[Steve]

Robert and John You’re not a Person …

https://youtu.be/M29JNQT3W3c


Robert verifies the DVLA photo scam by the Legal Fiction that has no right or life  …

https://youtu.be/B-jljV-Qnew

DVLA No Contract …

https://youtu.be/IWUT70EecwM

[awakened53]

The Biggest Secret – Our Birth Certificate Is A Trust

https://youtu.be/BkRug3IFjh0

[Steve]

Mountain Man ernie tertelgte before court -

Americans have to wake up to the truth. un learn what we have been taught. this is what we have subjugateted ourselves to and the Founders would be ashamed how we have squandered all that that they sacrificed. Land of the Coward...Home of the Slave.


https://youtu.be/LgGkjRLNy04

[Steve]

Strawman Is Killed Off By The Lawman -


https://youtu.be/N99kX2wPOng


The Process …

How to claim your Strawman - Peter’s Video -

https://www.claimyourstrawman.com/optin1...4YXs3xEJHo


The Video - UCC1 Financing Statement To Claim Security Interest In Your Legal Strawman Fiction Cestui Que Vie - 

https://youtu.be/uwqSde9Kbb4




Completing the UCC1 Financing Statement Link ….

https://d2saw6je89goi1.cloudfront.net/up...uIu6ldtcbg




The Addendum Link …

https://d2saw6je89goi1.cloudfront.net/up...EdjsxkxElY




Once Completed, Send Your Forms -

https://fortress.wa.gov/dol/ucc/filer.as...QkR4PW6QdQ

[Steve]

Telegram Post (Project #1 No Mercy) regarding the Council Tax

It may have "This is your Council Tax Bill" written on it but, if it does not have the signature of the person giving it on it, according to Section 3 (1) and (2), Bills of Exchange Act 1882, it is not a bill.

It is only a “statement”. 

One is entitled to require a bill and a lawful contract for any and all performance, under the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, Section 3; 

   (1) A bill of exchange is an unconditional order in writing, addressed by one person to another, signed by the person giving it, requiring the person to whom it is addressed to pay on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time a sum certain in money to or to the order of a specified person, or to bearer.

  (2) An instrument which does not comply with these conditions, or which orders any act to be done in addition to the payment of money, is not a bill of exchange."





Liability for payment of Council Tax -

Usually one person, called the 'liable person', is liable to pay council tax and usually the person living in the property will be the liable**person**. Liability is determined by ‘sole or main residence’ which may be determined with reference to a range of factors ultimately leading to the answer to the question ‘Where does the person actually live?’ as explored in R (Williams v Horsham District Council. However, where no one is resident the owner(s) of the property is/are liable. In the case of properties which have been empty for two or more years an additional premium may be imposed. From 1 April 2019 the additional premium may be increased to a maximum of 100% of the council tax due, with higher premiums of 200% from 2020, increasing to 300% for properties empty for more than five or ten years after 1 April 2021.

Spouses and partners who live together as owners or tenants are jointly and severally liable for paying the bill. Where more than one person is resident, the person liable to pay is determined according to the hierarchy of ownership and tenancy set out below (the person at the top or nearest to the top of the following list is liable for the bill):

•  a resident owner of the property

•  a resident in the property with a lease (this includes 'assured tenants' under the Housing Act 1988)

•  a resident with a freehold interest in the whole or any part of the dwelling

•  a resident with a leasehold interest (including an assured tenancy or assured shorthold tenancy) in the whole or any part of the dwelling which is not inferior to

•  another such interest held by another resident a resident and a statutory secure or introductory tenant (within the meaning of the Rent Act 1977 or the Rent (Agriculture) Act 1976) or a secure tenant (within the meaning of Part IV of the Housing Act 1985) of the whole or any part of the dwelling 

•  a resident with a contractual licence to occupy the whole or any part of the dwelling

•  any person resident eg a squatter 

If none of the above apply, liability will fall on a non-resident owner. For the purposes of council tax, a non-resident owner includes the person who has the inferior (shortest) lease granted for a term of six months or more of the whole, or any part of, the dwelling. If there is no such leaseholder, the non-resident freeholder is the owner.

In the case of a property which has been repossessed the liable person will be the person who is a mortgagee in possession of the owner's interest in the dwelling. 

If a person is disregarded when calculating whether any discounts should be applied to the council tax bill, this does not affect their liability to pay the bill. 

The owners of care homes, rather than the residents, are liable for council tax. In addition, if the care home contains a self-contained unit of accommodation for the owner, that unit is treated as a separate dwelling.

If a dwelling is occupied by a number of people, some of whom are severely mentally impaired and some are not, only those who are not severely mentally impaired can be held liable to pay the tax.

Properties occupied by full-time students are exempt from joint and several liability and no one under the age of 18 can be held responsible for paying council tax.

[Steve]

How To Get Rid Of Credit Card Debts In Court -

https://youtu.be/FR2C2K9IVgA

[Steve]

FB Post (Contact Law, Liens & Knowing your Strawman)

Admission/Entry requirements and Travel Issues …

Dear Beautiful Days Legal Team,

I was saddened and angered reading your ‘COVID 19 entry requirements’ on your facebook page.

When I bought my tickets, I entered into a contract with you. There was no disclosure of your entry requirements in your terms and conditions, relating to providing my private and sensitive medical data. Therefore, you have violated this contract by changing the terms and conditions, namely those of entry, by demanding that I provide my medical status as a condition of entry. Contractually you cannot change the conditions unilaterally after the event.

You are not being forced to do this by law but rather to make others feel safe. If others do not feel safe, I would suggest that they do not come to a festival where there will be large gatherings of people, if it is their belief that there is a highly contagious disease gripping the country (even though that has not been the case since Covid19 was down graded from this category by the WHO in March last year!).

Not only are you opening yourselves to being sued for discrimination, but also invasion of privacy,
breaking terms and conditions of a contract, breach of the Data Protection Act and contrary to GDPR – unlawfully demanding that I provide personal sensitive data (health information) that I am not compelled to provide by law.

If you wish to demand that anyone provide their medical data, you need to provide the following:
A competently trained health and safety manager,
A full risk assessment,
Give details of where the medical data will be stored and for how long for.

Please bare in mind that the government have been clever and are avoiding liability, by the fact that they have not made this law. This way you will be sued, not the government, which may put you out of business.

Yours sincerely,



Comments …

This applies to airlines when you buy a ticket they have a contract with you. If they refuse to let you fly refusing a test, passenger location forms jabs these are all VOLUNTARY. They are breaking an agreement. You can personally sue who is stopping you to fly in their personal capacity. They have no rights over you or can force you to take a medical procedure. At least without a risk assessment. People can get shares with the airline and take this to them as discrimination. Dolores Cahill. Your passport says: you have the right to travel freely

[Steve]

FB Post (Contact Law, Liens & Knowing your Strawman)

Question…

Who got a good resource /pdf/ or step guide on dealing with
debt collector via email and on your door ??

Where do I start with my learning ??


Answers …

Best to ignore 3rd parties, they have paid the debt and you have no contract with them. 

Thank you but I would like more detail then just ignore them. Just because im looking to be educated. im trying  to understand what 3rd parties can' and can't do with regards to trying to get money from us. 

And how would I prove  they bought  the debt?
In a court or to the police? If they end up at my door with them?

Thanks for the help.



Ask DCA for some docs (which the DCA will not have), which will prove they cant make a claim, and have no legal right to even hold your data: 1. Assignment notice from original creditor sent to you by recorded mail, 2. Deed of assignment from creditor to DCA, 3. Original (not copy) credit agreement and the full accounts from original creditor supplying funds to present. These are required under acts/legislation, you have to look them up, then quote them to DCA. Avoid emails, use recorded mail, this proves you served them. If it goes to court, it should be simple: Judge asks if they have the docs - NO? Case dismissed. You can also give them a fee schedule in your notice of what it will cost them if it goes to court and they lose.

Jonathan Reid firstly it will never have anything to do with police as it is always a civil matter. But send a DSAR to them (plenty of them in files) and if they don't correctly answer the DSAR send a warning letter, then put a claim in against them via an N1 and the compansation is usually between £2000 and £5000. They always lie. They NEVER buy debt. It does not exist. They have no "Chose in action" that means ANY AND ALL debt collection agencies/companies have NO LEGAL RIGHT to even speak to you. Go after them.(Peter Wilson)


You could try sending the company a freedom of information request. That is what happens, they will state that the debt has been sold onto a debt collector so that letter would be proof also.

SOME CASE LAW: See (Van Lynn Developments v Pelias Construction Co Ltd 1968.[3] All ER 824) Where Lord Denning M.R. said "the debtor is entitled to view the sale agreement to ensure that the assignee can give him good discharge under the contract";

And; [Webster v Ridgeway (2009) ] - A case that demonstrates that a debtor is entitled to see a redacted version where sensitive information is contained in the document(s);

Also; [Jones v Link Financial Ltd (2013) ] 1 WLR 693  Where at Section 9, the judge found that three conditions for the validity of such an assignment must be satisfied, 'namely': that the assignment was absolute and not by way of charge; that it was in writing under the hand of the assignor, and that express notice in writing had been given to the debtor.



Read defusing the debt bomb, I think it’s in the files

All the steps are in that book

Send a DSAR and then send notices 1 to 3 to them  do not joinder with them  via email or phone only except  in  writing and with a wet signature from the sender  if you received reply with no signatures or digital signatures then ignore it.
Most importantly you must request in your first notice the deed of assignment if they can not provide this then they can not claim the debt against you.

You could claim uttering law agsist them for documents that could ve misleading and creating decipt and confusion and forgery with documents or letters that have no lawfull control over you.

I'm ahead of you and current have 9 third party debtor all claiming agaist me and this has been going on for 6 months now.

Make sure you record and copy everything you send and track notices with Royal mail first class signed, and a week letter check its been delivered and print of the confirmation of delivery. If it goes to court you will have to prove you have done every in your capability to resolve the issue to prove they have been negligent in there proceeding to procure with you.



Also request the bill of exchange  or transfer of possession as when the debt was sold the terms and conditions have changed and thus requiring a new  trilateral agreement that has to be written  and signed with 3 signatures  this includes a third party  witness that lawfully has to check ID from both signing parties who are going to contract together.

Only  autograph you notices do not write your signature

imin the middle of doing this with my daughter whom is my property....debt collecters are 3rd prtys you ask them for wet ink signature on contract  ask them who gave permission to access your data with out your writen permission... or you could say thanks for buying the debt hehe.

[Steve]

FB Post (Contract Law, Commercial Liens, Controlling your Strawman)

Has anyone managed to get a credit card in their lower case name?
If so who with?

Read somewhere about a guy once, his credit card was all lowercase and when he went to purchase somthing the balance would reset back to £0, as money doesn't exist let me explain ...

What is Money? –

Well today in England the currency is 'Bank Notes' but there is one very important difference with the notes issued these days and Knowledge is Power will explain why;

These notes are issued by the private company called "The Bank of England" (which is as good a name for a company as any other name). However, if you were to take one of their bank notes to the premises of that company and ask for it to be cashed, all that they would do is give you another note with the same number of pounds written on it, or alternatively, some other notes with smaller numbers printed on them!

This is because, unlike the original bank notes, there is nothing of any physical value backing up the bank notes of today - they are only worth the physical paper on which they are printed

Ridiculous?
IT GETS WORSE!

What happens most commonly nowadays is that they do not even bother printing those pieces of paper. Now, they just tap some numbers into a computer record, or if they are old-fashioned enough, they write the numbers into a ledger.
What do those numbers represent?
Nothing at all - they have no actual value, in other words, just as much value as if you typed them into your own computer - quite meaningless. And yet, a bank or other financial institution will merrily "lend" you those numbers in return for years of your work - now isn't that really generous of them!?

Actually, this is not at all funny, because if you don't keep paying them money earned by your very real work, then they will attempt to take your house and possessions away from you
This won't happen if you understand that what they lent you was actually valueless. Take the case of Jerome Daly of Minnesota in America. In court, Jerome challenged the right of the bank to foreclose on his home which had been purchased with a loan from the bank. Jerome argued that any mortgage contract required that both parties (that is, himself and the bank), to put up a legitimate form of property for the exchange. In legal language, that is called a legitimate "consideration" put forward by both parties to the contract

Jerome explained that the "money" was in fact, not the property of the bank as it had been created out of nothing as soon as the loan agreement was signed. That is, the money does not come out of the bank's existing assets as the bank is simply inventing it and in reality, the bank is putting up nothing of it's own, except for a theoretical liability on paper
As the court case progressed, the President of the bank, Mr Morgan, took the stand and admitted that the bank, in combination with the (privately owned commercial company called) "The Federal Reserve Bank", created the entire amount of the loan in credit in it's own books by means of a bookkeeping entry, the money and credit coming into existence when they created it. Further, Mr Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.

A lawful consideration must exist and must be tendered to support the loan agreement. The jury found that there had been no lawful consideration put forward by the bank and so the court rejected the bank's application for foreclosure and Jerome Daly kept his home!

That is exactly the situation with all British mortgages. When someone makes an application for a mortgage or any other loan, the applicant's signature is required on the application form before the loan is approved. That signed application is a valuable piece of paper which the bank can lodge in it's accounts as a credit to the bank for the amount of the loan. The bank could just keep that application form and stay £100,000 or whatever, ahead, but they want more, much more.

They want the borrower to pay them that same amount again, funding it by years of work, and not only the amount of the supposed "loan" but significant extra in interest. Why do you think that they are so keen to lend you "money" - they are even willing to lend to people with very poor credit records as there is no way that the bank can lose out on the deal, no matter what happens

This is why, if a company starts demanding payment of large sums of money, you start by asking them to provide the "accounting" for the deal. In other words, you are asking them to show in writing that they provided something of genuine worth as their side of the loan contract. As they invented the money as numbers in their books with no real worth attached to those numbers, they are in deep trouble as they can't comply with your demand to see their accounting for the deal
Did you ever wonder how the average bank manages to make hundreds of millions of pounds profit every year?
Well, you are looking right at where a large chunk of it comes from!

This next part of the information may be a little difficult to understand...

When any business is being run, the accounts are recorded as money coming in and money going out. For a bank, the money coming in is called a "Credit" and money going out is called a "Debit". The objective is to have these two amounts match each other for any customer. Not everything done in banking is immediately obvious to the average person and so it may be a little difficult to understand how everything works in this area

FOR INSTANCE;

If you have an account with a bank and you deposit £500 to open the account, the bank enters that in it's books as a Credit. The Credit on your account is £500 and the Debit is £0 and so the balance has a positive, or Credit value of £500

If you were to withdraw £600, then the bank would record this as a Debit of £600 and as the Credit balance on your account is £500, the balance on your account would be £100 in Debit, that is, overdrawn by £100 right?

If you were to lodge a further £100 and then close your account, the bank would not have any problem, other than the fact that they would like to keep you on as a customer. As far as the accounting goes, your account is balanced and the bank is satisfied with the state of affairs, £600 has come in and £600 has gone out, the books balance - case closed

NOW, if you were to apply for a loan (mortgage or otherwise) for £100,000 from the bank, they would give you an application form which is set out in such a way that you have to fill in the Legal Fiction / Strawman's name rather than your own - separate boxes with one of them containing "Mr" or "Mrs" etc and they may even require you to fill the form in using block capitals. You may think that the capitals are so that they can read you writing or perhaps, to make it easier for it to be entered into a computer, but the name in those capital letters belongs to the Legal Fiction / Strawman and not to you!

All you have done is actually made an application on behalf of the Legal Fiction / Strawman and not on behalf of yourself!

You might wonder why they would want to do that!?...After all, what could they ever get from the Legal Fiction / Strawman? Well, you might be surprised.  When the Legal Fiction / Strawman was incorporated they assigned a large monetary value to it, possibly £100,000,000 and they have been trading on the stock market on behalf of the strawman ever since, and you know how many years that has been. So, very surprisingly, in their opinion, the little fellow is really very rich, and you have just authorised them to take the amount of your loan application from the Legal Fiction / Strawman's account! 

So before the bank passes you any money, it has already got it's money from the Legal Fiction / Strawman account and entered it in it's books as a £100,000 Credit to your loan account. They then place £100,000 into your loan account as a Debit. Interestingly, that loan account is now balanced and could easily be closed off as a completed deal

THIS IS WHERE THE EVEN SNEAKIER PART COMES IN!

To get the money out of your account, you had to write and sign a cheque for £100,000 on that account. What does the bank do with cheques which you sign?

It assigns them to the account as an asset of the bank, and suddenly, the bank is ahead by £100,000 because the cheque is in the name of the Legal Fiction / Strawman who can supply the bank with almost any amount of money. But it doesn't end there, as the bank is confident that you know so little about what is going on that you will pay them anything up to £100,000 over the years, against what you believe you owe them!

If that happens, then they have made yet another £100,000 for the bank. To make things even better for them, they want you to pay them interest on the money which you (don't actually) owe them. Overall, they make a great deal of money when you borrow from them, so perhaps you can see now why banks make hundreds of millions in profit each year!?

If the loan was used to buy a property, then the bank probably insisted that you lodged the title deeds with them as soon as the property deal was completed. If you then fail to keep paying them, they are likely to attempt to foreclose on the "loan" and sell your property quickly for an even greater profit.
And to add insult to injury, if the property sale did not exceed the amount of the "loan" plus the charges for selling it, then they are likely to claim that you owe them the difference!!

Perhaps you can now see why Jerome Daly told them to go take a running jump at themselves, and why your asking for "the accounting" for any loan made to you, puts the bank in an impossible situation. If the bank then just writes and says that the "debt" is fully discharged, they have still made a massive profit on the operation and they also hope that the vast majority of customers will not catch on to the fact that they are paying far too much or even that there is a Legal Fiction / Strawman involved

Please don't feel that you are ripping the banks off if you don't pay them!

What they are asking you to pay - they have already recovered everything paid out to you before you start paying them, for the second or third time

[Steve]

FB Post (Contract Law, Commercial Liens and Controlling your Strawman)

Our Government, please read …

Our Government is a Private Company!

Our bills and everything we receive from a corporation comes in CAPITAL LETTERS because we are a BUSINESS -  CAPITAL.

But, says somebody, we elect a government to represent us and so we have to do what they say, after all, they have our best interests at heart don't they?

INCORRECT and Knowledge is Power will explain exactly why these 'Companies' ran for profit, DO NOT have our best interests at heart;

You think that you elect politicians to represent you in your government, but that is not what you actually do. That is part of a very carefully fostered illusion intended to keep you in your place and giving most of your earnings away (typically, 80% of all you earn).

Part of the secret is that what is supposed to be your 'Government' is actually a privately owned, for-profit company and all that you do when voting, is help choose the serving officers inside that company!

It will never make the slightest difference to what happens in the future as the company policy and actions are controlled by the owners of the company and they are not influenced in any way whatsoever by what you want

Think this is far fetched? 

Then check it out via the still used (?) Dun & Bradstreet or any of the other places which records the setting up and performance of the 160,000,000 commercial companies world-wide.

When you do that, you will discover that, for example, the House of Commons was a commercial for-profit company (number UC2279443), The Labour Party is a commercial company which trades under the name of “Allister Darling MP”, The House of Lords which is the highest court in the land is a private company, the United Kingdom Corporation Ltd. formerly known as the “United Kingdom plc” and which never complied with the law which requires it to file it's financial records, is also a private company
The Ministry of Justice D-U-N-S Number 22-549-8526, Directors: Lord Falconer of Thoroton is a private company set up in the year 1600.

The Bank of England is a private company, as is every Court and every Police Force and even the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry is a company and not a person!!

It gets even more ridiculous when you discover that The Devon and Cornwall Police is a company which has been taken over by a company owned by IBM which is paid an annual budget of £256,800,000 taken from members of the public!

Gilbert and Sullivan would have loved this reality as a script for one of their comedies. Lancashire County Council was incorporated as a company (IP00666C) in 2002.  It’s registered office was "3rd Floor, Christ Church Precinct, County Hall, Preston" and it was completely dissolved on 25th January 2008 and all of it’s Assets and Liabilities were transferred on 12th November 2007 to another company - “The Blues and Twos Credit Union Ltd.” whose registered address is Lancashire Police Headquarters, PO Box 77, Hutton, Preston.

Do you by any chance get the feeling that you are being taken for a ride here?
Because I do!

Just in case you are not aware of it, the purpose of any commercial 'for-profit' company or corporation is to make money for it's owners (and shareholders if there are any). The people whom you think of as 'The Government' don't do anything which earns money - instead, they take money from you and their main job is to make sure that you don't realise that they are in the same position as IBM which takes away a cool £256 million of your money every year

So, why all the pretence of there being a genuine government which you elect and who serve you?.

They don't want you to UNDERSTAND that they are just running a company which produces nothing of any worth - Something like a betting shop, where almost every customer loses money.

And wake up to the fact that, unlike what you have been told all your life, this is all optional and you don't need to play their rip-off game any longer unless you want to. They want you to be so burdened down with paying them money and working so hard and so long that you don't have the time, money or energy to stop and think about what is happening to you and your family!

These people ARE NOT DAFT

They are desperate to stop you from just walking away from their scam, and so they make every effort to connect you with the fiction which is your 'Legal Fiction' / 'Strawman' because fictitious entities like commercial companies can't have any dealing with a real man or a real woman - they can only deal with another fiction like your strawman, and it is essential that they fool you into believing that you have to act on behalf of your strawman - which you don't

They have a number of well-proven methods of distracting you and keeping you from finding out. They want you to see a great deal of entertainment, not because there is anything wrong with entertainment, but while you are watching it you will not be asking awkward questions.

Also, they are very careful that most entertainment reinforces their make-believe world and makes it appear to be "the real world" where everyone is under 'The Government', Police Officers uphold the law, taxes are essential in order to keep things going and things which are said to be bad for you, are taxed heavily (not to make money) but supposedly, to encourage you to avoid those things. Which is utter drivel, at best

They also have another very effective technique, and that is FEAR, so DO NOT fear them. They want you to be 'Afraid' so DO NOT be afraid of them...Afraid of imaginary terrorists. Afraid of disasters. Afraid of new diseases. Afraid of foreign countries. Afraid of "the economy" doing badly and inflation rising. If you doubt this, then take a look at the news and count the number of positive, uplifting news items, and the number of negative or depressing news items!

It doesn't take much in the way of research to see the very heavy negative bias in the news. The reason behind this is to make you feel that you need a government and an army to protect you from these supposed dangers! It is easy to keep the news items biased that way, because all of the major news agencies and media outlets in the world are owned by only five or six privately owned commercial companies.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

FB Post (Contract Law, Commercial Liens and Controlling your Strawman)



Dealing With The Police –

Years ago, a policeman was your friend and defender. Things have changed now that Police Forces have become commercial organisations, dedicated to producing a profit by taking money from you in the form of Fixed Penalty Notices, Speeding Fines, Parking Fines and any number of other charges. Knowledge is Power, explains why;

Each individual 'Police Force' is a commercial company, it has NO AUTHORITY to enforce anything, any more than a McDonalds or a BurgerKing has. 

The men & women that work under the banner of their local 'Police Force' have two separate roles. When they take up their occupation, they take an 'oath of office' pledging to uphold the 'Common Law'. That oath, and nothing else gives them the Authority to act to enforce 'Common Law' - that is, the few things which are listed in our 'Legalese - Acts & Statutes' 

'Common Law' DOES NOT authorise them to do anything connected with so-called 'Government' Statutes & Acts and so they have been trained to use 'Legalese' to entrap UN-INFORMED members of the Public! 

To be fair, it is highly likely that even the members or the Police Force are aware of what they are doing and do not understand the difference between 'Legal Statutes' (which are optional) and the 'Lawful' Common Law requirements which apply to EVERYONE and are NOT optional



PLEASE DONT GET US WRONG – 

A lot of Policemen and Policewomen do a great job and assist members of the Public, sometimes above and beyond the requirements of there job - opposing bullying, intimidation, fraud etc. and comforting in cases of bereavement or injury. BUT, the commercial companies who control the Police Force are working extremely hard to end this sort of positive behaviour, using ridiculous Health & Safety regulations as an excuse, even to the extent that Police Officers are instructed for example to stand by and watch somebody drown and not attempt to save them! 

This is not the choice of the 'Officer' but the instructions of the owners of the company.

SO, because these thousands & thousands of 'invented' offenses don’t apply to ANYBODY unless they agree to be bound via 'consent' it becomes essential for a 'Police Officer' to (possibly with out knowing) persuade a member of the Public to agree to subject him/herself to these unnecessary restrictions and agree to pay invented cash penalties to the local commercial company called the 'Police Force' or 'Constabulary'. The normal first attempt to establish this spurious dominance of the 'Police Officer' is by him asking for your name. This is NOT an INNOCENT question and it is essential that you are VERY CAREFUL in what you say as there are verbal 'Legalese' TRAPS all over the place!

One suitable reply is "The Law does not require me to provide that information" which is entirely correct and avoids the first major pitfall, and no matter how often the question is asked, the answer always remains the SAME. It is also vitally IMPORTANT not to argue with a Police Officer as that is another 'Legalese' TRAP which makes you subject to the thousands of hateful regulations solely designed to part you of your MONEY. So, only answer questions (ideally with a non aggressive question) and don’t volunteer ANY INFORMATION AT ALL

So, here are some examples to help you understand;

If a Police Officer says "you were exceeding the speed limit!" you could say "Was I?" as you DONT ARGUE, nor do you point out that 'Common Law' does not require anybody to keep to the speed limits, obey road signs, park only where directed ETC. even though that is perfectly TRUE!

Under 'Common Law' an offense has only been committed IF there is a VICTIM (somebody who has been killed or injured, had possessions damaged or stolen or who has been defrauded) SO, if the Police Officer keeps pushing you to agree to pay his company money when you DONT need to, then a good question to ask is "Who is the Victim?" or alternatively some thing like "What is the charge? or am I free to go?" 

If you stick to these things, then the Police Officer has nothing to work on as you have not agreed to be bound by 'Statutes' as you have not provided a NAME and ADDRESS for him to write on an invoice/bill or 'Fixed Penalty Notice' as they like to call it! and you have not entered into a 'controversy' by arguing with him or her into 'dishonour’ refusing them point blank



AMAZING STUFF

But there is one thing, and that is, you MUST NOT be aggressive or offensive in any way, you MUST NOT do anything which he tells you to do because if you do then those charming 'Legalese' people can see that as you agreeing to 'Stand Under' them and then become subject to his 'Legal' (NOT LAWFUL) authority, and so become liable to those thousands of cunning plans called 'Statutes' carefully crafted in order to rob you in a PERFECTLY 'LEGAL' WAY!

One thing which any Police Officer needs to become aware of is the FACT that they do NOT have any security provided by the 'Police Force' which employs them. In any situation which does not involve 'Common Law' the Police Officer is on his own, acting as an individual and as such is wide open to actions against him either under 'Common Law' if he is acting unlawfully or by Civil Court action if his actions warrant it.

See, it all falls flat on its face for them if they cannot establish a 'JOINDER' or more aptly named a 'Pretensive Joinder' which is where a human agrees voluntarily to represent the 'Legal Fiction / 'Strawman' and so become subject to them Legal 'Statutes'...If they cannot get 'JOINDER' then the presumed authority of a Police Officer does not exist in ANY RESPECT and he is acting solely as an individual whose only authority is to enforce 'Common Law' and NOTHING ELSE