Users Online Now:
1,996
(
Who's On?
)
Visitors Today:
2,285,307
Pageviews Today:
3,175,072
Threads Today:
744
Posts Today:
14,983
11:53 PM
Directory
Adv. Search
Topics
Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject
HELP! Legal Straw Man and Sovereignty UCC-1 theory valid?
User Name
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
Black
Font:
Default
Verdana
Tahoma
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Anonymous Coward 23316818:MV8yNjQwOTZfMzMyNjU0MzdfMTNBRTFDQTg=] [quote:HardcoveR:MV8yNjQwOTZfMzMyNjUwMzhfODQxOEE5RTU=] [quote:humbleidiot:MV8yNjQwOTZfMzMyNTc5ODhfODU5NEY5RkE=] I thought the bottom line was 'no contract or note, no debt'? Wtf?! [/quote] Good question. Let me give you a roughly parallel and over-simplified situation to illustrate. Say you opened a line of credit at the corner grocery store (like people did 50 years ago). The owner says okay, you can buy my groceries on credit. Sign this "note" which says you promise to pay off your purchases at the end of each month. So you sign. The owner says "I will tell Sally, one of my cashiers that you have this line of credit and so be sure to go through her line when you come in to buy." You say "okay." So Sally has you sign for each purchase, and you pay at the end of each month. Everything goes fine for several months. Then you stop paying. The owner sues and now you are in front of the judge. YOU: I demand to see the original signed note. STORE LAWYER: Your honor, we lost the original signed note, but we have a carbon copy. We also have an "affidavit" from Sally, who is familiar with this account, that he owes the money. YOU: That affidavit is hearsay your honor. I demand that they produce this "Sally" in court. Unfortunately they have Sally to testify in court, and she shows all your signed slips of purchases, and she identifies you and the carbon copy of the note as being what you signed. The judge may rule in favor of the store owner even without the original signed note based on their "complete business records", the exact copy of the original note and the testimony of Sally, who has established her credentials as the cashier who rang up your purchases and identified you as the signer. So while the absence of an original signed note is a big plus in your favor, the bill collectors will have other tricks like an "affidavit" and "statements" and a generic "contract", which you object to as hearsay, without the witness familiar with your account being present to testify. Any "contract" they produce they have to prove as being the exact copy of what you got in the mail when you opened your account. They almost never can produce a competent live witness nor the exact copy of the contract they sent you, so that is also in your favor. Hope this helps. [quote:humbleidiot:MV8yNjQwOTZfMzMyNTc5ODhfODU5NEY5RkE=] Now I have an appointment with a goddam lawyer which I don't feel good about because I don't trust lawyers. [/quote] I don't trust lawyers *and* judges myself. [/quote] By the way, you have described a competent fact witness generally required in any case. The competent fact witness alone does not eliminate the need for the original signed agreement, but it does grant the judge or jury more latitude in adjudicating the matter. 99% of the matters I have been involved in have been credit card cases and there is, obviously, no competent fact witness. Further, credit card contracts are contracts of ADHESION for which the superior party cannot bring suit. In a mom and pop environment the scenario you listed is likely to result in a believable scenario as you described and the contract would be one of PARITY of the parties...that there was consideration and a meeting of the minds on an equal footing...thus remedy is available in court, and a signed contract not required. That is usually not the case in 99.9% of debt collection cases, which tend to be contracts of adhesion...credit card, mortgage, etc. Note that in mortgages, the remedy is NOT collection of arrears, but rather seizure of the underlying asset which was posted as collateral. [/quote]
Original Message
HI GLP.
I have a legal/financial issue that may be going to court soon. I cannot afford to lose!
I lost my job some time ago and was unable to keep up on payments for a car loan.
While considering declaring bankruptcy I discovered the 'Straw man'/Soveriegnty websites out there. Here are the sites i have found.
[
link to www.worldnewsstand.net
]
[
link to www.the7thfire.com
]
[
link to www.halexandria.org
]
[
link to www.wealth4freedom.com
]
Does anyone know if this stuff really works? Any legal eagles out there can tell me about this or if there is an alternative recourse?
I need someone who is not just preprogrammed by the system but someone who has tried it.
Pictures (click to insert)
General
Politics
Bananas
People
Potentially Offensive
Emotions
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Textual
Doom
Misc Small Smilies
Religion
Love
Random
View All Categories
|
Next Page >>