The Tender For Law

English Only

ENGLISH is the international language of law and commerce. Knowing FRENCH is useful for understanding LEGAL ENGLISH, but FRENCH is not the international language of law and commerce, so we will ignore French speakers who speak to us in the language of a conquered people.

Non.

I understand that you are a proud Québécois, but the people here have nothing but contempt for you because of decades of transfer payments and NONE OF YOU understanding what Quebec sovereignty means. None of you know who Russell Rogers Smith is, and you're too proud and arrogant to teach. Just go away and be Retardier somewhere else.

Volume 15

Jul 09, 2016 2:33 PM

Trojans Gilles

Oh man, Pete Daoust see "MONEY" here :-o He said he was forced to sign this to get his electricity back......he tried very hard for 5 days to get his bills of exchange back from Hydro, without success, Pete has 4 women and one other man that lives with him, and these guys, after 5 days, were fed up.... So Pete bended over....with rage in his heart :P Anyhow, this "TRANSACTION" (it says so on the document) was sent to Pete, for him to sign. So Pete signed it, by qualifying his signature with BY:____ And also noticed Hydro Quebec that this decision was taken because it is now evident for Pete today that Hydro-Quebec don't have to respect and/or recognize Pete's fundamental rights, and Pete is now scared that Hydro-Quebec will remove from him this electricity. Anyhow, Pete Signed and sent this to HQ, in TWO copies.... Hydro-Quebec returned one of the two SIGNED by this AUTHORIZED representative of HQ. Now, Pete has this in his hands.... :/ TWO signatures, the title of this document is: "TRANSACTION" So Pete can't see anything else than MONEY :-o TRANSACTION, contracts, civil law. An agreement between two or more persons, who for the purpose of preventing or putting an end to a law suit, adjust their differences by mutual consent, in the manner which they agree on. It is explicitely said on this that Pete makes this decision based on FEAR. FUCK, I can't see ANYTHING but "money" when I look at this :( Pete have all the good reasons to believe he needs to make NOTARIZED copies of this......send it to Bank of Canada and demand CASH in return :/ HELP !!!! :( Ceit Butler, Tara Duncan, Scott Duncan, Erich Kirov, Gilberto de Piento, Daniel J Wentz, Sino General, Will Bed

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=263412034030320&set=gm.1028088473893751&type=3

Read Comments 145

Trojans Gilles

"Transaction The delivery of a security by a seller and its acceptance by the buyer." Pete Daoust see this as "MONEY" :D He's certainly onto something, I know Pete, he looks weird sometimes but definitely not an idiot :P

Trojans Gilles

Seller A person or organization that relinquishes ownership of some asset in exchange for some monetary compensation. In a cash sale, the seller receives cash or a cash equivalent immediately in exchange for the asset. In a credit sale, the seller surrenders ownership immediately in exchange for future payment, often with interest. A seller is distinguished by the fact that he/she receives payment, as opposed to a buyer, who gives payment, or a donor, who relinquishes an asset for free. See also: Buyer.

Trojans Gilles

Buyer The person or company that takes ownership of some asset in exchange for some monetary remuneration. Buying may take any of several forms. In a cash purchase, the buyer gives cash or a cash equivalent immediately in exchange for the asset. In a credit sale, the buyer takes ownership immediately in exchange for future payment, often with interest.

Trojans Gilles

Acceptance Contractual agreement instigated when the drawee of a time draft "accepts" the draft by writing the word "accepted" thereon. The drawee assumes responsibility as the acceptor and for payment at maturity. See: Letter of credit and banker's acceptance.

Anibal Jose Baez

There is no question that you're (we're) not getting the "law" that you have been paying for. There is no question that you, and your family have been victims here. The only observation I have is that to me forced is with a gun to my head. I do not know if willingly singing a document can be called "forced to." Having said that, I would have done the same thing, should my family would be in the same position.

Anibal Jose Baez

Should this document turn into a security, your signature can only mean YOU have SURETY. The signature is PROOF of CONSENT, and UNDERSTANDING. Just like a $20 dollar bill, or a Birth Certificate, the signatory parties have surety. That's the only way I can see this thing. :/ I might be wrong, but if I have been programmed well, I am right.

Anibal Jose Baez

Well, in this particular case of this document, whoever places the signature holds/has surety. If you placed your signature, they found who has surety, or at least it is presumable. That is my understanding. I will retract if I am wrong.

Chris Evan

"(b) If a representative signs the name of the representative to an instrument and the signature is an authorized signature of the represented person, the following rules apply: (1) If the form of the signature shows unambiguously that the signature is made on behalf of the represented person who is identified in the instrument, the representative is not liable on the instrument."

Pete Daoust

Yes, me, Pete, I "have" surety. I "am" not surety but I "have" it. So I can "act" as an ADMINISTRATOR for PIERRE DAOUST, right? Hydro-Quebec must have received 30 documents so far telling them WHO I am....it's not like they can still presume that I am a legal entity :D

Anibal Jose Baez

What I meant is that, it is my understanding that whoever places a signature, is surety. I remember receiving a document from the local IRS. It had a signature, and a trustee. I saw that it was only missing another signature for it to become "Local IRS money," so I mentioned this to Scott Duncan. It was a document called "Debt Certification." Scott said to not place my signature there, for I would become surety. It made complete sense. So I have this information in my brain, and that is why I stated my opinion, which is worthless of course. But just when I sum everything for this particular TRANSACTION, it sounds like you are surety. Of course again, I might be completely wrong here.

Anibal Jose Baez

Well, that is why I mentioned that, if it was going to be money, it still needed a trustee. I was asking who/where is the trustee IF this was going to turn to money. Regardless, placing the signature is proof of consent, and understanding to whatever terms and conditions are in that transaction. Right?

Anibal Jose Baez

Ok this is how I see this. There is a document titled transaction. This transaction is between to parties. There are some terms, and conditions attached to this transaction. Whoever willingly sing this transaction agrees to the terms, and conditions. What are those terms, and conditions? I do not read/speak English well, let alone that other weird gargling language. What are the parties agreeing to in this transaction? I must presume that if someone makes me an offer for a transaction document with horrible terms, and conditions I would never sign it. But I have made the exception that should my family be in the exact same predicament as you, I would have signed.

Anibal Jose Baez

Scott Duncan has been clear about surety. Whoever signs, is surety. In this particular transaction, I can see no other situation other than whoever signs is surety. In THIS particular transaction, with terms and conditions attached still unknown to me. Maybe the terms, and conditions say WHO will "pay"/ is surety?

Pete Daoust

The signature is qualified. A man signed that transaction, acting as AGENT. Now, we all know that a MAN can't have a bank account, I tried it, they don't want to open a bank account for Pierre, they need a LEGAL ENTITY :/

Anibal Jose Baez

This transaction is a contract. An agreement. Two parties signed, and agreed to the terms, and conditions. Whichever they are. Just like with any other contract that we signed voluntarily. But again, Scott Duncan is the only man with this answer. Don't listen to me, I could be dead wrong.

Anibal Jose Baez

I understand qualifying the signature. My question is: can I sign a transaction for a car, to PAY certain amount of money, and then avoid the responsibility of the agreement by qualifying the signature as agent? Who is going to ACCOUNT for this agreement/transaction?

Anibal Jose Baez

Did any "rights" were transferred in this transaction? Maybe you sold some rights, when signing that contract? :/ If you accepted to PAY, then you must have sold/transferred the right to the security of the person in this particular transaction? I do not know.

Anibal Jose Baez

And then have you make videos of you walking out with cash from the Bank of Canada, explaining how to do this, right? Then all the freedumbers will be lining up at the Bank of Canada! "Where is "MY" cash?" :D

Anibal Jose Baez

Any word on those terms, and conditions of this TRANSACTION, Pete Daoust? <<TRANSACTION, contracts, civil law. An agreement between two or more persons, who for the purpose of preventing or putting an end to a law suit, adjust their differences by mutual consent, in the manner which they agree on; in Louisiana this contract must be reduced to writing. Civil Code of Louis, 3038.>>

Anibal Jose Baez

<<Here's where personal responsibility comes into the picture. If you don't like the terms and conditions of your returned offer, don't fucking sign! >> Scott Duncan, from THE TENDER FOR LAW: Obiter dictum: MEADS v. MEADS FOR IDIOTS.

Back to top