Adam of the family Hayden returned to Luton with fellow researchers Matt and Simon to discuss some great result he has using Void Orders to interrupt the programming of the broken robots currently running the country into the ground.
Anyone reading this will likely already have received some kind of threatening communication from a Council or an agent of the council. That communication will probably contain some claims that you did something which was illegal and or punishable with a fine. Most of the time this ‘offence’ will be something that you don’t agree with; for example parking your car or driving your car in a way which sad people with no life take exception to. You are completely correct to feel and think ‘fuck these guys’.
At this point you may well have many ideas on how to deal with this problem which may be
1) Chucking it in the bin
2) Writing back and pleading your innocence
3) Writing back and furiously arguing
All are reasonable reactions to an encroachment on your freedom and security, but sadly are not proven to be effective at making the problem go away. Adam has been experimenting with a new method of dealing with the expansive fraudulent debt collection network of councils, courts and their agents, and the Void Order method is so far 100% effective in producing climb-downs, backdoor exits and silence from accusers. If you search online you’ll see that the void order method is not brand-spanking new, but it helps to have first hand evidence of the technique before podcasting on the matter, so that is what we present for you today. Remember that even though what is offered in the document pack is evidence for Adam’s actions and results for him, it may not be the same for you.
The basis of the void order method is to highlight the defects in the process of recovery, and it is discussed in depth. Lord Denning’s definition of which is covered in depth and cited within the document pack.
Adam’s cases are discussed, pay particular attention to an alleged bus lane contravention and speeding fine. Both have been successfully shut down using the void order process. The bus lane document pack is a fascinating read and it helpful to download and read through as the podcast is discussed, it shows the confident and robust approach Adam has taken. This was a fairly informal discussion and there is a bit of swearing, sorry about that.
Barnet Borough Bus Lane Document Pack
A portfolio of void orders is being built up to demonstrate the effects this technique has, if you wish to be considered for the portfolio listen for the requirements as discussed in the podcast and email adamh[at]lawfulrebellion[dot]org or info[at]lawfulrebellion.org
Approximate timings
– What’s needed – the basic requirements.
a pure case, with no prior representations made
3m+ – ask for the case management file, at least 3 times, and on the 3rd time instruct them that the court order is void.
6m15 bus lane penalty Barnet Borough Council (3 year old case)
-> No Contract return to sender x3
-> Order for recovery of unpaid charge
-> Task Enforcement limited & Northampton Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC)
http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/northampton-bulk-centre/traffic-enforcement-centre
-> Due process is challenged in Adams documents
-> Notice of void order to TEC received and not rebutted
-> Barnet Borough in cahoots with Task Enforcement
9m Lord Denning & Lord Green defines Void Orders
10m – Receive & Accept are synonymous.
11m30s – The issue of nullity from fundamental defects in process
12+m – Warrant execution
– No one can execute a warrant other than officials from the court that ordered it (Common Fraud & The Fraud Act 2006)
– Duty of care requirements
– Notice of Void Order sent to TEC
– Letter to CEO of Barnet Council cease and desist all collection due to defective process.
17m – Council uses the backdoor, and backs down
18m Case 2 – Voiding a £800 fine for failing to display licence plate, no insurance (a de-registered car)
– West Herts Magistrates £800 fine
– Litigant in person requesting the case management file was ignored, therefore void order.
– Walk in posession, bailiff doesn’t take anything due to family trust (20m)
– A very useful deterrent for the bailiff was to point out that all property in the house was held in trust.
21m+ – Stevenage Borough PCN
– Template of document sent to all councils
– Case law on void orders ab initio
– Thelioness.co.uk
25m – Tricks used in paperwork to manufacturing consent
28m – Summary of what we’ve discussed
32m – Conditions needing to be met for our portfolio of void order cases
