My appearance in Court

[KentB]

Hi everyone.

Just thought I should post this here also (have posted it elsewhere under DVLA court summons where the full story is) as this may be of value or interest to someone:


Was in Court today (21.05.09). Said I would keep you posted so here is the latest:

Yesterday I gave the Notice below to the court reception and was told it would go with the papers for the case.

_____________________________________________________

NOTICE

To Mid Sussex Magistrates Court
Haywards Heath



I am addressing the Court as a third-party in this matter (Summons 293SMK) - as the authorized representative for my client: KENT B.

I am a man of peace. I have done no harm and mean no harm. I am a living breathing human being in possession of a sound mind and self awareness. I am not the legal fiction written in capital letters to whom the charging instrument was addressed (i.e. KENT B).

I reserve my natural rights under common law and my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily and intentionally.

I do not accept the liability or the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement.

I wave all benefits, and I release the court from it's duty to perform, as consideration.




Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity




Kent-E...: of the B..... family
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved

______________________________________________________________


Today I went to the Magistrates Court. I was told to wait outside, but soon decided to rather get in the Court Room to get a better idea of what was going on in there. Saw a taxidriver who had been caught because he picked up the wrong person at some place, be fined over £1000 and have 6 points taken off his licence, resulting in loosing his drivers license and thereby livelyhood. Turned out he did not have the right insurance for taxis that can pick up just anyone, and therefore he was technically driving uninsured. I was absolutely disgusted at what they did to that man for a kind of mistake anyone could make. Now he will porbably live on the dole until he gets his license back. Just goest to show that they are not interested in Justice.

Anyway, about my appearance, here is roughly what was said:

When my name was called I stood up and declared: "I'm here about that matter. I am the authorized representative for my client" As per Mary Croft advice.
So the Magistrate asked "Are you a Barrister or a Solicitor?"
Me "Neither"
Magistrate "Then you cannot represent another person in Court"
Me "I'd like to make a statement....."
Magistrate "If you are not Mr B this Court cannot hear you. A new date will be assigned or the matter will be dealt with in abscence"
I thought that since I have already told them what I wanted to say in my written Notice, and I am not willing to drop the stance that I am not the Legal Person, I rather not pursue this now, so I said "Alright" and left the Court.

I went there hoping I could get a "Case Dismissed". So from that viewpoint it was pretty much a non-event and waste of a morning.

What is worth commenting on however is that if they had read my Notice, they kind of confirmed that they recognize the existence of a separate legal person and that I was not it.

If they were lazy and never bother reading the file, then I will tackle whatever they throw at me next, as and when.

I beleive this is not the end of the Saga. If there are any more developements I will post them.

[fries&brimstone]

"When my name was called I stood up and declared: "I'm here about that matter. I am the authorized representative for my client" As per Mary Croft advice."

Hmmmm......'representing' a 'clent' may well be exclusive to members of the BAR (in the eyes of the court).

Acting as 'agent' is, I believe, far less exclusive and open to private individuals.

My understanding is that acting as 'representative' makes the 'person' represented a ward of court (i.e. a legal imbecile). The representative then 'defends' the ward of court completely within the court's jurisdiction. This is not what you want.

I've always understood the act of 'representation' to be playing by the courts rules. . . . .

[BaldBeardyDude]

Personally, I would have made a special appearance under common law as per the established fundamentals, Kent B, but you can do that next time, can't you? I would have asked who the plaintiff was, how I can have caused harm to the fictional entity, etc - then asked the magistrate/judge ON OATH for whom he works! - conflict of interest may be an issue.

Do a little more reading of the fundamentals for next time and I'm sure you will get the dismissal you seek.

To explain look at the words - present (that's you) re-present (that's your brief) you are not a member in the 'club' (bar assoc) so you cannot re-present anyone in their private court - only members can do that to earn their crust

It's a basic method to go through, it is hard to remain calm, but re-read the court stuff and see where you can improve for the next (and hopefully last) time, my friend - all the best.

[Veronica]

Yes, a worthy effort, but - as I think it showed - acting as Agent (i.e. following the CR path) is VERY problematic. I'm not one for CR, myself.

I would have gone straight for the SPECIAL APPEARANCE to ESTABLISH JURISDICTION myself. The point is, what did they do after you left? Maybe they proceeded in your absence? I don't see how the Special Appearance allows for that possibility. They have to argue it out there & then. (Maybe the "Agent" could come as the 2nd step if they proceed without Common Law jurisdiction?)

I'm not a wholehearted follower of Mary Croft or Winston Shrout, myself. I don't think the CR-ers understand that "money is an ILLUSION" ... they base everything on "money is somehow REAL".

What they did to the Taxi Driver is absolutely bloody TYPICAL! I have seen this endlessly back in the Poll Tax days. The Policymen make the report, and kick the process off, and then absolve themselves from whatever happens as in: "What the Court does with it is nothing to do with me". Jobsworths, that's all they are. They consider that can take absolutely NO RESPONSIBILITY for the fact that they act out of GROSS NEGLIGENCE ... and can just walk away ("What the Court does with it is nothing to do with me". IT'S FUCKING EVERYTHING TO DO WITH YOU, AND YOUR GROSS NEGLIGENCE AT NOT KNOWING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "LAWFUL/PEACE OFFICER" AND "LEGAL/POLICYMAN"! Are you really that FUCKING THICK ... or just pretending to be?)

[markie b]

aye i agree there veronica i think people as a whole should begin making counter claims for gross negligence against the arresting officer for dereliction of duty

[KentB]

Thanks for this input everyone.

I have not been following the topic that closely lately - sorry it I am a bit late in updating.

I got a new Summons from the Justice's Clerk of the Court with a new date of 25 June. I replied to it with a Notice giving them 7 days to reply or they would have lost all lawful excuse to proceed with this matter. I sent it registered mail 8 of June. They did not reply and on 21st of June I sent a Notice of Default to the Clerk again by registered mail. I hae proof the letters arrived.

Today I get a Notice of Fine & Collection Order - they have completely disregarded my notices and gone ahead and passed a judgement in agsence, which they are now trying to enforce.

I am not sure which approach is best now. Should I hold them to the defaulted earlier notice and thereby claim they have no right to enforce this judgement.
Or should I again meet this current Notice of fine and collection order, with another Notice - witch they seem to disregard anyway? Or must I spend money to do it via a Notary in order for it to have any weight?

I apprecialte any advice.

Regards

Kent

[huntingross]

This is my problem with one sided notices flying all over the place.

As soon as they disregard it, we're left wondering what the next cause of action is.

This is my solution, it may not work, and I'm not in a position to have tried it yet (perhaps that is fortunate)....that is to always counterclaim and/or have a fee schedule attached.

Now they have disregarded it you can write back explaining that you have estoppel, and as a direct consequence of their further action your fee schedule is activated and send them a Bill.

There has to be cause and effect to balance the equation otherwise it continues to be a one way street.

As always....my humble opinion.

[KentB]

Thanks Huntingcross,

How would one go about counter claiming a Penalty Charge Notice or Court Summmons?

something like "If you fail to prove all of the above points I claim £******** for Harassment, Stress and waste of my time." ?

Kent

[huntingross]

Exactly that kind of thing Kent, there becomes a penalty to lack of proof, or frivilous actions

[Jono]

Today I get a Notice of Fine & Collection Order - they have completely disregarded my notices and gone ahead and passed a judgement in agsence, which they are now trying to enforce.

Ok so in order to impose a fine the individual has to of been convicted in a court of law as per Bill of rights 1688?

What was the case number/date ? who was the judge, what was the conviction and judgment, for exactly ? Whats the courts phone number ?