The Tender For Law

Volume 1

Mar 06, 2013 3:24 AM

Rick Land

New thread regarding 'MY home...'

Scott (or anyone more well-informed than I).

I am currently heading to Kelowna for court tomorrow to attempt to stop the sale of my house by the bank. They are petitioning the courts for the sale at 9:45. I Served them notice that I do not consent to the sale and did not receive PROPER NOTICE regarding the contract and require FULL DISCLOSURE as to whom the parties in the contract are, whom put forth the required CONSIDERATION.

There is more and I can post the full notice if you like. I am mainly just concerned that I have done this properly and what can or should I expect. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Read Comments

Scott Duncan

Lien the AG's office with the court file as the account.

And lien your own property.

This is just tossing it out there. "last minute" is not something I do. Every time, either the client lies, or the data I get about the case is inaccurate. I can't work with "last minute"

Fiona Munro

Well Rick looks like your in luck being it that bank ! I watched some videos in retards to HSBC, I will see if I can find them here is one from the US. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/19/business/hsbc-will-pay-249-million-to-settle-foreclosure-review-case.html?_r=0

Derek Moran

RICK- this video will explain what the bank has done to you and what to do to STOP IT!:

At minute 10:00, this guy Redress starts breaking-down the scam of a Foreclosure-sale: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS37CtPmtus

Fiona Munro

This was the reason I made a Tenant's agreement with the Queen.back in 2010.........From: David Butterfield Date: May112009 6:20:19

Subject: Re: SUPREME COURT RULED: CANADIANS HAVE NO PROPERTY RIGHTS

To all: I've been advising people of the denial of any "right to one's own property" for many, many years. As you can read for yourself in the attached "Request for Remedial Action", composition of which I completed, three days before the date of the ruling shown below. This is a denial of everyone's 3rd Natural Right to "one's own property" was given us by our Creator, it has nothing to do with any of "man's laws", corporate or otherwise. This is also exactly why I have been telling people that there is no avenue of domestic resolve available to end this violation of our Natural Rights and must be taken before an International Human Rights Tribunal. Attempting any other means to resolve this issue and restore this Natural Human Right will surely fail, especially in light of the unlawful ruling below. Mind you, after duly serving "Notice of Challenge of Jurisdiction and Lawful Authority" to both, no evidence has ever been presented by either the Attorney General of Canada or British Columbia that "Canada" is comprised of any geographic areas commonly called "provinces" (small "p") having names such as "British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan...etc". It has though been confirmed to me in writing by Legal Counsel for Justice Canada, that no statutory instrument exists to confirm that Canada is comprised of "provinces" with names as mentioned above. You cannot read something into a "law" that is not in fact written there, in other words, you cannot just assume or presume that we are actually in a country called "Canada". David Butterfield Educator and Defender of Natural and Universally Recognized Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms ----- Original Message ----- From: FMNP To: F P Sent: Monday, May 11, 2009 5:32 PM Subject: Fwd: SUPREME COURT RULED: CANADIANS HAVE NO PROPERTY RIGHTS

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Norris Barnes <vancouverpropertyrights@shaw.ca> Date: Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:16 PM Subject: SUPREME COURT RULED: CANADIANS HAVE NO PROPERTY RIGHTS

unknown.jpg �NEWS RELEASE

July 29, 2003 For Immediate Release

SUPREME COURT RULED: CANADIANS HAVE NO PROPERTY RIGHTS

�Anything you own can be expropriated without due process and without compensation say the Supremes.�

Yorkton � Today, Garry Breitkreuz, Official Opposition Critic for Firearms and Property Rights, denounced a Supreme Court decision saying that the government has the power to take anyone�s property without due process and without compensation simply by passing an �unambiguous� law. �We have just lost one of our most important freedoms necessary for the existence of a truly free and democratic society. The right to life and the right to property go hand-in-hand � you can�t have one without the other. When Parliament resumes sitting in September, Canadian Alliance will be introducing a motion calling for property rights to be entrenched in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,� promised Breitkreuz.

What got Breitkreuz so riled was the Supreme Court�s July 17th judgment in the class-action suit Authorson v. Canada in which the Supremes ruled in favour of the federal government and against mentally disabled war veterans (see supporting documentation). The government amended the Veteran Affairs Act to avoid paying hundreds of millions in interest on pension benefits the government had held in trust for about 30,000 veterans. The Supreme Court ruled: �Parliament has the right to expropriate property, even without compensation, if it has made its intention clear and, in s. 5.1(4), Parliament's expropriative intent is clear and unambiguous.�

The Supreme Court ruling also stated: �Lastly, while substantive rights may stem from due process, the Bill of Rights does not protect against the expropriation of property by the passage of unambiguous legislation.� Breitkreuz asked, �So if the property rights guarantees in the Canadian Bill of Rights don�t protect an individual�s fundamental property rights, what good are they? They even ruled that the Bill of Rights �does not impose on Parliament the duty to provide a hearing before the enactment of legislation.� Once again, we have a court ruling � this one by the highest court in the land - that demonstrates an urgent need for my Private Members� Bill C-313 (see supporting documentation) calling for amendments to strengthen the property rights protection in the Canadian Bill of Rights. If my bill were law, at least the Liberals would have to get a two-thirds majority in the House to pass any law that runs roughshod over our property rights,� explained Breitkreuz. �This first step in property rights protection in federal law is required while we are trying to convince seven provinces with 50% of the population to approve our proposed constitutional amendment to entrench property rights in the Charter.�

�This Supreme Court ruling means that the Liberals can simply ram a law through Parliament giving themselves the right and the power to confiscate each and every bit of Canadian-owned property falling under federal law without paying a dime in compensation to the legal owners,� warned Breitkreuz. �This Supreme Court ruling should raise concerns for all Canadians over their ability to enjoy their own property including the fruits of their labour. What more evidence do you need that Liberals are undoing everything our ancestors fought for, for hundreds of years?"

�This wasn�t just another bad ruling by the Supreme Court. A free and democratic society needs to have the best protection of property rights or else all is at risk. We must entrench property rights in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the Canadian Alliance has repeatedly called for.�

-30-

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT Authorson v. Canada (Attorney General) - July 17, 2003 Neutral citation: 2003 SCC 39 - File No.: 29207 ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO http://www.canlii.org/ca/cas/scc/2003/2003scc39.html BREITKREUZ BILL C-313 - An Act to amend An Act for the Recognition and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and to amend the Constitution Act, 1867: http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_individual.asp?Language=E&Parl=37&Ses=2&Bill=C-313&BillType=public

Derek Moran

A guy named Derek Hill on here told a story on one of Dean's shows, where his friend sent to the Municipality or whoever a Notice of Fee Simple Absolute, and it eventually stuck. I am looking forward to reading that case-law though! ;)

Rick Land

Sorry all. I'm currently making my way through a blizzard to reach Kelowna. Almost there now, 1 hour to go. (hopefully...). I truly appreciate all the input and hope my day in Court has a favourable result! I will check in once again from my destination. Cheers! :)

Fiona Munro

LOL.... Derek sorry I was reading more documents to see if I can find something for Rick......tomorrow is now lol...... Rick you can also talk to the Court Clerk and ask about a.. Stay of proceedings. and give your reasoning ..I hope you get through that snow safe ..must be on the Coquihalla :)

Beverly Berta Braakschmack

I told him what to do... based on my understanding from all things I've learned, with Scott as verification... I don't see Rick being the administrator in this matter, just let them follow their own rules... as that's what they do...

Beverly Berta Braakschmack

no, I don't need to own anything, but I have a right to eat, live, travel, have a roof over our head, and if some government is going to take a loan out on my "being born" here, "to accommodate me" then shall that be done?

Beverly Berta Braakschmack

I dunno, I run a store where people can order furniture. I always allow for 2-4 weeks, since the 4 week part is fairly usual. So, between my creating sales (liability) I have to run around, with my AUTHORITY as being the buyer... and constantly chase orders around... "has this been shipped" "where is this order standing as of today?"

Fiona Munro

Its easy to read these Laws and to know the difference between wrong and right... Common Law is not being upheld in the Court room"s ..They are not real Judges .. they don't sign the documents anymore because they don't want to be held liable..There is no such thing as Innocent till proven guilty ! there is no such thing as an ...Order for Possession ...but they still do it !

Fiona Munro

Rick .. I will post it here ;) No Order of Possession now ! Writ of Possession (RTB-14) is no longer in use When applying for a Writ of Possession,the Supreme Court requires applicants to use the Supreme Court �Residential Tenancy Act - Writ of Possession Package� (http://courts.gov.bc.ca/supreme_court/self-represented_litigants/info_packages. aspx) which includes an Affidavit of Service. File the following documents at the Supreme Court civil registry: Certified Copy of the Order of Possession (the original you receive from the Residential Tenancy Branch is a certified copy) Requisition - Form 17 Affidavit of Service Writ of Possession � Form 52. See also: Fact Sheet RTB-103: Landlord: Enforcing an Order of Possession (http://www.rto.gov.bc.ca/documents/RTB-103.pdf)

Stuart Stone

From previous readings elsewhere: What parties to the contract risked anything? (only you, because the bank have not provided any valuable consideration to the transaction)...If the bank claim they have risked anything/funds, demand that they show the origin of the funds via Generally Accepted Accounting Principles of double entry bookkeeping which will show who the grantor was (ie: you in a different status)...Ask for a stay in proceedings to allow them time to come forward with this information. I hope that's useful & this post wasn't too late.

Pete Daoust

POSTE RECOMMAND� [xxxxxxxxxxxxx & xxxxxxxxxxxx]

� AU NOM DE NOTRE SOUVERAINE BRITANNIQUE �

AVIS DE 9xxx-8xxx QUEBEC INC AUX TIERS SAISIS DE CETTE DEMANDE

Article 1 du Code civil et de la Charte des Droits priv�s et Libert�s de la personne juridique s�applique sous l�autorit� du jugement et des notes st�nographiques asserment�es du dossier de la Cour de l��tat du Qu�bec num�ro # 200-22-028373-041 d�termine l�identit� r�elle et v�ritables des parties. & Articles 888, 1440, 1455, 2504, 2655, 2941 et 2942 du Code civil de l��tat du Qu�bec. & <Pr�somption / Apparence de droit � L.Q. 1992, c. 57 Loi sur l�application de la r�forme du Code Civil de l��tat du Qu�bec d�finition : DE JURE> & Loi d�Interpr�tation de l��tat du Qu�bec L.Q. c. I-16 art. 42 & DROIT DE JOUISSANCE CONTRE LE DROIT DE PROPRI�T� art. 405 C.c.B.C. de 1866 � 1980 et L.Q. c. C-64 art. 911 & ABSENCE DE LOI FISCALE QU�B�COISES formulaires RC251 et T1118 de l�Agence du Revenu du Canada conform�ment article 1, L.Q. c. I-3 ``Loi de l�Imp�t sur le Revenu Qc. & Identit� de l�instrument scriptural du d�biteur : Art. 27 (2) L.R.C. c. B-4 et Cour supr�me du Canada Banque du Canada c. Banque de Montr�al, [1978] 1 R.C.S. 1148 & ARTICLE 460 L.R.C. C. c-46 monnaie sans valeur refuge / sans provision & �TAT DU QU�BEC L.R.Q. 2000 c. E-20.2 oppos� � L.R.C. 2000 c. 26 & Avis d�intention selon l�article 95 du Code de proc�dure civile de l��tat du Qu�bec ou article 34 du Code de proc�dure p�nale de l��tat du Qu�bec. & L.R.Q. c. A-2.1, 1982 confirme l�assimilation du pouvoir ex�cutif et du pouvoir l�gislatif de l��tat du Qu�bec au Premier ministre, au Cabinet des Ministres et aux 385,000 fonctionnaires de l��tat du Qu�bec. & L.R.Q. c. A-23.1 & art. 71 et 92 (1) de l�Acte de l�Am�rique du Nord Britannique de 1867

TIERS SAISIS DE CETTE DEMANDE / D�BITEURS : BANK NAME Address �TAT DU QU�BEC J7E 5xx & AGENCE DU REVENU DE L��TAT DU QU�BEC Name 4. Place-Laval, bureau 500 Secteur L453P2 Laval, �tat du Qu�bec, H7N 5Y3

CR�ANCIER MINISTRE DES FINANCES DE L��TAT DU QU�BEC.

DOSSIER num�ro : # 25xxxxxx Num�ro de r�f�rence : 7xxxxxxxx

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE la source de toute existence contractuelle est l�identit� par l�acte de bapt�me sign� ou ratifi� par les parents, ensuite par l�invention juridique de la personne � persona � � partir de l�enregistrement de la d�claration de naissance vivante et le Certificat de bapt�me et de naissance sign�e par le cur� ou un pr�tre, par le Certificat de naissance du Directeur de l��tat civil de l��tat du Qu�bec ainsi que par l�Acte de Naissance du Directeur de l��tat civil sign� par le Directeur de l��tat civil autres que les parents responsabilise les signataires qui n�ont pas re�u le consentement formel des parents pour inventer des enregistrements de propri�t� intellectuelle � partir de l�identit� du baptis�.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE le formulaire NAS-2120-(01-12) de demande de remplacement d�une carte d�immatriculation d�assurance sociale corrige la fraude ou la corruption d�identit� de la propri�t� intellectuelle de l��tat sur l�identit� du baptis�.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE la vraie monnaie n�est pas la r�serve de monnaie num�raire canadienne ayant cours l�gal de la Banque du Canada. La vraie monnaie est la monnaie scripturale sans provision des membres de l�Association Canadienne des Paiements.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE l�entit� juridique de facto des d�biteurs n�est pas � d�montrer aux actes de facto r�gissant la fiscalit� dans les contribution comme dans les perception et les recouvrement, par leur devoir et obligation de gestionnaire et d�administrateur de # 2xxxxxxxx d��tre redevable de n�importe quel montant d�termin� entre eux et exigible envers # xxxxxxxxRI en vertu d�une apparence de droit sur perception ou recouvrement fiscal en r�f�rence au dossier num�ro # xxxxxxxx en rapport aux articles de facto ou de jury et en rapport aux jugements �nonc�s dans cet avis.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE l�article 42 de la loi L.Q. c. I-16 stipule pour application que nulle loi n'a d'effet sur les droits de l'�tat, � moins qu'ils n'y soient express�ment compris.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE la d�finition de l�expression loi stipul�e � l�article 1 de l�acte du Qu�bec chapitre I-3 stipule : loi comprend une loi autre que le parlement du Qu�bec.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE le formulaire demande formelle de paiement num�ro RC251 et T1118 identifie les provinces et territoires au Canada sauf le Qu�bec.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE le serment des juges et des avocats de droit priv� sans constitution dans l��tat du Qu�bec sont des juges et des avocats (es) membres du Barreau de l��tat du Qu�bec dans leur pouvoir discr�tionnaire hors la loi et hors constitution d�appliquer les articles 24 (2) et 33 de la Charte canadienne des droits et libert�s dans l�int�r�t des banques membres de l�Association Canadienne des Paiements en fonction de l�article 460 du Code criminel canadien, en fonction de l�article 27 (2) de la loi L.R.C. c. B-4 et en fonction de la d�cision de la Cour supr�me du Canada [1978] 1 R.C.S. 1148.

ATTENDU ET NOUS CONVENONS QUE la Commission Charbonneau, la Commission Gomery, la Commission Bastarache ont �t� constitu�s par un mandant formulant le mandat constitu� en ma�tre MANDAT du juge concern� d�exercer ses fonctions de juge par son seul ma�tre � LE MANDAT � ou bien corporel / physique / mat�riel comme tous les sujets concern�s dans un palais de justice interdisant l�existence de l��tre humain de facto dans l��tat sans droit parce que sans constitution du Qu�bec.

9xxx-8xxx QUEBEC INC en vertu de ce qui pr�c�de et de ce qui suit cette demande; nous, repr�sentants autoris�s sans droit de propri�t�, sans droit de gestion et sans droit d�administration de 9xxx-8xxx QU�BEC Inc et Company Name et Company Name nos ma�tres, exigeons aux tiers saisi de cette demande sans condition dans l�exercice criminel des tiers saisis par fraude et extorsion fiscale des contributions impos�es, des perceptions et des recouvrements fiscaux ex�cut�s par nous les tiers saisis que soit vers� au Ministre des Finances de l��tat du Qu�bec sans limiter la somme fix�e par eux-m�mes au montant de 83,437.16$ en pr�cisant ou en instrument num�raire ou en instrument scriptural.

La d�marche de remboursement a �t� enclench�e par son d�biteur gestionnaire et administrateur du compte de d�p�t # 8xx-3xxxx- 1xxxxx en pr�sence des repr�sentants autoris�s. Occ. Cour du Qu�bec # 200-22-028373-041. Les montants en recouvrement devront correspondre au relev� annuel de participation du R�gime Enregistr� d��pargne Retraite des repr�sentants en rapport aux recettes fiscales de 9xxx-8xxx QU�BEC Inc, Company Name / Company Name.

Veuillez faire parvenir sans d�lai au Ministre des Finances de l��tat du Qu�bec le versement exig� propos� dans le pr�sent avis.

� VOS RISQUES, vous tiers saisi de la demande, avez (10) dix jours de la r�ception par courrier �lectronique pour acquitter la somme exig�e.

VOUS AVEZ LE DEVOIR ET L�OBLIGATION D��TUDIER LES ARTICLES DE LOI ET JUGEMENTS PR�CIT�S, l�ignorance n�excuse pas la perp�tration de l�infraction.

Le 05 octobre 2012.

Par MA�TRE 9xxx-8xxx QU�BEC INC.

Derek Moran

RICK- its important for you to realize what the bank has done to you, which is effectively gotten you to slit-your-own-throat. Watch the video above i provided for you, until it sinks in on the switcheroo the bank has pulled on you in terms of the reversal-of-roles/positions they have pulled-over on you without your knowledge i.e. MATERIAL NON-DISCLOSURE, FIDUCIARY BREACH-OF-TRUST

Derek Moran

Ignoring your Notices works in your favour. After 3 ignored Notices, you make a Notice of Application, in a Court of Equity, to get the Judge to make an ORDER, and then ENFORCE the Order, of one of the 5 Common Law Prerogative-Writs: Habeas Corpus, Quo Warranto, Certiorari, Mandamus, Prohibition.

Fiona Munro

I have a Tenants agreement with the Queen since 2010.Obtained through acquiescence ! 3 months later I did receive a letter from the Queen. Telling me she is a constitutional Sovereign, Her Majesty acts through her personal Representative, the Governor-General and had forwarded my documents to the same so she may be aware of my approach to the Queen and consider the points I had raised, Which is of course my tenants agreement... I gave her Majesty $20 in consideration ! which her Majesty has taken, . Now since the Lawyer fraudulently foreclosed on me I think I should write the Governor-General

August le Blanc

Pierre, I was required to have a corporate identity, Then you need to lien the maxima name. The corporation then has first right to all the debtors (the name),present and after personal property. Then find someone you trust and give them your BC in Trust. Making your the beneficiary.

Gail Marie

I don't fully understand liens, but if the bank automatically puts a lien on the house when you get a mortgage, and if it is true what Stuart shared "first in time first in right", I'm not clear how a lien would help other then as Pierre said, the value of the home above the cost of the mortgage would be available to the home owner?

August le Blanc

What is REPLEVIN? A personal action ex delicto brought to recover possession of goods unlawfully taken, (generally, but not only, applicable to the taking of goods distrained for rent,) the validity of which taking it is the mode of contesting, if the party from whom tbe goods were taken wishes to have them back in specie, whereas, if he prefer to have damages instead, the validity may be contested by action of trespass or unlawful distress. The word means a redelivery to the owner of the pledge or thing taken in distress. Wharton. And see Sinnott v. Feiock, 165 N. Y. 444, 59 N. E. 265, 53 L. R. A. 565, 80 Am. St. Rep. 736; Healey v. Humphrey, 81 Fed. 990, 27 C. C. A. 39; Mc- Junkin v. Mathers, 158 Pa. 137, 27 Atl. 873; Tracy v. Warren, 104 Mass. 377; Lazard v. Wheeler, 22 Cal. 142: Maclary v. Turner, 9 Houst. (Del.) 281. 32 Atl. 325; Johnson v. Boehme. 66 Kan. 72, 71 Pac. 243, 97 Am. St Rep. 357.

Beverly Berta Braakschmack

Outty for this night... if only our fictions could learn whilst we sleep and inject what they've been up all night doing into our brains... which... based on results... FICTIONS ARE NOT VERY HANDY are they? *grumble

Beverly Berta Braakschmack

I just don't know if there is any chance of stopping this for Rick, since its gone this far... Verification from Scott plz... I read some of the stuff you posted on Praecipe, but do not know if this is applicable anymore

Steve Lemieux

Rick, the courts will not hear you at this point, you are in dishonour and as far as I know, there is no turning back. The house is gone; I would learn and move on. Let me elaborate� Rick likes house, makes offer on house. Rick enters contract with bank which allows him to close on the purchase contract and move into house. Rick has fun in house. Many women are fucked and much beers and weed is consumed. Rick has a lot of fun in said house. Rick has a little too much fun and forgets his contractual obligation with the bank to make his mortgage payment. The bank sends a friendly letter reminding Rick to make his payment. Rick ignores the letter. The bank sends 2 or 3 more letters. Rick ignores the letters. The bank sends NOTICE and warns Rick they are going to foreclose and COLLECT the COLLATERAL if he does not make good on his PROMISE to pay. Rick ignores the NOTICE, ignores the court appearance; dishonours himself. Bank goes to court UNCHALLENGED, get judgement in their favour. Rick breached a contract; the COLLATERAL must be COLLECTED. Rick does ignores that he is NO LONGER OWNER of the house Bank lists the property on the MLS with a realtor with the CROWN as SELLER Rick ignores that the house he thinks he still owns is for sale. Another realtor brings a buyer along who likes Rick�s house and writes an offer SUBJECT to financing. Rick ignores that his house is PENDING under a NEW and VALID CONTRACT Several days go by and the new BUYER removes his conditions. The home is no longer PENDING SALE. All that is required at this point is for the judge to say �done deal!� Ricks pulls his head out of the sand and says �hey! You can�t do that, that�s my house!� Court does not hear Rick because he is not even part of the equation anymore. He breached a contract, agreed to the JURISDICTION by not showing up. In the courts eyes, he is insane. He agreed for the COLLATERAL to be claimed and is now saying he owns the house. Rick is lucky they didn�t send him away for a psychological assessment. This is what happened. You can give all the notices you want, the judge will not REVERSE the initial judgement awarded to the bank. Should you have shown up at the first court session, you might have had a chance, although highly unlikely. The judges are there to PROTECT the SYSTEM (scam). Don�t expect to penetrate the wall of bullshit they put up. The wall is thick and high. Bend over, smile and try not to scream too loud when they stick it in�

Derek Moran

Hey Rick- where exactly are you from again?..i have a friend-of-a-friend going through the same thing in Calgary, maybe you guys can work together on this.

"Hey Derek,

I have a question for u,I have a friend out in Calgary who is having some issue with his house , he loss is case to summary judgement , he did an appeal, so he is actually waiting for the appeal , the realtor came to take pictures to put the house on the market, can any thing be done to for him at this time. "

Derek Moran

Fiona Munro No Order of Possession now ! Writ of Possession (RTB-14) is no longer in use When applying for a Writ of Possession,the Supreme Court requires applicants to use the Supreme Court �Residential Tenancy Act - Writ of Possession Package� (http://courts.gov.bc.ca/supreme_court/self-represented_litigants/info_packages. aspx) which includes an Affidavit of Service. File the following documents at the Supreme Court civil registry: Certified Copy of the Order of Possession (the original you receive from the Residential Tenancy Branch is a certified copy) Requisition - Form 17 Affidavit of Service Writ of Possession � Form 52. See also: Fact Sheet RTB-103: Landlord: Enforcing an Order of Possession (http://www.rto.gov.bc.ca/documents/RTB-103.pdf)

Derek Moran

Fiona Munro: I had been given an order Writ of Possession via mail not signed by a Judge ! and had Bailiffs kick in my door refuse to show me a signed document from a Judge, and now I see there is NO ORDER OF POSSESSION... ?

Derek Moran

(Scott clicked 'Like' on this): Derek Moran: When i brought up to my paralegal-instructor this past week who is a lawyer about Prerogative Writs, he admitted to me that he had forgotten about those cuz itd been awhile since he had ever done one, but he did admit that "you are talking about common law Writs." He thought i was asking him about Civil writs which were/are the ones you are talking about i believe Fiona- WRIT OF POSSESSION. I could tell he was quite surprised that i even knew about Prerogative writs at all and further surprised as i listed off all 5 of them as he could only remember two. I think you need to declare to the court that you are not there IN PERSONAM, but, that you are there IN REM. IN PERSONAM = agree to the jurisdiction.. IN REM = you are there to protect/defend a right 'against the world,' which would entail that Maxim that no one shall be dragged from their house, an inviolable right which is even entrenched in the Constituition of IRELAND - me lucky charms!

Derek Moran

Scott Duncan: Lien the AG's office with the court file as the account.

And lien your own property.

This is just tossing it out there. "last minute" is not something I do. Every time, either the client lies, or the data I get about the case is inaccurate. I can't work with "last minute"