Unbelievable letter from an HMRC solicitor

[nameless]

Further to several Notices to HMRC, one of their solicitors has written to my strawman. It is over two pages long so I quote a few excerpts from it below. My comments are in brackets and italics:

Dear Strawman

re: Strawman

I act for HM Revenue and Customs "HMRC".

(After such an opening, what more needs to be said?)

I have been passed the following correspondence:

Your letters to HMRC - (he lists the dates and they are not letters, they are Notices)

HMRC letters to you - (he lists the dates)

The correspondence relates to a payment of tax including accruing interest on the outstanding tax and a penalty owed by you as follows:

(He lists the amounts etc)

Your correspondence records a reluctance to pay the outstanding tax for the following reasons:

1. You have sent negotiable instruments described as 'presentments' reducing the amount of the balancing payment to zero.

2. You have described yourself as a 'blessed living soul', (etc, etc) and relied on such descriptions as the basis for asserting that no tax should be levied on or paid by you.

(He then quotes one of my paragraphs stating that living souls should not be taxed, unless HMRC can prove I am a government created fiction.)

I advise that HMRC is familiar with letters similar to your own that seem to be downloaded from a site in the United States of America. The subject matter of these letters have no force or legal weight in this jurisdiction and have no effect in respect of HMRC's statutory powers.

HMRC addresses all taxpayers by their legal names; in the case of individual taxpayers this is their name as registered on their birth certificate or if they have changed their name by deed poll the name registered on that deed, or in the case of a body corporate the name given in the Deed of Incorporation or partnership deed for that entity.

(The next paragraph says they have no record of my changing my name and he thinks jane of the doe family is another legal entity and they don't mind what legal entity I call myself).

It is not for HMRC to speculate on this point and until you establish otherwise you will be assessed on the basis of the current information which is that you are a living individual who is resident in the UK.

(He then quotes all the Acts and of course, I did file a self assessment return, hence the subject matter of this letter. He says it is now a statutory debt due and payable to the Crown. HMRC has a statutory obligation to collect this debt and will pursue me for recovery of the full amount if I fail to pay. If I wish to dispute ... etc. etc.)

We do not consider the presentments or the information contained in your letters provide any legal basis under UK law to resist payment of tax.

Until we see such documentary evidence HMRC will not change your form of address and will continue to correspond with you in your original name.

Should you choose to ignore or fail to respond to such correspondence we will draw this letter to the court's attention if the issue comes before the court in support of any application that can be made for costs incurred in recovering payment of outstanding tax.

Yours faithfully

end-------------

Doesn't he know that when you start a letter with Dear Mr or Mrs, you should use yours sincerely at the end?

Incidentally, my first invoice on HMRC has been served.

[Jim]

Interesting. Being a letter from a solicitor I imagine it will either be written very carefully and the meaning of every word will have a significance of its own both within the context of the letter and within the wider context of the English language OR it will be a mire of double-speak. Let's see...

Your correspondence records a reluctance to pay the outstanding tax

Does it? I would have said it records a willingness to pay, just by other means than the use of fiat currency.

1. You have sent negotiable instruments described as 'presentments' reducing the amount of the balancing payment to zero.

Did he just confirm that the outstanding balance is zero?

2. You have described yourself as a 'blessed living soul', (etc, etc) and relied on such descriptions as the basis for asserting that no tax should be levied on or paid by you.

I gaven't seen your letters, nameless, so this could well be correct...

(He then quotes one of my paragraphs stating that living souls should not be taxed, unless HMRC can prove I am a government created fiction.)

Ah. OK. I think I see where he's coming from. All titles (names) are legal fictions I think. Therefore, anything with a name must be subject to legal processes (?)

I advise that HMRC is familiar with letters similar to your own that seem to be downloaded from a site in the United States of America. The subject matter of these letters have no force or legal weight in this jurisdiction and have no effect in respect of HMRC's statutory powers.

The meaning and significance of this sentence appears to depend on the definition of "this jurisdiction". Does he mean the UK (it's implied by his reference to the United States in the preceding sentence but not stated explicitly) or something else (eg. PUBLIC as opposed to PRIVATE)?

HMRC addresses all taxpayers by their legal names

So anything without a legal name cannot be a tax payer? Round and round we go...

(The next paragraph says they have no record of my changing my name and he thinks jane of the doe family is another legal entity and they don't mind what legal entity I call myself).

Fair enough. As I said above, I believe all names are legal fictions. If you've asked HMRC to clarify certain things to your satisfaction before you forward payment in the form of fiats and they haven't done as you requested (or explained properly, again to your satisfaction, why they don't have to) then why should you bend to their will?

It is not for HMRC to speculate on this point and until you establish otherwise you will be assessed on the basis of the current information which is that you are a living individual who is resident in the UK.

This sentence is totally meaningless. Assess away, my good man. You can "assess" until the cows come home. It won't make one atom's worth of difference to God's kingdom.

(He then quotes all the Acts and of course, I did file a self assessment return, hence the subject matter of this letter. He says it is now a statutory debt due and payable to the Crown. HMRC has a statutory obligation to collect this debt and will pursue me for recovery of the full amount if I fail to pay. If I wish to dispute ... etc. etc.)

I think this is the crux of the matter. If you've completed a self assessment form and signed it they'll argue that this is your agreement (that's a trust term, too, by the way...) that you're under the jurisdiction of UK Parliamentary Acts. If that's the case then quote Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights at them. You have the right to change your mind about anything at any time for any reason. And that's not a right you claimed in any fancy pants NUICOR; that's their own "law"!

We do not consider the presentments or the information contained in your letters provide any legal basis under UK law to resist payment of tax.

But you're not resisting payment. You're investigating alternative methods of payment. They're not the same thing. If he'd said "the presentments or... your letters provide (no) legal basis for the payment of tax" I'd concede that he had a point. See? Double-speak.

Should you choose to ignore or fail to respond to such correspondence we will draw this letter to the court's attention if the issue comes before the court in support of any application that can be made for costs incurred in recovering payment of outstanding tax.

There's your remedy right there. Don't ignore them. Just keep writing back, accepting their claims upon sight of proof, offering conditional agreement and asking for further clarification. If you can keep arguing with them indefinitely maybe they'll give up eventually? I doubt it, though. If you've served them with a fee schedule then you can pretty quickly make your claim bigger than theirs. That's when the fun begins...



J

[Veronica]

If it were me, I would write back:

Dear Sir,

Don't refer to me as Strawman, you cunt.

Your two-page load of bollox contains so many unproved assertions, assumptions and other in accuracies I can only assume you must be mentally retarded.

The Common Law and the Magna Carta 1215 are still very much up & running as any Constitutional Lawyer will tell you.

Clause 35 says: "No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights and possessions, or outlawed, or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgment of his equal or by the law of the land"

Since the Magna Carta PREDATES ALL PARLIAMENTS AND ALL SUBSEQUENT STATUTES, it stands ABOVE them by virtue of being CONSTITUTIONAL, and forms "the Law-of-the-Land" to which that Clause can only refer.

Only a numpty could not understand that. Have another go ... try to get it right next time.

(I suppose you think the Magna Carta was 'American' do you?)

Oh ... by the way ... were you acting under your Oath when you wrote that letter to me?

Yours utterly sincerely,

Yada

(I DO ... DO THIS ... I REALLY DO. I've done it 2 or 3 times now. They go very quiet ... or at least they have up till now)

[Jim]

LOL. You have an amazing way with words, V.



J

[Veronica]

LOL. You have an amazing way with words, V.

I consider them there to be used, darlin'

[Farmer]

(He then quotes all the Acts and of course, I did file a self assessment return, hence the subject matter of this letter.

You should not have filled in the assessment; they will consider that as you having volunteered to pay.

In the US, the IRS gets people found guilty because they have in the past filled in a tax return no matter how many years back that may have been even though there is no income tax law.

He says it is now a statutory debt due and payable to the Crown. HMRC has a statutory obligation to collect this debt and will pursue me for recovery of the full amount if I fail to pay. If I wish to dispute ... etc. etc.)

So they call it a debt.

This also looks like the same reason the council give, that they have a "statutory obligation to collect". Interesting that they never say that we have a statutory obligation to pay.

[Veronica]

(He then quotes all the Acts and of course, I did file a self assessment return, hence the subject matter of this letter.

You should not have filled in the assessment; they will consider that as you having volunteered to pay.

Yes. A Sovereign would not have done that. You can't expect others to understand your Sovereignty if you don't understand it yourself.

[nameless]

Many thanks indeed for all your comments. I will spend a great deal of time formulating my reply, which I will send to the CE and Permanent Secretary of HMRC and not to her agent, the solicitor, as part of my lien process.

(He then quotes all the Acts and of course, I did file a self assessment return, hence the subject matter of this letter.

You should not have filled in the assessment; they will consider that as you having volunteered to pay.

Yes. A Sovereign would not have done that. You can't expect others to understand your Sovereignty if you don't understand it yourself.

This referred to 2007/8 which was the last year I employed an accountant. It was also 2007 that I first came across Mary: Croft's book and started studying. So you can see that all this occurred prior to my awakening. Once I did awaken, I started AFVing, and have since used the 'cheque' method. They have had billions out of my 'account'.

I have not filled out any of their forms since that time. As Jim has said when referring to Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the strawman has the right to change his mind about anything at any time for any reason, let alone the sentient being's indefeasible and unalienable rights.

[Farmer]

COUNCIL OF EUROPE
The European Convention on Human Rights
ROME 4 November 1950

ARTICLE 9

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.

2. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

Green gives you the privileges, red takes them away again. Human rights are a mugs game.

If you don't believe me, why were they written in that order? Or for the John Harris fans, why were they wrote in that order?

[goodwood1969]

Hi all.
I am new to all of this, however, i am on about my 3rd or 4th reading of veronica; of the chapman family (as commonly called) book. Very interesting and enlightening a read it is too.
This section is personally relevent to me for a number of reasons. I have been self employed and had been filling in the self assessment forms (ex girlfriend used to do the paperwork and id sign it) bt when we split up and i had to move out of her home, i could no longer make head nor tail of the necessary paperwork, probably due to stress of moving a few times and losing various bits along the way. I had written to HMRC stating these facts, giving genuine addresses of the places i had lived in, prior to moving back in with my folks, and asking for sufficient time to complete an enormous task honourably.
That was some time ago and as mentioned before some receipts have gone walkabouts. About 2 months ago our back garden was broken into and my pushbike was stolen....bt then found that the shed was also broken into and my laptop, accounts books and disc containing the progress i had made into my accounts, had also gone and now am in the position that i cannot finish my bookwork, with any hope of an outcome.
In the mean time, i have become enlightened as to the wickedly ways of the perpetrators of the most vile disguisers of 'TRUTH' and shall soon have the privellage of a face to face meeting with them...or is this unwise, even with my phone camera left on record?
I must sort this out or it will roll on forever. I am not afraid of the confrontation for i really dont have much to possibly lose as the loss of all my records is logged with the local police and i have a crime reference number for that and is undeniable. ITS GONE and not of my own choosing.
I will try and deal with this myself and read all the various threads in relation to it but if i need some guidance, i hope i may ask for advice without upset to the long standing members who have seen (possibly this very same thing) before. If not , I hope this saga may be of some interest to someone else in the future.
Peace to you all and to all the very best wishes
G