A new way of paying bills

It appears that Richard Vobes has settled his water bill.In a most novel way, by returning the bill as a legal promissory note.In which he authorises the amount to be deducted from a government account which we all have. As far as the law is concerned it is quite legal. Which makes me wonder if the move to CBDC's is a way to plug this loophole. The water bill contained a barcode with his account on it.It appears they accepted it most probably after talking with their legal department. They then issued the current bill without any accrued debt.I surmise under the corporate law system they had no choice, because if they took it to court the finding would be that if it was deemed invalid it would be a shock legal precedent which would undermine legal tender which is after all just a promissory note.

a reply to: annonentity

In which he authorises the amount to be deducted from a government account which we all have

the feds won't be standing for this if to many people start trying it.

Which makes me wonder if the move to CBDC's is a way to plug this loophole.

if CBCD's ever come to fruition it will be more about control than stopping people using them to pay corporations with a promissory note other than cash, except maybe the ones the power mongers own.

He says in the video ‘paraphrased’ “if you pay it, you’ve paid twice” . If that’s the case, don’t they owe a SloppyJoe-load of money back to people? Lawsuit??!!

a reply to: annonentity

Interesting stuff eh?

If it starts to work for people more frequently I wonder how long it'll be before they bring in new laws?

Vive La Revolution!

Sovereign Citizen BS.

Don't fall for it.

They'll have the bailiffs on you.

There is a lot that is right from Richard Vobes in how the banks do create money for loans. Once you sign a loan agreement that becomes an asset for the bank in the amount of the loan. The assets is your promise to bay it back and the income stream this generates over time.

Now that the net assets of the Bank has increased with this new loan agreement, the balance sheet is then used to create the money for the loan. It is how an economy based on debt works. As long as the debts are getting paid it all adds up and is what we have. When the cashflow stops it all crashes down as in 2008.

As for this other state trust based on our birth certificate, I don't exactly know. With how things are, quite possible something like that is going on. It started back in Rome's empire days, used to help expand their campaign. It makes a lot of sense to have an economy based on population. As for who or what holds these accounts and how they are used these days?

I like the basic approach with Common Law, keep it simple and get to the point with a complex and growing legal system. Lot of people trying lots of things, some of these legal issues do get quickly complex. In looking for a lawful line in a complex world there are some good tips in standing your ground among the more general common law community. Do your homework, act in honor.

a reply to: Ohanka😊

According to a previous vid from Richard...If they hand it over to a debt collection agency you ask them for the. Judges signed "Bill of collection number" or something like that I can't remember the correct term. Since no judge would touch it with a barge poll until you have it, payment is not required . As they sell the debts in blocks to collection agencies to collect it all becomes a bit weird.

I've been looking at some of the comments and I wouldn't give it a go.

a reply to: Ohanka

Does indeed sound like that.

All this im a sovereign citizen and admiralty/maritime law bullshi@t simply does not fly.

End of the day it all comes back to bite you in the arse when you ultimately find yourself in a court of law and in front of a sheriff or judge.

They dont put up with disparaging the court in such a manner and you are apt to find yourself in contempt should you try.

a reply to: andy06shake

Having to troll through common law not to pay for fines bills or whatever, is more of a desperate act because living is costing more than you have. Homelessness no jobs etc is a numbers game in the end if it gets too far out of balance then theirs nothing to lose . I wonder if you committed a crime to get a bed and a meal would if the cops realise, if that is why you did the crime refuse to arrest you. Like its winter judge give me three months.

a reply to: annonentity

Having to troll through common law not to pay for fines bills or whatever, is more of a desperate act because living is costing more than you have.

The desperate part i can well believe because of their cost of living.

The fellow in the video hardly looks desperate nor destitute all the same.

Homelessness no jobs etc is a numbers game in the end if it gets too far out of balance then theirs nothing to lose .

About 320,000+ nationwide at last count or thereabouts. As to the nothing to lose part, well when you are on the street that's true to a certain degree, you dont have much to lose, aside from your life of course should you get it wrong or come across the wrong person or crowd.

I wonder if you committed a crime to get a bed and a meal would if the cops realise, if that is why you did the crime refuse to arrest you. Like its winter judge give me three months.

Having been homeless in a previous life annonentity i can assure you that police and authorities are wise to that tactic.

They just put you back on the streets and leave you to get on with it as unfortunate as the case may be.

Short of committing a serious offense it's just not going to work.

And criminalising homeless people is not the best of ideas in the first place.

a reply to: andy06shake

All this im a sovereign citizen...

It is an oxymoron to use 'sovereign citizen' together. As a sovereign you have domain over your your life. As a citizen you are bound by the nation. I do agree to take the sovereign citizen approach does not work out well once the police and courts are involved.

With those that can hold the more sovereign approach do better.

I've been following down this rabbit hole and found a .doc document with some explaining, and I have been following up on all the different terms. Here it is:

Post 1. Continued on poast two below:

Brief notes for “Express Trust Contract” follow up letter using the “Express Trust Method”

The following follow-up letter is intended for use by those of you who have recently sent out your signed and accepted documents and have since received some responses from the other parties. It is at your discretion if you choose to use it, we have had success with this approach and are happy to share this with you to adopt this peaceful and honourable approach also as an option if you so choose.

Sending back your signed contract document “express trust contract” already closes and settles the matter, however the person who receives our document at their end may not understand what we are referring to as they may not be familiar with this process, so we need to be a bit patient and communicate with them our intent by writing a follow up letter such as the following so at least they can direct our document to the correct department.
The legal term for what we are doing here is “Expressing the Trust” in our contract relationships:
Short Brief to below response letter;

With the following letter we establish the following;
1. Proper Identification, we as Beneficiary, them as Trustee
2. Recognise their role as Trustee and administrators of the Trust
3. Express to them again our peaceful and honourable intent
4. Direct them as Trustee to settle the matter
5. Establish peaceful intent in our relationship with them moving forward in other similar matters we will contract in with them

What we are aiming to achieve with this “Express Trust Method” is peaceful acceptance and settlement of the particular matter.
We have already expressed our peaceful intent through the document we signed, accepted and sent back to them. Here with this letter we are just reminding them that we are still maintaining our position as Beneficiary and they are our Trustee in our contract relationship as we move forward.

They won’t necessarily just hand over the keys to us as Beneficiaries just because we identify ourselves now as such, they will more than likely challenge us a few times in this process to see that we can act accordingly as Beneficiaries in directing them to settle the accounts in this way. We need to maintain our position peacefully and respectfully both over the phone and in writing. We are like a child that turns eighteen and tells our parents that we now want to be treated as an adult. They won’t necessarily start treating us as adults right away until we consistently start acting like adults, and then it just happens.
Once we identify ourselves as the Beneficiary we don’t want to argue or fight with them anymore, we just want them to perform their function as our Trustee moving forward to settle these types of administrative matters as per our directive.

We want to be aware that moving forward we still need to have them act as our Trustee to perform the administrative task of managing the Trust (They manage the Trust, not us) as we are not able ourselves to do that as we only have access to the Trust as Beneficiaries, through them.

Each one of these notices, bills, fines, etc they present to us are just offers from them to do business with the Trust, that’s really all they are. We need to “accept that” and not necessarily argue, deny or fight it. As long as there is no harmed party, these are just purely administrative matters, ways for them to generate money, and we need to accept that to so that we can deal with it in this manner. Using this “Express Trust Method” we need to try to not get emotional and start challenging and fighting them because this will cause them to feel threatened by us and they will fight us back, and so goes the usual chain of events.

We can get most of our administrative matters such as the ones presented here resolved peacefully this way, by identifying ourselves correctly and proceeding accordingly, directing them to settle the matter through the Trust peacefully, without having to argue and fight and challenge. The matter gets settled peacefully this way and closed. We are essentially free from any more obligation to it.

Also something to note: When we present ourselves in this way we are directing the other party to settle this matter in Equity Law Jurisdiction which is under God’s Law which is peaceful and also what they get us to swear by when we go to court and testify. If we start arguing with them again after “expressing the trust” then we go back into Statutory Law Jurisdiction and we’ll be back fighting them with their own man made laws. We want to avoid this and instead offer them peace. Once we start being consistent in presenting ourselves peacefully in this way, then we will have shown them that we actually have attained the Age of Majority and that we can direct them peacefully to settle our matters and manage our Trust for us, and it could just become the normal way we do it from now on.

The letter template below from the dotted line down can be copied and pasted into an email “change the words highlighted in green to suit your particular reference numbers / names etc” and then sent to them as confirmation of our peaceful and honourable intent.
……………………………………………………………………………………………

Dear "Sir/Madam",

Ref: "Your reference / account number here"

Thank you for your response to my signed document that I accepted and returned to you for processing, and also thank you for your continued service.

I recognise that you perform a vital function, and I acknowledge you need to be compensated accordingly in order to continue performing this function as you currently do.

I also recognise that there is a dollar amount outstanding on the Named Trust account ledger being addressed here which must be settled in order to close this matter, and I intend for that outcome to be achieved in a peaceful and honourable manner.

I acknowledge that you have issued me an offer to contract in the form of a Bill of Exchange ie: Money, that you have created and that this matter needs to be remedied and settled and I have already given you my acceptance of your offer and instructions to perform your fiduciary duty in the form of the Express Trust Contract that I submitted to you for processing as my Trustee in all matters regarding the Trust's administration.

Furthermore, as this matter is addressing a Named Estate Trust, the proper jurisdiction for remedy is one of Equity, not statutory.

Therefore, I am expressing to you as my public trustee to place that physical “express trust contract” document on the accounts receivables ledger for the Trust and treat it as remittance ie: Money, to use to zero/settle the account in the administration of this matter and close it.

Since recently coming of age in the legal sense and attaining the age of majority as per the Age of Majority Act by declaring that this Trust exists and that it is a Named Estate Trust of which I am the Principal Beneficiary and Equitable Title Holder in all matters relating to it, I no longer require your corporation to make yourselves beneficiary on documents regarding the Trust's contract administration matters in all future similar dealings, including this matter, as I am expressing to you that I am claiming my proper title in this relationship as the Equitable Beneficial Named Estate Trust Title Holder on all administrative documents, and in correcting our positions regarding this administrative matter you are acting in the capacity as Trustee.

I am expressing to you as my public trustee to fulfil your fiduciary duty and settle/zero the Trust account in Equity as per my express trust contract that I have submitted to you and close the matter.

As I have now properly identified myself in our contractual relationship, I intend to honour my Trust obligation as a responsible Beneficiary in directing you to settle such similar matters through the Trust moving forward.

I do not intend to argue or fight with you, I intend to maintain a peaceful ongoing contract relationship with your organisation into the future.

If you personally are not in a capacity to zero the account as per my directive, then I instead direct you to hand this matter over to someone more senior who can get it administered as per my instructions.

I look forward to receiving new contract offers from you moving forward and dealing with them in a peaceful, equitable and honourable manner.

Let me know if you require me to mail you a recent certified copy of my Birth Certificate of Title for your record as proof of my claim.
Yours Honourably,
“Your Name”
Equitable Beneficial
Named Estate Trust Title Holder (not the Trustee)
Without Prejudice
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
Additional note: That completes our letter of response. This is probably best emailed back to them and does not need your signature as you have already signed the Express Trust Contract that you sent back to them regarding this matter.

a reply to: kwaka



Combining the two terms creates a contradiction by my guess.

As it suggests a person who claims the rights and privileges of citizenship is also rejecting the authority and obligations of the state/nation that grants those rights.

a reply to: andy06shake

As it suggests a person who claims the rights and privileges of citizenship is also rejecting the authority and obligations of the state/nation that grants those rights.

Close. As a sovereign you accept the rights and responsibilities assigned by god. As a citizen you accept the rights and responsibilities as assigned by the state.

a reply to: kwaka

God gave us about as much rights as he did a Bee Kwaka.

Human beings require a code of laws to interact with one another in groups.

Otherwise anarchy and survival of the fittest tend to be the colour of the day.

The law of the land is decided by those responsible for creating such.

And those are people, not god.

a reply to: andy06shake

The law of the land is decided by those responsible for creating such.

Lot of different jurisdictions out there. When in Rome, do as the Romans. With how much of the government has fallen into corporate law, there is a matter of consent. When it comes to a 'Mandate', it does require the consent of the governed. Walking away might have a cost, you will not be forced down and take something against your will.

a reply to: kwaka

A lot of different jurisdictions out there indeed.

Hence like you suggest "when in Rome, do as the Romans do."

As it's prudent, never mind good manners.

Different strokes for different folks all the same.

None of it changes the fact that the law of the land is implemented and upheld by man as opposed to God through.

End of the day kwaka we are all governed and subject to the law to one degree or another.

After all "no man is an island entire of itself, every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main."

a reply to: andy06shake

None of it changes the fact that the law of the land is implemented and upheld by man as opposed to God through.

When looking at the maximus of law, it starts with god. We would not be here without whatever that unknown is. It might be hard to define at times. The insurance companies have tried it with their 'act of god' clause. It is hard to see someone give their life to god get close. As for others dealing with their daily bs standing for what is right for them, done better than most.

For a couple of good starts into common law:

Konow Your Rights

A Warrior Calls