Go down
Posts : 26
Join date : 2018-01-12
View user profilehttp://dementiafraud.forumotion.com

Using the correct Mailing Service and the correct format correspondence. Empty Using the correct Mailing Service and the correct format correspondence.

on Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:48 am
It might be a good idea to get some basics down about a few things, so we will starting with what you can do on receipt of ANY presentment/offer to contract. Feel free to add anything you consider pertinent (including questions), and to offer correction where it may be needed.

Ok, a letter arrives 'suggesting' that it 'might' be for you. Whatever it may contain there are certain things you should look out for that mean you can refuse to deal with them (be that 'refusing for cause' or - my current preference - 'conditional acceptance'):

1) Check the envelope - is it 'windowed'? Is it stamped or is it franked?
2) Is it addressed to a 'titled' (Mr) ALL CAPS person?
3) Is the return address a PO Box no.?
4) Having committed to honoring the presentment (by opening the envelope) , take out the letter and before reading it - examine it. Does it:
a) .....have any more glossa (ALLCAPS) on it?
b) ......contain boxes in which to write information?
c) ....address 'you'?
d) .....require you to write in black ink and ALLCAPS?
e) .....contain any reference to specific legislation?
f) .....seem designed to scare/intimidate you?
g) .....purport to be an offer, or bill?
h) .....contain terms and conditions?
i) .....suggest a time scale to adhere to?
j) .....appear to be written in non-present tense of English (ie does it include words that have been prefixed or suffixed (future and past tense))?
k) .....bear a hand written signature?

These are all areas that could negate the presentment and even prevent any further approaches to you, before you even get to the subject matter of the letter! Opinions/questions?  

There are people here who will understand why each of these points are relevant and how to employ that knowledge, but there will also be readers who don't. For those who don't I will explain my thinking behind each point:

1) Check the envelope - is it 'windowed'? Is it stamped or is it franked?

Windowed and franked mail are your first clue that the presenter is acting dishonourably. They are attempting to circumvent postal regulations that protect both you and the integrity of the postal service. On the bright side it is an indication that they KNOW they are acting dishonourably, this can be used against them.....

Technically this is 'defective service of process' and grounds to return to sender - un-claimed (unopened)

2) Is it addressed to a 'titled' (Mr) ALLCAPS person?

The use of a title is presumptuous, but it tells you they wish to deal with the 'person' rather than the 'man'. You need to decide if you are prepared, in this instance, to represent your 'straw man' and in which capacity.

The ALLCAPS is not English language. It is listed in the Chicago Manual of Styles as ASL (American Sign Language) and bears no relation to English, as ASL is a 'descriptive' language.

This is grounds to 'record for fraud' and return to sender unclaimed. Advise them (if necessary) that you neither recognise nor understand ASL (or indeed any language other than English) and they need to reformat their offer in proper English.

You'll probably have to be persistent in pressing this point as they (usually) won't get that what your asking is reasonable and legally correct.

3) Is the return address a PO Box no.?

If it is then that's another dishonour on their own presentment. If they are offering to contract yet using a non-contracting return address (PO Box no.) not only are they muddying the waters of their intent, it's actually fraudulent but hard to prosecute on if it is a windowed and franked (rather than a stamp) envelope - which is why they use windowed and franked envelopes!

Again, grounds to record for fraud and return to sender unclaimed.

4) Having committed to honouring the presentment (by opening the envelope) take out the letter, and before reading it - examine it. Does it:

4a) .......have any more glossa (ALLCAPS) on it?

It's still not English. and it 'poisons' the text of the presentment to the point you can refuse to deal with the offer until it is presented in proper English. Rather than an outright refusal i would offer a conditional acceptance to CONSIDER their offer if re-presented in proper english.

Romley and Rohan are to thank for this info. Thanks guys!

4b) Does it contain boxes in which to write information?

This brings us to the 'four corner' rule. Anything you present as information in that box is considered as part of a separate document, and is not to be taken as part of the actual document the box appears on - which renders the actual document as incomplete.

Take some copies of their 'document' and on one copy 'white-out' the boxes. On another copy 'white-out' any glossa (ALLCAPS). On another copy 'white-out' both the boxes and the Glossa. Take copies of these and send them (do NOT return a copy of the original!) to the presenter and ask them which document they wish you to respond to.

I'm sure their (non-)response will be interesting.....

4c) Does it address 'you'?

This is an interesting play on words gleaned from a Bill Turner YT vid. By now most of us are aware of the connotations of the word 'you', ie 'you' isn't necessarily referring to.....er....'you'.

Basic example: Dear Sir, I have recently received a letter from yourselves addressed to Mr Bill Turner. However, the letter itself appears to be addressing 'you', but Mr Turner isn't 'you' and I am not 'you' so I am returning this letter to its rightful owner - which I believe to be 'you'.....or something like that, was a while ago that I saw it. You might also wish to address it to the 'man'.

4d) Does it require you to write in black ink and ALLCAPS?

I'm sure contracts can be completed in any colour medium, but the most binding of contracts are written in either blood - or black ink.

Having you write in ALLCAPS is to make it seem that you actually consent to be treated as a 'person' (as opposed to 'man'), and that you know you are dealing with matters of your ESTATE (aka SUR-name, HOUSE-name, LORD-name).

Basic example: the V5 application for the car you've just bought requires you to use black ink (contract) and ALLCAPS (Estate). When you complete the application in the prescribed manner what you have actually done is pledge your property, and any 'incidents'/revenue it might generate to pay off the (bankster's) national debt via your 'House of....' name.

Some may think the DVLA now own their vehicle. Some say the government. Some may think they have created a trust with themselves as the beneficiary.

They would all be wrong (imo).

There is indeed a trust involved, and by not claiming your role as beneficiary you give the equitable interest to whomever created (and so owns) your LORD-name. This makes you - by default - the legal title holder/Trustee, and responsible for generating revenue from that car to give to the equitable owner.

The revenue is generated by you/your 'person'. You have volunteered to pay off some of the (banksters') national debt with your road tax, insurance tax, speeding tickets and anything else T.H.E.Y. can get you on.....

If you were the equitable owner you wouldn't need to be granted license to enjoy the use of 'your' property.
Only the Trustee requires such license......

Btw I'm almost certain that 'registration' converts your property from whatever-you-like-to-call-it (eg car, or my favourite - my 'travel-room') to the legal designation of 'vehicle'.

4e) Does it contain any reference to specific legislation?

Ok, this is where it gets a tad more difficult. It is your responsibility to study any cited legislation for several reasons, but in this instance you're looking for incongruities between the legislation and any claims made in the letter. As Tiggy recently pointed out there's a good chance that they could misquote it, even to the point of citing the wrong legislation or getting the name of the correct legislation wrong - this can (and did!) blow a claim out of their beloved bl@@dy water.....

4f) Does it seem designed to scare/intimidate you?

The best advice I can offer on this is just the best advice you will ever hear - here or anywhere else:

Know thyself and fear not.

If you can manage the former, the latter will take care of itself. Seriously.

Does it purport to be an offer, or bill?

Ask them if it's an offer - you can use their response against them, whatever it is. You'll be wanting to know what 'consideration' is coming your way if you take them up on it. Demand details as to whether it's a trust arrangement, and if so, what role in that trust do they fill? If they say it's not, they could be in BIG trouble (with correct noticing).

Ask them if it is a bill. Again, you can use their response against them. If it's a bill you can ask them how they would like you to pay..... if it's not, then wtf do they want?

4h) Does it contain terms and conditions?

If it does - lovely! If it doesn't - lovely!

Terms and conditions tell you that this is a contract. All terms and conditions are negotiable - seeing as it's only your signature that will activate the contract, and nobody may be compelled to sign ANYTHING, without you they have nothing. Remember - if they aren't negotiable, why include them.....?

A lack of t + c's says it's NOT a contract.

Basic example : You receive an offer to contract from your local council, asking you (again) to help reduce the (banksters') national debt by contributing 'council tax'. So.....

Dear Council tax man,

Although you have sent an offer to contract in your council tax scheme, you have neglected to include the terms and conditions, and failed to state what manner of contract this is ie whether or not we will be in a 'Trust' relationship.

Unfortunately this makes it impossible to consider your offer, legally speaking.

Please represent your offer complete with full details of the intended relationship between the parties, and a comprehensive list of terms and conditions so that your offer may be properly considered.

Yours sincerely

How do you like that one - good, innit?

4j) Does it appear to be written in non-present tense of English (ie does it include words that have been prefixed or suffixed (future and past tense))?

This comes from David Wynn Miller but more recently presented in Troy's latest video - which is the only reason I include it here. Rather than explaining it I shall direct you to watch 'Troy on Language' on Ceylon's YT.

Correspondence by mail is crucial to dealing with issues/matters before they are sent to court.  Get this right and you stand a much greater chance of success.
Back to top
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum