FB Post - Contact Law/Private Trusts/Law Common to Man)
Question - Summons for Unpaid Council Tax letter ….. Should I return to sender or ask for the liability order?
Answers - No. They create their own anyways. So go with their Legislation, play them at their own game.
Template ….
To Lorraine McDonagh
I have received a letter signed by you, whereby you claim to be collecting a debt on the behalf of Bedford Borough Council Letter dated 11/05/2022
This document will be kept on file as physical presentable evidence as it represents the criminal activities of Lorraine McDonagh a manager of Bedford Borough Council whether he or she is aware of this transgression or not. Ignorance of the law is no defence.
I now draw your attention to the following: -
The Companies Act 2006
“44 Execution of documents.
Under the law of England and Wales or Northern Ireland a document is executed by a company-
By the affixing of its common seal, or
By signature in accordance with the following provisions.
A document is validly executed by a company if it is signed on behalf of the company-
By two authorised signatories, or
By a director of the company in the presence of a witness who attests the signature.
The following are “authorised signatories” for the purposes of subsection (2)-
Every director of the company
In the case of a private company with a secretary or a public company, the secretary (or any joint secretary) of the company.
A document signed in accordance with subsection (2) and expressed in whatever words, to be executed by the company, has the same effect as if executed under the common seal of the company.”
The legal effect of the statute is that documents and deeds must be signed on behalf of the company by a director in the presence of a witness, or by two authorised signatories. Without adherence to these provisions no contracts can be considered duly executed by a company and their terms are therefore legally unenforceable, as was clearly implied when the Court of Appeal endorsed the view of Lewison J in the case of Williams v Redcard Ltd [2011]:
“For a document to be executed by a company, it must either bear the company’s seal, or it must comply with s.44, In order to take effect as if it had been executed under seal. Subsection (4) requires that the document must not only be made on behalf of the company by complying with one of the two alternative requirements for signature in
s.44 (2): it must also be “expressed, in whatever words, to be executed by the company. That means that the document must purport to have been signed by persons held out as authorised signatories and held out to be signing on the company’s behalf. It must be apparent from the face of the document that the people signing it are doing something more than signing it on the company’s behalf. It must be apparent that they are signing it on the company’s behalf in such a way that the document is to be treated as having been executed “by” the company for the purposes of subsection (4), and not merely by an agent “for” the company.”
Fraud Act 2006
“Section 4, Fraud by abuse of position
(2), A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.”
If Lorraine McDonagh is not able to provide evidence that the ‘letter dated 11/05/2022’ sent to MR JEROME F (you) is not a fraud then we will take it that it is a fraud, and the representatives of Bedford Borough Counci are now conspiring with it.
Due to the seriousness of this allegation we need to ensure Lorraine McDonagh's claim against MR JEROME F is lawful. This is a matter of complying with current legislation, without which MR JEROME F would be unsuccessful if he were to pursue legal proceedings against the representatives of BEDFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL. It is therefore requested that Lorraine McDonagh from BEDFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL provides physical presentable evidence of the following:
Validation of the alleged debt with full accounting
A copy of the relevant and lawful terms and conditions
A true and certified copy of the deed of assignment (not notice of assignment)
Deed of novation; A wet ink signature from MR JEROME F on a trilateral agreement between each party
A true and certified copy of the original credit agreement
Verification of the claim (a sworn affidavit or a signed invoice)
Evidence that MR JEROME F gave permission to pass the alleged debt to your company.
Should Lorraine McDonagh not be in possession of the aforementioned documents then the representatives of BEDFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL will be deemed to be party to a fraudulent act, and MR JEROME F reserves the right to full recourse through the courts of law.
Take notice of the following: -
Fraud is a deliberate action to defraud where the victim of the crime is unaware having no knowledge of a situation or fact. This crime carries a penalty of 7-10 years’ incarceration and there latter, where there are multiple instances of.
Malfeasance, Misfeasance, and Nonfeasance are also very serious crimes with a period of incarceration of life in prison. Malfeasance is a deliberate act, with criminal intent to defraud. Ignorance is no defence. Malfeasance has been defined in appellate courts in other jurisdictions as a wrongful act which the actor has no legal right to do; as an act for which there is no authority or warrant of law; as an act which a person ought not to do; as an act which is wholly wrongful and unlawful; as that which an agent has no authority to do and is positively wrong or unlawful; and as the unjust performance of some act which the party performing it has no legal right.
Crimes of this nature cannot go unpunished. “I was just doing my job” or “I was just following orders” is no excuse.
Also consider the following: -
There are some fundamentals to be given consideration before an agreement or a contract is valid and enforceable.
Full disclosure by the parties. If there is no full disclosure by the parties then the agreement is void from the outset. There would not be any physical presentable evidence to any missing disclosure, but the absence of this material physical evidence is evidence of the fraud.
Agreed consideration by both parties. There must be a consideration by both parties! There must be material evidence of this consideration.
There should be a signed agreement by both parties. Without the signature from both parties there is no material evidence to the agreement or contract.
Must be compliant with the companies act. (See above).
The very absence of the company seal or signatures from the company is the material evidence of the fact that the activities are fraudulent from the start.
Does Lorraine McDonagh representative for BEDFORD BROUGH COUNCIL wish to proceed any further?
Comments -
Ring courts and see if your case is listed bet they cannot find your case
Yes but obviously record the call so you've got it as evidence, then you'll have your own defense pack to bring criminal justice to these.
Surprised not to see text in boxes. But yeah this will be issued by the council not the courts. You could do them for sending you and creating a fraudulent document.
The barcode is the give away. No true court document has a barcode. A council produced one does which is fraudulent
Definitely ask for the liability order, don’t stop asking questions, keep eeking it out, the longer it goes on, the more will be exposed.
Promissory note.!
do you know if this process is similar for those living in Scotland ?
Yes
… so just a matter of slightly modifying your template then
Question - Summons for Unpaid Council Tax letter ….. Should I return to sender or ask for the liability order?
Answers - No. They create their own anyways. So go with their Legislation, play them at their own game.
Template ….
To Lorraine McDonagh
I have received a letter signed by you, whereby you claim to be collecting a debt on the behalf of Bedford Borough Council Letter dated 11/05/2022
This document will be kept on file as physical presentable evidence as it represents the criminal activities of Lorraine McDonagh a manager of Bedford Borough Council whether he or she is aware of this transgression or not. Ignorance of the law is no defence.
I now draw your attention to the following: -
The Companies Act 2006
“44 Execution of documents.
Under the law of England and Wales or Northern Ireland a document is executed by a company-
By the affixing of its common seal, or
By signature in accordance with the following provisions.
A document is validly executed by a company if it is signed on behalf of the company-
By two authorised signatories, or
By a director of the company in the presence of a witness who attests the signature.
The following are “authorised signatories” for the purposes of subsection (2)-
Every director of the company
In the case of a private company with a secretary or a public company, the secretary (or any joint secretary) of the company.
A document signed in accordance with subsection (2) and expressed in whatever words, to be executed by the company, has the same effect as if executed under the common seal of the company.”
The legal effect of the statute is that documents and deeds must be signed on behalf of the company by a director in the presence of a witness, or by two authorised signatories. Without adherence to these provisions no contracts can be considered duly executed by a company and their terms are therefore legally unenforceable, as was clearly implied when the Court of Appeal endorsed the view of Lewison J in the case of Williams v Redcard Ltd [2011]:
“For a document to be executed by a company, it must either bear the company’s seal, or it must comply with s.44, In order to take effect as if it had been executed under seal. Subsection (4) requires that the document must not only be made on behalf of the company by complying with one of the two alternative requirements for signature in
s.44 (2): it must also be “expressed, in whatever words, to be executed by the company. That means that the document must purport to have been signed by persons held out as authorised signatories and held out to be signing on the company’s behalf. It must be apparent from the face of the document that the people signing it are doing something more than signing it on the company’s behalf. It must be apparent that they are signing it on the company’s behalf in such a way that the document is to be treated as having been executed “by” the company for the purposes of subsection (4), and not merely by an agent “for” the company.”
Fraud Act 2006
“Section 4, Fraud by abuse of position
(2), A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.”
If Lorraine McDonagh is not able to provide evidence that the ‘letter dated 11/05/2022’ sent to MR JEROME F (you) is not a fraud then we will take it that it is a fraud, and the representatives of Bedford Borough Counci are now conspiring with it.
Due to the seriousness of this allegation we need to ensure Lorraine McDonagh's claim against MR JEROME F is lawful. This is a matter of complying with current legislation, without which MR JEROME F would be unsuccessful if he were to pursue legal proceedings against the representatives of BEDFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL. It is therefore requested that Lorraine McDonagh from BEDFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL provides physical presentable evidence of the following:
Validation of the alleged debt with full accounting
A copy of the relevant and lawful terms and conditions
A true and certified copy of the deed of assignment (not notice of assignment)
Deed of novation; A wet ink signature from MR JEROME F on a trilateral agreement between each party
A true and certified copy of the original credit agreement
Verification of the claim (a sworn affidavit or a signed invoice)
Evidence that MR JEROME F gave permission to pass the alleged debt to your company.
Should Lorraine McDonagh not be in possession of the aforementioned documents then the representatives of BEDFORD BOROUGH COUNCIL will be deemed to be party to a fraudulent act, and MR JEROME F reserves the right to full recourse through the courts of law.
Take notice of the following: -
Fraud is a deliberate action to defraud where the victim of the crime is unaware having no knowledge of a situation or fact. This crime carries a penalty of 7-10 years’ incarceration and there latter, where there are multiple instances of.
Malfeasance, Misfeasance, and Nonfeasance are also very serious crimes with a period of incarceration of life in prison. Malfeasance is a deliberate act, with criminal intent to defraud. Ignorance is no defence. Malfeasance has been defined in appellate courts in other jurisdictions as a wrongful act which the actor has no legal right to do; as an act for which there is no authority or warrant of law; as an act which a person ought not to do; as an act which is wholly wrongful and unlawful; as that which an agent has no authority to do and is positively wrong or unlawful; and as the unjust performance of some act which the party performing it has no legal right.
Crimes of this nature cannot go unpunished. “I was just doing my job” or “I was just following orders” is no excuse.
Also consider the following: -
There are some fundamentals to be given consideration before an agreement or a contract is valid and enforceable.
Full disclosure by the parties. If there is no full disclosure by the parties then the agreement is void from the outset. There would not be any physical presentable evidence to any missing disclosure, but the absence of this material physical evidence is evidence of the fraud.
Agreed consideration by both parties. There must be a consideration by both parties! There must be material evidence of this consideration.
There should be a signed agreement by both parties. Without the signature from both parties there is no material evidence to the agreement or contract.
Must be compliant with the companies act. (See above).
The very absence of the company seal or signatures from the company is the material evidence of the fact that the activities are fraudulent from the start.
Does Lorraine McDonagh representative for BEDFORD BROUGH COUNCIL wish to proceed any further?
Comments -
Ring courts and see if your case is listed bet they cannot find your case
Yes but obviously record the call so you've got it as evidence, then you'll have your own defense pack to bring criminal justice to these.
Surprised not to see text in boxes. But yeah this will be issued by the council not the courts. You could do them for sending you and creating a fraudulent document.
The barcode is the give away. No true court document has a barcode. A council produced one does which is fraudulent
Definitely ask for the liability order, don’t stop asking questions, keep eeking it out, the longer it goes on, the more will be exposed.
Promissory note.!
do you know if this process is similar for those living in Scotland ?
Yes
… so just a matter of slightly modifying your template then