The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael » Mon Jul 20, 2009 11:29 am

For your honourable consideration, the following is a sanitised transcription of the on-going genuine attempt of a former executive level chartered accountant to enforce the Acceptance For Value of a credit card remittance slip in the geographical area known as England.

Robin Hoody
Managing Director
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

1 December 2008

Notice of Acceptance for Value

Dear Robin,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

Please find enclosed the financial instrument your company sent me in relation to the above account, accepted for value and returned for settlement, and prepayment against future transactions.

Please also be advised that this instrument, once accepted for value, is lawful specie of money which can be used to credit/off-set the balance of the above account with the authorised use of my exemption ID number. This properly endorsed remittance can be redeemed by depositing it with Her Majesty’s Treasury, as I am sure Capital Two’s Chief Financial Officer is already well aware.

Therefore, please forward this letter and remittance to the appropriate accounts facility within Capital Two and instruct them to act accordingly, providing me with evidence that the account balance has been adjusted.

If no written response from Capital Two is received by mail within ten days of your receipt of this notice, it will be assumed that the account has been credited as per these instructions and that this fact will be reflected in the next monthly statement of account.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT.

Robin Hoody
Managing Director
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

29 December 2008

NOTICE OF NON-RESPONSE

Dear Robin,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

With reference to the financial instrument, accepted for value and returned for settlement and prepayment against future transactions, that was enclosed with the Notice of Acceptance for Value dated 1 December 2008, both of which were delivered to Capital Two by registered mail.

As no written response from Capital Two has been received within ten days of your receipt of said notice, it has now been assumed that the above account has been credited in accordance with my previous instructions. However, this fact is not reflected in the current balance of the account.

Therefore, please send me written confirmation that payment has been received and accepted, as well as an appropriately adjusted statement for the above account, within three working days of your receipt of this notice.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

Robin Hoody
Managing Director
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

29 December 2008

NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF STANDING ORDER

Dear Robin,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

With reference to the financial instrument, accepted for value and returned for settlement and prepayment against future transactions, that was enclosed with the Notice of Acceptance for Value dated 1 December 2008, both of which were delivered to Capital Two by registered mail.

In accordance with the original instructions in the said notice, since Capital Two have accepted the said financial instrument as means of payment, I hereby deliver notice that the standing order related to the above account has been cancelled, as of 29 December 2008.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

They might choose to cancel the facility, but they refused legal tender of payment so the debt has now been legally dicharged in accordance with the Bills of Exchange Act.

The credit agencies are about to be served notice that should they record false information in relation to this account they will be immediately reported the Office of Fair Trading and invoiced for a substantial fee schedule.

Robin Hoody
Managing Director
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

12 January 2009

NOTICE OF DISHONOUR

Dear Robin,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

With reference to the financial instrument, accepted for value and returned for settlement and prepayment against future transactions, that was enclosed with the Notice of Acceptance for Value dated 1 December 2008, Notice of Non-Response, dated 29 December and Notice of Cancellation of Standing Order, dated 29 December 2009, all of which were delivered to Capital Two by recorded mail.

I hereby give notice that Capital Two has dishonoured each and every one of the said Notices by failing to respond appropriately within a reasonable timeframe. Therefore, Capital Two has agreed to all the terms set forth therein; namely:

1. In accordance with the original instructions given in the Notice of Acceptance for Value, Capital Two have accepted the properly indorsed remittance slip as means of settlement and prepayment; and
2. The above account will be credited accordingly.

Since Capital Two has accepted the above, Capital Two therefore also accepts the following:

1. Capital Two has no claim to any interest payment, or additional charges, neither of which can be legally added to the account balance; and
2. Capital Two has no authority to adversely affect the credit rating of the card holder.

Therefore I request Capital Two send me written confirmation that payment has been received and accepted, as well as an appropriately adjusted statement for the above account, within three working days of your receipt of this notice, sent by recorded mail.

Please be advised that Section 43(a) of the English Bills of Exchange Act, which is still in full force and effect in the UK, clearly states that a bill of exchange is discharged when it:

‘…is duly presented for acceptance, and such an acceptance as is prescribed by this Act is refused or cannot be obtained’.

Therefore, in accordance with the law, in the event that you fail to provide me with what has been so reasonably requested once again, Capital Two’s dishonour of a legal tender of payment discharges the outstanding balance on the above account.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

Robin Bandit
Director of Collections
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

15 January 2009

NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIM REFUSED FOR CAUSE

Dear Robin,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

In relation to the above account, I hereby serve notice that since 1 December 2008, I have presented legal tender of payment and served four notices by registered mail to ROBIN HOODY, MANAGING DIRECTOR, CAPITAL TWO EUROPE, all of which have been dishonoured.

Therefore, please find enclosed Capital Two’s invalid claim that I have defaulted on the above account, along with an invalid statement of the above account, both of which were received on 15 January 2009, and both of which are hereby REFUSED FOR CAUSE.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

Theevin Basterd
Executive Office Manager
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

22 January 2009

NOTICE OF OPPORTUNITY TO CURE DISHONOUR

Dear Theevin Basterd,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

Firstly, I must respectfully decline your offer of title and kindly request that any future correspondence be addressed to Uppercase: Lower, a flesh and blood man. ‘Mr’ is the title to a corporate fiction, otherwise known as my Legal Person, for which I am acting as fully authorised agent and administrator.

Thank you for your letter dated 9 January 2009, which was received at the above mailing location on 21 January 2009, some 11 days after the registered date of posting. Contrary to your claims, I do not feel that Capital Two has given an appropriate response to the serious issues that my legal notices have raised, nor do I consent to your offer of this case being considered closed.

You refer in your letter to my ‘letters’. It is important that Capital Two understand and acknowledge that far from sending Capital Two letters, I have, in fact, sent several ‘Notices’, which are a different specie of correspondence altogether. The Notices, which were all sent by recorded mail, were:

• Notice of Acceptance for Value, dated 1 December 2008,
• Notice of Non-Response, dated 29 December 2008,
• Notice of Cancellation of Standing Order, dated 29 December 2008,
• Notice of Dishonour, dated 15 January 2009 and
• Notice of Invalid Claim Refused for Cause, dated 15 January 2009

Your correspondence was the first response I have received from Capital Two in relation to any of the above. I do not believe it to be acceptable business practice for a company to take 40 days to respond to a Notice sent in good faith by a customer, nor should it take 11 days from the date of writing for a letter to be received by the customer. Your tardy response is the only reason matters have yet to be resolved. Therefore, I do not give my consent for you to record negative information on my Legal Person’s credit file and feel compelled to reiterate that Capital Two has made an invalid claim that STRAWMAN has defaulted on the above account, notification of which was Refused for Cause in the Notice dated 15 January 2009.

Furthermore, as set out in each of the said Notices, by failing to respond appropriately within a reasonable timeframe, which was also set out in each Notice, Capital Two has in fact given its tacit acceptance to all the claims made within these Notices, including, but not limited to:

1. Capital Two have accepted the properly indorsed remittance slip as means of settlement and prepayment,
2. The above account will be credited accordingly,
3. Capital Two has no claim to any interest payment, or additional charges, neither of which can be legally added to the account balance; and
4. Capital Two has no authority to adversely affect the credit rating of the card holder.

With reference to your confusion regarding the financial instrument I sent to Capital Two, the legal definition of remittance is:

‘REMITTANCE, comm. law. Money sent by one merchant to another, either in specie, bill of exchange, draft or otherwise.

In commercial law, to remit is to send money, bills, or something which will answer the purpose of money.’

It is my understanding that, in accordance with the English Bills of Exchange Act, my acceptance and indorsement of the said financial instrument as Holder In Due Course, validates it as a legal tender of payment. Therefore, the legal definition of ‘remittance’ clearly includes without restriction, the properly indorsed financial instrument I sent to Capital Two as legal tender of payment in relation to the above account.

Furthermore, my National Insurance number, which identifies my Cestui Que Trust account, otherwise known as the Pass-Through to my Exemption Account (Foreign Situs Trust), along with my signature, is what legally authorises HM Treasury to credit the above account with Capital Two.

In addition to all of the above, if, as you claim, Capital Two does not accept prepayment, or if, as you also claim, the ‘giro bank payment slip’ is not legal tender, why has the remittance not been returned to me with an instruction to amend the amount or send alternative payment before now?

Please be advised that Section 43(a) of the English Bills of Exchange Act clearly states that a bill of exchange is discharged when it:

‘…is duly presented for acceptance, and such an acceptance as is prescribed by this Act is refused or cannot be obtained’.

Therefore, in accordance with all of the above stated facts, I have provided Capital Two with a valid method of payment and an account number from which Capital Two may effect payment and clear instructions as to how to effect this payment.

I hereby serve notice that if Capital Two should choose not accept the properly indorsed remittance, currently held by Capital Two, as legal tender of payment within ten days of your receipt of this notice, sent by recorded mail on 22 January 2009, the debt will be considered legally discharged and the account must be adjusted accordingly.

I hereby declare that notice to principal is notice to agent, and notice to agent is notice to principal, shall apply to all correspondence referenced herein, as well as all future correspondence in relation to this matter.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

Theevin Basterd
Executive Office Manager
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

23 January 2009

NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIM REFUSED FOR CAUSE

Dear Theevin Basterd,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

Please find enclosed Capital Two’s invalid claim that I have defaulted on the above account, received at the mailing address above on 23 January 2009, the entire contents of which are hereby REFUSED FOR CAUSE.

In relation to the above account, I hereby serve notice that since 1 December 2008, I have presented legal tender of payment and served six notices by registered mail to Capital Two, all of which have been dishonoured. It is important that Capital Two understand and acknowledge that far from sending Capital Two letters, I have, in fact, sent several ‘Notices’, which are a different specie of correspondence altogether. The Notices, which were all sent by recorded mail, were:

• Notice of Acceptance for Value, dated 1 December 2008,
• Notice of Non-Response, dated 29 December 2008,
• Notice of Cancellation of Standing Order, dated 29 December 2008,
• Notice of Dishonour, dated 12 January 2009,
• Notice of Invalid Claim Refused for Cause, dated 15 January 2009, and
• Notice of Opportunity To Cure Dishonour, dated 22 January 2009.

Ignoring legally served notices in relation to the above account and making invalid claims against STRAWMAN will result in following fee schedule being charged to Capital Two:

- GBP£150.00 per invalid claim made by Capital Two – GBP£150.00 per notice sent by registered mail by STRAWMAN – GBP£150.00 per hour of the Agent & Administrator’s time

The law of agent and principal shall apply this notice and all other notices sent to Capital Two in relation to this account.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

Robin Bandit
Director of Collections
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

2 February 2009

NOTICE OF DISCHARGE

Dear Robin,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

I hereby serve notice that Capital Two have chosen not to reply to a Notice sent in relation to the above account on 22 January 2009 by recorded post. As detailed in that Notice, failure to reply within ten days of Capital Two’s receipt of that notice can be taken as Capital Two’s tacit acceptance to all the claims made within that, and previous Notices, including, but not limited to:

1. Capital Two have accepted the properly indorsed remittance slip as means of settlement and prepayment,
2. The above account will be credited accordingly,
3. Capital Two has no claim to any interest payment, or additional charges, neither of which can be legally added to the account balance; and
4. Capital Two has no authority to adversely affect the credit rating of the card holder.

Therefore I request Capital Two send me written confirmation that payment has been received and accepted, an appropriately adjusted statement for the above account, within three working days of your receipt of this Notice sent by recorded mail, along with evidence that the credit rating of the account holder has not been adversely affected.

Furthermore, as explained in the NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIM REFUSED FOR CAUSE sent by recorded mail to Capital Two on 23 January 2009, ignoring legal Notices in relation to the above account will result in the following fee schedule being charged to Capital Two:

- GBP£150.00 per invalid claim made by Capital Two – GBP£150.00 per notice sent by registered mail by STRAWMAN – GBP£150.00 per hour of the Agent & Administrator’s time

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

Robin Bandit
Director of Collections
Capital Two Bank (Europe) plc
PO Box 666

INVOICE

4 February 2009

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 8080808080808080

In accordance with the Fee Schedule clearly defined in legally served Notices to Capital Two Europe, all of which have been tacitly accepted by said debtor, Capital Two are now liable to pay a total sum of SIX HUNDRED GREAT BRITISH POUNDS to STRAWMAN, in return for the considerable and valuable time, skills and energy expended by the authorised Agent in the administration of the following:

- GBP£150.00 for one dishonoured legal notice – GBP£150.00 for one invalid claim, enclosed REFUSED FOR CAUSE – GBP£300.00 for two hours of the Agent & Administrator’s time GBP£600.00 TOTAL AMOUNT NOW DUE

Cheques should be made payable to STRAWMAN and should be sent to the mailing location below within ten days of receipt of this Invoice, which was sent by recorded mail.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Agent & Administrator)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

The credit card company are now sending notices of their own refusing to accept that the debt has been discharged. They are denying that they agreed to the proposed terms with their silent consent and they are falsely claiming they have a right to charge late payment penalties and adversely affect the credit rating.

They’re also pretending they haven’t received an invoice for the Fee Schedule, which is now in excess of £1200 and that they have not been asked for verification and validation of the liability. In other words, they are fecked and they know it!

DECLARANT: Uppercase: Lower
c/o Non-Residential Mailing Address

RESPONDENT: THE ROBIN HOODIES 1-5
CAPITAL TWO BANK EUROPE PLC

RE: Account number: 123412341234
Registered Mail Number: 123412341234
Return Receipt Requested

VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS BY SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT
A verified plain statement of facts

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT

I, the flesh and blood Man known as Uppercase: Lower, hereinafter “Declarant”, do hereby affirm and declare that I am of legal age, have first hand knowledge of the facts contained herein, am expensively educated, highly qualified and a former chartered accountant. Therefore, I certainly feel more than competent enough to make this verified plain statement of the facts in relation to the account referenced on Page 1 of 4 of this Affidavit.

Therefore, let it be known by those responsible for the corporate entity known as CAPITAL TWO EUROPE (“Respondent”), and any relevant parent or subsidiary company, including its directors, shareholders, agents and affiliates, that I do hereby state that the following is, to the very best of my knowledge, true, correct and complete, presented in good faith, and not intended to mislead in any way.

1. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT is not in multiple dishonour of registered legal notices served by the Declarant in relation to the above account, and believes that no such evidence exists.

2. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has not dishonoured legal tender of payment presented by STRAWMAN in relation to the above account, and believes that no such evidence exists.

3. Declarant has seen no evidence that a properly endorsed ‘remittance’ is not legal specie of money, and believes that no such evidence exists.

4. Declarant has seen no evidence that STRAWMAN’S liability has not been legally discharged by RESPONDENT’S dishonour of said presentment of payment, and believes that no such evidence exists.

5. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has returned the balance to zero on the account referenced on Page 1 of 4, as agreed by RESPONDENT in its dishonour of said legal notices, and believes that no such evidence exists.

6. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has the legal right or the Declarant’s consent to telephone STRAWMAN’S place of work, mobile phone or mailing location, and believes that no such evidence exists.

7. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT, in its telephonic harassment of the Declarant at STRAWMAN’S place of work, and its repeated telephoning of STRAWMAN’S mailing location, does not constitute contacting the alleged debtor at unreasonable times, and believes that no such evidence exists.

8. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT, in its pursuit of the exclusively authorised Agent & Administrator for STRAWMAN, is not pursuing a third party who is not liable for payment, and believes that no such evidence exists.

9. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT, in its psychological harassment of the exclusively authorised Agent & Administrator, is not putting pressure on a third party that is considered to be oppressive, and believes that no such evidence exists.

10. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has ensured that adequate history of the discharged debt has been appropriately passed on, resulting in both repetitive and frequent contact by different parties, and believes that no such evidence exists.

11. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has ignored and/or disregarded the Declarant’s claim that any previous liability has now been discharged, and believes that no such evidence exists.

12. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT is legally entitled to disclose or threaten to disclose details of the alleged debt to third parties, and believes that no such evidence exists.

13. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has not failed to investigate a disputed debt in the appropriate manner, resulting in the wrongful pursuit of an alleged debtor, and believes that no such evidence exists.

14. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has ceased collection activity whilst investigating said disputed debt, and believes that no such evidence exists.

15. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT is not claiming collection costs from an alleged debtor in the absence of express contractual or other legal provision, and believes that no such evidence exists.

16. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT is not applying unreasonable charges which are not based on actual and necessary costs, and believes that no such evidence exists.

17. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has not engaged in business practices which appear deceitful, oppressive, unfair and improper, whether unlawful or not, and believes that no such evidence exists.

18. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has fully disclosed information pertaining to any assumed, presumed or implied Consumer Credit Agreement between the parties, and believes that no such evidence exists.

19. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT has not, through its multiple dishonour of legal notices and tender of payment, agreed to pay the exclusively authorised Agent & Administrator’s Fee Schedule in relation to the account referenced on Page 1 of 4, legal notice of which has already been appropriately served, and believes that no such evidence exists.

Furthermore, following detailed and extensive research on the deception, greed and corruption that is all too common in the fictional world of commerce:

20. Declarant has seen no evidence that a legally enforceable bilateral contract exists between RESPONDENT and STRAWMAN, excluding the offers presented by STRAWMAN to RESPONDENT, which were tacitly accepted by RESPONDENT, as evidenced by the legal notices that were sent by STRAWMAN by recorded mail and subsequently dishonoured by RESPONDENT, and believes that no such evidence exists.

21. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT is not attempting to aggressively enforce an invalid claim, and believes that no such evidence exists.

22. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT is able to provide verification of the alleged debt owed by STRAWMAN, and believes that no such evidence exists.

23. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT is able to provide validation of the alleged debt owed by STRAWMAN, and believes that no such evidence exists.

24. Declarant has seen no evidence of RESPONDENT’S valuable consideration pertaining to the account referenced on Page 1 of 4, and believes that no such evidence exists.

25. Declarant has seen no evidence that RESPONDENT does not balance its accounts every time the exclusively authorised Agent & Administrator signs for a credit card purchase or enters the appropriate pin number, and believes that no such evidence exists.

26. Declarant has seen no evidence that the RESPONDENT’S dishonour of Declarant’s tender of payment did not transfer all liability in this matter to RESPONDENT, as holder in due course of Declarant’s consideration, and believes that no such evidence exists.

27. Declarant has seen no evidence that notary certification of said dishonour would not comprise RESPONDENT’S confession to offering a chose in action for all such liabilities, and believes that no such evidence exists

28. Declarant has seen no evidence that notary certification of said dishonour would not comprise the RESPONDENT’S stipulation that no facts are in dispute and no controversy exists in the above-noted matter, and believes that no such evidence exists.

29. Declarant has seen no evidence that notary certification of said dishonour would not comprise Administrative Default Judgment, binding RESPONDENT pursuant to voluntary agreement, and believes that no such evidence exists.

30. Declarant has seen no evidence that such notary certification would not create a permanent and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence as an operation of law, barring the bringing of any and all further judicial or administrative actions pertaining to this matter, whether against Declarant’s property, collateral, interests, freedom and liberty, and believes that no such evidence exists.

31. Declarant has seen no evidence that, upon such notary’s certification, the RESPONDENT would not have waived for all time all rights, remedies and defences in and at law, equity, commerce and admiralty regarding the above-referenced matter and consequential actions which may be brought to cure the RESPONDENT’S commercial dishonours, and such waiver of rights shall include, without limitation, waiver of the right to argue, raise a controversy or initiate litigation or arbitration in any venue or jurisdiction, whether foreign or domestic, and believes that no such evidence exists.

32. Declarant has seen no evidence that the said dishonour does not comprise RESPONDENT’S agreement by way of default to the filing of such consequential actions, judicial or administrative, as Declarant may deem necessary, and believes that no such evidence exists.

33. Declarant has seen no evidence that the said dishonour does not comprise RESPONDENT’S tacit agreement of the facts listed on all Notices and Schedules delivered to the RESPONDENT in relation to this matter, and believes that no such evidence exists.

34. Declarant has seen no evidence contravening the maxim of law that silence comprises agreement in commerce, equity, admiralty, Lex Mercatoria and public policy, and believes that no such evidence exists.

35. Declarant has seen no evidence contravening the maxim of law that an affidavit stands as truth in commerce, equity, admiralty, Lex Mercatoria and public policy, unless rebutted, point-by-point, by an affidavit which is sworn to the same degree of commercial risk, and believes that no such evidence exists.

36. Declarant has seen no evidence that an answer indicating “NA”, “not applicable”, “inapposite” or similar dishonours, or failure to answer any point herein would not be unresponsive and comprise stipulation to all facts in this Affidavit, pursuant to the maxim that silence comprises agreement, and Declarant believes that no such evidence exists.

37. Declarant has seen no evidence that failure to respond to this Verified Affidavit of Facts, point-by-point, will not comprise the RESPONDENT’S affirmation, attestation and agreement to all terms and statements contained herein, and believes that no such evidence exists.

COMMERCIAL AFFIDAVIT OATH AND VERIFICATION

“I, Upper-Case: Lower , the exclusively Authorised Representative, Agent & Administrator for STRAWMAN, hereby certify upon my own commercial liability that I have read Pages 1-4 of this Affidavit, and, to the very best of my knowledge, the facts contained herein are true, correct and complete, not misleading, and should be considered a verified plain statement of the facts as I perceive them.”

Use of a Notary Public is for attestation and verification purposes only and does not constitute a change in status or entrance or acceptance of foreign jurisdiction.

Autographed and sealed this, the sixteenth day of March, in the year known as two thousand and nine. Void where prohibited by law.

Right thumbprint:

Sworn & Subscribed By: Uppercase:Lower

_____________________________________________
All Rights Reserved – Without Prejudice – Non-Assumpsit

Autographed & Sealed in the presence of:

Notary Public: Seal:

Dated: _____ Day of ______________________, 200___

Notary Public’s Signature:__________________________

Directions for Response

All responses to this affidavit must be made upon full commercial liability and under penalty of perjury, and received by mail at the above Notary’s office within 7 (seven) days of service. Failure to respond to this affidavit in an appropriate and timely manner will result in an automatic default judgement, establishing permanent and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence, forevermore barring the bringing of any charges, claims or liens under any statute, act, code and by-law against Upper-Case: Lower (Declarant).

Surprise suprise, no response was received at the notary’s office within the stated time and the following Notice of Dishonour was duly served.

NOTICE OF DISHONOUR

Notice to the principal is notice to the agent
Notice to the agent is notice to the principal

Dear ROBIN HOODY,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 123123123

Following the recorded delivery of the AFFIDAVIT OF NEGATIVE AVERMENT to CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC on 20 March 2009 in relation to the above account, and the subsequent failure of CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC to deliver a response within the stated time and in the appropriate manner, I hereby serve NOTICE OF DISHONOUR.

Legal Maxims:

Silence comprises agreement in commerce, equity, admiralty, Lex Mercatoria and public policy.

An affidavit stands as truth in commerce, equity, admiralty, Lex Mercatoria and public policy, unless rebutted, point-by-point, by an Affidavit which is sworn to the same degree of commercial risk.

CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC’S failure to respond to the VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS BY SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, point-by-point, at the same level of commercial risk, comprises the Respondent’s affirmation, attestation and agreement to all terms and statements contained therein.

Therefore, since the parties are now in agreement that the liability of STRAWMAN has been discharged, please return the endorsed instrument for reconsideration, along with confirmation that the balance of the above account is zero, within three days of your receipt of this notice.

CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC should also be advised that any further demands for payment may be in contravention the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, the Fraud Act 2006 section 3, the Theft Act 1968 sections 17, 18, 21 and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. At no time have I abandoned, implied or given consent for any party to claim or withhold proceeds as abandoned funds.

In the event that the said instrument has been lost, then section 69 and 70 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 may apply, in which case, please supply both your Public Liability Insurance policy number and your TIN (Tax Identification Number), in order that the necessary claim might be effected.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Upper-Case: Lower (Authorised Representative)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

The usual threats we have all experienced at the hands of credit bandits have been conspicuous by their absence, as has ANY correspondence from Robin Hoody’s in-house debt collection arm, and a delinquent debtor report to the credit referencing agencies has not been filed.

The executive in question, rather than risk being held personally liable for fraud, has now closed the account and passed the legally discharged debt on to a third party interloper with no legal standing, who has sent a very polite letter attempting to establish a new agreement.

Nevertheless, it has taken five months to achieve this, using a process which is definitely not for the faint-hearted. Since the beginning of the tale new information has come to light that suggests that there is a much more efficient way to enforce Accepted For Value technology.

NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIM

Dear Chief Executive Officer of 3rd Party Interlopers,

INTERLOPER REFERENCE: 123123123

I hereby serve legal notice that INTERLOPER has made an invalid claim against STRAWMAN, in relation to a discharged liability with CAPITAL TWO BANK EUROPE.

The alleged debt has been legally discharged pursuant to the English Bills of Exchange Act 1882, following CAPITAL TWO BANK EUROPE’S dishonour of legal tender of payment, and its subsequent failure to respond to a notarised AFFIDAVIT OF NEGATIVE AVERMENT, which was delivered to your client on 21 March 2009 by recorded mail, creating permanent, irrevocable estoppel and administrative Default Judgement, vitiating any and all previous agreements between CAPITAL TWO BANK EUROPE and STRAWMAN.

Please be advised that INTERLOPER’S pursuit of this false claim against STRAWMAN may be in contravention of the Statute of Frauds Act 1667, which clearly states:

“IV Noe action shall be brought…F2 whereby to charge the Defendant upon any special promise to answer for the debt default or miscarriages of another person…F3 unlesse the Agreement upon which such Action shall be brought or some Memorandum or Note thereof shall be in writing and signed by the partie to be charged therewith or some other person thereunto by him lawfully authorized.”

For the avoidance of doubt, at no point has STRAWMAN entered into or consented to any Agreement of any kind with INTERLOPER, nor does STRAWMAN consent to any Agreement, whether express or implied, with INTERLOPER.

Furthermore, the Fraud Act 2006 states that:

“1 Fraud

(1) A person is guilty of fraud if he is in breach of any of the sections listed on subsection (2) (which provide for different ways of committing the offence).

(2) The sections are –

(a) section 2 (fraud by false representation),
(b) section 3 (fraud by failing to disclose information), and
© section 4 (fraud by abuse of position).

(3) A person who is guilty of fraud is liable –

(a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);
(b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine (or to both).

2 Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he –

(a) dishonestly makes false representation, and
(b) intends, by making the representation –

(i) to make gain for himself or another, or
(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if –

(a) it is untrue or misleading, and
(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(4) A representation may be express or implied.

(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

Please be aware that making any further invalid claims against STRAWMAN and/or attempting to contact the Authorised Representative by mail, mobile phone and/or telephone, whether at the above mailing address or at STRAWMAN’S place of work, will constitute the agreement of INTERLOPER to the following Fee Schedule:

- GBP£1500.00 per invalid claim in writing – GBP£1500.00 per notice sent by recorded mail – GBP£150.00 per hour of the Authorised Representative’s time – GBP£150.00 per attempt to contact by telephone

Furthermore, please supply me with your Public Liability Insurance Policy Number and your Tax Identification Number (TIN) in order that I can instigate any and all administrative and/or judicial procedures necessary to redeem the liability that you have created by bringing this invalid claim against STRAWMAN.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Upper-Case: Lower (Authorised Representative)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED – WITHOUT PREJUDICE – NON ASSUMPSIT

NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIM

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT

Dear Chief Executive Officer of Interlopers Limited,

RE: 123412341234

In response to your Calling Card, received at the above mailing location today, 20 April 2009, please find enclosed a copy of NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIM, which was delivered to the Chief Executive Officer of Interlopers Limited by Post Office recorded mail on 17 April 2009.

I hereby record the assumption that your Calling Card and said NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIM crossed in the post and that Interlopers Limited have now ceased from all attempts to collect a legally unenforceable claim against STRAWMAN, which could be construed as fraud by false representation, pursuant to the Statute of Frauds Act 1667 and the Fraud Act 2006.

Please be advised that should you or any other representative of Interlopers Limited call in person at the above mailing location in any further attempts to collect on this invalid claim, a liability of GBP£1500.00 per visit will be incurred and a complaint will be filed with the Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading, for the purposes of which Interlopers Limited’s licence number ******** has been duly noted.

Furthermore, please supply me with your Public Liability Insurance Policy Number and your Tax Identification Number (TIN) in order that I can instigate any and all administrative and/or judicial procedures that I deem to be necessary in relation to this matter.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Authorised Representative)
WITHOUT PREJUDICE – WITHOUT RECOURSE – NON-ASSUMPSIT

NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIMS

Dear CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,

RE: ####/######

In response to your company’s letter dated 02 June 2009 (enclosed Refused for Cause), please find enclosed a certified copy of the NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIMS, which was sent to you at the above address on 28 April 2009.

Please be advised that POWER2INTERLOPE LIMITED, in sending another invalid claim in writing, have now incurred a liability of GBP£1,500.00, in accordance with the Fee Schedule set forth within said notice.

Furthermore, please supply me with your Public Liability Insurance Policy Number and your Tax Identification Number (TIN) in order that I can instigate any and all administrative and/or judicial procedures that I deem to be necessary, in relation this invalid claim against STRAWMAN.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Authorised Representative)
WITHOUT PREJUDICE – WITHOUT RECOURSE – NON ASSUMPSIT

NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIMS

Dear CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 1234123412341234

In response to your company’’s INPORTANT NOTICE, sent for and on behalf of POWER2INTERLOPE LTD, I hereby serve NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIMS made by Interloper Limited, on behalf of CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC.

Contrary to Interlopers Limited’s claims, a NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIMS was delivered to Robin Bandit on 12 May 2009 by Post Office Recorded Delivery ***************. Since this NOTICE was ignored, a certified copy of it was sent by Post Office Recorded Delivery *************** on 16 May 2009. Please find enclosed certified copies of all correspondence sent by STRAWMAN to Interlopers Limited in relation to this matter.

Please be advised that any further invalid claims made by POWER2INTERLOPE LTD following service of this NOTICE, and/or further attempts to contact the Authorised Representative in person, by mail, mobile phone and/or telephone, whether at the above mailing location or at STRAWMAN’S place of work, will constitute the agreement of POWER2INTERLOPE LTD to the following Default Fee Schedule:

- GBP£1500.00 per invalid claim in writing, nunc pro tunc – GBP£1500.00 per visit to the above mailing location – GBP£1500.00 per notice sent by recorded mail by STRAWMAN, nunc pro tunc – GBP£150.00 per hour of the Authorised Representative’s time, nunc pro tunc – GBP£150.00 per attempt to contact by telephone, nunc pro tunc

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Authorised Representative)
WITHOUT PREJUDICE – WITHOUT RECOURSE – NON ASSUMPSIT

NOTICE OF ATTEMPT TO COLLECT AN INVALID CLAIM

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT

Dear CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard – Account Number: 1234123412341234

In response to your comaony’s INPORTANT NOTICE, sent for and on behalf of POWER2INTERLOPE LTD, NOTICE OF INVALID CLAIMS was sent to you by Post Office Recorded Delivery ************* on 28 May 2009, a Certified Copy of which has been enclosed with this notice, along with NOTICE OF FEE SCHEDULE.

Please be advised that an employee of POWER2INTERLOPE visited the above mailing location at 11am GMT on Thursday 18 June, claiming that he was “looking for MISS STRAWMAN”. Since I was not present at the time my partner spoke to Mike Atkinson (Ref: 1904), who asked him if “MISS STRAWMAN” lived there, to which my partner replied “No”, since MISS STRAWMAN is a fititious entity, who can neither live or be seen anywhere, and for which I am the exclusively authorised representative, as you have already been informed.

For the avoidance of doubt, this alleged liability has been settled administratively by a notarial proces; the outstanding balance of the above account has been legally discharged pursuant to the Bills of Exchange Act 1882; and any and all previous agreements have been vitiated because of CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC’s failure to provide validation and verification of the alleged debt and an original bilateral credit agreement, in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553). Please be aware that the House of Lords, in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd – [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul), ruled that a credit agreement must contain the prescribed terms and must be signed in the prescribed manner for the agreement to be legally enforcable.

Therefore, POWER2INTERLOPE are clearly attempting to enforce an invalid claim after being served due legal notice that the debt has already been discharged. Certified Copies of all relevant correspondence will now be forwarded to Chairman of the Office of Fair Trading, John Vickers, along with a request that he initiates an investigation into POWER2INTERLOPE’s entirely dishonourable business practice, which may well be in contravention of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553), the above referenced ruling of the House of Lords and the OFT’s Guidance Notes on Fair Debt Collection.

Without malice or mischief, in sincerity and honour,

By: Uppercase: Lower (Authorised Representative)
WITHOUT PREJUDICE – WITHOUT RECOURSE – NON ASSUMPSIT

The Robin Hoodies sold the discharged liability to yet another 3rd party interloper, who immediately served a blood red, highly aggressive and threatening CREDITOR’S NOTICE, stating clearly that county court proceedings would be initiated if the alleged debt was not settled within 7 days. the sanitised version of my favourite accountant’s nuclear-powered response appears below.

NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT

Dear INTERLOPERS,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard 1234 1234 1234 1234

Following the receipt of your company’s NOTICE dated __________________, I hereby serve notice that I conditionally accept the alleged debt of ALLEGED AMOUNT DUE, and will use my best endeavours to settle and close the account in the most expedient manner possible, upon receipt of the following items at the mailing location above:

1. A legally enforceable original credit agreement signed in blue ink by the Authorised Representative for STRAWMAN
2. Verification of the balance due in the form of a true bill
3. Validation of ROBIN HOODIES’ valuable consideration pertaining to the alleged debt, in the form of the actual accounting of its losses
4. Proof of claim that the outstanding balance of the above account was not legally discharged pursuant to Section 43 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, when ROBIN HOODIES refused to accept the payment tendered on DATE OF TENDER OF PAYMENT
5. Proof of claim that any and all previous credit agreements were not vitiated when ROBIN HOODIES failed to provide validation and verification of the alleged debt, or a legally enforceable credit agreement, pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and the House of Lords ruling in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd – [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul)
6. Proof of claim that this alleged liability has not been settled administratively, following ROBIN HOODIES’s failure to respond appropriately to a notarised VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS BY SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT
7. Proof of claim that ROBIN HOODIES is not in multiple breach of the Office of Fair Trading’s Final Guidance on Unfair Business Practices July 2003 (updated December 2006)

Dishonour of this NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE by failing to provide these reasonably requested items within seven (7) days of ROYAL MAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY BARCODE NUMBER, will constitute the voluntary agreement of INTERLOPERS LIMITED that it has aggressively and unfairly attempted to collect an invalid claim, and in so doing, it has caused injury to STRAWMAN, for which the Authorised Representative for STRAWMAN is legally entitled to make a commercial claim through the county courts for three times the value of the alleged debt, in the event that all available private administrative remedies have already been exhausted.

In sincerity and honour, without malice, mischief, ill will, vexation or frivolity,

By: Upper-Case: Lower (Authorised Representative)
WITHOUT PREJUDICE – WITHOUT RECOURSE – NON ASSUMPSIT

Within three days of receiving this, the interlopers replied with the following letter:

Dear STRAWMAN,

Re: Capital Two Mistercard 1234 1234 1234 1234

Further to your recent contact with our office and your request for further information in relation to the above account, we would confirm that your account is now on hold for 28 days whilst we obtain the information required.

If you have any proof of payments or correspondence that would assist with your query, please forward these documents, with a brief covering letter, to our Collections Administration department, so that we can resolve the matter as soon as possible.

Yours sincerely,

Collections Administration Department.

Oh dear. It seems that the CEO has created a liability of the 3 times the value of the invalid claim, which is why he is attempting to establish a new agreement with the collections department. With a notarised administrative judgment in hand, there can be no doubt that the final settlement and closure of the matter has materialised on the horizon.
Nothing, except the truth, is like it seems to be.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
User avatar
The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:38 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby city boy 5705 » Mon Jul 20, 2009 12:00 pm

Hi Michael

this makes very good reading, just seem to have them just where you want them

good work, i just wish i knew as much about this as some of people on here do ( you included)

anyway you said

"Nevertheless, it has taken five months to achieve this, using a process which is definitely not for the faint-hearted. Since the beginning of the tale new information has come to light that suggests that there is a much more efficient way to enforce Accepted For Value technology."

is that something you can now share with us?

city boy
city boy 5705
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 9:01 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael » Mon Jul 20, 2009 2:18 pm

city boy 5705 wrote:Hi Michael

this makes very good reading, just seem to have them just where you want them

good work, i just wish i knew as much about this as some of people on here do ( you included)

anyway you said

"Nevertheless, it has taken five months to achieve this, using a process which is definitely not for the faint-hearted. Since the beginning of the tale new information has come to light that suggests that there is a much more efficient way to enforce Accepted For Value technology."

is that something you can now share with us?

city boy


it is too early to make definitive claims, but all the evidence suggests that turning the remittances into MONEY ORDERS is having success in Canada and Australia.
Nothing, except the truth, is like it seems to be.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
User avatar
The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:38 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby Karen: Reeves » Wed Jul 22, 2009 10:47 pm

Very good reading and very good writing there sir...i enjoyed every moment of that, and you are so funny with it, you had me in stitches some of the time...i love robin hoody and i love the po box number :rotfl: that was great.

And I do thank you for this, I have been trying for some time now, to get anyone to listen, they just pretend they do not know what the heck I am talking about, and I agree with the one who answered it is not for the faint hearted, So we will stay strong of heart, we have a heart and a soul, that business does not have, so we have the upper hand there...we are doing this for a reason way beyond money/debt notes...and they will never match us with that...


So thanks again for that...and I hope you do not mind, I am thinking of using some of them myself, as it is running along my lines, though they are at the dishonour big time stage now, I have billed them already too...so just see what happens now, and thinking very much if I will right to the Queen tomoro...
As her officers and business are getting out of line.

Though a big thank you again
with love and respect
Karen
It is easy to be brave from a distence. You are what you do, not what you say you will do. It is time. I do not fear change. One Human can not be get to 3 million people, though is it not so, that one match can start a forest fire?
User avatar
Karen: Reeves
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:54 pm
Location: Luton - Bedfordshire

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael » Fri Jul 24, 2009 12:11 am

you are very welcome Karen. hope it is of some help in your battles with the credit bandits.

namaste
Nothing, except the truth, is like it seems to be.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
User avatar
The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:38 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby city boy 5705 » Fri Jul 24, 2009 4:44 pm

Michael

"That turning the remittances into MONEY ORDERS is having success in........ "


now that sound sweet to me, after all what is a "money order" ?

CB
city boy 5705
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Sat Jul 18, 2009 9:01 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael » Tue Aug 11, 2009 11:27 am

The CEO of the ROBIN HOODIES has just dishonoured this thermonuclear conditional acceptance:

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
CHIEF EXECUTIVE ROBIN HOODY
ROBIN HOODIES LIMITED
ADDRESS
POST CODE

COMPANY NUMBER: XXXXXX
LICENCE NUMBER: XXXXXX

DATE

NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT


Dear CHIEF EXECUTIVE ROBIN HOODY,

Re: Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Following the receipt of your company’s NOTICE dated __________________, I hereby serve notice that I conditionally accept the alleged debt of ALLEGED AMOUNT DUE, and will use my best endeavours to settle and close the account in the most expedient manner possible, upon receipt of the following items at the mailing location above:

1. A legally enforceable original credit agreement signed in blue ink by the Authorised Representative for STRAWMAN
2. Verification of the balance due in the form of a true bill
3. Validation of ROBIN HOODIES’ valuable consideration pertaining to the alleged debt, in the form of the actual accounting of its losses
4. Proof of claim that the outstanding balance of the above account was not legally discharged pursuant to Section 43 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, when ROBIN HOODIES refused to accept the payment tendered on DATE OF TENDER OF PAYMENT
5. Proof of claim that any and all previous credit agreements were not vitiated when ROBIN HOODIES failed to provide validation and verification of the alleged debt, or a legally enforceable credit agreement, pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and the House of Lords ruling in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul)
6. Proof of claim that this alleged liability has not been settled administratively, following ROBIN HOODIES’s failure to respond appropriately to a notarised VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS BY SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT dated ______________.
7. Proof of claim that ROBIN HOODIES is not in multiple breach of the Office of Fair Trading’s Final Guidance on Unfair Business Practices July 2003 (updated December 2006)

Dishonour of this NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE by failing to provide these reasonably requested items within seven (7) days of ROYAL MAIL SPECIAL DELIVERY BARCODE NUMBER, will comprise the tacit procuration of ROBIN HOODIES’ agreement that it has aggressively and unfairly attempted to collect an invalid claim, and in so doing, it has caused injury to STRAWMAN, for which the Authorised Representative for STRAWMAN is legally entitled to make a commercial claim through the county courts for three times the value of the alleged debt, in the event that all available private administrative remedies have already been exhausted.

In sincerity and honour, without malice, mischief, ill will, vexation or frivolity,
By: Upper-Case: Lower (Authorised Representative)
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED - WITHOUT PREJUDICE - WITHOUT RECOURSE - NON ASSUMPSIT
Errors & Omissions Excepted


It seems like the matter is finally nearing its conclusion and guess who has just assumed the position of the creditor-in-fact? :8-): i believe this will be settled out of court, as soon as the commercial injury claim is filed for the public record.
Nothing, except the truth, is like it seems to be.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
User avatar
The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:38 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby Farmer » Tue Aug 11, 2009 3:00 pm

The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael wrote:It seems like the matter is finally nearing its conclusion and guess who has just assumed the position of the creditor-in-fact? :8-): i believe this will be settled out of court, as soon as the commercial injury claim is filed for the public record.


A work of art.
If you're scared of 'them' poisoning 'us' with some shit then maybe you haven't noticed the shit they are already poisoning us with.
- prajna - fmotl.co.uk forum 2011
User avatar
Farmer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:07 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby Initiate » Fri Aug 14, 2009 2:44 am

Bravo... that is all I have to say. A tour de force. Looking forward to seeing how it goes.

Do you have any links or information the the remittance being accepted for value in canada? I would be interested to read some success stories with that.

Thanks!
Initiate
 
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 12:39 am

Re: The A4V of Robin Hoody: A Bankster in Dishonour

Postby The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael » Mon Oct 19, 2009 4:19 pm

At this point, my favourite former chartered accountant saw fit to appoint an Agent in Commerce, in the genuine hope of settling and closing the matter...

PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ROBIN HOODY
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC
PO BOX 666

24 July 2009
NOTICE OF APPOINTMENT

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT


Dear ROBIN HOODY,

Re: Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

I hereby serve notice that AGENT’S STRAWMAN™ has been appointed as the exclusively authorised Agent for STRAWMAN (& all derivatives thereof), in the genuine hope that we might settle and close any and all disputed matters pertaining to the above account, in the most honourable and expedient manner possible.

Therefore, please be advised that all further correspondence must be sent to:

AGENT’S STRAWMAN™
Agent for STRAWMAN
STRAWMAN’S ADDRESS

Failure to honour this express stipulation will result in a charge of GBP£150.00 being levied against CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC for every item of unauthorised correspondence received by STRAWMAN.

Without malice, mischief, ill will, frivolity or vexation, in sincerity and honour,



By: Freeman-on-the-Land, Upper-Case: Lower©
Authorised Representative for AGENT’S STRAWMAN™
Agent for STRAWMAN (& all derivatives thereof)
All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice – Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted



PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
ROBIN HOODY
CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC
PO BOX 666

07 August 2009

NOTICE OF DISHONOUR & OPPORTUNITY TO CURE

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT


Dear ROBIN HOODY,

Re: Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Following your company’s dishonour of STRAWMAN’s NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE dated 27 July 2009, I hereby serve NOTICE OF DISHONOUR & OPPORTUNITY TO CURE. Kindly provide the following items at the mailing location below without further delay:

1. A legally enforceable original credit agreement signed in blue ink
2. Verification of the balance due in the form of a true bill
3. Validation of CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC’s valuable consideration pertaining to the alleged debt, in the form of the actual accounting of your company’s losses
4. Proof of claim that the outstanding balance of the above account was not legally discharged pursuant to Section 43 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, when CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC refused to accept the payment tendered on 3 January 2008
5. Proof of claim that any and all previous credit agreements were not vitiated when CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC failed to provide validation and verification of the alleged debt, or a legally enforceable credit agreement, pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and the House of Lords ruling in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul)
6. Proof of claim that this alleged liability has not been settled administratively, following CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC’s failure to respond appropriately to a notarised VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS BY SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT dated 16 March 2009
7. Proof of claim that CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC is not in multiple breaches of the Office of Fair Trading’s Final Guidance on Unfair Business Practices (updated December 2006)

Dishonour of this NOTICE, by failing to provide these reasonably requested specific items within seven (7) days of service, will comprise the tacit procuration of CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC’s agreement that it has aggressively and unfairly attempted to collect an invalid claim, and in so doing, CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC has caused injury to STRAWMAN, for which STRAWMAN is legally entitled to make a commercial claim through the county courts for at least three times the value of the invalid claim, plus the alleged principal, in the event that all available private administrative remedies have already been exhausted.

Without malice, mischief, ill will, frivolity or vexation, in sincerity and honour,



By: Freeman-on-the-Land, Upper-Case: Lower©
Authorised Representative for AGENT’S STRAWMAN™
Agent in Commerce for STRAWMAN (& all derivatives thereof)
All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice – Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted



PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL
NEIL MACFUCK, DIRECTOR
MACFUCK DEBT RECOVERY LIMITED
2 HEARTLESS GARDENS
HOCKPORT HP66 6FU

11 August 2009

NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL
NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT


Dear NEIL MACFUCK,

Re: Account Number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Following receipt of your company’s letter on 10 August 2009, in my capacity as Agent in Commerce (notice enclosed), I hereby serve notice that MISS STRAWMAN conditionally accepts the alleged debt of Five Hundred & Ninety Two Great British Pounds & Sixteen Pence, and agrees to use best endeavours to settle and close the account in the most expedient manner possible, upon receipt of the following items at the mailing location below:

1. A legally enforceable original credit agreement signed in blue ink
2. Verification of the balance due in the form of a true bill
8. Validation of your client’s valuable consideration, in the form of the actual accounting of its losses
9. Proof that the outstanding balance of the above account was not legally discharged pursuant to Section 43 of the Bills of Exchange Act 1882, when your client refused to accept the payment tendered on 3 January 2009
10. Proof that any and all previous credit agreements were not vitiated, when, upon reasonable request, your client failed to provide validation and verification of the alleged debt or a legally enforceable credit agreement, pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and the House of Lords ruling in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul)
11. Proof that this alleged liability has not already been settled administratively, following your client’s failure to respond appropriately to a notarised VERIFIED AFFIDAVIT OF FACTS BY SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT dated 16 March 2009
12. Proof that MACFUCK DEBT RECOVERY LIMITED and its client, CAPITAL TWO BANK (EUROPE) PLC, are not in multiple breaches of the Office of Fair Trading’s Final Guidance on Unfair Business Practices (updated December 2006)

Dishonour of this NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE, by failing to provide these reasonably requested items within seven (7) days of your company’s receipt of this notice, will comprise the tacit procuration of MACFUCK DEBT RECOVERY LIMITED’s agreement that it has aggressively and unfairly attempted to collect an invalid claim, and in so doing, your company has caused injury to MISS STRAWMAN, for which the injured party is legally entitled to make a commercial claim through the county courts, for at least three times the value of your company’s invalid claim, plus the principal, in the event that all available private administrative remedies have already been exhausted.

Without malice, mischief, ill will, frivolity or vexation, in sincerity and honour,



By: Freeman-on-the-Land, Upper-Case: Lower©
Authorised Representative for AGENT’S STRAWMAN™
Agent in Commerce for MISS STRAWMAN (& all derivatives thereof)
All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice – Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted
Nothing, except the truth, is like it seems to be.

All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
User avatar
The Freeman-on-the-Land known as Michael
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 10:38 am

Next

Return to Credit cards

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest