Freeman Megamerge

Robbo

There was a judgment published today that rang a few bells in the issues raised and phrasing thereof.

It's been a notable theme in recent missives from The Hub-Ireland that you should personally sue the County Registrar who makes a possession order against you. They've also been continually moaning about being denied judicial reviews of possession orders (spoiler alert: JR isn't the appropriate cause of action here, it's an appeal to the Circuit Court) by Justices Humphreys and Noonan. Nothing wrong with our paperwork they say, it even gets complimented by the judge. It's all a great conspiracy. Well here's a lay litigant who personally named a County Registrar in a failed attempt at a Judicial Review.

Reading through the judgment, there's a lot of themes common to the the current outpourings from The Hub-Ireland. Ten grounds were advanced for the JR and a perfect ten were all rejected. Some of these were familiar failures (the Official Offer) whilst others were part of the Hub's new found love of international law.

Of course they are now finding that exercising certain aspects of international law is slightly trickier than just Googling it for 15 minutes and copy-pasting the bits you like the look of...

18. Grounds 8 and 10 rely on a direct plea of breach of international instruments which are not part of Irish law.

19. Ground 9 relies on art. 6 of the ECHR which is only incorporated in the law through the European Convention on Human Rights Act 2003 which is not pleaded, and not directly. In any event the ECHR claim is again only a generalised allegation of an unfair trial which has not been made out.

None of this should come as a surprise to them because their buddy Ray Hall has tried and failed with many of these exact strategies over the last few years. That's Ray Hall who makes his own promissory notes and is one of the biggest proponents of The Official Offer. Humphreys J sums up the nonsense that is The Official Offer better than I ever could at para 14.

Ground 4 alleges a refusal to read and consider the applicant’s documents. However these documents are totally misconceived in the sense that they constitute what the applicant has grandiosely termed an “official offer” to make a minor payment in satisfaction of the debt due. There was no error in failing to consider this material. The applicant’s contention that this created an estoppel or an amended agreement (relying on Hirachand Punamchand v. Temple [1911] 2 K.B. 330) is misconceived because there is no basis for the contention that the bank ever agreed to the applicant’s view of the situation. Merely cashing the applicant’s cheques could not be treated as acceptance of the applicant’s counter-offer by way of conduct or otherwise. In any event this argument classically goes to the merits of the order rather than its legality and is therefore not a matter for judicial review.

So we still have people being sent into Court like absolute lemmings, filled with the nonsense ideas of people who have failed several times over. It's almost like these guys are being used as cannon fodder to keep the heat off the Svengalis who've been defaulting on their mortgages for the best part of a decade now.

Serjeant Buzfuz

Don Quixote and Sancho Panza (Manning and Granahan) are appealing on social media for a "fearless" lawyer to represent them- who will ride to the rescue of these dweebs in distress?

whippet

spotted this article in the Drogheda Leader this week.

We really do have our fair share of the lads in the north east.

The defendant in question would be a pall of Ray Hall and would have their own show educating the masses on People's Internet Radio.

Having a look at his Facebook feed he seems to believe in the rejuvenated Irish Republican Brotherhood and Billy's seal turning on Independence day.

Has it all really ... seems to think the guards are picking on him and illegally kidnapping him when he seems to have a fairly decent history of not obeying the law. So when all realistic defences fail .. throw the freeman nonsense around

blackwhite

Newstalk Breakfast were doing a report this morning on non-payment of litter fines in Dublin.

At lease one business was putting forward Freeman-esque "no contract" woo as their stalling defence.

Losty Dublin

blackwhite wrote: »

Newstalk Breakfast were doing a report this morning on non-payment of litter fines in Dublin.

At lease one business was putting forward Freeman-esque "no contract" woo as their stalling defence.

Appeared in todays IT. In case of Paywall this is the relevant content.

"Replies to a question tabled in January 2015 show that Dublin City Council issued 70 litter fines to a person running a discount shop over the period January 2013-December 2014.

“Originally the fines were forwarded to the business address and were returned with a label stating: ‘I do not recognise you. I do not understand your intent. I do not have an international treaty with you. No assured value’,” the council said."

The council followed up by forwarding the fines to the person’s home address. However, “the fines were again returned with the label as above”.

The council said reminders came back in a similar fashion. Summonses for nonpayment of fines were not accepted or collected at the post office. The council then received permission to serve the summonses by ordinary post.


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/two-thirds-of-litter-fines-going-unpaid-in-dublin-city-1.2982394

Robbo

It's been a while since we've heard tell of Charlie Allen. It turns out he's still in the business of running magical trusts and was drawn into this case which involves a missing €1 million of rental income and the debtor claiming they have no idea where it went...

Mr McCaul, counsel said, denied any involvement in collecting rent during that period and said he had put the properties into a private and irrevocable trust.

Mr McCaul said agents of the trust collected the rent and he (McCaul) had no involvement in the collection and said he did not know where those rent monies have gone, counsel said.

It turns out Ol' Colonel Mustard has a new operation called Prior Park Assets Company which was dragged into the Mareva injunction.

In other classic Freeman news, there's another magic trust out there that's doing the rounds. This one is called The People's Mortgage Protection Vehicle and also requires you part with some money, which is grand if you've been defaulting on your mortgage for 5 years.

Mr [X] said PMPV has apparently given him and others advice to the effect that his mortgage should be transferred to this entity enabling him to defeat the bank’s claim.

Mr [X] had also claimed he had been making payment to the (PMPV). “If this is so, and certainly if it applies to others like Mr Flynn this is a very worrying development” the Judge said.

whippet

Legal papers presented on their behalf have been “ineptly drafted” and the applications were “doomed to fail.”

Interestingly one of our favourite groups mentioned recently that they are only helping people to draft their own paperwork and can't be responsible for them not doing it properly. Timing probably coincided with the Judge's remarks.

Sort of contradicts other updates from this group where they are boasting about the amount of paperwork they are preparing for people.

Robbo

whippet wrote: »

Interestingly one of our favourite groups mentioned recently that they are only helping people to draft their own paperwork and can't be responsible for them not doing it properly. Timing probably coincided with the Judge's remarks.

Sort of contradicts other updates from this group where they are boasting about the amount of paperwork they are preparing for people.

People can be all high falutin' with their legal texts and professional standards but The Hub know the real score, where the real legal gold is to be mined. It's in the plotlines to Fair City.

Losty Dublin

Byron and Friends have made the dizzy heights of today's paper of record.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/volunteers-advise-on-fighting-home-repossessions-1.2989610

Robbo

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Byron and Friends have made the dizzy heights of today's paper of record.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/volunteers-advise-on-fighting-home-repossessions-1.2989610

I see they've been presenting a few "alternative facts"...

Unlike other lay litigant groups, The Hub doesn’t stage courtroom protests or try to perform citizen’s arrest on judges. Doyle says they do things “lawfully, legally and respectfully – we’re not into the screaming and protesting”.

Yeah, about that. It might be a little more plausible had you not embarked on a nationwide series of courthouse protests in the following locations:

• Waterford
• Donegal
• Waterford
• Cork
• Limerick

It coincided nicely with the published judgment in the case where "shadowy advisors" were referred to. Noonan J ends with a helpful list of the legitimate help available for free or at little cost. I wonder will the lay litigant now be suing the entity that has apparently been taking his mortgage money all along whilst promising protection from the bank?

Their tactics have won them few fans in the Four Courts. Most notably, Mr Justice Seamus Noonan, without naming The Hub, criticised the advice it gave to seven of its clients who were using judicial review to challenge the courts’ powers to order home repossessions.

“There is a lot of misinformation out there,” Noonan said after being told the litigants had received their legal advice from “a friend”. While rejecting a similar case earlier this month, the judge hit out at “shadowy advisers who profess to have legal knowledge, but in fact possess none”.

The comments have not gone unnoticed in The Hub, where Mr Justice Noonan has become something of a bête noire. “We call it the day of the long knives,” says Jenkins, referring to the judge’s rejection of the seven Hub cases in one sitting.

“We absolutely reject his comments,” adds Doyle. “The paperwork was perfect. He doesn’t like lay litigants.”

It's not because judges don't like lay litigants, lads. It's because they generally don't have a breeze of what a judicial review is or when it's to be used, as has previously been demonstrated by a different High Court judge. The paperwork was pretty far from perfect and the whole idea was fundamentally wrong. It just sounds lawyerly and important. Like the person selling it speaks with authority.

whippet

This sums up what this thread has been about for the last couple of years.

It is a matter of considerable concern that Mr. Flynn, and perhaps others like him, are being duped by anonymous parties into paying money to them on the basis of so called legal advice about their rights and entitlements. The advice apparently given by these shadowy advisers, who profess to have legal knowledge but in fact possess none, is, as recent cases concerning possession applications in this court demonstrate, to bring appeals from the Circuit Court or seek judicial review on foot of papers ineptly drafted by them, which are doomed to fail and expose the unfortunate unrepresented parties to much higher levels of costs than they should otherwise have to bear. Unlike professional lawyers, these advisers are of course unregulated and uninsured with the consequent perils of engaging with them for the unsuspecting litigant. They draft documents which espouse a grandiose form of legal speak designed to give such documents the appearance of being learned and erudite when in fact they contain little more than legal nonsense.

Yet ... our learned friends in Little Mary Street will still claim they are nailing the paperwork and also that they are just offering support !!

ArmaniJeanss

Forget the boring stuff like EU directives and the rateable valuation issue, where The Hubcaps will really have them on the run is the missing fada in the Irish translation of Circuit Court.
https://www.facebook.com/irishselfhelpzone/posts/757778947712222

whippet

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Forget the boring stuff like EU directives and the rateable valuation issue, where The Hubcaps will really have them on the run is the missing fada in the Irish translation of Circuit Court.
https://www.facebook.com/irishselfhelpzone/posts/757778947712222

clutching at straws now ....

eldamo

whippet wrote: »

clutching at straws now ....

whippet wrote: »

now

?

whippet

it started off with Trusts, then Securitisation, then incorrect paperwork for receivers, then rateable valuation and now the missing fada.

what will be their next tactic ... mortgage docs weren't signed in blue ink ... they started off as rambling freemen .. mellowed bit when they thought they had found magic beans and back full circle to the freeman nonsense.

Robbo

I'll place a bet that they'll get upset about the size of the paper.

"Is your possession order printed on A4 Paper? Does it measure 210 mm x 297 mm? Well we've found out that there's a paper size called "Legal" and that's the only thing that matters. We offer a full paper measuring service with our commercial partners in Acme Ruler Wavers Ltd for the knockdown price of €400. Boom. When County Registrars hear of this they start crying and are obliged to offer you a free house. Boom. If they don't you're allowed legally sue them and their pets. Boom."

Grassey

Robbo wrote:

I'll place a bet that they'll get upset about the size of the paper.

Surely all their documention must be FOOLSCAP

Losty Dublin

For sale; one bog standard house.

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/homes-and-property/new-to-market/inside-gorse-hill-the-house-behind-the-o-donnell-saga-1.2993911#.WLffQ5_6AaI.mailto

ArmaniJeanss

The Hubyanka Building on Little Mary Street seem to be no longer a base, and they are looking for new premises as we speak.
No word as yet about the biscuits or the donation bucket.

Losty Dublin

I'm surprised we all missed out on this uplifting event. I'm sure it will be back if it turned a profit.

https://www.eventbrite.ie/e/open-minds-ireland-conference-2017-tickets-29202985917?discount=OMIC2017#

Indricotherium

I love that they are now posting pictures of actual headlines, and saying that "this needs to make the headlines"

nuac

Robbo wrote: »

I'll place a bet that they'll get upset about the size of the paper.

"Is your possession order printed on A4 Paper? Does it measure 210 mm x 297 mm? Well we've found out that there's a paper size called "Legal" and that's the only thing that matters. We offer a full paper measuring service with our commercial partners in Acme Ruler Wavers Ltd for the knockdown price of €400. Boom. When County Registrars hear of this they start crying and are obliged to offer you a free house. Boom. If they don't you're allowed legally sue them and their pets. Boom."

Way back approx pre-1960 GAA would refuse to accept a team-sheet or any objection or submission re match disputes unless written on paper with a watermark showing it was made in Ireland.

Very surprised the Freemen haven't spotted this:)

Robbo

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

The Hubyanka Building on Little Mary Street seem to be no longer a base, and they are looking for new premises as we speak.
No word as yet about the biscuits or the donation bucket.

All a great conspiracy, y'understand. Remember that it's a Jerry Beades property which the bank has moved against before. I wonder has there been a falling out or has a third party intervened?

Isn't it marvellous when these organisations like to boast about their amazing track records but when it comes to securing their own locations, not so much.

Losty Dublin

Robbo wrote: »

All a great conspiracy, y'understand. Remember that it's a Jerry Beades property which the bank has moved against before. I wonder has there been a falling out or has a third party intervened?

Isn't it marvellous when these organisations like to boast about their amazing track records but when it comes to securing their own locations, not so much.

A pro like him, I'd expect Jerry to have the building covered with good old fashioned securitisation. With all the loot he can buy three new Hubs.

scruff murphy

wonder what happened!

Indricotherium

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/14/tasmanian-family-refuses-to-pay-council-tax-on-gods-land

Hmmmm checking a lot of boxes

Ste.phen

Indricotherium wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/14/tasmanian-family-refuses-to-pay-council-tax-on-gods-land

Hmmmm checking a lot of boxes

So if God owns the land, why are they using it without his/her permission? ��

fxotoole

Ste.phen wrote: »

So if God owns the land, why are they using it without his/her permission? ��

God has no contract, therefore God does not consent

Pickpocket

Hi. I remember someone once posted a link to a Canadian judgment (I think?) that took all of this Freeman stuff seriously, before absolutely dismantling the arguments one by one. Can someone direct me to it? Thanks.

Robbo

Pickpocket wrote: »

Hi. I remember someone once posted a link to a Canadian judgment (I think?) that took all of this Freeman stuff seriously, before absolutely dismantling the arguments one by one. Can someone direct me to it? Thanks.

Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571