chip in if I can, but for now I just can't seem to connect the dots...

Unless maybe you can declare to the government that your time is worth 1000$/h, that you have that PERSON to administrate, which they use as a collateral on the debt, and that you no longer wish to do it for free, and since YOU can create MONEY, you want the PERSON's SURETY to pay what is owed to the Sole Authorized Administrator, or a PERSON he TRUSTS, say 40h a week, to keep administrating THE PERSON THEY CREATED... Because as you said, you're not their slave...

You'll SEE it, eventually. You are just still coming from a "servitude" mentality.

And also, you are confused, because offering to settle the account for my person with my TIME it's NOT a change of terms, and conditions. I think it would be ILLEGAL to tell my person to pay in a particular way. It's their system, and it's not my fault.

Scott, am I wrong here, to use an Affidavit of Claim or Affidavit of Obligation with a Notice of Breach of Contract?

Mackximus- does "This (promissory)Note is Legal Tender" not represent DEBT? Scott always says this is all about surety, and, ACCOUNTING. In accounting, there is a ledger. That ledger has a debit side, and a CREDIT side. So if "This (promissory)Note Is Legal Tender" represents debt, then by simple logic, wouldnt a RECEIPT, that Scott has already said equals "PROOF-OF-TITLE," represent the CREDIT in this equation? My aunt likes to shop at 'Winners' btw alot, and has amassed quite a number of 'credit-slips' as a result of bringing stuff back for return. I am assuming that a credit-slip from Winners would be considered as a "valuable security" too?

I wonder if thats why the ink on the receipt fades quickly in weeks then disappears completely after a few months...have you noticed this

Let’s examine the bank loan scenario that Max was discussing with Will. I can see both sides of this exchange...

My brain goes like this:

Q: What NAME is the bank account made out in? A: The PERSON’s

Q: How do I know? A: Because when the account was opened and/or the loan made, (government issued) PERSONal identification was used, the loan was made out in the PERSON’s name, the account is in the PERSON’s name. (Even if the PERSON in question is a corporation, government issued/approved identification ie: Company registration certificate is used to identify the corporation).

Q: What was offered as consideration/security for the loan? A: A promissory note, in advance, thus creating money of account, listed as an asset on the bank’s ledger. And yes, the bank happily accepted it. Consequently, the alleged loan has been prepaid, by ME via the surety of the PERSON:

Q: Have I made any mistakes along the way? A: I may have mistakenly led the bank to believe that the PERSON and ME are one & the same entity, so I may need to go back and clarify this mistake and inform them that I am instead acting in the role as Sole Authorised Administrator for the PERSON.

Q: Can this mistake be addressed? A: Absolutely.

As ALL commerce (when using legal tender) is through the PERSON, in that it was paid to a PERSON, deposited into a PERSON’s account, or transferred from one PERSON to another. ALL those debts are acquired and may consequently be discharged via the surety of the PERSON, or purchased using the PERSON’s private account.

That is my comprehension, but if this is a massive stainshit and I’m missing something here, please feel free to correct/berate etc.

As legal tender has no intrinsic value, it in effect only has the agreed upon value of the parties (by agreeing to a dollar amount at/prior to the commencement of the contract). In that respect, Will is correct. Now, at the performance end of the contract, production of the agreed dollar value is the key issue. In that case, Mackximus can decide what his time is worth in several ways, (I’m sure there are many creative ways), here are 3:

He may renegotiate the terms of the contract, the amount etc (in much the same way that a debt recovery company does not pay full face value for the alleged debt). “Hey person I owe money to. You can come after me for the debt, but I am unwilling/unable to pay it to you, in which case you will probably transfer it to a debt collection company for 10% of its face value, and write it off on your company books for a tax benefit. In this case, how about I give you 10% of face value and we call it quits?”

OR:

I agree that my time is the market value for whatever tasks I’m performing (in this case, $20 per hour for mowing grass and emptying trash appears to be the going rate), so I’ll exchange 50 hours of my life for that.

OR:

I’ve been doing a bunch of reading and learning and I’m certain that I decide what I’m worth, in the only valuable currency I have: TIME.

So, I’ll use my brain to create a promissory note, deposit it with a bank in exchange for some money of exchange & transfer it to your account by wire, cheque or cash. Then I can discharge the alleged bank debt via the surety of the person, or let the bank send it on to a debt recovery company & I’ll deal with them in due course, cos those fuckers are easy to get rid of.

The second and third options are just examples of how you CHOOSE to leverage your TIME.

So, you’re both right, you MUST honour your contracts, but you get to CHOOSE what your time is worth by determining how you are going to use your TIME to settle the account, using the agreed upon medium of exchange at commencement.

I see what you are saying, Stuart. The third option looks like I would need a RECEIPT to justify, in order to offer the bank's surety as consideration for that cheque.

But please tell me I am wrong, Scott Duncan or Pete Daoust, I have never seen a contract that obligates to repay it in an specific form of payment. :( I thinks it's suggested. For example, if there is banks that tells you that they only accept a bank manager check's to settle the account, I think that is illegal. There is something to this whole thing, I cannot still put my finger on it completely. :/

Pete, why are you answering the to the "tits guy", and ignoring me ? Hahaha! :P

I knew it! I am thinking right! :D

Bobis Youruncle

Another awesome thread :D

Considering the Bills of Exchange Act says basically that the signature is the value, and that the definition they give for value is "valuable consideration," then, if you 'paid' for something with "This Note Is Legal Tender," and you get a RECEIPT for doing so, and RECEIPT=PROOF-OF-TITLE.....wouldnt the RECEIPT in a way act as PROOF that the vendor got 'paid,' but, that i used "This Note Is Legal Tender" in order to do it instead of my SIGNATURE as we are supposed to do, and having the RECEIPT may mean that the ACCOUNTING on this PURCHASE still needs to be adjusted for?

Mmmhhh !!! ^^^^ ....I don't get what Chip Douglas is saying there ?

Chip Douglas...

...shut up. Seriously, stop trying to think. That convoluted bullshit you just spewed directly contradicts the simplicity I teach.

Seriously. Shut up.

Ha, that's why :D

Chip Douglas you and people like you who pretend to think, are what makes me just want to walk away. The ONLY thing that crap you just spewed did was to convince me that there is too much stupid to fight.

Seriously, the MAJORITY of you are wasting your time here. You're simply too dumb to grasp the VERY SIMPLE things I teach.

If I go to the store, and intent to pay CASH for stuff, I am cooked :P , because I am TRANSFERRING debts to another PERSON, and I get stuff in return…..done deal, I have accepted the TENDER for LAW.

If I go to the store, and use MONEY OF ACCOUNT for stuff, I can ADMINISTRATE the shit later on, because that NEW money of account, had just been CREATED by “ME”, with my signature…..so it’s just normal that this bill I have got in return, gets discharged, if I want to…..

I hope I am NOT "thinking" too much here :D

With CASH, you are the BENEFICIARY ONLY. The TENDER FOR LAW is to PROTECT THE BENEFICIARY.

Use all the CASH you like!

Just make sure to TRANSFER TITLE TO A TRUST, when you buy shit you don't consume.

Hey, Chris Evan, I picked up a Service Interruption Notice in PIERRE DAOUST's mail box, from Hydro-Quebec ?

What am I going to do now ? :(

They are claiming $6800.00 :-o

I filled the thing the same way that guy on the video showed us :/

What?

:D

That's true though....just picked it up

I sent an Invoice on the 27th to the electric guy here

For what, Chris ?

Chris Evan, why have you invoiced them ?

Scott, would you not write up an affidavit here and require them to answer all of your questions and/or rebut anything you've said? If they don't answer, it means they've agreed? Then you would have a default judgement on the issue?

Did that :D .....I have begged them to tell me I am wrong, and if they do so, I will PAY :D

It's been 23 months I have not acted as SURETY for this bill, I did received 2 of these NOTICE from them before......it's like a cycle, they do things like their system tells them to do things, I think......

Ok...

See? You guys are going on about affidavit's only required in court... duh!

I have sent them an affidavit telling WHO I AM.....and WHO IS PIERRE DAOUST, that's all

I sent them one saying that and MUCH MUCH MORE...

The much much more has been NOTIFIED to them, by the SOLE authorized Administrator.....

Its how you create YOUR law.

Anyway, I think they are ready for the PRICE LIST :P

So I will create a PRICE LIST, and send it to them. :/

3 line items...traveling within Massachusetts to administrate the account, completion of a boe, and the dishonor of the last BoE. All was properly noticed and accepted

$6800.00 !!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!.....that is 2 years of electricity ffs !!!! :D

What about "Breach of Trust", Chris Evan ? :(

I'm at about $2000 of electricity...

Maybe I could offer 6800 dogecoin ? :D HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

How bout 3 dogecoins...

:D

I didn't account for that. What is the going rate?

The dogecoin rate is 1 dogecoin = 1 dogecoin :/

I still think Breach of Contract... THEY send you a bill and you accepted... then they don't like the "payment type". Breach of contract...

No, it's breach of TRUST in Quebec :-P

Oh, well maybe in Queback... :D

Its a violation of MGL ch 106 3-603

Hydro-Quebec is owned by the PEOPLE :-D

Chris? what is MGL ch106 3-603?

Mass codification of the UCC. Same as UCC 3-603. Acceptance

They are breaching the TRUST towards one of the SHARE HOLDER :P

Pete, gotcha...

EPCOR and its Shareholder, the City of Edmonton = THE PEOPLE

:D BING!

BANG ! :D

Ajax is one of four shareholders of Veridian, with a 32.1-per cent stake. here too :D

EPCOR has one shareholder... what a scam...

Breach of TRUST: $10,000.00 Every Hour of not providing what's already mine: $300.00 Every Hour of my time Administrating this shit: $1000.00 Violation of the INTEGRITY of the PERSON: $10,000.00 Violation of the private RESIDENCE: $10,000.00

What else ? :/

Seems I should update my fees...

I go by "Every day of not providing what's already mine = $10,000"

I go daily...

Scott Duncan said BILL PER HOUR, or per ITEM :/

Yes I did. Don't be sad.

Ok, I have ALL these groceries receipts in front of me, what do I do now ? :D

I am wondering, since all these consumable product has been bought with a CREDIT card, the beneficiary of this Bill of Exchange should be CIBC Mastercard ?

So Bank of Canada could transfer Money of Account directly in PIERRE DAOUST's CIBC Master Card account ?

Hmm, the Sole Authorized Administrator would complete the back of the receipts as they do with a boe, create a remittance for consumable goods (itemize if necessary), total the amount and send to bank of canada?

So far, some stuff happening in Quebec :D HAHAHAHA!!!!!

I wnder if I will have to include a certified copy of PIERRE DAOUST's surety bond with this :-\

As "consideration" :-D

I definitely would, at least the first time...

How's that sound ? :D

Mirabel, May 2, 2014 POST certifed . LT 82400000 Hydro -Québec Service Recovery CP 176 Succ D'Youville Montreal ( Quebec ) H2P 2V4

Subject: Client Number 103XXXXXX Account Number: 299XXXXXXXXX

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED / WITHOUT PREJUDICE

NOTICE OF BREACH OF TRUST

Hydro -Québec ,

Because you do not respond to my communication of April 30 , and none of my previous communications, I can only UNDERSTAND that you have no intention to enforce the law, and in addition , you sent the person named PIERRE DAOUST , another notice of termination of service on 26 May 2014.

Please be advised that I no longer buy public debt, I chose to administer via the surety of the person , so you just have to present to the PAYMENT ( Bank of Canada) bills of exchange completed by me, it’s your obligation.

So if you proceed with a service interruption , you will thereby commit an illegal act , you must understand that PIERRE DAOUST is SHAREHOLDER of Hydro -Québec , like all PERSONS domiciled in Québec , so a BREACH OF TRUST will be clearly established by YOU , if you follow with your threats.

Here are the claims that will be made in the event of an outage at the site of PIERRE DAOUST , 1196604XXXXXX registration and account number 26X-XXX-XXX

1 ) . Breach of Trust: $ 10,000.00 2 ) . Each hour of service outage : $ 300.00 3 ) . Violation of INTEGRITY of PIERRE DAOUST : $ 10,000.00 4 ) . Time taken by me to administrate all this : $ 1000.00 per hour.

So I WANT you to obey the law, because all must obey the law and nobody is above the law.

If a defect exists on these bills which I completed, please let me know as soon as possible, so that I can correct them, if you choose to decline this administrative method, please send me a notice of refusal , and all bills of exchange completed , and the reasons for your refusal , IT'S THE LAW ...

I have a person , and I 'm not SURETY for this person that I have, but I have the right to it, and, as SOLE AUTHORIZED ADMINISTRATOR for this person that I have, I use this for SURETY to discharge all public debts sent to PIERRE DAOUST

Again, if I'm wrong , TELL ME AND I'LL PAY You only have to tell me in writing that I'm wrong , that's all .....

You have eight (8) days to respond to this notice.

Authorized By: SOLE Authorized Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST 26X-XXX-XXX / Registration 1196604XXXXXX

:P

Just tell me I AM FUCKING WRONG, and I will pay :P

Now, let's get ALL these income taxes paid, back.... :P

Dear CRA and QRA,

I, as the sole authorized administrator for the person named PIERRE DAOUST, wish you could send a complete statement of account concerning ALL income taxes paid by PIERRE DAOUST, since 1982.

As the sole authorized administrator for PIERRE DAOUST, I will claim the total amount back from you, and you will be able to send PIERRE DAOUST a HUGE Bill of Exchange, so I can administrate that PUBLIC DEBT via PIERRE DAOUST's surety.

With all my love.

Sole Authorized Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST

:P

:D

I would copy/paste, because you know I like to make sure they have to read/read again every useful / dumbproof detail with every single communication I send to any of them the articles of law which they seem to be ignoring, and I would ask them to answer : Did you read the law ? Do you understand the law ? Are you deliberately infringing the law ? I have reasons to believe the answer to each of those questions is YES, so shall you refuse to answer to these questions and prove any of your statements, your silence will indeed be considered a YES...

?

I thought this is covered in: So I WANT you to obey the law, because all must obey the law and nobody is above the law. :/

:D http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khg4E8XE63I

:D

I read something, not so long ago, saying something along the lines of : Asking questions negates understanding and serves the ball back to them...

You want to obey the law, and everyone must obey the law, and there's no but after, BUT one thing I learned so far is all of the mother fuckers somehow seem to think they must only obey the laws they know and can ignore the rest... Ignorance is bliss.

Questions negate understanding. Use them. Question credentials! That is hilarious. A brilliant man told me this. You want to see stupid faces.

And asking questions to make things clearer also seems to prove that you care for all parties to agree on the same facts -> good faith / good administrator

Ok, questions to whom ?

there is 3 subject in here ! :-D

Hydro Ask them if they read the law If they understand the law If they deliberately refuse to respect their obligations You have reasons to believe yes to all of those, so no answer with proofs to contrary will be considered a yes... But you're better than me with asking the right questions ;)

Ho, that's my 12th communication with them, all questions has been asked... :-D

Did they aswer those questions ?

Nope, they NEVER answered fuckall

All they have left is to continue to pester you, hoping you will give in to that insanity again of gifting every month along with the vouchers. They can't answer to the bankruptcy with anything other then discharge. So all questions, as Pete said, will go unanswered.

I would send them copies of all communications with highlight on all questions they never answered, and ask them all again, saying you have reasons to believe they read the law, understand the law, deliberately act illegally, ask them if there's an article which mentions the law doesnt apply to them... You have reasons to believe there aint any, i guess they already got your fee schedule, so invoice ? And maybe tell them you will copy the minister of justice as a witness if they refuse to respond, as this seems like fraud and/or extortion to you...

I won't do what's already been done, Will :-)

I will make sure they know the COST of their future actions...

Well... After an invoice... Ex parte order ?

No, an account statement

They hold remedy (completed voucher/instrument) in their hands. "If you refuse to find your reward at the Bank of Canada is fine with me. It absolves every party involved except the beneficiary which is Hydro Quebec of liability. Have a nice day."

Done that too :-D

You'd best go back to the beginning and get those unanswered questions answered!

YES INDEED!

They don't answer tabarnac :-(

If Pete, as acceptor, is holder in due course, he should require payment then of this, no?

The payment is in undertakings at the moment.

Tell them, they make a claim based on stuff you dont understand, they have to clarify it so that you can understand, because as far as you are concerned, you honoured all your obligations, did nothing illegal or unlawful, and unless they return all the coupons/slips/vouchers they are considered to be paid.

If they don't answer your questions, you have reasons to believe they recognise they act illegally. Tell them that's their last chance to answer and you graciously give them 10 days to prove the contrary, then extra fees apply and the minister of justice will be informed, and the Suret” du Quebec as well because it seems like they try to defraud the PERSON, maybe even trying to cash in twice on the SURETY for the *same* debt which has been administrated and/or (should already be) paid...

And make sure your invoice is bold, you have no time to waste, especially with people who give you the impression they are trying to defraud PIERRE DAOUST.

Make it clear and final. Use the word PREREMPTORY. Then you should have more than everything to get an ex parte order ?

Never been there, so you tell me if I'm totally outtawack or something...

Will Bed has been doing his TENDER FOR LAW Homework, I see! :D

Holy shit I still feel like I know NOTHING AT ALL !

That just means you're on the right track.

OK, I will do that, that is what I have done bavk in October, when they've sent for the second time a Notice of Interruption of service......this is the third on I receive :-\

They never interrupted the service......I feel like I am caught in a cycle of some sort...

That's the thing about "Musical Chairs"; There's never a loser as long as the music plays.

:-D

Is this what Cra will do to me? What I can expect? As last week I administered the bill as learnt here

No, CRA will definitely shoot you...

Lol

"The payment is in undertakings at the moment"

I am not sure what this mean..... :/

I think of this for 20 hours now :D

I looked it up too. Does it mean it is being securitzed?

I thought it mean the payment is jammed somewhere, :D

The LEGAL definition of undertaking:

Undertaking

A written promise offered as security for the performance of a particular act required in a legal action.

In a criminal case, an undertaking of bail is security for the appearance of the defendant. In the event the defendant fails to appear, the amount posted as bail is forfeited.

An undertaking with adequate security is a bond. The term is used in a general sense to refer to any type of promise or stipulation.

But Scott wrote "undertakings" (with an "s" ).....that fucks me up goods :D

Hellossss !!! :D

I was thinking the same thing

UNDERTAKING, contracts. An engagement by one of the parties to a contract to the other, and not the mutual engagement of the parties to each other; a promise.

Maybe the Hydro company is not getting any answers either!!! :-D

So I have checked the definition of the words with an "s" , and the only thing I have founds is:

See: dealings

Well, if it's the case Chris Evan, why would they cut the service ? :D

Because their accounting is not yet satisfied, so to satisfy the accounting, they would cut the service to get the party who want s serice to show up

I will call them tomorrow, and will use Beverly Berta Braakschmack's "question bombarding" technic :-D

And rcord the call of course, and then email it to them :-P

hahaha....maybe he means the issue is dead...like an UNDERTAKER does UNDERTAKINGS

Scott Duncan, what did you meant ?

*mean

I get it as "getting the payment is now under the responsibility of Hydro" since you have done everything you legally had to do ... So they now have to honour their legal obligations too... They are responsible for it. They are SURETY for the matter of getting their payment. The music's still playing.

You served the ball back to them. You have honoured your responsibilities you are not responsible for the rest. If THEY fuckaround with this, THEY are the only ones responsible....

English and legalese aint my first languages, but it seems that : You understand facts, laws, etc. You undertake actions, procedures, etc.

When you underSTAND, you are responsible. When you underTAKE, you are responsible. Being responsible = SURETY.

The task of answering a question is a UNDERTAKING.

They MUST complete the UNDERTAKING for the transaction to be honoured.

There are SEVERAL QUESTIONS, so there are SEVERAL UNDERTAKINGS to be completed before they can make demands.

3. To act as surety for (another); to make oneself responsible for (a person, fact, or the like) <her husband undertook her appearance in court>. [Cases: Undertakings undertaking, n. (l4c) 1. A promise, pledge, or engagement. [Cases: Undertakings (::::0 1.] 2. A bail bond.

Pete, have they ever zeroed the account or is it a carry over balance with the new charges added every month? After 24+ months, I would presume that the hydro should have been 5000.00+ monies of account. I remember back when you started mining, I said that Hydro Quebec is going to wonder what their favorite customer is up too. Well, I wonder why they won't budge. They can't. AND NEITHER CAN YOU! Standoff at the OK Tabernac Corral. Turn on ALL the lights!

carry over, $6800 so far...

I picture them standing in front of a cracked and leaking dam with a finger stuck in a hole and Pete on the other side biting that finger. I wonder how many customers of hydro Quebec are trying this at the moment? All the vouchers that you have returned in honor each month is being held as a loss to them if they never sent to bank of Canada in some sort of timely manner, (this I can only speculate.) They can't stop you from biting the finger for that is illegal, so all they have is slow monthly nagging for you and everyone else brave enough to take it this far and not give a fuck. They still make enough off other customers to cover you and the other administrators, but you are cutting into the bottom line of profits too. Higher rates to balance? Only a PERSON would care!

Ask them if there is a prize/reward for reaching 100,000.00 monies of account.

I just called Hydro, didn't past the IDENTIFICATION step, which is step number 1. :(

The hung up on me :(

How rude!

So disappointing, much hates :(

They want to talk to a PERSON, and that person needs to be PIERRE DAOUST 26X-XXX-XXX.....

tell them that person's been trying to talk to them via registered mail and they seem like they are the ones who dont wanna talk to the person !?

No time to get to that, Will Bed... :D

you recorded the call ?

Yes, but I have deleted it, by mistake :/

I think I can make it re-live......

would hydro and gas be considered consumer purchases?

Yes.

Could a credit card be used to pay gas and hydro debts and the receipts sent to the bank of canada?

Over the phone, it has happened to me. I tell them "I am the Sole Authorized Administrator for ...", and they tell me they need to talk to the PERSON, or that they cannot continue the conversation. :D And then I tell them that the PERSON cannot speak, but that the Sole Authorized Administrator can speak. If they refuse to speak to the administrator, I inform them that then, they are choosing to communicate only in writing.

I had similar experience with a woman at the bank...their frustration level escalates quickly

Will Bed, I'll send you the audio, I have it back to life :D

That is good to give a choice, Max. Now, you remain in charge and they know the situation. "You can either talk to the administrator or to the PERSON through mail." Think about it. If I were to phone JOHN DEERE implements and ask to speak to John Deere, what would they say. Not sure, phone them. This is the exact same!

If I don't say : My name is PIERRE DAOUST, and my postal CODE is blablabla, they just hang up the fucking phone :D

Impossible to tell the truth ... :/

HAHAHA !!!.... I found something :-D DETERMINATION is very useful.... :-P

Tell us more please ?

Tomorrow, I'll do it first... ;-)

By the way, my phone says the file is too heavy to email it, I will have to fix it before I can email it, Will Bed

26 minutes of waiting, and 2 minutes of talking :-\

Hmm, went for a hot shower today and it was cold...I have been threatened with discontinuation of service by the gas company.They are one notice away from being in default for their lack of payment of their account with us. A lien prepared to be registered. My question is, if we were to buy back the debt to get hot water back, does that affect what has been done to date through the admin process?

NOTIFY them on WHY you are BUYING back that debt, tell them that you are FORCE to do it by them :)

Yes I will definitely do that.

Alright it's official they cut my gas and not a hot water tank issue.

Question. How is any hydro any different than Cra in terms of accepting my administrative work? Why does it work with Cra and not hydro?

I may be incorrect in my comprehension but I think CRA is more open to it because they are tied to the government accounting/books and places like hydro have their own accounting/books and refuse to submit the bills of exchange to the bank of canada?

Then what if you send bill to bank of Canada instead of hydro company

My understanding is that the bank of canada requires receipts. Those will be forthcoming to them, once I receive my new credit card lol

So when you administer Cra vouchers do you send it to Cra or bank of Canada

For my gas I sent the original first completed bill of exchange to the Bank of Canada and a copy to the gas company. The idea was to have bank of canada aware that it was accepted by me, and to let me know if there were any issues on their part. No response so they had no issue. The completed bills of exchange after that, the original was sent to the gas company ....no response from them other then threats lol

I would think CRA will just discharge the debt, without the bank of canada being involved, but I don't know that for sure, I'm still learning through experience here lol

I'm thinking some here have successfully has Cra debts discharged through administration

I've not done anything with them....my plate is already full right now :P

Gail Marie, we have a thing in our criminal clubhouse rules called 'Unwarranted Demand with Menaces':

The Australian Criminal Code 1995, Section 138 specifically outlines the liability associated with making continued demands, now that this information has been brought to your attention:

138.1 Unwarranted demand with menaces (1) For the purposes of this Part, a person (the first person) makes an unwarranted demand with menaces of another person if, and only if: (a) the first person makes a demand with menaces of the other person; and (b) the first person does not believe that he or she has reasonable grounds for making the demand; and (c) the first person does not reasonably believe that the use of the menaces is a proper means of reinforcing the demand. (2) This Part applies to a demand whether or not it is for property. (3) This Part applies to a demand with menaces, whether or not the menaces relate to conduct to be engaged in by the person making the demand. 138.2 Menaces (1) For the purposes of this Part, menaces includes: (a) a threat (whether express or implied) of conduct that is detrimental or unpleasant to another person; or (b) a general threat of detrimental or unpleasant conduct that is implied because of the status, office or position of the maker of the threat. Threat against an individual (2) For the purposes of this Part, a threat against an individual is taken not to be menaces unless: (a) both: (i) the threat would be likely to cause the individual to act unwillingly; and (ii) the maker of the threat is aware of the vulnerability of the individual to the threat; or (b) the threat would be likely to cause a person of normal stability and courage to act unwillingly.

I add this with any competed Bill of Exchange, along with the relevant instructions in accordance with the Bills of Exchange Act, specifically Section 96 & Section 50 from the Australian Act (Section 84 in Canada I think):

96 Good faith A thing is deemed to be done in good faith, within the meaning of this Act, where it is in fact done honestly, whether it is done negligently or not.

50 Rules as to presentment for payment (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, a bill must be duly presented for payment. If it be not so presented, the drawer and indorsers shall be discharged. (2) A bill is duly presented for payment which is presented in accordance with the following rules: (d) A bill is presented at the proper place: (i) where a place of payment is specified in the bill and the bill is there presented;

Once forewarned, any further attempts at collection/demands/threats of court action/cutting supply etc would probably fall under the heading 'unwarranted demands with menaces', which is considered a criminal act.

In short, you have acted in good faith, the duty is theirs to present the completed bill (which they commenced) for payment, and continuing to demand/threaten/coerce without and/or in spite of doing due diligence as to the validity of the information you have provided to them, is most likely a criminal act on their part.

So, tell them to bugger off and restore the person's service, or face the consequences of their actions.

I love that. Where can I find that in Canadian acts

Jason, you seems to fall in love easy, just saying....

Lol. With this stuff... Fuck yeah

Section 50 is the Same as Section 84 of the Canadian Bills of Exchange Act (I think).

Section 96, good faith should be easy enough to find in the Bills of Exchange Act over there.

Canada's criminal code will have something similar...I recall Pete Daoust making a reference to Canadian criminal law re negotiable instruments.

Have a read through :D

Pete, it's my wit n charm, makes me loveable :P

:-D

Hold on Jason, let me spoon feed you more shit, so you won't actually learn anything. Please stand-by while I find the act for you. Go get a beer, relax! :D

Have you red the Bill of Exchange act, Jason Lerato ?

You forgot the shoulder rub n foot massage Mackximus Minimus ;-)

Lol. Yes I have and need to read it again and again

LIAR! Hahahaha!

Jason Lerato, you can't lie in here, you know that, right ?

This ain't a church :P

Watch this: It's a good primer while Mackximus Minimus gives you that shoulder rub :P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJBblYulqFc

Fuck... Give me a break for once. Yes I have read it?

*sigh* :(

Seriously, the Bills of Exchange Act seemed like a bunch of gibberish until I watched the video 3 or 4 times, did a bunch of study & started to comprehend what was hidden in plain sight...

It's a paradigm shift and it continues to blow my mind that it's all there in front of us, once we know how to use it.

Now I get pissed off when people (read Freedumbers) claim they ARE the person, that it's theirs and that the gubbmint is stealing from THEM...fraudsters.

Fuck you, Jason Lerato. You see, that mentality of LYING enables other evil people, like you, to enslave me and the rest, and I take that shit personal now. You might not see it.

Do not be a lying piece of shit here, because that tells you do not give a shit about the men, and women giving their TIME trying to help. They only thing many of us have of value, is our time. We do not get ANYTHING in return for helping your lazy ass.

Please think about what I just said.

Mackximus Minimus. I have never lied here... So stop acting almighty. I don't know as much as most here but I'm here many times a day... Reading files and learning. I appreciate all the knowledge here. So damn take it easy...I take this stuff serious.

Jason Lerato...its just that we have been here for 18 months reading every word...

I've been here only a month or two... But gotta start somewhere right

Yeah....start reading at the bottom. Fuck...I've gone all the way back once recently looking for stuff

Seriously Jason Lerato, this stuff will mess with your head & everything you have ever believed (which is part of the reason why ALL belief is evil).

The deprogramming/reprogramming is a time consuming/difficult/mindblowing process...it wont be easy but it IS worth it.

Cut & paste posts into word, delete all the fluff n trashtalk & focus on the key elements...then read & reread...especially the stuff Scott mentions...the more cryptic it seems & the more it seems to make no sense at this point in time, the more profound it usually is...then when you have a basic handle on it, define the terms, ALL of them.

Then as your comprehension improves, go back over old posts again & you'll have leaps in understanding on concepts that made no sense before, things like civil death/liens/trusts/corporations & especially money...and then you'll comprehend the 2 key principles:

1. Scott is ALWAYS right 2. It's ALL about accounting & surety.

Then you'll get angry at the lies n bullshit you've been fed, and then you'll begin to learn how to use the system as it was designed (and never taught)...

And then you'll become a belligerent cantankerous fucker like the rest of us :D

Sounds good to me. And will do

belligerent cantankerous fucker !! :D

Jason Lerato, I just saw this when I reloaded the page << Fuck... Give me a break for once. Yes I have read it>> I had not seen this answer, so I thought you acquiesce to having lied. If I was a bit trigger happy, please forgive me!

But I was trying to make a point, that even lying a little bit, it's part of the flaws that we present as a programed society, and must always deal saying the truth. And it pisses me off to see liars not getting called to account.

Once again, sorry for your butthurtness, please forgive me! :P

Man, this exchange began with love, progressed into fucking & has ended in butthurt...that's messed up! :P

^^^ Authorized by: "Almighty" Mackximus Minimus! Hahaha!

I create monsters. :D

Shit, yes you DO! :O

Weaponised boat bunnies AND monsters :D

No problem Mackximus Minimus... Forgiven and all good

I am in the process of creating two monsters, and I also realized I can't teach women, they're too dumb...

Ok, good night everyone, I'll leave you with this.... :-D

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/belligerent

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cantankerous

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/monster

Would it be better to use these little sticky numbers on your coupons to make sure they are recorded in the public so they will not be ignored?

I'm not QUITE sure what you are asking here.

If you pull those extra number (stickers) off the registered mail and put them on the coupon you are sending with that registered mail, which gives the coupon an identifying number, then they would be registered in the public and can't be just stolen?

Wouldn't it be much easier to appoint a TRUSTEE, such as the Finance Minister (Provincial) to handle these public debts and NOTIFY the companies involved?

You could, but Government workers suck at that.

You are liable for your trustees.

How about CRA?

Do you do business with them? They ARE NOT the government after all.

:D good thread here. "The basics"

You are welcome. ;)

Is a lien a "negotiable instrument" ?

The definition of "negotiable instrument" in the financial administration act finishes with ..."and any other similar instrument"

I am trying to connect some dots here myself. I have an unpaid invoice, that I expect will soon get to the lien stage. I am wondering if it will itself become a negotiable instrument. If it is, then it is money right? I could then give it away to a charitible non-profit organization and get a tax reciept correct? I could then have the accountant do the tax return for the person I administrate and there would be a large refund there that I could do something constructive with?

Am I way off here?

I know it"s a VALUABLE one, but NÉGGOTIABLE.....can you sell it ?

But can you create a negotiable one from it?

My girlfriend asked me that last night Kent with a very bemused face!

Thats a good question. The surety is obligated to, isn't it?

9111-1111 Quebec Inc will add this security to its book....

Let say the lien is for $20,000.00

Well, 9111-1111 Quebec Inc just increased its value for $20,000.00

If the name is liened for 50 millions, 9111-1111 Quebec Inc will end up having a value of $50 millioms...

That will be in its books, CERTIFIED by a charter accountant.

What do you think the Bank will tell you, when they'll see that ? :D

"Sir, do you need a credit limit ? :D

If a lien is registered in regard of an unpaid invoice, that lien can be published in the newspaper, in the legal notice section.

Make sure to add a phone number and/or an email address where you can be reached.

A LAWYER might call and offer his help to COLLECT on that lien :D

But the question still remains as to it being a negotiable instrument or not.

If that lawyer offers his help to collect on that lien, does he have to do it as agent or can the lien be sold to him to do with as he pleases?

Up to him, and you.....I guess :/

Then it would have to be a negotiable instrument wouldn't it?

I don't see a lien as a negotiable instrument, I haven't made any research on it, but from what I understand,, I can't go out and BUY something with a lien......

http://negotiableinstruments.blogspot.ca/

A lien is a claim to equity.

But can that claim be given away?

From Pete's Law Dictionary.... :D

Lien.

Definition: An arrest on title, known to be the ONLY valid claim in COMMERCE.

Of course it can!!

No it can't :P

Maybe it can be TRANSFERRED......but given away ? ... :/

Oh yes. It can be transferred.

It's an arrest on title, so it's not even your's. So since it's not your's, I guess you can't give it :D

I think, the only thing I can really GIVE, as a Man, is my signature and my time.....

I don't see anything else I can give....

Well, maybe I didn't spent enough TIME to think about it :D

Gift A voluntary transfer of property or of a property interest from one individual to another, made gratuitously to the recipient.

Let me take a second here to rephrase the question I had, because it appears I should have used a different word. Gift instead of Give.

Can that claim be gifted away? As in, a gift to a charitable organization....

Pete Daoust, I am just trying to follow the notion of "Take what you need and give the rest away" to determine how I might apply it to a scenario like this with a lien

A lien isn't TAKING anything. It's CORRECTING/HALTING a wrong.

The taking what you need part could be in the form of the tax deduction I think? Scott said somewhere that the government must pay out the refund.

And the giving, would be the transferring of the lien to a suitable non-profit group. Scott also said that the chartered accountants can push the lien through. I was thinking that the accountant for the non-profit group could take that and do something constructive with it.

I must be way off I guess.

Must be! :D

Did YOU create that money? Are you a trustee in its administration?

The answer is NO!

You are the lawful holder in due course of that security. Nothing more. If you BENEFIT from that DEBT IN TRANSIT, then you are DEEMED TO HAVE ACCEPTED THE TENDER FOR LAW THAT MONEY PROVIDES, and ALL of its rules.

So no, you cannot alter the terms after you committed.

Sino General alters the terms BEFORE he signs, just like you are supposed to. I'm not sure why they get so upset when he tries to leverage the PERFECTLY LEGAL (Perfected [Two signatures and a trustee's seal]) terms in those contracts.

"You are the lawful holder in due course of that security. Nothing more"

But that security must appear in some books, right ?

Yes! No books that have anything to do with you!

McDonalds makes BILLIONS on the books, and not even once, have they shown the books to the cows.. before they become Big Mac's.

You are cattle. No different than a passenger on a train. THAT is your role in commerce. Nothing more.

In the scenario I was asking about, the lien would be resulting from an unpaid invoice.

The unpaid invoice stems from an unresolved claim for the original promissory note not being returned when the mortgage was discharged and closed.

So, although it is different from a "Lien-the-name" based question, I don't think it would change the answers to anything I've asked. :)

OK, so you want DEEPER into commerce! Got it!

The LIEN stops THEM from benefiting and/or securing the VALUE you are claiming. Since it's LEGAL, the only VALUE they can provide is MORE DEBT IN TRANSIT. It's not really "TRANSIT" if the VEHICLE can't move. ;)

This is also endorsed by Dan LIEN-YOUR-NAME Wilson. :D

ALWAYS REMEMBER: IN COMMERCE, IF IT'S 'FREE' THEN YOU ARE THE PRODUCT!

EVERYTHING I SHOW YOU IS FREE! YOU ARE THE PRODUCT! I just don't lie to you about it.

Thank you Scott for ALL the information you have shared. You have changed my life in ways I still don't grasp fully, but I'm reading and learning on a daily basis. I'm way ahead of the curve...

The Bell-Curve? :/

Yes Pete, it's an important mathematical curve I'm afraid most people won't understand or comprehend in the future. There is the X Factor after all ?

Bump