The Tender For Law

Volume 5

Mar 20, 2014 5:20 PM

Scott Duncan

NOTICE OF MISTAKE:

Derek Moran is SPREADING LIES REGARDING NOTICE OF MISTAKE!

DO NOT USE ANYTHING DEREK MORAN POSTS!

YOU DO NOT SIGN! YOU DO NOT PUT "NON ASSUMPSIT" (You fucking idiots don't even know what that means)

YOU DO NOT ADD TO MY WORK YOU FUCKING IDIOTS!

Read Comments

Pete Daoust

I can't see Derek's post, I had to block him from my view, with a huge bunch of other fucktards, because I can be misled again, I know I can, that is the fun part of KNOWING who I am.

It will take me some time to have a solid grasp of that "ME", I just found out not too long ago, I really have to AVOID misleading stuff :(

Eamonn O Brien

By Eamonn O B, Non Assumpsit, All rights reserved, In Good Faith.

That's what I had on my notice. My understanding of assumpsit at the time was one who assumes liability for another's debt. I didn't sign it... That's relating to the incident in which I received confirmation of their receipt of the notice and I then completed that bill and returned it, for which I still haven't had a reply (obviously that's a good thing)... Just the notice in future so. Live & learn...

Pete Daoust

But I have to admit that....

Everytime I administrate a public debt, I always attach an explaination letter, of what I do, and WHY I do it, with the completed remittance voucher, and I add this on the letter...

"If me, or anyone else, have led you to believe that I was one of your agent, and/or employee, and/or slave, that would be a mistake, and please forgive me".

And guess where I took that from :P

Scott Duncan

...AND WHEN YOU ASS-HATS TRY TO "PERSONALIZE" THESE THINGS, BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE THAT I'M 'MEAN' TO YOU SO YOU WANT TO DETACH ME FROM THE RIGHT FUCKING ANSWER, YOU END UP LIKE DEAN!

STOP THINKING YOU ARE AS SMART AS ME. YOU AREN'T AND YOU NEVER WILL BE!

Anibal Jose Baez

That it's why Rinzai Zen Masters rule the world...

Oh, wait, they don't! Nobility does, and they are actually doing a bit more than "meditation", by the looks of it. I guess some dominate, while others meditate.

It's just what I think. Don't be so Kung-Fu sensitive, Tommy, you might loose your "zen". :D

Scott Duncan

IT DOESN'T MATTER THAT YOU DON'T LIKE THAT I'M RIGHT! TOUGH SHIT! YOU ARE STUPID, AND I AM NOT! THAT IS REALITY! THAT MEANS THAT WHEN YOU MIX YOUR STUPID WITH MY RIGHT ANSWERS, YOU WILL GET THE WRONG ANSWER! IT DOESN'T MATTER IF YOU DON'T LIKE ME. I'M STILL FUCKING RIGHT!

Anibal Jose Baez

<<SOMEBODY SHOW ME THE BILL! 1: Demand PROOF that you owe. A BILL or a SIGNED INVOICE will do. They never produce one 2: SET THE TERMS THROUGH NOTICE (Do not sign it! A notice of NO PARKING or KEEP OFF THE GRASS is not signed; neither should yours be) Return ALL paper to them REGISTERED MAIL, along with NOTICE. Signing attaches a NAME to the RESPONSE. Surety is assumed. No Name No signature No Surety You want to send a "keep off the grass" notice, not write a love letter and/or become pen pals.>> Scott Duncan, Golden nuggets notes, The Best of.

Tommy Atherton

The Persons we have, received notice a set-off officer from CRA will now take any tax-refunds to the person in order to set-off debt for Property Tax. No Bill from Minister of Finance for Property Tax although the Sole Authorized Administrator has Demanded one. Round and round we go!

Cara Small

It was interesting because the one letter that came was threatening action against the property (which of course we answered). This notice is simply saying they will take off anything they owe the person through income tax credits to balance the debt. "On behalf of the Ministry of Finance". Would this be third party interloping?

Cara Small

Yes. We have asked for the bill from the original party. We think this notice was sent before they even received our correspondence. Along with sending notice back to third party, we will demand a bill again from the original party.

Pete Daoust

Dear CRA,

I am the SOLE AUTHORIZED administrator for the person named PIERRRE DAOUST, inscription number 119XXXXXXXXXX, and SIN no. 26X-XXX-XXX.

It came to our attention recently, that CRA may have some PUBLIC debts addressed to the person I happen to have, and these PUBLIC debts are not administrated.

PLEASE, send these debts to that person� address as soon as possible, so we can administrate these debts.

If we do not receive any PUBLIC debst from you, in the next 30 days, we will UNDERSTAND that this were false rumors, and there is no existent debts concerning the person I happen to be the SOLE administrator of, named PIERRE DAOUST �.blablablabla�.

With PEACE.

BY:_______________________________ Sole Authorized Administrator for PIERRE DAOUST Inscription no. 119XXXXXXXXXX SIN: 26X-XXX-XXX

:P

Pete Daoust

No, I am saying to tell CRA, or ANYONE, that you WANT to administrate ANY debts for the person you happen to be the sole authorized admin for....if debts exists... :/

In other words, do the OPPOSITE of what everyone is doing, BEG them to receive debts, so you can ADMINISTRATE these debts, tell them you HATE having a slave in your pocket that has DEBTS pending :D

J.P. Alexander

Pete is saying NOTIFY the CRA they can't ACT on the person you have in your pockets behalf. Only the SOLE AUTHORISED ADMINISTRATOR can. Apparently these people think they are AUTHORIZED to do it for you. Or they are atleast trying. :-D

Pete Daoust

I was more thinking about "ME", creating a Bill of Exchange, in the case of one of these fucktards that refuses to supply one for me to complete it.... :/

If I want to THINK as a creditor, for that person, I can't see anything wrong with it... :/

Cara Small

I see. We were thinking of creating a bill trough the corp for what WE value ourself at per hour and providing the person, to whom the bill is addressed, instruction on administrating. Just curios how that would play out. But I am first interested in your question.

Janick Paquette

So when Dean would tell us to adapt the text in our own words so it would be more like something we might say... that wasn't a good thing! :(

And so copy\paste is a good thing cause, good is good no matter how many times the gouvernement receives cpies of it! right?

Tommy Atherton

speak clearly, if you speak at all; carve every word before you let it fall. - Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr. I am only beginning to see the artistry of Scott Duncan's documents. This thread has helped me become aware that fucking with his documents is like smearing a Rembrant with finger painting. I now understand "shitstain," Apologies!

Scott Duncan

Oliver Wendell Holmes was an over-rated blow-hard who has nothing of use to say.

He was a piece of shit, made out to be of "value". You all have heard of his famous "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" statement, when discussing the limits of free speech. What nobody mentions, is that he was putting the publishers of a Yiddish newspaper in jail, for daring to write, in a language that most Americans COULDN'T READ, that America should not be involved in the Great War (WW1).

The sack of shit JAILED them. Quote Hitler. I'd have more respect for you :P

Pete Daoust

setoff (offset) n. a claim by a defendant in a lawsuit that the plaintiff (party filing the original suit) owes the defendant money which should be subtracted from the amount of damages claimed by plaintiff. By claiming a setoff the defendant does not necessarily deny the plaintiff's original demand, but he/she claims the right to prove the plaintiff owes him/her an amount of money from some other transaction and that the amount should be deducted from the plaintiff's claim. (See: offset, affirmative defense)

Tommy Atherton

guess?; I would think two parties that do commerce together could agree to exhange goods and/or services simply "off-setting" (cancelling) what each other owes to each other until a certain time, at which time one party would "square" up with the other, It seem co-operation would be needed?

Pete Daoust

I know what you mean Tommy, but when two parties AGREE to EXCHANGE stuff, no one owes to no one, I may have to adjust the INVENTORY on the stuff, but if no INVOICE is created, no offsetting is needed......I think, :)

Pete Daoust

I was referring this to a debt, I can only see a debt being discharged, I can't figure out OFFSETTING a debt, unless two debts exist, one from each other parties, and for that, two invoices are needed.........that's what I think anyway, I may be wrong though :/

Phillip Prater

I may be thinking wrong, but It seems that if money is owed by PHILLIP to FAMILY SUPPORT and they have suspended his license for one year to "pay" his debt, he may bill them for 24hr x 365 days x hourly rate. The total amount would be more than PHILLIP owes. And since they are not going to send that total to PHILLIP the first time, give them a bullshit buffet of send a check and remove the suspension OR if I don't receive a check, It will be understood that there is no longer any debt due to the offset and the account is closed and that the suspension is lifted.