NATWEST CC 'bill' Discharge letter: UPDATE

NATWEST CC 'bill' Discharge letter: UPDATE

Postby rhiannon » Tue May 26, 2009 2:47 pm

Please see below a letter I have drawn up regardeing my Natwest Credit Card 'debt'. I have looked at various templates (thanks V) and adapted it to ensure it is in line with my personal understanding of the matter and the law.

I would appreceiate greatly any feedback from those of you 'in the know': this is my first attempt at a discharge. Are there any mistakes I have made they could trip me up on? Have I excluded any essential points? Would it be considered legible and above all reasonable?

thanks, and have a happy tuesday

Elizabeth Miranda Rhiannon - of the free family.

In care of:
address minus postcode


NatWest
Milton Keynes
MK77 1SE
May 26th, 2009

Re: 5454***********, dated 12th May 2009.
Notice of Discharge of Outstanding Demand and Request for Clarification.

Without Prejudice.

Dear Sirs.

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before responding. It is a notice: It informs you.

The reason why you need to read carefully is thus: I am offering conditional agreement. This removes controversy; meaning that you no longer have any ultimate recourse to a court of law in this matter, because there is no controversy upon which it could adjudicate. However, you always have the option of bringing these conditions into a court of law only to be told that they are perfectly lawful. For this reason it is important that you consider and respond to the offer in substance.

There is, however, a time limit on the agreement being offered. It is reasonable; and therefore if it runs out, then you and all associated parties are in default, removing any and all lawful excuse on your part for proceeding in this matter.

For these reasons it is recommended that you carefully consider this notice and respond in substance, which means actually addressing the points raised herein.

You have apparently made a claim that I have current owing balance on Natwest MasterCard Account 5454***********.

I do not understand this apparent claim and therefore cannot lawfully fulfil it. I seek clarification of your document so that I may act according to the law and maintain my entire body of inalienable Natural Rights.

Failure to accept this offer to clarify and to do so completely and in good faith within twenty-one days of receipt will be deemed by all parties to mean that you, and your principal or other parties, abandon all demands upon me.

I conditionally accept your offer to agree that I am legal fiction 'person' MISS E M *******, and I conditionally accept your claim for the purported outstanding balance of £3407,50 and minimum repayment instalment of £76.00, upon proof of claim of all of the following: - Under your full commercial liability that the facts are true, complete, certain and not misleading.

1. Upon proof of your claim that I am the legal ‘fiction’ person MISS E M *****: Being the entity to which your paperwork was addressed, as opposed to a human being commonly called Elizabeth M R of the ****** family.

2. Upon proof of claim that you can provide the lawful binding contract between NATWEST and Elizabeth of the ******* family for NatWest Account number ********** containing the following requirements for a lawful binding contract:

· Full disclosure: where the said credit/funds on the account came from, and whether this was fully disclosed.
· Equal consideration; what NatWest brought to the agreement that was theirs, and of value, in exchange for a valuable signature/promise given.
· Lawful terms and conditions.
· ‘Wet’ Signatures of both parties.

3. Upon proof of claim that the funds/credit on NatWest Account number ********** were NatWest's assets from the onset and were neither created for NatWest by signature, promise or promissory note; nor were they created upon NatWest's books by mere book-keeping entries.

4. Upon proof of claim that NatWest risked any of its assets regarding the creation of NatWest MasterCard Account number ************: and if this is not the case, please prove that this was fully disclosed to account holder.

5. Upon proof of claim that any contract with any element of fraud or deception is not null and void.


Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity


By: (Agent)
Elizabeth: of the ***** family
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved
Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely Elizabeth: of the *********family, as commonly called.


Encl: Original paperwork as received.
Last edited by rhiannon on Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:55 pm, edited 2 times in total.
rhiannon
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:40 am
Location: Wallington, Surrey

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: Feedback appreciated please

Postby huntingross » Tue May 26, 2009 6:03 pm

Seemed OK, and 21 days is 7 days generous in my opinion, but to your credit if it goes to the wire...ie court.

Oh, and you didn't put the perjury clause in
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: Feedback appreciated please

Postby rhiannon » Wed May 27, 2009 4:20 pm

Thanks, have added int he perjury clause now. Thought I would give them 21 days as I have taken over 14 days to respond to the bill and, as you have said, they cannot say I am being unreasonable.

thanks, will keep you posted
rhiannon
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:40 am
Location: Wallington, Surrey

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: Feedback appreciated please

Postby huntingross » Wed May 27, 2009 6:27 pm

Exactly so, good luck....
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: Feedback appreciated please

Postby rhiannon » Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:10 pm

I sent it off.

Over three weeks later, i have had no aknowledgement or response to the letter (which I sent recorded delivery.)
They have however sent my STRAWMAN a bog-standard 'default sum notice' and added a £12 late payment fine to my 'debt'.

The default sum notice is from 'Tanya Sweetman- Head of key service delivery' at customer services at Southend, wheras i sent my letter to Milton Keynes.. which is where they instructed payment to be sent to.

Would I be right in thinking that they are in dishonour for not responding to my notice? I am unsure as to my next step- whether to

a) send Tanya a copy of my notice - giving her the benefit of the doubt (that my original notice is on someones desk in milton keynes or I have sent it to the wrong place - should have sent it to her maybe due to her swanky job title).. and give them another three weeks (recorded del) or

b) tell Tanya that natwest is in dishonour of my original notice, including a copy forthwidth, and that I consider the debt to be discharched. quoting 'estoppel'

... I don't want to have 'controversy' and allow it to get to court...
Would appreciate feedback from those who have trod this path before. If I can make a susess of this I will repay my debt of gratitude by posting all the correspondance and advising as many more as poss.
rhiannon
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:40 am
Location: Wallington, Surrey

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: Feedback appreciated please

Postby huntingross » Wed Jun 17, 2009 6:42 pm

I'm into a process with Northridge Finance....here.

You could send them a Notice of Fault and Opportunity to Cure....the notice period is 7 days....

They've had every opportunity to provide the proof etc....I would probably start loading some costs in here for the enevitable counterclaim....ie prove it or piss off...if you keep bothering me £500 etc.
Success nourishes hope
User avatar
huntingross
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 4324
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:29 pm
Location: FIDACH, Near Edinburgh

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: Feedback appreciated please

Postby rhiannon » Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:47 pm

They sent me a default sum notice..

I have sent them the following letter .. no reply yet

In Care of:
**********
Tanya Sweetman
Head of Key Service Delivery
Customer Management
Natwest
Cards Customer Services
PO Box 5747
Southend-on-Sea
SS1 9AJ
30th June 2009

Dear Tanya Sweetman

Firstly, I must respectfully decline your offer of title and kindly request that any future correspondence be addressed to Elizabeth Miranda: of the ******** family, as commonly called, a flesh and blood human blessed with a living soul. ‘MISS’ is the title to a corporate fiction, otherwise known as a Legal Person, for which I am acting as administrator and agent.

I write in response to your enclosed letter, dated 12 June 2008, addressed to MISS ELIZABETH M **********.

Please also find enclosed a copy of the Notice of Discharge of Outstanding Demand and Request for Clarification: sent to Natwest dated 26th May 2009, via recorded delivery (a receipt for which I retain), to which I have not yet received an acknowledgement or response. This puts Natwest in Default of the Notice.

However, wishing to remain honourable; I shall assume that my original notice as somehow been misplaced, or residing in the incorrect department within Natwest.
Therefore, as it is yourself who has issued the enclosed letter dated 12th June 2009, I hereby re-serve the original notice for your personal attention, and will allow a further twenty-one days from receipt of this letter for your detailed response, addressing all the enclosed points in substance: Signed by your representative under full commercial liability and penalties of perjury; that the facts are true, complete, certain and not misleading.


1. Upon proof of your claim that I am the legal ‘fiction’ person MISS E M ***********: Being the entity to which your paperwork was addressed, as opposed to a human being commonly called Elizabeth Miranda of the *********family.

2. Upon proof of claim that you can provide the lawful binding contract between NATWEST and Elizabeth Miranda of the ******** family for NatWest Account number 5454***********, that contains the following requirements for a lawful binding contract:

· Full disclosure: where the said credit/funds on the account came from, and whether this was fully disclosed.
· Equal consideration; what NatWest brought to the agreement that was theirs, and of value, in exchange for a valuable signature/promise given.
· Lawful terms and conditions.
· A copy of the contract signed by both parties and therefore binding to both parties.

3. Upon proof of claim that the funds/credit on NatWest Account number 5454*********were NatWest's assets from the onset and were neither created for NatWest by signature, promise or promissory note; nor were they created upon NatWest's books by mere book-keeping entries.

4. Upon proof of claim that NatWest risked any of its assets regarding the creation of NatWest MasterCard Account number 5454*******: and if this is not the case, please prove that this was fully disclosed to account holder.

5. Upon proof of claim that any contract with any element of fraud or deception is not null and void.

If you fail to provide the documents requested within twenty-one days of the receipt of this letter, then such lack of a proper response will place you in permanent and irrevocable lawful estoppel by acquiescence.


Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity


By: (Agent)

Elizabeth Miranda: of the ********** family
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved
Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely Elizabeth Miranda: of the ******** family, as commonly called.
rhiannon
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:40 am
Location: Wallington, Surrey

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: Feedback appreciated please

Postby rhiannon » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:43 pm

jaytee wrote:Sorry for going somewhat off-topic here in your thread, rhiannon, but I do think it is important for new folks here to see and understand the implications of the 'legal fiction person' issue because it is one of the fundamental issues we are challenging and basing our defense upon. Anyway, I think I answered my own question this morning! :

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=1690

Back on the topic of feedback, I really like a lot of the wording and elements of the notices you have put together. It looks to me like 'they' will have a hard time trying to wriggle out of them! :clap:

Fingers crossed!

Jay



Hi Jay

Yes.. very good point. It gave me a lot of food for thought.

I like the way you have considered the approaches and broken them down.
I would say that I, personally, am going for option 2; to 'use' my strawman rather than dissacociate absolutely with it.
I see my 'strawman'; as a peice of paper- a bond, maybe, for want of a better description.

Firstly, with the money and debt issue, I agree with Mary Elizabeth Croft's approach: that everything we need already exists, and the monetary value of whatever we need or think we own is nothing but a collective illusion. (from her ebook- how I clobbered every cash confiscatory agency known to man). So, for instance, a loaf of bread is only 'worth' £1.50 'cos every bastard price fixing supermarket says it is. If we give it for free- it is worth no 'money'.

With Natwest (or any credit lending agancy, for that matter)- I am not denying that I have used the credit card on behalf of my STRAWMAN (my peice of paper). What I am saying is that they have deceived me on the points that I have outlined in my notice to them.
For instance, I was lead to believe that they 'loaned' me real money- rather than type mere figures onto a screen (which cost them nothing), and then go on to use my 'debt' as an asset from which they can make more money.

I am not denying I have used the card on behalf of my stawman (peice of paper: birth bond). However, that peice of paper is not me. Also, the money was not real. The credit card is associated with my peice of paper / birth bond: (MISS- the legal fiction title)wheras I was lead to believe that was me.

It is in that capacity I am acting as administrator/agent. I do not deny association, I deny accountability. I am a living soul and can only contract witth another living soul. They need to prove a lawful contract between two living souls, prove that I am my legal fiction, and prove they didnt deceive me (accounting).

On the 'fiction' point, the only way I can get my head round it, is that my STRAWMAN' is a fiction that exists on paper and in the mind of those who inagine it: like a novel. The whole story of the novel is fictional; yet the novel itself exists on print. Therefore it exists.

I hope this makes an ounce of sense. It took me soo long to get my head round, and even now I do not profess to know anywhere near everything.

Not forgetting, there is a also a chance that I have taken inaccurate advice and f*cked the whole thing up! Time only will tell.
rhiannon
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:40 am
Location: Wallington, Surrey

Re: CC 'bill' Discharge letter: UPDATE

Postby rhiannon » Thu Jul 16, 2009 2:53 pm

Futher to my letter to Tanya Sweetman (Head of key service delivery, lest we forget) sent via recorded delivery on 1st July,
I have received a second 'Default sum notice', also from Ms Sweetman herself; Without ANY aknowledgement to my Notice, Or the follow up letter with copy of my original Notice.

They are still within the twenty one days that I gave them to respond:- Howevr, assuming the next three days go by without a formal response, would I be right in thinking they are in Default?

If so, what would be my next sage.. to inform them, or do nothing?
Any advice from those who have trod this path will be appreciated.

Personally, I cannot see how Tanya Sweetman, if she is a real person, could not have got the follow up letter and copy of the Notice. Someone would have had to have signed for it.

I have quoted lawful estoppel by aquiecence: Surely this would stop it going to court? Or am I a bit ahead of myself here???

peace and thanks to all

R :sun:
rhiannon
 
Posts: 111
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2009 12:40 am
Location: Wallington, Surrey

Re: NATWEST CC 'bill' Discharge letter: UPDATE

Postby IamallthatIam » Thu Jul 16, 2009 3:11 pm

Send them a default notice , that's what they do to us lol !!!! There plenty on the site to use as a template. let them know exactly where they stand and that they are now in dishonour - dont forget your fee schedule - charge them default and late fees :rotfl:

love and light
Angie x x
Invito beneficium non datur - A benefit is not conferred upon one against his consent.
I DO NOT offer legal advice
- "I just say what I say because everyone is entitled to my opinion!" -

- Saffi Elder (Aged 7)-
User avatar
IamallthatIam
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1044
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:36 am

Next

Return to Credit cards

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests