Page 2 of 4

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 11:28 am
by bustachemtrails
Going back to my original posting of 'successful notice to dvla', i would like to make this point; Although dvla did tell me to shut up and refused to answer my valid points in common law within my notices, the fact remains that my 'notices' are entirely lawful and now stand as my truth in law.

My next step was to send a 'notice of lawful objection' to the head of traffic for my area ( Devizes, wiltshire ) which read ;

NOTICE OF LAWFUL OBJECTION 10/04/2010

Dear sir/madam,
whereas i David of the Robinson family am by law, (article 61 of magna carta) a 'freeman on the land' in 'lawful rebellion', whereas i have served upon her majesty Queen Elizabeth 11, two affidavits by recorded post, and retain photocopies and postal receipts of the affidavits as proof of my lawful position, and whereas it is to my understanding as a 'freeman on the land' i am entitled to travel freely, untaxed and unhindered unless observed to be in breach of the peace, and whereas i own a private conveyance ( known as a vehicle in legalese ) that has been deregistered by dvla, by way of sending a 'notice of understanding and intent and claim of right', and also a 'notice of estoppel by aquiescence and, whereas i am a peaceful man and seek to conduct my duties lawfully and honourably, i hereby serve you with this 'notice of lawful objection', and request from you any objection's to my common law right's to travel in my private conveyance upon the public highway's, untaxed and unhindered which is my common law right, and the United Kingdom is to my understanding under common law jurisdiction.
As a responsible and sensible man, my conveyance shall be in a roadworthy safe condition upon the public highway's that will come upto V.O.S.A. standards, and i may maintain an M.O.T. as a free choice rather than a legal requirement.
As a responsible man i shall have public liability insurance in case an accident should occur due to my own negligence, this being a common law requirement and which is just and fair.
Within my notice to dvla there are financial penalties for being harassed or stopped by police officers whilst travelling upon the public highway's without myself breaching the peace. Which reads ;
Fee schedule.....

I claim my fee schedule in regard to my natural born lawful right to freely travel on her majestys roads and highways.
£500. per hour if i should be prevented from my lawful right to travel without reasonable cause.

£5000. per hour should i be handcuffed, arrested, transported, incarcerated or subjected to any adjudication process.

£20,000. should violence be used against either myself or those under my care and protection.

Whereas i have no lawful obligation to contract to your legal system, i do not and will not enter into any contract put to Mr DAVID ROBINSON (the legal fiction), please refer to me the man, David : Robinson, as i do not represent the legal fiction.

Without any admission of any liability whatsoever, and with all natural, inalienable rights reserved.

I give you a time limit to respond or to make lawful objection to my claims within this notice, of fourteen (14) working days. I believe this to be a reasonable time limit, if no objection ( common law ) to my lawful right is received within the alloted time limit then i shall assume you have no objection's to my lawful claim's herein, and i shall be free to travel in my private conveyance known by dvla as Nxxx xxx, that shall be re- plated to read 'WIZE CROW ( as noticed to dvla ). This being so as i can be recognised in case i am involved in an accident, this being a reasonable requirement under common law.

Please may i remind you of your oath of office and allegance to the Queen and her people's, in any correspondence between us regarding this notice.

sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity. David : Robinson ( family)

Notice to principle is notice to agent, notice to agent is notice to principle.

I received a reply within the alloted time limit from a chief inspector Ocus of Devizes H Q....it reads as follows ;

Date 4th may 2010.
reply contact name is
Chief inspector Ian Ocus

Dear David Robinson ( yay a proper address ! )

Thank you for your letter dated 20th april 2010 concerning your notice of lawful objection around the use of your vehicle, index number Nxxx xxx, on the public highway.

The role of the police in respect of these matters is predominantly as an enforcement agency and i am therefore unable and not in a position to provide objections to the common law rights you refer to in your letter. I can however advise you of the legislation that needs to be complied with if a vehicle is used on a road and the relevant legislation headings that may assist you.

Registration number ( index plates ). If a vehicle is used on a road it needs to comply with the road vehicles ( display of registration marks ) Regulations 2001. Generally this requires vehicles to display index plates in a prescribed manner- there are a number of exemptions to this that are detailed within the act.

Road tax ( vehicle Excise licence ). Again if a vehicle is used on the road it needs to comply with this aspect of legislation and a valid excise licence of the prescribed size and colour should be displayed. There are a number of exemptions to this which can be found within the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act of 1994.

MOT ( test certificate ). Vehicles of certain types and over a certain age are required to have a valid Test certificate. This aspect of legislation is primarily in place to ensure that vehicles are maintained and used in a road worthy and safe condition. Exemptions to vehicles requiring an MOT can be found under section 47 of the road traffic act 1998.

I note within your letter that you state that you have notified DVLA of your intentions via a ' notice of understanding and intent and claim of right '. It may well be that the DVLA have responded to you detailing the obligations placed upon you should you take a vehicle on a public road. As detailed within the first paragraph of my letter the role of the police service within this area is the enforcement of legislation. This is primarily to ensure road safety to enable the safe use of the highways by everyone and the compliance with legislation that supports this. It would be a matter for the courts to decide on the merits of any defence that is presented to them.

The legislation therefore will be enforced appropriately and proportionately should any alleged offices ( a typing error ? lol ) be seen to be commited whilst your vehicle is used on a public road and they will be presented to a court in line with the force's prosecution policies.

Should you require any further information i can be contacted at the above address or on the phone number detailed.

Yours Sincerely

(signed)
Ian Copus
Chief inspector
Head of Roads Policing.

I have responded to his letter and shall post this soon, along with any reply.

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Mon May 24, 2010 2:47 pm
by bustachemtrails
After finding more petrol for the generator i can write here my response to chief inspector Copus.
It is interesting to note that the double think within his letter is based upon Health and safety of road users, this being a tool of the E.U. and has eroded our freedoms systematically for 3 decades.
Yes Lawfully and morally I have a duty of care to myself and to other road users, and it is the responsibility of my honourable self to arrange certain things like public liability insurance and to maintain the truck to a standard that is acceptable to ensure safe passage. As a sovereign man i accept my responsibilities to myself and to other beings, it is not a 'licence' to run rough shod over the rest of society yet i have no lawful obligation to contract to the legislation laid down by the law society to enforce such moral and lawful obligations.
The double think is that he has no objections to my common law rights, yet he is going to enforce the will of the law society even though it doesn't apply to myself who chooses not to enter into contract with the law societies legislation, and it is FOR YOUR PROTECTION.( health and safety )
The health and safety aspect is a powerful tool and is used widely within this country for 'common purpose'.
As Chief inspector Ian Ocus intends to leave it up to the courts to decide on the merits of any defence, then he has totally ignored his oath of office whereby he will serve and protect the the Queen and her peoples to keep her Majesty's peace etc, and chooses instead to see his role and the role of the police to be predominantly an enforcement agency of legislation. This of course is entirely unlawful !

I have not mentioned too strongly this point within my response to the chief inspector as yet, my intention is to gain clarity and attain confirmation
of my understandings under common law, and to ascertain if he is acting under oath....

20th may David : Robinson
c/o Address.
your ref IC/LB

Dear chief inspector Copus,
thank you for responding to my 'notice of lawful objection' with a letter dated 4th may 2010.
Thank you for confirming to my understanding, that you are "unable and not in a position to provide objections" to my common law
rights and claims within my 'notice of lawful objection', dated 20th April 2010.
I take this to mean, that as you have no lawful objections to my claims to travel untaxed and unhindered upon the public highway,
which being my common law right as a 'freeman on the land' in 'lawful rebellion', then in fact my claim is entirely lawful.

Thank you for providing me with advice on the legislation that needs to be complied with under the vehicle excise and registration act
of 1994, and the road traffic Act of 1988. As both of these Act's come under 'maritime admiralty law'/ 'statute law', and are dependent
upon the legal entity/ person contracting to the legal system of the law society, and that i David of the Robinson family do not wish to
contract to the legal system of the law society, nor represent the legal fiction/ person that the said legislation addresses, and that to
my understanding i have no lawful obligation/ need to do so, and in point of fact whilst in 'lawful rebellion' i have a duty not to do so.
Therefore it is to my understanding, that your advice on current legislation is directed entirely toward the 'person' and does not apply to
my 'self' in common law as a 'freeman on the land', and therefore to my understanding i have no 'lawful' obligation to comply with the
legislation that you have so kindly advised me thereof and, it is to my understanding that i am acting entirely within my common law
rights by choosing not to adhere to the legislation laid out by the road traffic Act of 1988 and subsequent Act's in regard to using a
private conveyance upon the public highways, known in legalese as a 'Vehicle'.

My intention regarding this letter, is to avoid conflict with police enforcement officers whilst using my private conveyance upon the public
highways, i am willing to follow the legislation that you have advised on confirmation that i have a lawful obligation to do so.

As it is to my understanding that the role of the police is to preserve her majesty's peace, and not predominantly as a policy enforcement
agent, please can you clarify to my understanding whether or not you are acting in accordance with the oath of office that you and
every constable were required to take ?

I respectfully request that if you find any error within my understanding of my position under common law jurisdiction, please clarify to
my understanding the error so that i may act entirely within the constraints of our lawful system, so that i do not come into conflict with
Wiltshire police p.l.c.

It is to my understanding that my 'notice of understanding and intent and claim of right' served upon DVLA is a lawful document, given the
power of law by the acquiescence of DVLA, and that my claims within said notice now stand as my truth in law, whereby my demand for DVLA
to delete my details from their registry is a lawful demand, as the V5 registration contract is made void by it's lack of clarity of the terms of
contract. And that this being the case in law, the private conveyance known by you as Nxxx xxx and re-identified by myself as WIZE CROW, :giggle:
is to my understanding my private possession owned by myself and not under contract with any government department.

It is to my understanding that i have acted with honour at all times during this process, and entirely within my natural, inalienable common law rights.

Without vexation, frivolity or ill will, sincerely,
David : Robinson.

It maybe the case that I should of entered a time limit for a response, but i will wait a month and if i receive no reply I shall write to him again telling him that
I understand he could see no errors within my understanding, and that the matter is concluded. In the meantime I had better get prepared to enforce my law as it seems he is intent on following (like a mind controlled robot) the legislation brought into being by a treasonous system of governance.
The way I see it is this, any person that is acting for government who tries to enforce the will of this treasonous government upon myself, shall be made fully
aware of this criminal behaviour that they themselves are perpetrating under the treason laws of our constitution, then they shall be forced under notice to report this crime or be liable for the criminal charge of 'Misprision of treason', ( under the treason laws if you know of an act of treason committed against our sovereign heir, and you do not report this crime to the relevant authorities i.e. the police, then you are equally guilty of the crime).
I will however need to report this crime myself, and fully intend to do just that within the next few weeks.

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2010 6:20 am
by Freeman-B
Much respect to you for your efforts so far, Busta, but why on earth would you say
bustachemtrails wrote: known in legalese as a 'Vehicle'.
?

This is playing into his hands, as, by definition, a "Vehicle" is used in commerce - you just equated your conveyance to a vehicle and gave him jurisdiction!

Or am I missing something?

:peace: :love:
B

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Sat May 29, 2010 12:03 pm
by bustachemtrails
Thank you for you kindness. Yes i see your point...my intent was to clarify that my 'private conveyance' is the same as their definition of a 'vehicle' so that there could be no misunderstanding within the notice. I hope i have not made a serious mistake there ? any further comments ? David.

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Sun May 30, 2010 12:24 am
by bustachemtrails
BTW, just like to say that my original 'notice of understanding and intent', (for not providing the DVLA with the £80 of worthless paper that they demanded for having no TAX, was never responded to and therein lies the success). :)..as small a success as it maybe. Look please forgive my ignorance but it seems to me that all representatives of government statute enforcement, are acting for a Treasonous system of governance and must not be complied with for this very reason. I have every intention of creating a 'notice of Treason and understanding of misprision of Treason and intent' (something along those lines) to serve on any 'persons' that act according to the governments will against my sovereign being.

To my understanding according to the Treason laws, if you know of an act of Treason committed against our sovereign heir, and you do not report this crime to the relevant authorities, then you can be tried for 'misprision of Treason' which carries a life imprisonment sentence. I will of had to of submitted my evidence of this crime to the police before I serve a notice of this kind however, obviously. In my view Albert of the burgess family has a reasonable plan, and as I fully intend to assist in his plan that being, to have every police force investigating every other police force for 'serious neglect of duty and compounding Treason, as somewhere along the line the police will be left with no choice, but to decide that arresting the odd politician or 10 is better than going to prison themselves.

I don't know if this has ever been accomplished before ? or even if this type of notice has any validity. But i don't have much to lose and i have every lawful reason (nay duty) to inform those whom are acting for this government, as to the unlawful and downright criminal proceedings of the traitor's they are serving. If I have served a notice of this nature then, would I not have evidence of a crime ? and the evidence of which I am bound by the treason laws to submit to the relevant authorities ? sounds justifiable to me.

i don't wish to be perceived as an extremist however, the situation to my understanding is serious in the extreme. Peace.

"When the power of love overwhelms the love of power
the world shall know peace". - jimmy of the hendrix family.

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 7:50 pm
by bustachemtrails
Time for an update.

I did not receive a reply to my letter to the chief inspector so i sent him a further notice on the 21st june :

TO:
Chief inspector Ocus. (my co address)
Police HQ
London road,
Devizes wiltshire.
SN10 2DN.

Date, 21st june 210.

NOTICE OF UNDERSTANDING AND INTENT.

Notice to principle is notice to Agent
Notice to Agent is notice to principle.

Sent by recorded post.

Dear chief inspector Ocus,
as i have not
yet received a reply to a letter i sent to you
on the 20th may 2010 ( a copy of which i retain
in my possession with a receipt of postage to
verify this fact)-this being a letter requesting
further information and verification of my common
law right to travel untaxed and unhindered upon the
public highway's,within my private conveyance
index/identification plate ' WIZE CROW ', and a
reasonable time frame has,in my view, expired with
regard to the importance of the information required,
therefore, i am seeking clarification by way of this
formal ' notice of understanding and intent', whereby,

1. Can you assure me that the advice pertaining to my
lawful ' obligations ' or ' needs ' that you made reference
to in your letter dated 4th -may 2010 is lawful advice
observing my common law right as a freeman on the land ?

2. Was the advice that you refer to within said letter given
to me whilst honouring the rule of law in accordance with
your oath of office ?

3. As i am a freeman on the land, that being my natural,
inalienable common law Right, and because i have no
contractual agreement's, obligation's or need to contract to
statute law under the common law of our land, which has
primacy over admiralty law/statute law, and because within
your letter you stated " the legislation " ( pertaining to the
law society )-" will be enforced appropriately and
proportionately should any alleged offices " ( ? a typing error
that should likely read 'offences') " be seen to be committed
whilst your vehicle is used on a public road ", how do you
therefore intend to enforce this 'legislation' that has in point
of fact no authority over my right's as a sovereign human man
with a soul ?

4. Please will you define, for my understanding the difference
between 'statutes' and common law and how they apply to my
self as a man with a soul, and in direct contrast to the strawman
or legal 'fiction', that i do not represent, which was a fiction
created by a fraudulent contract, namely the ' Birth certificate '?

5. Will you confirm, for my understanding, that the vehicle
registration document, known as the V5 document, is in point of
fact a contract ?

6. Will you confirm, for my understanding, that this contract (V5)
is a fraudulent contract because full disclosure was not honoured
by said contract and it does not state anywhere within the terms
of agreement that by entering into said contract the signee gives
up the right of ownership of the vehicle ?

7. Do you accept that I, David of the Robinson family, am not a
member of the law society therefore i am NOT subject to the
legislation of said society ?

8. Do you accept that you swore an Oath to her majesty the
Queen to uphold and protect her peace, rather than to enforce
the legislation of a corporate enterprise over the rule of law ?

9.Do you accept that you are Acting for a corporation in your
honourable position as a chief inspector, and that Wiltshire
police are trading as a corporation ?

10. Do you accept that your position of employement is as a
public servant paid by the public, who have no authority over
my sovereign being than i do over your sovereign being, except
in the event that i should break one of the following laws;
a) breach the peace;
b) cause another harm;
c) cause another loss;
d) use mischief in my promises or agreements.

Please will you respond to this ' Notice of understanding and
intent ' in substance ' thouroughly addressing all Ten (10)
questions within fourteen (14) days from receipt of this notice,
to give me clarity in my understanding of my lawful needs and
obligations. So that we may come to an amicable settlement
on this matter herein and assure me that i will not be subject
to any harassment, hinderance, loss nor injury by you or those
under your instruction.

Chief inspector, i am an honourable man. I shall accept and
observe the rule of common law and i shall comply with the
obligations you refer to in your letter dated. 4th may 2010,
on condition that ALL of my questions are answered lawfully,
observing the primacy of law ( common law ), whilst you are
on your oath of office, and that you do so in ' substance '.

The time limit i have placed on this notice is reasonable and
is fourteen (14) days, if it runs out then i shall take it to
indicate that you are in agreement with all of the points
herein stated and that you have no objections to any or all
of the points contained herein, in full accordance with my
rights in law.

FEE SCHEDULE.
I claim my fee schedule with regard to my natural born lawful
right freely to travel on her majesty's roads and highways.

£500 (five hundred) G.B. pounds per hour or part thereof, per
individual unreasonably involved, for : any transgressions by
police officers, Government principals or their agents, or
participents in the system of justice should i be stopped by a
uniformed officer or non uniformed officer doing so without
reasonable cause or prevented from going about my lawful
peaceful right to roam; questioned, interrogated or in any way
detained, harassed or otherwise regulated.

£5,000 (five thousand) G.B. pounds per hour or part thereof, per
individual unreasonably involved, should i be handcuffed, arrested,
transported, incarcerated or subject to any adjudication process
without my express written and notorised consent.

£20,000 (twenty thousand) G.B. pounds in addition to any
compensation awarded per individual unreasonably involved,
should violence be used against either myself or those under my
care and protection, or should damage or loss be caused to my
privately owned, borrowed or hired private conveyance.

I claim the right to convene a proper court ce jure in order to
address any potential criminal actions of any police officers,
Government officials, principals or agents, or participants in the
system of justice who, having been served notice of this claim, fail
to dispute or discuss or make lawful counter claim and then
interfere by Act or Omission with regard to the lawful exercise of
my properly claimed and established rights and freedoms.

I claim the right to deal with any counter claim or disputes publicly
and in open forum using discussion and negotiation for whatever
lawful purpose i see fit.
Responses or counter claims are required to be made under Oath or
attestation upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury and
received via registered mail to the address at the heading of this
notice. Letters are to be addressed to David:Robinson the human man
with a soul, and NOT addressed to the corporate address (MR)- DAVID
ROBINSON; any post so addressed shall be ignored with no dishonour
on my part.

Failure to record an appropriate dispute against the claims made
herein will be taken to mean that you agree with my understandings
and claims, and will result in an automatic default judgement and
permanent and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence, barring any
claims or the bringing of charges by you or any interested 3rd parties
under any statute against my self for exercising my lawful and
properly established natural born rights and freedoms.

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity,
David:Robinson ( Family)
(as commonly called).

so....that runs out on the 7th july when i shall issue my notice of estoppel. Balls in their court then :)

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Mon Jul 05, 2010 9:18 pm
by treeman
:cheer: :cheer: :cheer:
:peace:
a beautiful standpoint.
Respect.

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 11:39 am
by emmanualgoldstein
Glad to hear of your success. Im wondering if you can maybe help me with something Im wondering about in regard to getting mail sent to you. Im under the impression that the only two ways of doing this in a "free address" is to have the mail sent to a care-of address, or to get a mailbox attached to a care-of addressas if it was my own.

Ideally I would like mail sent to my "free address", but failing this I would like it to be unattached to anyone elses address. Do you (or anyone) know of any options for achieving this?

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Tue Jul 06, 2010 3:00 pm
by bustachemtrails
Thank you treeman i shall be exercising my right to free travel tomorrow (or within the next few days more likely) when i park my truck outside Devizes police station on double yellows to submit my evidence of sedition and treason. We may video the event ?

In regard to having a "free Address" ? well....erm...i understand that you can resurvey your land to create it as a sovereign state if you are a land/home owner, or you can use a post office as a c/o address, i have a few friends some on barge's and some on the road who do this. I have used a family address for the last year or so just to get my notices sorted. When i can free myself from the benefits i rely upon i wont even have an address.

I have not come across a "free address" so my knowledge is rather limited on this subject, i am free so whatever my address maybe it is a free address in my mind. Sorry i can not help further. Namaste.

Re: Successful 'notice' to dvla

PostPosted: Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:09 pm
by bustachemtrails
I sent my Final notice of lawful estoppel today to the chief inspector, as follows;

Chief insp Ocus,etc, etc. my address

Date 7th july 2010.

NOTICE OF PERMANENT ESTOPPEL BY ACQUIESCENCE.

notice to principal is notice to agent,
notice to agent is notice to principal.

Dear chief inspector Ocus,
it is to my understanding
that it was lawful for me to send you the previous
notice.
It is to my understanding that i could and did provide,
within that notice time for objections to be resolved
honourably on both sides. It is to my understanding
that it is lawful for me to assume that, since you have
not responded in substance, to the fundamental points
of law that were addressed within the notice (to the
best of my knowledge) I have your tacit consent (by
acquiescence) to the statements i made/ proofs i
requested... which now stands as my truth in law.

It is to my understanding that it is now possible for
me to assume that, since the proper time for your
objections has expired, i have gained a permanent
and irrevocable , lawful estoppel by acquiescence.

It is to my understanding that i have acted in honour
at all times, since you have not objected to what i
stated, and have failed to respond to the lawful points
that i sought clarity on.

It is to my understanding that it is now possible for me
to point out that you must henceforth cease and desist
in any policy enforcement against my self as a freeman
on the land in lawful rebellion. Any breach of my natural,
inalienable rights shall be opposed and rebutted, and i
shall seek with Prejudice my fee schedule by way of lawful
notice and commercial lien if necessary.

Without any admission of liability whatsoever, and with all
my natural, inalienable rights reserved.

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity.

David : Robinson.

So that was sent today. I will have my number plate's ready for monday ; ' WIZE CROW ' and the notice in the front windscreen
which reads as follows ;

NOTICE
EXEMPT FROM LEVY
PRIVATE PROPERTY
OUTSIDE THE JURISDICTION
OF THE UNITED KINGDOM
ANY PERSONS UNLAWFULLY
INTERFERING WITH THIS PROPERTY
AFFIXING P.C.N 'S OR HINDERING
THE OWNER WILL BE SUED UP TO
£100,000.00

On Tuesday or Wednesday next week i will submit my evidence of treason. I have 3 witnesses possibly ? 2 for certain anyway, that will accompany myself to the station. We have sourced a video camera to record evidence of the submission and will see about sticking it online afterwards. Busta.