|  Are You the Alleged Debtor? The word alleged in this context is used as "being stated or said, but (being) without proof". In other words, the bank, financial institution and/or the debt collector and latterly their legal representation will allege or infer without proof, that you are the Debtor in this case. And that is just the point, if you admit or agree that you owe them anything, then you are defining (identifying) yourself as being the "debtor", or the one who owes a debt. It is NOT for you to admit to this, it is up to the/your accuser (Plaintiff) to prove this, to prove that you are the debtor, and for that matter to PROVE everything else. The more information that you give them, the stronger their case is going to be. The less information that you give them, the weaker their case is going to be. A debtor (debitor) is one who owes or has a legal obligation to another: In most of the cases/issues concerned within this text, we are concerned with the/a legal obligation to pay money, and/or dealing with an attempted possession of land or property. You are only a debtor when you either freely admit to it; or when they, the bank, financial institute, the debt collector and/or their legal representative prove that you are. The vast majority of People do freely admit they are a debtor. Most People are convinced by the media and the hype, and their recurrent words and phrases "it is my debt" or "I always pay my debt(s)", and "I did get the money". The words and phrases are repeated and pumped out incessantly on television, radio and in the populist print media, and thus continually feed the message of guilty, before been proven guilty. If you tell a Man he is a horse often and persistently enough, eventually he will help you put a saddle on him. What does it all mean? Very few People actually ever sit down and critically analyse what it means to be a debtor, or to be alleged to be a debtor. Very few People sit down and ask themselves, "what exactly is owed?", and "why is it owed?", and "what proof is there that it is owed?", and "is it really owed by me?", and "can they prove any of this?", and if so, "what proof have they got?", and "is it possible to examine such alleged proof?". Wouldn't it be a very interesting Island to live upon, if all the People of the Island were to start asking questions, as to the validity of all or any alleged contracts/agreements or alleged debt within the context of critical analysis, and kept asking until they got answers? Offerings are misleading at best, and at worst will help you lose. There are groups and individuals out there espousing the virtues of making the bank or financial institution what is colloquially called an offer, or an "official offer". The idea being that any amount given or tendered to the bank or financial institution is better than nothing. The FALSE assumption being, that the bank or financial institution are bound to accept your offer, and take the paltry amount given, and this somehow will stop or halt the bank or financial institution in proceeding with legal action, and ultimately getting an Order for money or worse still an Order for possession of your home, land or property. No doubt, the bank or financial institution will accept any amount that you give them, but only as part payment of an alleged outstanding debt, and without having to state this, and/or without ever compromising their legal position. By giving the bank or financial institution any amount whatsoever, you are strengthening their position, in the medium and in the long term, and what's more, you are weakening yourself and your own. Certainly, it may perceivably slow down the process of legal action; but giving the bank or financial institution any amount of money whatsoever recognises in law that the bank or financial institution has a valid claim. It compounds (assists) their claim, and it compounds the alleged contract as being valid and lawful. After all, in terms of contract law, you are recognising the alleged contract, because you are willingly (partly) performing upon the alleged contract, and you are also in breach of that same alleged contract, because you are now in default, as you are not making full payments. By making a partial payment, proof of performance, although not adequate under their terms and conditions is now something demonstrably provable, and if you have and/or continue to pay the bank or financial institution then you are giving the alleged contract more weight and validity, by which to hang yourself. By paying and continuing to pay any amount whatsoever, you are entrapping yourself, and it weakens your case when the bank and/or the financial institution do finally instigate legal action. Anyone that says otherwise either does not know what they are talking about, and/or they do know and are directly or indirectly working as an agent to preserve the States Status-Quo. By paying and continuing to pay, you are feeding the beast that is ultimately going to eat you up, take your home, property, land, business and/or asset(s). Most People have this idea in their heads; once the Judge sees that some form of payment is being made, then he or she will see that we are being reasonable and are genuinely trying to "pay off our debts", and will show us mercy, and will let us stay in our homes. This is all propaganda, designed to keep you dumbed down. A Judge is not going to save you, a Solicitor is not going to save you, the best Barrister in the world is not going to save you, God is not going to save you. You are for all intents and purposes, as far as the Court is concerned, simply in breach of the alleged contract, and the best you can hope for is a stay on the Order, in order to allow you to find alternative accommodation i.e. somewhere else to live. This is Justice seen to be done, and not Justice being done. No, it is not fair, but until you find an alternative way of looking at and identifying the problem, and dealing with what is going on appropriately, it will continue. Back to the question: Are You the Alleged Debtor? i.e. Do you legally owe an obligation (usually money) to another? Isn't this a question that you should and or could be asking the party that alleges you owe them something, by demanding that they prove that you owe them an obligation? Food for thought or what? ~~~ NOTE: This article is an extract from a far larger body of work and programme that will be announced and released in its entirity in 2015. The body of work being prepared encompasses all aspects of the law, that the Common Man or Woman will need and require in order to protect themselves from persecution and prosecution. It is an indepth expression and explaination of the LAW that Every Man and/or Woman will require and need for the future. If you have ever lost a case, or are currently facing into the Civil/Commercial Courts then this material will assist you in reopening cases, and protecting you from the wrath of the Courts unlawful processes. More on this later !!! |
No comments:
Post a Comment