[svd2022]

hi morag-
i did book consultation with zoltan few weeks ago, but have not heard from him. i sent him an email but no reply. would it be possible to speak to him, or change my booking to reyna?
or refund please.

[svd2022]

thank you; i will contact him

[svd2022]

dear morag-janet,

am in agreement with you here. one certainly hold position. that is fine.

i also agree with you that they have the burden of proof.

my question (rather academic actually) is regarding the apparent “maxim” that mark quoted in multiple places- “one who claims must provide remedy”.. this doesn’t seem right.

if the maxim was ” the one who claims has the burden of proof”, that would be fine..

[svd2022]

seems like a sleight of hand..

suppose you have a gardener has access to tresury.. he works on your lawn, and later on sends a bill/ invoice letter to you asking (claim) for payment, the letter itself is remedy? makes no sense.

[svd2022]

thank you janet;

i, did look at consultant page; but mark was unavailable; could you find from mark if he knows anyone that can help?

[svd2022]

hi morag,

how do you deal with further statements increased balance due, and piling interest charges.

Also, do you try to pre-emptively address equifax to sort this?

[svd2022]

yes- I have.

[svd2022]

thank you for clarifying. yes, we are all in the same page…

i would not use the original maxim though, as it doesn’t align with natural law.

instead i propose two separate rules if you will:

1) the one who claims has the burden of proof.

2) the one who harms must provide remedy.

as morag and you put it well, (1) allows us to ask questions: is the claim true, is there a debt due, has someone been harmed, do they believe PN/negotiable instrument not acceptable, etc etc.

.. and if turns that the claim is true, or that you actually benefited from someone’s labor, and are satisfied with their service, then per (2) you need to provide remedy, or you would be the one causing harm to someone.

[svd2022]

dear anand;

thank you for taking the time to reply. though, I don’t agree nor find your arguments relevant. just to be clear, i am not “writing off” or writing in anything. i take this seriously.

the whole objective is to be able to stand your ground, and understand the fundamentals, and have the conviction to defend your words and actions.. otherwise you will get your as$ handed to you. (possibly a maxim of modern law 🙂 )

your medical analogy.. ” he who provides poison provides remedy” actually makes sense to me.

there are many examples of this: e.g. the antidote (remedy) is the poison itself.

anyway for everyone’s benefit, i wish to bring this back to debt..

let me ask you simple yes or no question:

are you saying that, (per the maxim):

the one who claims a debt be due must provide remedy?

[svd2022]

hi.. thanks for this p[df. this is useful.

but do you have thoughts specific to this maxim that mark quoted. i find this to be incorrect. why should the one who claims you owe payment provide remedy as well. he is seeking remedy for the claim against you, no?

[svd2022]

hi anand,

i am responding to your recent new thread on this subject, can you share your email.

[svd2022]

Thank you.

[svd2022]

dear morag-janet,

thank you so much. i sincerely appreciate your help the pdfs are great .. v helpful.

one thing that caught my attention is that mark recommends filing “affidavit of status”.
In the affidavit- along with other statements such are living man etc.. i wonder if you also state that ucc has been filed and that you are an SPC not debtor, and that you are not surety for the debtor?

how do we weave the ucc into the defense. I see that none of the docs on handling court/police mention the ucc.. does mark believe this to be not useful?

[svd2022]

thanks morag;

yes, I do have p7 and highlights from the webinar written down (to ask for affidavit and proper warrant).
I have 2 questions:
1) what do you do physically with the warrant paper if they hand it to you. Do you take it, mark it and return? or do you refuse to take? at what do point do they have authority to handcuff you?
2) do you have any docs to indicate that you will be charging them if they detain you or force you under duress?

[svd2022]

thank you all for responding..
@morag-janet how about warrants. suppose they come knocking at the house door warrant, is it acceptable to say ” sorry, I dont talk to police, red-mark the warrant no consent/no contract, and return back to them”?
I also would like to tell them to buzz off or sign the liability waiver form and fee schedule.
does any module have these docs specifically? I recently purchased a court/police module, and unfortunately, it wasn’t what I was looking for!