Very Nice, bet that took awhile. ;-) 2 long days... I am confused between the terms who and what... would it not be by whose authority? no person to stand and all that.....

Was supposed to have a photo of the received notice. Will see if I can try again to upload it. Basically this is a point for point query to the Notice. Started as a 1 page rant then went over 20 pages. Came to my senses and started to think dropped down to 7 pages all said. Some minor errors in numbering and wording that I see but would be great if members could pick it apart. :)

Mmm, by what authority vs by whose authority. Interesting Jason LeBlanc I look into that. Thanks.

here is the Notice received. I hope it comes out okay.

it's fine. The magic box...

Chad Brodgesell did you find out? What vs Whose?

Fuck Chad Brodgesell maye...what the fuck have 'you' been eating....or smoking ?? Sounds like that killa shit Willie Nelson, choofs like puffing Billy. Awesome. ..I need to breathe though dude & I think if I was tgat Flaherty, kunt id be hearing a beeping from a life support machine going bbeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeePPPPPPPPPPPP

Siegs....mate

But of course behing this jellyfish kunt Flaherty, he's an arsehole sized room full of assholes that sit around all day long doing reach arounds to each other & fantasizing about a massive penis that enjoys fucking, rupturing, & ravaging unsuspecting but TRUSTING tight virgin assholes with no spit lubeRIcunt but done DRY........

Ahh Chad, have ye liened your name etc or not as I think that might be required to do on the "TO BE DONE IMMEDIATELY LIST". I might be wrong but tis just my BUCK - O - FIVE MATE ;-)*

WOW!!!!....that is great Chad Brodgesell, :D Are you, Mr. Jim FLAHERTY urging yourself to do something? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!! Great stuff !!!

Crap, I'm not getting notifications anymore of posts. I thought every one was dead the last 24 hours. Ya Pete Daoust and Adam Thomas, is a hoot doing this sht. I fucking love questioning their requests now. :) 3 years ago this one would have made me piss in a corner, :)

Piss in a corner ? :/ , fuck I'm getting it :D And nope, not dead.....still alive :D

Adam Thomas, no I have not liened thy name yet. Am working on another 7 documents to send in. Still not up to knowledge on doing the lien unfortunately.:( But working on it. :)

Same here Chad. I AM about to domy first one thiugh & tis a biggie too. ..I'll let all know soon of my progress. Keep fucking them kunts up hard core Chad mate.... Two thumbs up mate.

Jason F. LeBlanc, I am sticking with 'who' for now as I am only asking questions so far. I can see greater clarity in being more specific in the correctness of the usage, just in a time bind right now so have done a few word corrections and number changes but must send it tomorrow.

Sweet! Adam Thomas, do you have a full understanding of the lien process? I am only maybe half way.

The Trust thru it's asset the Trustee corporation Iiened The ALL CAPS name, now working out the fine details.

I do but I AM the wrong person to ask. Who are yiu Who-are You Frisbey knows how to. As does others here. I am about a few days or a week again from doing my first lien.

Chad, just out of curiosity... did you returned the offer sent VOID, back with your reply? I always like to return what is not mine, or what others presume to be mine... with a VOID love note. :)

What follows is from a Supreme Court of Canada Justice in an SCC ruling. I draw you attention to this pertinent part of the citation, "Since the state defines the parameters of corporate existence". Anyhow here is the full citation from the Thompson News Paper case, I hope it helps your understanding, enjoy: "Modern corporate existence carries with it a notion of privacy which is at odds with the privacy inhering in physical persons. This difference flows from the nature of corporate existence. While individuals as a rule have full legal capacity by the operation of law alone, artificial persons are creatures of the state and enjoy civil rights and powers only upon the approval of statutory authorities. Even if corporations are given legal capacity, their legal powers may be restricted by the enabling articles of incorporation and legislation. The corporation's legal existence can be terminated by the state for failure to comply with these restrictions. Since the state defines the parameters of corporate existence, it would in my view be unreasonable for the corporation to expect that it is completely free to determine by itself whether it exercises its delegated powers in accordance with restrictions imposed by law."

James Allan, nice find. Thanks. I have gone over my Incorporation papers and can find no tie to the government that provided full disclosure. I am not going against this or any other items they wish to send my way to remove myself from paying. Am here just to be able to force them to be held accountable for their actions as I must be aswell.

Maximiliano P�rez, Ha, nice one. Thanks, I had managed sadly enough to forget that , am doing now. Sucks because we just had a whole slew of threads speak of it too. My ability of memory for for stuff I do not use is about zero. :(

Regarding the what , who I have changed all items to WHAT/WHOSE AUTHORITY. That ties it neatly.

I haven't seen my suggestion in this forum, however I have had success with it. I'm not sure if I was merely lucky, or, if I was on track and therefore suggest that you take this advice with a grain of salt: Prior to mounting an "attack" you might send something similar to the following: Dear Mr. Flaherty, I received this document in the mail. As it is not signed, I am unable to confirm its validity. I suspect it is a forgery and someone has initiated a hoax upon me. Please be advised I do not communicate with paper or other inanimate objects. If this document was sent by you, or, one of your agents, please resend it an be sure to sign it, or, have one of your agents sign it so I can be certain that it was constructed and sent by you or one of your agents. If I, or anyone, has lead you to believe that I am willing to attempt to communicate with inanimate objects, including unsigned paper, that would be a mistake. Please forgive me. If I do not receive a response from you, or, one of your agents, with your signature, or, the signature of one of your agents on such a document within 21 days, I will understand that the enclosed letter was a forgery, and is in fact an instance of MAIL FRAUD, and, or, PUBLIC MISCHIEF, and I will report it as such to the Postmaster General.

Oh, Nice! Robert Cormier, very nice. I still want my questions answered though. Problem is, the originating document is not addressed to ME. It is addressed to the corporation of SDI to be directed to my PERSON. not sure if I am saying that right. Can I blatantly steal your suggestion to also attach to what I am sending? Your suggestion never the less goes on my wall. :)

Also, yes, I like to attack everything though some times that has not been wise.

mmmm, wait, ..Robert Cormier, may I use this in a slightly different worded form to INSERT in my document near the beginning.? I can tie your suggestion in 1) b) which is their get out of jail card.

and switch the main with 1) b) so that that is the first item addressed.

My wife just read what you posted Robert Cormier and said I do not think that way. "Your not that nice, you like to get all up in arms at the drop of a hat and damn the torpedoes" Probably a good thing I don't have an army at my disposal.

You may use it in any way you want Chad Brodgesell. The point of my suggestion is to establish SURETY and is therefore a suggestion regarding strategy. The letter you crafted will get backs up immediately and put everyone on the defensive. It is likely that you will get a one line response in another letter that will also be unsigned. It might read "I am terribly sorry to inform you that we don't understand the point of your letter. Could you please rephrase your questions. PS you have 4 more days to respond before we dissolve your company" I would use mine first to establish SURETY, and, I would be all nice about it adding "please" and "thank-you" as well as something along the lines of "Surely you appreciate that given the seriousness of the implications, you will understand my need to confirm if it's authentic." etc. Additionally, I would break your letter into about 4 or 5 letters. I would be nice in those letters as well. Example: I am seeking clarification regarding the box which contains xxx. A lawyer friend suggested to me that this letter is likely a hoax because, according to him, the contents of a box do not appear on that page in the eyes of the law. Was that box that contained xxxx supposed to be there? My point here is that you are more likely to get an articulate response if you pose a few question/points at a time. Also, if your letter is "tight" legally speaking, and you are entitled to eleventy billion, Flaherty's office could say We never sent such a letter, who is it signed by?" When you establish that nobody signed it, you yourself will confirm that none can be held liable. I'll make more points regarding your content later. Have to go. Again....this post, and my previous post here is intended as food for thought. :)

I would buy a VOID stamp. I would also buy a PRIVATE stamp (HINT HINT) quickly. Keep the matter PRIVATE so you have a better chance of suing/liening the private person who responds and not their public office. I would go after their office (career) after I was done with them on the civil side. :)

Get them to damn themselves piece by piece. Example: "no, the box has no legal implications" etc. Then send off a few more questions. As they say, "keep giving them just enough rope to continue hanging themselves". (Y) In my humble opinion, your letter lays all your cards on the table for everyone to see what cards you will play. From its submission they can deduce your strategy as well. It also leaves you without additional cards to play in the future.

It is addressed to your corporation. The CEO or an agent of the company ought to respond. It's the honourable thing to do.

Robert Cormier, thanks, good advice. I see what your getting at.I need to rewire my brain a bit to reserve ammo. Greatly appreciated.

I might also have a fee of gold or silver, because, as you know, if they were to payout, the burden of repaying it goes on all of our backs.

1000 ounces of gold?

Chad, I think perhaps one of the main points of my posting was missed. Like it or not, as the party having requested use of the corporation, which the State writes the rules for, you are responsible for ensuring it fulfills its obligation. These obligations, as well as the rights of a corporation, are detailed in statute. They have no duty to disclose or otherwise explain the term you are bound by (statute) to you. You do know the maxim - ignorance of the law is no excuse. As for the legal duties of the corporation and it officers and directors, you will likely receive a response stating that if you are unsure of same you should contact a lawyer. And while I see where Robert Cormier is coming from, I suspect that the provisions of the statutes (the rules that apply to corporations) allow for unsigned or electronic signatures. Respectfully, I think you are just spinning your wheels and the exercise will not be a good investment of your energy. But I wish you all the best.

I am just wondering Chad, is this has to do with Corporate Income taxes, or Sales taxes ?

I'm dealing with two corporate lawyers that are a very special kind of dumb as they're now trying to tell me that they DO NOT ACCEPT BILLS OF EXCHANGE, PROMISSORY NOTES or any other unspecified form of payment made in relation to the contract. Also they only accepts payments made by the specified methods, namely cash, CHEQUE, Direct debit or Bpay. Hmmmmm........I'll lay my balls on the line corporate lawyer for MBFSAu that "YOU" & YOUR OTHER BRAINIAC IN CRIME Jenny sits on the Crapper that I WILL FLEECE YE ON EVERYTHING YE OWN & HAVE YE SACKED FROM YOUR JOBS. WHY? BECAUSE YE ARE LAWYERS & WOE BE UNTO YE MUTHAFUCKAS IS WHAT JESUS SAID & GUESS WHAT KUNTS? I AM BAAAAACCCKKK...... TO JUDGE & BUCK-O- FIVE ALL YOU KUNT LAWYERS THE WORLD OVER.... VIVE LE REVOLUTION !!!

UM... FUCK.

OK... How to explain this...

*drumming fingers*

CORPORATIONS MUST FILE TAX RETURNS!

LOL...I know that :D

What about SALES TAXES Scott Duncan, is there ANY possibilities to add terms & conditions for doing it, as, Mister Government, I will gladly take some of my time to collect taxes for you, but, since I am not your slave, I want to get paid for it... Just a thought.... Thanks

quarterly. but what do I know I'm just the village idiot

Hahahahaha...nice question to ASK Pete Daoust baby.....awesum.... ;-)"

Hey John, are ye making claim to MY JOB NOW??

Pete Daoust: Yes, you can. You may charge a fee for the service of tax collection.

When creating a new original document one voids ALL signatures, correct?

And Scott Duncan, is there ANY average known amount of this SPECIFIC fee I could charge ? is it like a % of the taxe collected ?, like a 25% on all taxes collected ?.... :)

No, it cannot be a percentage. It must be a fixed fee.

A fixed fee....LIKE ?

Like go ask them! They already know about it.

Interesting comments from all. As I have no problem filing returns or anything regarding any form of documents with any one , As long as there is an obligation to. Hence, the questions. Question: Can any one refute some one else from asking questions regarding something that affects them.? If some one can not show Cause is a presumption that is refuted have any force or effect.? Nothing wrong with clarifying.

Then declare that you DO NOT UNDERSTAND at the beginning of the letter. THEN ask your questions.

They can even OFFER you to do your filing with you :D

Thank you Scott Duncan. THAT makes sense. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. But that can be dealt with a Notice of Mistake. Some unintentional act, omission, or error arising from ignorance, surprise, imposition, or misplaced confidence.

Mmmm yes, For greater clarity and understanding,..implies that I have 'some' clarity and understanding already.

Chad Brodgesell, I do not believe the Notice of Mistake will help you where obligations of your corporation are concerned. But where your human rights are concerned, that is those rights not granted by Her Majesty, you may be able to put forward facts which establish a breach of trust and confidence and/or fiduciary duty by the State, thereby nullifying any social compact (statutory) liabilities and duties as a result of thier breaches of duties owed to you as a man.

James Allan, been working on that on for awhile. Trying to start at the beginning to clear up mistakes. You know, step 1 then step 2 yaddayadda but this sht keeps interfering must deal with it.

Here, I hope this will help in your understanding as to the minimal rights you possess as a representative of the corporation (you being a rep of your corp does not, by your actions, appear to be a fact in dispute). This is from the SCC, enjoy: " That is, read as a whole, it appears to us that this section [s. 7] was intended to confer protection on a singularly human level. A plain, common sense reading of the phrase "Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person" serves to underline the human element involved; only human beings can enjoy these rights. "Everyone" then, must be read in light of the rest of the section and defined to exclude corporations and other artificial entities incapable of enjoying life, liberty or security of the person, and include only human beings. Thus, to the extent that the individual appellants act as representatives of the corporation, s. 7 is no more applicable. Indeed, to allow the individuals acting in such a representative capacity to invoke Charter protection under s. 7 would be to grant the corporation rights which it cannot enjoy."

I hear ya Chad. Not criticizing or judging by any means. It is a tangled web they weave and one easy to get caught in. Just throwing out some food for thought. Hope things work out well for you. :)

file and claim exempt

To all the comments, :) I have come up with this to start it rolling. Dear Mr. Flaherty, I received the attached document in the mail. As the attached document is not signed, I am unable to confirm its validity. I have NO UNDERSTANDING of the attached document yet have many questions regarding the attached document to ask of the person who sent the attached document to my corporation. I suspect it might be a forgery and someone has initiated a hoax upon me and my corporation or it could possible be a simply mistake of issuing and sending the attached document without a signature. If this document was sent by you, or, one of your agents, please issue a new Notice of Pending Cancellation signed by you, or, have one of your agents sign it so I can be certain that it was constructed and sent by you, or, one of your agents and I may reply appropriately. Please hold on to the attached document for purposes of evidence if indeed you or any of your agents did in fact not send attached document. Please be advised I and/or SOLUTION DEVELOPMENT & INTEGRATION CORP. do not communicate with unsigned paper or other unsigned inanimate objects. If I, or anyone, has lead you to believe that I am willing to attempt to communicate with unsigned paper and/or other unsigned inanimate objects, that would be a mistake. Please forgive me. If I do not receive a response such as a new signed 'Notice of Pending Cancellation', or, a signed 'Notice of Mistake' for issuing the attached document if indeed it was a mistake by you or one of your agents within 30 days of the Date of this letter then I will understand that the attached document is possibly a forgery, and I will report it as such to the Postmaster General. I thank you for your appreciation of the seriousness of this matter and timely response. That is the soft fluffy one. I need really critical, in my face comments regarding this. If any thing it seriously helps my writing and language skills. Thanks to all who commented. :)

I will need to re read. Looks good to me though. However I am not the best source for grammatical issues. I constantly am editing. Substance wise it appears strong.

I would take a COMPLETE different approach with this matter, but your letter is very nice :)

The way I see this, is like you are putting yourself in a "ready to fight" position against someone that has no intention at all to fight you :/

Such as this.....? super fluffy and doesn't make my blood boil? But pleasant and sugar coated. Dear Mr. Flaherty, I received the attached document in the mail. As the attached document is not signed, I am unable to confirm its validity. I have NO UNDERSTANDING of the attached document yet have many questions regarding the attached document to ask of the person who sent the attached document to my corporation. If the attached document was sent by you, or, one of your agents, please issue a new Notice of Pending Cancellation signed by you, or, have one of your agents sign it so I can be certain that it was constructed and sent by you, or, one of your agents and I may reply appropriately. Please be advised I and/or SOLUTION DEVELOPMENT & INTEGRATION CORP. do not communicate with unsigned paper or other unsigned inanimate objects. If I, or anyone, has lead you to believe that I am willing to attempt to communicate with unsigned paper and/or other unsigned inanimate objects, that would be a mistake. Please forgive me. If I do not receive a response of a new signed 'Notice of Pending Cancellation', within 30 days of the Date of this letter then I will understand that the attached document is simply a mistake and of no force or effect.

LOL.....:D

Let me explaine�. YOU registered that corporation. By doing so, you�ve accepted to some terms and conditions. The CEO of the corp, have not met some of these terms and conditions. Now, they must have tried, in the past, to explaine to the CEO that some duties haven�t been done. Now, they are fed up with it, and they want to shut down the corp, because the corp is in default. The CEO need to contact them, and tell them that the corp is READY TO DO EVERYTHING it needs to do. Now, the CEO of the corp., needs help to do, step by step, what�s need to be done, because the corp. has NO FUNDS to hire a professional to do the work. So the CEO is ready to sit with them, for them to HELP the CEO to resolve these issues. DO YOU WANT TO HELP PLEASE ? Thanks The CEO If ever they don�t want to HELP, that will bring this to a complete different story.

cool Pete Daoust, can not disagree with ya. What I really want to ask is will some body just sign this so it can move forward.

Up to you ;)

for now its sugar coated sidewalks and candy drops on trees

But that won't change ANYTHING, you will have to FACE the bullshit at one point or another :D

yup, but then I know who with

*sigh* :(

YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT :D

no, I DO NOT KNOW, there is NO signature. it COULD be a mistake. It is NOT definite.

HAHAHAHA!!!!! :D

Is this a good example of the saying: FUCKING THE DOG :P

I learned that from YOU, Pete Daoust. :)

Chad, respectfully, do you really believe it to be a mistake? Do you think you could convince any finder of fact to believe that you honestly thought it was a mistake? Was there not previous letters of a similar subject matter sent to you? Do you not think that a finder of fact may see you as just being difficult and not acting with honour and integrity?

Don't listen to me, and don't learn anything from me Chad Brodgesell, but this James Allan guy is on the piton, or button :D

You are assuming that I am trying to get out of something. That would be wrong. I KNOW I registered and have duties to perform that can be back tracked. You miss the point. If you are going to send me something, sign it. That is the point. Other wise I would have to assume. This is an exercise of language, the usage of the language and the application of Law on all parties. Being here is supposed to broaden minds and abilities not close them in. Most of my and my wife's returns are written regarding 2 corporations another couple weeks they will be mailed in. Stop making assumptions. The assumptions **IS** the point. EVERYTHING any one does here regarding law is to, *Correct assumptions to return to Fact* This is my insight though just my opinion. All comments welcome.

I am sorry if you thought I was assuming anything. My communications should not be deemed as expressing any assumption on my part, as I made no statment of fact as to my position, should I even have one respecting your matter. I only poised questions that you may wish to consider. Chad I understand the frustration. It is what brought me here as well. I am well over a decade into this. Let me ask you this, do you know EXACTLY and SPECIFICALLY what you are trying to achieve by your letter? I am unsure of your objective/goal so it makes providing useful feedback challenging.

If some one sends you some thing that affects you, would you not want to know who in case they are wrong leaving you some one to address for remedy? A signature. Some one accepting liability for their actions should they be wrong. As to comments and replies regarding posts. Yes it is frustrating to have comments not on topic. I posted an article to be critiqued, Not as to if I have liabilities or how to get out of, or circumvent. I would ask a question regarding my post. Did I miss any thing regarding the questioning of every item that could be questioned? Are there flaws in the method of questioning.? Is the structure of my questioning flawed and if so then how.? Is the grammar used unbiased, without myself making statements? Like I said in the post, the more critical the comments the better. (To the post) Please re-read the top portion of the post. Not the pending reply part. Not giving flak here just attempting to gain insight in methods and structure of legal documents.

Sorry Chad Brodgesell, I did not want to bother you in any ways....promess !!! As far as these questions: Did I miss any thing regarding the questioning of every item that could be questioned? Are there flaws in the method of questioning.? Is the structure of my questioning flawed and if so then how.? Is the grammar used unbiased, without myself making statements? If you don't mind, I'll pass this on to my secretary, she is so good in that shit :D

QUOTE 'I wrote this version up on purpose of NOT referencing any other documentation from here or other sources just to see how well I could do from memory and gained knowledge. I know that there are sources of better phrasing regarding certain parts but I wanted to stand alone with what I could come up with even if I had to verbally respond in a situation such as court. END QUOTE "THIS VERSION" no it is not the one sent, nor any thing like it. QUOTE I see this as an exercise in being able to train my mind to think objectively with no outside assistance either from documents and/or other peoples help. Comments no matter how critical would be welcome. END QUOTE Have you ever wanted to learn how to question properly? Have you ever wanted better speech/writing skills when dealing with Courts and Lawyers? Have you ever wanted to be able to ask concise direct question to a statement of another? Have you ever wanted to be able to comprehend what was said and give a appropriate response regarding what was said? Have you ever wanted to increase your linguistic/writing skills to better your ability to fend off others who would trample on your rights because you lack these skills? Have you ever wanted to be able to speak sense without fear when in a tough situation? Have you ever wanted to be able to hold your own ground against all adversaries when the only weapon you have is speech as you are in chains? Thanks to all commented. :)

OK.....my friend does that :D He practice golf on XBOX, and think he will be as good on a real golf course :D

I think it was a great exercise Chad Brodgesell. Thanks for the mental work out. :-)