Letter to DVLA ~ opinions please

[weeandy]

in fact , ive not even signed a v5 document , as the bike was transferred into my name from the shop, so what rights do dvlc have against bme if ive not registered it for road use ?

[shinobi]

The DVLA doesnt own vehicles I got that in black and white under threat of perjury.

You have a reciept that you bought your car and that is proof of ownership.

Stop sending these daft letters
I can post mine if it will help you see the light.

asky

Yes please asky, that would be helpful.

I'd like to see exactly what they sent you, including the bit that says it's under penalty of perjury.

I'd also like to see what you sent them to convince them to reply under penalty of perjury.

[weeandy]

Callked the private company and told them i dont have a contract or account with them (phillips) , they never bothered me gain. My bike got sorned over the phone no problem and they were not interested in said charge for not recieving sorn. Am now writing letters on behalf of my friends though to be honest , n email usualy does it.

[MonacoJim]

I have changed one of my de-registered cars and have received the V5 doc from the DVLA for the new car, addressed to my legal fiction. I have sent the part back that exports the car and I am now sending them the following; Notice of Understanding, Intent and Claim of Right. Note; If no CONTRACT is formed with the DVLA, then as it maybe is that a Trust is formed when you apply for a licence, or at some other time, this is covered in this Notice too. (You can withdraw from the Trust nunc pro tunc, and reissue your signature with your terms for the trust that the trustee must follow). Anyhow here is the letter, I will post the DVLA reply as & when.

DE-REGISTRATION
DVLA 
Swansea 
SA99 1BA 

Served by First Class Recorded Delivery
June 26th 2010
Reference: Vehicle known as XXXX XXX
Notice of Understanding and Intent and Claim of Right
Dear DVLA, 

Please read the following notice thoroughly and carefully before responding. It is a notice. It informs you. It means what it says. 

It is important that you consider and respond to the notice in substance. The 'nearest official form' will not suffice, and consequently is likely to be ignored by My Self without any dishonour on my part. 

On the other hand there is a time-limit on the notice being served. It is reasonable, and if it runs out then I shall take the understanding that you are in agreement with the points herein stated and that you have no objections to any or all of the points contained herein in full accordance with my Rights in Law. 

It is my understanding that notice to one is notice to all. Should you not be in a position to respond with clarity to the points stated herein it is my understanding that an officer of your choosing will be delegated the task of response and the name of said person will be made known to My Self. 

For these reasons it is recommended that you carefully consider this notice and respond in substance, which means addressing the points raised herein. 

Failure to respond to this offer and to do so completely and in good faith within 14 (fourteen) working days will be deemed by all parties to mean you and your principal or other parties agree in full to the points made herein and wholeheartedly accept this claim. 

I now draw your professional attention to the following points wherein "DVLA" should be taken to read "the DVLA or any associated Agency".

It is my understanding that when a thing becomes registered with a body, the body it is registered to, or with, takes title ownership of said thing.  (see Blacks Law dictionary)

It is my understanding that in this case the thing in question is a device for use to aid roaming commonly called a “vehicle” by the DVLA. 

It is my understanding that a person who registers a vehicle gives up the right to own the vehicle in exchange for equitable title, i.e. the right, to keep or look after or store or use what is now in point of fact the property of DVLA.  (If this is not so, and the DVLA has stated this in the past, then please answer the question; “Who is the legal owner?” in your reply.) If you cannot answer the question;”Who is the legal owner of the car in question”, then please pass this Notice to someone who can answer this question, as you are probably not qualified to answer to this Notice.

It is my understanding that in doing so the keeper must abide by the rules of the Trust, society or corporation or body to which the vehicle is registered. 

Consequently it is my understanding that subsequent keepers are not owners as stated in section C4c of the Registration Certificate which states: “The registered keeper is not necessarily the legal owner”. 

It is my understanding that this vital information is not fully and plainly disclosed on the contract known as the V5 Registration Certificate. For a contract to be valid it must contain FULL disclosure. It follows that since this vital information is not shown clearly on the contract it must be deemed that the contract is null and void. 

It is my understanding that upon 1st registration a vehicle known as XXXX XXX was registered with DVLA. 

It is my understanding that DVLA took title ownership of the vehicle known as XXX XXX at the moment of 1st registration. 

It is my understanding that when the vehicle came into the possession of My Self, believing to be the new owner, I was in point of fact only buying the right to use and not the right to own property of DVLA and that this vital information was kept from being disclosed to My Self on the contract. 

In consequence: 

I hereby serve notice and state clearly, specifically and unequivocally, that under the laws and customs of England, which Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II has sworn to protect, I make claim to what is rightly, justly and lawfully mine. 

I claim full lawful rights, allodial title and ownership of the conveyance known to DVLA as XXXX XXX in my possession and the use of it freely on roads and highways and on private land, acting with reasonable care and responsibility to 3rd parties so long as I am not acting or involved in commerce. (Commerce being defined as the buying and selling of goods for the benefit of the operator of the conveyance). 

I claim full lawful rights, allodial title and full ownership irrespective in any faulty understanding as expressed above. 

I claim my lawful right to roam and use any form of private conveyance on roads and highways without let, hindrance, levy, licence or duty. 

I claim that any consent which may have been either expressed or implied by My Self in regard to, or in relation to any statute regulating the operation of any form of conveyance on roads and highways and private property is withdrawn. 

I claim that the registration of XXXXXXX with DVLA is now withdrawn, and I demand that it be struck from registration, and said registration voided. I may be prepared, if requested, to allow sufficient details to be recorded such as to enable lawful contact in connection with said conveyance via the address given below. 

I claim the right to fix reference plates of my choosing on my private conveyance formally known as XXXXX,to my design, colour and style, and record my chosen reference of SUI JURIS X, that any 3rd party may identify and refer to in such cases of harm or injury caused to, or in the event of, injury sustained by My Self due to incident while operating the conveyance. 

I claim the right to use or accept any word or words to describe a private conveyance being owned or used by My Self or words used to describe the operation of the conveyance which will include but not limited to: vehicle, motor vehicle, driver, driving, car, motorcycle, or any word in relation to that private conveyance. And that the use or acceptance of those words does not in any way imply consent to stand under any statute.

If a Trust was formed by my signature on the original D1 form for my Driving licence, or anywhere else, and this results in statute rules being applied to my travel activities, and if this Trust survives after my herein claim of allodial title to my cars, then nunc pro tunc I withdraw my signature from that Trust and hereby reissue same with instructions to the Trustee to apply the following Terms to the Trust; “you shall administer the trust in good faith for my benefit, without cost to me whatsoever, with no rules or regulations applying other than those I prior specifically agree to in writing".

Now it is your professional duty that you should inform Noel Shanahan, the DVLA CEO, and maybe co-Trustee, Philip Hammond, the Secretary of State for the Department of Transport, or whosoever the responsible Trustee is, of this change of Terms, otherwise you could be guilty of negligence and or professional misconduct. 

Fee Schedule 

I claim my fee schedule in regard to my Natural Born Lawful Right to freely travel on Her Majesty’s roads and highways. 

£500 (five hundred) GB Pounds per hour, per individual reasonably involved, for: Any work caused to me or transgressions by police officers, government principles or their agents, or participants in the system of justice or should I be stopped by a uniformed or non uniformed officer doing so without reasonable cause or prevented in going about my lawful peaceful right to roam, questioned, interrogated or in any way detained, harassed or otherwise regulated. 

£5,000 (five thousand) GB Pounds per hour, per individual reasonably involved: Should I be handcuffed, arrested, transported, incarcerated, or subjected to any adjudication process without my express written and notarized consent. 

£20,000 (twenty thousand) GB Pounds (in addition to any compensation awarded), per individual reasonably involved: Should violence be used against either My Self or those under my care and protection, or damage or loss to my privately owned or borrowed or hired private conveyance. 

I claim the right to convene a proper court de jure in order to address any potential criminal actions of any police officers, government officials, principals or agents, or participants in the system of justice who, having been served notice of this claim fail to dispute or discuss or make lawful counterclaim and then interfere by act or omission with the lawful exercise of property claimed and established rights and freedoms. 

I claim the right to deal with any counterclaims or disputes publicly and in open forum using discussion and negotiation and to capture both video and audio evidence of said discussion and negotiation for whatever lawful purpose I see fit. 

Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein or make their own counterclaims must respond appropriately within 14 (fourteen) working days of receipt of this notice. Responses are required to be made under oath or attestation upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury and received via registered mail to:
In care of:
James: of the XXXXXX family, 
Common Law Academy, PIL-JM,
XXXXX Building, 
XXXXXXXX Hall park,
XXXXX, Bedfordshire, 
Near: [LUX XXX]


Failure to record an appropriate dispute against the claims made herein will mean that you agree with my understanding and claims and will result in automatic default judgment and permanent and irrevocable estoppels by acquiescence barring any claims or the bringing of charges by you or any interested 3rd parties under any statute against My Self for exercising my lawful and properly established Natural Born Rights and Freedoms. 

Replying with quotes of statutes, or not under oath or attestation upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury, will hereby be taken as consent on your part that you agree with the points, claims and facts of this Notice and that you are without any lawful rebut of this Notice, please be guided accordingly.

Sincerely and without ill will, vexation or frivolity, 

SIGNED

Sui Juris
James: of the XXXXXX family,

WITHOUT PREJUDICE, i.e. all Natural Inalienable Rights Reserved 
Please address all future correspondence in the matter to a direct Human Self, namely James: of the XXXXX family, as commonly called.

[MonacoJim]

The question of who owns your car looks to have been answered by Guy on Lawful rebellion web site, it seems a Trust is set up when you submit a D1 application for license. Your signature is the asset. trouble is if you don't instruct the Trustee on how to operate the trust, they get to make the rules. (and do they ever!)
Good news is that you can withdraw your signature and reissue it with Trust instructions, such as; "operate the trust in good faith for my benefit and without any cost to me whatsoever, with no rules or regulations applying other than those I prior specifically agree to in writing".

It may be a good idea to add this to the de-registering NOTICE OF UNDERSTANDING, INTENT AND CLAIM OF RIGHT.


Toolbox: Trust is everywhere, it’s your relationship, express it!
Published: 20/06/2010

For some time now I have fallen silent. Having researched and experimented with things like freeman and commercial redemption, I have had some success, but nothing has given solid results. This lead me to believe that there is something wrong with what we are doing, after all, if someone had success, it was presumed that his/her process was perfected, you would use what had succeeded for them to the letter, yet you failed? Why was this? It seems it is a very low percentage of success and not at all consistent. It seems that the gatekeepers have been throwing us little doggies a bone here and there, but only to keep us looking in the wrong direction…
So my brothers and sisters, I started with some close friends to look into ‘Trusts’ and let me tell you, when you look into Trusts you start to realise, as we always believed, it’s indirectly ALL our fault! We have the ability to do amazing things, we have but to ‘express’ it. Trusts are how we have all been duped into consent, consent to losing freedoms, being legislated against and giving up our hard earned funds (I won’t use the term money) allowing gangsters, thugs and criminals to de facto govern us.
In this article I wish to open your eyes to Trusts. This is not for the faint of heart, if your eyes are opened there is no turning back! Once you see the Trusts, you will always see Trust in everything, as the three basic parties of Trust are prevalent in all things within the System.
Ok, the basics of Trusts for you to understand is that it’s a relationship, a Trust relationship, in the relationship there are three identifiable parties, this does not mean three men or women, but three assigned parties.
These are the Grantor or Settlor (there are older terms that we will go into in the more advanced tuition), it is the “or” part that is the granting party, the creat “or” of the relationship. The Creator has started the relationship by bringing value to it (puting in something of value, not necessarily financial value), then it is the Creator that also sets out the rules by which the Trust operates and then defines the use of the property (that was put in) by the Beneficiary (one who does not own the property but is allowed to use it).
Then you have the Trustee. The Trustee is the party that is charged with the administration of the trust relationship as laid out by the Grantor/Settlor/Creator – the rules having been laid out, are the guiding corner stone’s of the Trust. These rules are to be adhered too totally or a terrible crime occurs (known as breach) for which the penalty is heavy.
Then we have the Beneficiary. This is the party that is to ‘benefit’ from this relationship, usually the use of the property entered into the Trust. The property must only be used in the manner laid out by the Creator/Grantor/Settlor, and it is the duty of the Trustee to make sure this happens to the letter.
There is a flip side to this, if the Beneficiary is dissatisfied by the performance of the Trustee and pulls up the Trustee for this failure on his/her part and is left wanting, then it is for the Beneficiary to bring the Trustee into a law form called ‘Equity’. Equity is a different ball game altogether, it deals with the conscious man, and it is not a totally rigid law form, it takes into account all the facts and makes a conscious decision, e.g. it’s not rigid like statutory summary judgements etc.
You will mostly find Equity in the courts of chancery, well true equity anyway. In the 1700s the powers that be, tried to merge statutory and equity law forms, but it was really an attempt to snuff out true remedy of the flesh and blood man/woman. It was not successful and it left the courts with just a simple colour of equity (kind of like a picture of, but not actually the real thing) and equity went into the higher courts of the land i.e. chancery division in the ‘City of London’ within London.
Time for a diagram: (go to bottom)

So as you can see from the above diagram, a pyramid funnily enough!, the three parties form a triangle and these effect the parties required to form a Trust, and if you added the eye of the trustee at the top, we would have the symbol everyone obsesses about.
The property that’s put into the Trust is split amongst the parties, which results in the titles being altered. When someone owns something free and clear, the title is total, which is known as ‘allodial title’. This means that no Trust is in effect, as it is whole, but if the Grantor/Creator/Settlor splits the title, i.e. splits the pure title (allodial) between two parties, the legal title goes to the Trustee (remember this, it’s important) – It is that particular title that denotes the administrator of the Trust, the one whom governs it within the rules given by the Grantor/Settlor/Creator. Then there is the title of use, which is given to the Beneficiary of the Trust relationship, this title is known as the ‘equitable title’ – this means that the beneficiary has usage rights (within the assigned parameters). Now that the titles have been split in two, a Trust element is formed, though there is a bit more to complete before you can claim you have a Trust relationship, but that is the easy part…
So in a Trust you can create it by ‘declaration’ with ‘words’ or ‘conduct’ (remember these terms). Then you must have the Trust property (the thing to put into Trust), also known as ‘Trust res’. Once you have created the Trust res, it must be passed onto the other parties, this is known as transfer. This can be done a number of ways, but to keep it simple for now, let’s use:
1.Endorsement
2.Delivery
The way I do it, is you deliver the two titles of the property by Royal Mail signed for, that way you have a proof of delivery by endorsement (their receiving signature). To cap it off you can have a third party sign an affidavit that they saw it being posted within the given envelope – that ties that up.
The last remaining part of the Trust elements required by you to prove there is a Trust relationship, are that of purpose and intent, which can be together or separate. But it is as simple as, the purpose of the Trust is to see that the beneficiary gets the benefit of the trust property, and the intent is, you wish it to be done in this particular way at this time etc… (it’s really one in the same most of the time).
Ok, so now you can prove you have a Trust, as all of the elements are present, you have:
‘Specific res’ (Trust property) to have its titles split and be transferred
‘Intent’ to create a Trust to do something
‘Purpose’ to make sure the beneficiary gets the benefit
Parties ‘Grantor, Trustee and Beneficiary’
Warning: don’t ever retain full title to property, full title is allodial, if you have that you have no Trust. If you ‘merge’ the titles after splitting them then you have just terminated a Trust.
Ok I hope that was not too painful, now I want you to understand a silly rule that you may have never realised and it is at the heart of how the Queen, the Government and its minions have captured you into this life of rules and financial servitude.
If a Trust is created and does not have its rules fully ‘expressed’, then you have left it to others to ‘construe’ the rules or terms and conditions, which allows these filthy blaggards to make the rules to suit themselves, and that they do, in droves, however, my friends, salvation is at hand.
The Grantor/Settlor/Creator can ‘express’ the terms at ANY TIME, so, providing you realise you have inadvertently created Trust, yet have not fully expressed it, then you have the ability to go back and sort out what you haven’t done, and clear this whole sorry mess up.
So without further ado, here is an example of an ‘unexpressed’, and so construed Trust! (you’re going to hate this)…
My personal favourite, the ‘DRIVING LICENCE’, it’s probably a good point to note here, all though not to emphatically yet, that your signature is the beginning and end of all things in your world (more on that later). So you feel that it is time you got on the road, you go to the Post Office and you get yourself a form ‘D1’ and fill it in and ‘sign (endorse) it, then send it away… What have you just done without realising it? You have just created a Trust!
You have given over a ‘specific res’ (Trust property) transferred/delivered (provable by the fact you received the license itself). The Trust property you gave them was not the form, it was your signature on the form. Your signature is the power and value behind the document (equity see’s the substance through the form), the substance being your ‘signature’ and the form being the ‘D1’, equity knows that is the substance or Trust property transferred. So when you sent that in, did you by chance give them instructions? Or what law form you want in your Trust? Did you? No, and neither did I at that time. It is time for you to express these terms now, and you CAN do it now, all the way back in time to the date you handed over your property in Trust, using the term ‘nunc pro tunc’ (do a search for the definition).
So let’s see what happened, we provided something of value to a Trustee, DVLA’s, Noel Shanahan, the CEO, and maybe co-Trustee, Philip Hammond, the Secretary of State for the Department of Transport (DFT). You did not give them the terms and conditions surrounding the use, so they have construed it. They wrote its use to be in line with the Road Traffic Act 1988 etc, so you are now surrounded by overbearing rules and regulations that they kid you is for your own good! Of course it’s not about generating money!!! Like hell it’s not!!!
So what do you do? Well for a start you need to withdraw your signature from them by notice. Once withdrawn you can re-deposit it as special (specific res), and then give them a full rundown of the parties, terms and conditions for use of YOUR Trust res. If you are still in doubt and can’t see what I am saying, then email Philip Hammond at the DFT, and see if he responds with anything other than bullshit! or evasion by quoting some stupid statutory crap!!
Ask him these questions: Questions = Q, N = are notes:
Q: Sir, I am to understand I am the registered keeper of my car, which is beneficial use? (equitable title) but it states not the legal owner? Who is the legal owner?
N: Ask that because the legal owner is the Trustee, and the Trustee has administrative duties to pay for the upkeep of everything. You could if you want an answer without him crying, just ask, ‘who owns it it’, it’s that simple. He will not answer, but bombard him anyway.
Q: Sir, it said when I received my driving license or digital tachograph card that it is for my use, but is owned by the Secretary of State, are you the legal title holder?
N: Ask this for the same reason, legal title holder is liable for all fines etc… Especially once you have assigned them the terms and conditions as such (expressed the terms). Send your polite questions to Philip.hammond@dft.gov.uk report back to us your replies firstly in confidence to protect your identities please.
Once you have expressed all of your Trusts, you will start to see a change in your life, don’t get me wrong it is not without a fight, they do not want to lose control and we sometimes have to have a little fight, but the remedy is there.
This is something you must do, if you don’t, you will forever be under the jack boot of the filthy liars known as government. For learning the finer points of Trusts, I would recommend a Trust research group, there are many, Skype is best for this.
Well, that’s your first insight into Trusts, I hope you can see the power in what I have just ‘granted’ you, it is in everything we do 100s of times a day. It cannot be ignored, I have studied so very hard to bring you this, and the team I work with are amazing.
Guy
ATTACHMENTS

Guys diagram of a Trust structure.

[MonacoJim]

Woah, as posted elsewhere here, I was robbed last night at 1.15am by 2 PCs creeping up and removing the plates from my cars. Didn't notify me, didn't ring the door bell. I asked what they were doing and they said they were removing the plates for evidence. I asked evidence of what as I had written notification to the DVLA and I was in a dialogue with the local police station. They didn't have an answer. I have lodged a formal complaint and written to the county Police commissioner, as this was theft of private property, without a court order or a warrant based on a court order.
The reason I am bringing this up again and it may be important is that they left a Fixed penalty Notice on the car, after I had gone in, and it quoted the DVLA identifier, not the plates I had on the car. The DVLA database should show the car as being exported. Now why might this be important: I haven't had a reply from the DVLA on the second car re my Notice of Intent, Understanding and Claim of Right (NUICR) whereas I did for the first car I de-registered, the only difference between my 2 de-register docs was that the latest one included a section that said that if a Trust was set up during my application for a Driving licence, then Nunc pro tunc, I was rescinding my signature and reissuing it with my expression of the rules for that Trust. (rules in my favour).
As these 2 PC came all the way from Kempston (not local) I have the feeling this is a high level motivated move. The Police county commissioner is in Kempston. Could it be that the Trust clause has hit a nerve and that is where they are getting their power from and we've found it?!! The speed at which the following disappeared from the website where I found it may have some bearing, I don't know. I will repeat it here in case its something we need to spread fast. rgds, Jim
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Published: 20/06/2010

For some time now I have fallen silent. Having researched and experimented with things like freeman and commercial redemption, I have had some success, but nothing has given solid results. This lead me to believe that there is something wrong with what we are doing, after all, if someone had success, it was presumed that his/her process was perfected, you would use what had succeeded for them to the letter, yet you failed? Why was this? It seems it is a very low percentage of success and not at all consistent. It seems that the gatekeepers have been throwing us little doggies a bone here and there, but only to keep us looking in the wrong direction…
So my brothers and sisters, I started with some close friends to look into ‘Trusts’ and let me tell you, when you look into Trusts you start to realise, as we always believed, it’s indirectly ALL our fault! We have the ability to do amazing things, we have but to ‘express’ it. Trusts are how we have all been duped into consent, consent to losing freedoms, being legislated against and giving up our hard earned funds (I won’t use the term money) allowing gangsters, thugs and criminals to de facto govern us.
In this article I wish to open your eyes to Trusts. This is not for the faint of heart, if your eyes are opened there is no turning back! Once you see the Trusts, you will always see Trust in everything, as the three basic parties of Trust are prevalent in all things within the System.
Ok, the basics of Trusts for you to understand is that it’s a relationship, a Trust relationship, in the relationship there are three identifiable parties, this does not mean three men or women, but three assigned parties.
These are the Grantor or Settlor (there are older terms that we will go into in the more advanced tuition), it is the “or” part that is the granting party, the creat “or” of the relationship. The Creator has started the relationship by bringing value to it (puting in something of value, not necessarily financial value), then it is the Creator that also sets out the rules by which the Trust operates and then defines the use of the property (that was put in) by the Beneficiary (one who does not own the property but is allowed to use it).
Then you have the Trustee. The Trustee is the party that is charged with the administration of the trust relationship as laid out by the Grantor/Settlor/Creator – the rules having been laid out, are the guiding corner stone’s of the Trust. These rules are to be adhered too totally or a terrible crime occurs (known as breach) for which the penalty is heavy.
Then we have the Beneficiary. This is the party that is to ‘benefit’ from this relationship, usually the use of the property entered into the Trust. The property must only be used in the manner laid out by the Creator/Grantor/Settlor, and it is the duty of the Trustee to make sure this happens to the letter.
There is a flip side to this, if the Beneficiary is dissatisfied by the performance of the Trustee and pulls up the Trustee for this failure on his/her part and is left wanting, then it is for the Beneficiary to bring the Trustee into a law form called ‘Equity’. Equity is a different ball game altogether, it deals with the conscious man, and it is not a totally rigid law form, it takes into account all the facts and makes a conscious decision, e.g. it’s not rigid like statutory summary judgements etc.
You will mostly find Equity in the courts of chancery, well true equity anyway. In the 1700s the powers that be, tried to merge statutory and equity law forms, but it was really an attempt to snuff out true remedy of the flesh and blood man/woman. It was not successful and it left the courts with just a simple colour of equity (kind of like a picture of, but not actually the real thing) and equity went into the higher courts of the land i.e. chancery division in the ‘City of London’ within London.
Time for a diagram: (not here, its a triangle with 1 of the 3 parties in each corner)

So as you can see from the above diagram, a pyramid funnily enough!, the three parties form a triangle and these effect the parties required to form a Trust, and if you added the eye of the trustee at the top, we would have the symbol everyone obsesses about.
The property that’s put into the Trust is split amongst the parties, which results in the titles being altered. When someone owns something free and clear, the title is total, which is known as ‘allodial title’. This means that no Trust is in effect, as it is whole, but if the Grantor/Creator/Settlor splits the title, i.e. splits the pure title (allodial) between two parties, the legal title goes to the Trustee (remember this, it’s important) – It is that particular title that denotes the administrator of the Trust, the one whom governs it within the rules given by the Grantor/Settlor/Creator. Then there is the title of use, which is given to the Beneficiary of the Trust relationship, this title is known as the ‘equitable title’ – this means that the beneficiary has usage rights (within the assigned parameters). Now that the titles have been split in two, a Trust element is formed, though there is a bit more to complete before you can claim you have a Trust relationship, but that is the easy part…
So in a Trust you can create it by ‘declaration’ with ‘words’ or ‘conduct’ (remember these terms). Then you must have the Trust property (the thing to put into Trust), also known as ‘Trust res’. Once you have created the Trust res, it must be passed onto the other parties, this is known as transfer. This can be done a number of ways, but to keep it simple for now, let’s use:
1.Endorsement
2.Delivery
The way I do it, is you deliver the two titles of the property by Royal Mail signed for, that way you have a proof of delivery by endorsement (their receiving signature). To cap it off you can have a third party sign an affidavit that they saw it being posted within the given envelope – that ties that up.
The last remaining part of the Trust elements required by you to prove there is a Trust relationship, are that of purpose and intent, which can be together or separate. But it is as simple as, the purpose of the Trust is to see that the beneficiary gets the benefit of the trust property, and the intent is, you wish it to be done in this particular way at this time etc… (it’s really one in the same most of the time).
Ok, so now you can prove you have a Trust, as all of the elements are present, you have:
‘Specific res’ (Trust property) to have its titles split and be transferred
‘Intent’ to create a Trust to do something
‘Purpose’ to make sure the beneficiary gets the benefit
Parties ‘Grantor, Trustee and Beneficiary’
Warning: don’t ever retain full title to property, full title is allodial, if you have that you have no Trust. If you ‘merge’ the titles after splitting them then you have just terminated a Trust.
Ok I hope that was not too painful, now I want you to understand a silly rule that you may have never realised and it is at the heart of how the Queen, the Government and its minions have captured you into this life of rules and financial servitude.
If a Trust is created and does not have its rules fully ‘expressed’, then you have left it to others to ‘construe’ the rules or terms and conditions, which allows these filthy blaggards to make the rules to suit themselves, and that they do, in droves, however, my friends, salvation is at hand.
The Grantor/Settlor/Creator can ‘express’ the terms at ANY TIME, so, providing you realise you have inadvertently created Trust, yet have not fully expressed it, then you have the ability to go back and sort out what you haven’t done, and clear this whole sorry mess up.
So without further ado, here is an example of an ‘unexpressed’, and so construed Trust! (you’re going to hate this)…
My personal favourite, the ‘DRIVING LICENCE’, it’s probably a good point to note here, all though not to emphatically yet, that your signature is the beginning and end of all things in your world (more on that later). So you feel that it is time you got on the road, you go to the Post Office and you get yourself a form ‘D1’ and fill it in and ‘sign (endorse) it, then send it away… What have you just done without realising it? You have just created a Trust!
You have given over a ‘specific res’ (Trust property) transferred/delivered (provable by the fact you received the license itself). The Trust property you gave them was not the form, it was your signature on the form. Your signature is the power and value behind the document (equity see’s the substance through the form), the substance being your ‘signature’ and the form being the ‘D1’, equity knows that is the substance or Trust property transferred. So when you sent that in, did you by chance give them instructions? Or what law form you want in your Trust? Did you? No, and neither did I at that time. It is time for you to express these terms now, and you CAN do it now, all the way back in time to the date you handed over your property in Trust, using the term ‘nunc pro tunc’ (do a search for the definition).
So let’s see what happened, we provided something of value to a Trustee, DVLA’s, Noel Shanahan, the CEO, and maybe co-Trustee, Philip Hammond, the Secretary of State for the Department of Transport (DFT). You did not give them the terms and conditions surrounding the use, so they have construed it. They wrote its use to be in line with the Road Traffic Act 1988 etc, so you are now surrounded by overbearing rules and regulations that they kid you is for your own good! Of course it’s not about generating money!!! Like hell it’s not!!!
So what do you do? Well for a start you need to withdraw your signature from them by notice. Once withdrawn you can re-deposit it as special (specific res), and then give them a full rundown of the parties, terms and conditions for use of YOUR Trust res. If you are still in doubt and can’t see what I am saying, then email Philip Hammond at the DFT, and see if he responds with anything other than bullshit! or evasion by quoting some stupid statutory crap!!
Ask him these questions: Questions = Q, N = are notes:
Q: Sir, I am to understand I am the registered keeper of my car, which is beneficial use? (equitable title) but it states not the legal owner? Who is the legal owner?
N: Ask that because the legal owner is the Trustee, and the Trustee has administrative duties to pay for the upkeep of everything. You could if you want an answer without him crying, just ask, ‘who owns it it’, it’s that simple. He will not answer, but bombard him anyway.
Q: Sir, it said when I received my driving license or digital tachograph card that it is for my use, but is owned by the Secretary of State, are you the legal title holder?
N: Ask this for the same reason, legal title holder is liable for all fines etc… Especially once you have assigned them the terms and conditions as such (expressed the terms). Send your polite questions to Philip.hammond@dft.gov.uk report back to us your replies firstly in confidence to protect your identities please.
Once you have expressed all of your Trusts, you will start to see a change in your life, don’t get me wrong it is not without a fight, they do not want to lose control and we sometimes have to have a little fight, but the remedy is there.
This is something you must do, if you don’t, you will forever be under the jack boot of the filthy liars known as government. For learning the finer points of Trusts, I would recommend a Trust research group, there are many, Skype is best for this.
Well, that’s your first insight into Trusts, I hope you can see the power in what I have just ‘granted’ you, it is in everything we do 100s of times a day. It cannot be ignored, I have studied so very hard to bring you this, and the team I work with are amazing.
Guy