the worm that turned wrote:Can and does a document need to be seen in court to be legally binding?? I don't think it does, and so long as the relevant people have seen the affidavit (i.e. those that it effects) then why should it need to be seen in a court? Once I have successfully registered following presentation of the affidavit to the GRO etc. then I will be sharing the contents on here and elsewhere.
Not "legally binding! ... "LAWFULLY binding". A contract that is made out containing full disclosure, equal consideration, lawful terms & conditions and two wet signatures is LAWFULLY binding. This only ever gets into a court if one party breaks the contract. Contracts are being made all the time. They are lawfully binding but never reach a court because both parties continue to honour the agreements made.
If anything is actually brought into a court, then the first thing that happens is it is determined whether or not it is lawful (aka lawfully binding) and - if so - then who is right, who is wrong ... and who pays what as a penalty.
In summary a document is lawful if it meets the terms of the law. You can post it - as a notice - to anyone you choose. That way they can see you are acting lawfully, and you are letting them know that any court action against you will fail. That way it would only get as far as a court if they are too stupid to realise that you will win hands down.
At the time of writing quite a number of members of this Forum, and some non-members, have sent off lawfully-binding documents in response to 'official demands', and so on. This has been happening since February. To the best of my knowledge - at the time of writing - no-one has actually been physically taken to court ... although many, many, threats have been made.
That's not strictly true. In one case a summons had been issued and it only came to my attention with about 7 days to go before the Hearing. We created a letter, and it was hand-delivered. We decided that it would be best to actually go to the Hearing. On the day, outside the court, the Defendant spoke to a clerk, and drew her attention to the letter. She disappeared - came back - and said "They've adjourned this for a month".
Two days later he got a letter informing him of the new time/date for the Hearing.
A day later he got another letter, from the clerk, saying the case had been dropped and that he would hear no more about it.
However I should point out that he would have won anyway, because he was on Housing Benefit and was charged with not paying Council Tax. (Council Tax Benefit is automatic from Housing Benefit).
THIS POINT WAS DELIBERATELY - NOT - MENTIONED IN HIS LETTERS. So what actually happened was that his letter focussed their attention to review the situation ... AND THEY DISCOVERED THIS for themselves ... and probably breathed a huge sigh of relief. That was our impression.
(One of our problems is that 'things go cold'. They breathe fire & brimstone and then, after putting them on notice, the whole thing goes cold. It takes quite a length of time - maybe six months - before you get the idea that they've given up ...
because they will rarely ever tell you)