at approximately 16:30AM ????? Did she not proof read before she sent it? Seems that she also has trouble reading as she is claiming you are claiming some things that you just haven't claimed.
Make sure you rebut where they say it's the law, or you agree that it is. It looks like they are saying it in passing, but you need to rebut that too.
all that they say is still under their statutes and acts ,so where is your contract with them ,if you are not in contract you are not obligated to their statutes or code ,acts ...under the constitution you may freely travel the lands god put forth.with any conveyance at hand.
Im not sure if its best to respond to all their points as each point being a claim ignoring the more fundmental claim of jurisdiction, keep it simple and stick to the fundmental point dont let them trick you into walking the Via Dolorosa.
I like the "claimaint admits to the offence of having an uninsured motor"
I guess that could be a simple question to put to the court or defendant, did you attempt to address the critial issue of jurisidction in your defence?
I know your testing waters ben and i do hope you get what your looking for with this. I personally think though that you have played straight in their hands on this one. iIt seems that your Arguing and i think you should not have used their paperwork. I May be wrong. I,m not saying i know it all. Good luck with this.
Comment removed
mrichards55 4 months ago
at approximately 16:30AM ????? Did she not proof read before she sent it? Seems that she also has trouble reading as she is claiming you are claiming some things that you just haven't claimed.
dejorn 4 months ago
1:52 "notwithstanding" [<One's capacity, status or standing]
AVER. In pleading. To declare or assert; to set out distinctly and formally; to allege.
Black's 1st
ADMIT. To allow, receive, or take; to suffer one to enter; to give possession; to license. [also see ADMISSION; ADMISSIONS]
Black's 3rd
It would seem the respondent(s) presumes you have no standing and that you're an "affiliate" of the COMPANY/STATE.
abedanger 4 months ago
Make sure you rebut where they say it's the law, or you agree that it is. It looks like they are saying it in passing, but you need to rebut that too.
shekkyshabazz 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You had yer drivers license in your wallet?
When they found your drivers license, that gave them the "joinder" between you and your strawman.
TxStJohn 4 months ago
Comment removed
TxStJohn 4 months ago
Comment removed
waynej1407 4 months ago
Comment removed
waynej1407 4 months ago
The Defendant's scant summary of the Particulars of your Claim is impoverished.
mrichards55 4 months ago
all that they say is still under their statutes and acts ,so where is your contract with them ,if you are not in contract you are not obligated to their statutes or code ,acts ...under the constitution you may freely travel the lands god put forth.with any conveyance at hand.
Disterbed1199 4 months ago
Comment removed
Disterbed1199 4 months ago
Im not sure if its best to respond to all their points as each point being a claim ignoring the more fundmental claim of jurisdiction, keep it simple and stick to the fundmental point dont let them trick you into walking the Via Dolorosa.
I like the "claimaint admits to the offence of having an uninsured motor"
no
"claimaint admits to having an uninsured motor"
Danster82 4 months ago
I guess that could be a simple question to put to the court or defendant, did you attempt to address the critial issue of jurisidction in your defence?
Clearly not.
Danster82 4 months ago
Legal Services Department? Wheres the Lawful Services Department
61shirley 4 months ago
I know your testing waters ben and i do hope you get what your looking for with this. I personally think though that you have played straight in their hands on this one. iIt seems that your Arguing and i think you should not have used their paperwork. I May be wrong. I,m not saying i know it all. Good luck with this.
alex121207 4 months ago
Computer says no...
anafael1 4 months ago
complaints = issues of contention
VerifiedNews 4 months ago
three sections: The Legally Established (by evidence or contract) Facts, The complaints, then statutory or case references in support.
VerifiedNews 4 months ago