Hannah Shotbolt- An English Rose

[ArthurWankspittle]

Oh my god! #almosthadtogetarealjob!

#hannahfuckwit meets #reality

[Normal Wisdom]

Has anyone else noticed that Hannah seems to struggle with basic mathematics, and the proper use of hashtags. Well that and just about anything else involving higher cognitive function.

So Please, to the 3 generous people that actually donated. take your donations back! In the best way. I want sponsorship not charity. You can still have all of my knowledge for free.... ‪#‎i‬'m passionate

As I recall Hannah's gofundme attracted four contributors, not three. You'd think she'd be able to keep track considering it's not really that big a number, most of us can easily count it on one hand. That and a hashtag doesn't have spaces, like this "#shemakesblondesthebuttofjokes".

The hashtag error was my fault. I messed up the copy and paste and my automatic reflex to write in english took over. Sorry if I made Hannah look stupid.

[PeanutGallery]

Well the point about basic maths and paying attention to things like how many people have donated money to the campaign she set up for her benefit(s) still stands.

[Normal Wisdom]

So Hannah has sent the court her promissory note for the sum of £1510 (I guess the original £1000 fine has ballooned somewhat).

It appears she also owes council tax from 2014 as, very unreasonably, the local authority wouldn't accept her lawful rebellion status as a reason not to pay. They have continued to send her requests so she's sending them a promissory note for £397 too.

She's going to be very unhappy when they refuse to accept the notes and even unhappier when she's dragged back to court again.

[notorial dissent]

I fear poor Hannah is doomed to lead a very unhappy and frustrated life at the rate things are going for her.

She does not appear to have the capacity to learn from prior events either it would appear.

[littleFred]

That figures. The stupid is strong in that one.

Not that I doubt you, but can you cite a reference, please?

[PeanutGallery]

I can confirm what Normal posted, most of her stupid is announced to the world at large throug her facebook page https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id ... 96&fref=ts, you may have to scroll down to an entry for the 7th of March at 07:15am. It reads:

Good morning!
So, i admit I have been procrastinating a bit. Ok a lot, before sending the promissory note for the value of £1510 to HMCTS.
I sent it yesterday for my own sanity. In my head the police were just about getting ready to come and kidnap me again from my bed at 3am with no warning and no choice for not doing what they want.... Bastards. Luckily I thought fuck them I do what I want.
So now the court fine is 'paid'. With a promissory note that is "as good as cash" according to Lord Denning they can now fuck off bullying me with their fraud.
Today I have a promissory note to pay a council tax bill of £396. 95.... They refused to acknowledge when I went into lawful rebellion regarding any tax in April 2014 and have still been sending bailiff letters. So now they can swivell on this instead.
I hope this works I really hope this works.
Have a lovely day everyone

If you can be bothered to scroll through the comments, Jamie "Bopalot" Barnes, features and continues his reformed beliefs by trying to tell Hannah that a lot of the Sovrun stuff won't work, he even cites Meads v Meads. To give him credit it's good that he's seen the error of his ways and certainly commendable that he's trying to help others avoid making the mistakes he made.

[littleFred]

Thanks.

I have a lot of respect for people like Jamie who can haul themselves out of the rabbit hole.

I hope this works I really hope this works.

I hope she eventually realises that it won't, and discovers why it can't, and figures out that burrowing deeper into the hole is doing her no good at all.

[Hyrion]

the court fine is 'paid'. With a promissory note that is "as good as cash"

Wow... I interpret the fact she puts quotes around those as indicators she herself doesn't believe in them..... yet she expects them to work.

If she's really so concerned about her safety that she's been having nightmares of police busting in at 3:00am to kidnap her - you'd think she'd make proper payment rather than pretending to pay.

[PeanutGallery]

I'm unsure if Hannah believes it will work, certainly she's hoping it will work. We know that it is very likely (in fact I'm 99.9999~∞% sure it won't work (and if it did it would likely be because of a screw up by the court clerks and certainly not because Hannah's promissory notes are precious commodities)).

I also think that Hannah may be thinking that if the Promissory notes don't work, she'll then be able to argue her point in court and cite the Denning judgement (which if I recall doesn't actually say what she thinks it says - especially because the case Hannah's been told this is from (Fielding & Platt Ltd -v- Selim Najjar; CA 17-Jan-1969 where the actual quote is:

The defendant never paid the first promissory note or any of the others. He never paid anything. In consequence, the plaintiffs suspended work on the contract, and it remained suspended. No further work was done on it. There were negotiations for a revival of the contract, but they came to nothing.
Stopping there, it is quite plain to me that the defendant was liable to pay the first of the promissory notes. We have repeatedly said in this court that a bill of exchange or a promissory note is to be treated as cash. It is to be honoured unless there is some good reason to the contrary. It is suggested that, on the first note, there was a failure of consideration. That suggestion is quite unfounded. The plaintiffs were getting on with their part of the contract. They were, they say, ordering goods from their suppliers and getting on with the work. At any rate, there is no evidence to the contrary; and, unless they were themselves in default, they were clearly entitled to payment of the first note.

The point of the whole judgement is clear, when you issue a promissory note you must be prepared to and able to pay it. That was very clearly what Lord Denning was saying. The promise contained on such a note must be honoured. Denning allowed Fielding and Platt ltd the amount of the first note, he awarded them it's value in damages.

Of course the Sovrun only looks at a fraction of the judgement, which strikes me as being more obiter than ratio and gets all confused.

[grixit]

What's a "lawful" rebellion?

[PeanutGallery]

What's a "lawful" rebellion?

A misunderstanding of the magna carta and a belief that the document signed in 1297 has an article 61 which can be invoked and allow you to protest the government by breaking the law and not get into any trouble for it at all.

It's wrong for a number of reasons:

One: The 1297 Magna Carta only had 37 provisions. Of these only 3 survive today. None of them are listed as 61.
Two: No surviving provision allows for 'lawful rebellion'
Three: Of the surviving provisions none contain the phrase 'lawful rebellion' (in fact only lawful only appears once and rebellion never appears).
Four: It was in the Magna Carta of 1215 but only applied to Baron's and gave them the power to seize the kings holdings, legally, if King John did not adhere to the charter - but they would have to give them back once he did.
Five: The 1215 Magna Carta was repealed on the orders of the Pope. The War of the Barons followed, the Barons lost.

Even if the article was in force today, which it isn't, Hannah wouldn't be able to apply it, as she's not a Baron. She's also following a path which the first folks to try out lost quite emphatically. It's come back into Sovrun vogue thanks to the "Historical" research of Roger Hayes and the British Constitution Group. In terms of how it applies to Council Tax it's not a reason not to pay.

[notorial dissent]

Poor Hannah, so ignorant, and so very very stupid, it has to almost hurt.

As a side note, I do wonder how long it will be before the court issues an arrest warrant for her failing to pay.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Five: The 1215 Magna Carta was repealed on the orders of the Pope. The War of the Barons followed, the Barons lost.

I don't think repealed is the exact term you want here. My understanding was that king John had deal with the pope that anything John signed had to be approved by the pope. He signed the Magna Carta but the pope didn't approve it, therefore it wasn't valid from the start according to the king and the pope.

[PeanutGallery]

Perhaps, we could say that because the Magna Carta lacked papal assent, which was a requirement back in those days, it was declared invalid?

Either way the point was that lawful rebellion isn't recognised in the UK, for anyone (not even the Barons) and it's not a reason to get out of paying your council tax and that still stands.

[littleFred]

... anything John signed had to be approved by the pope. He signed the Magna Carta ...

Sorry to be really picky, but John didn't sign. He sealed it, ie attached a wax seal on the end of a ribbon.

Certainly, "lawful rebellion" isn't a concept recognised in law.

[Pottapaug1938]

In any rate, the Magna Carta is almost wholly irrelevant in terms of modern law; so Hannah can declaim about it all she wants, but it won't make a difference. She is still an idiot; and she is destined to be a guest of Her Majesty in one of her Graybar Hotels, someday.

[PeanutGallery]

To continue with the general theme of finickiness I feel I should point out that Hannah has already been a guest at one of her Majesty's fine hotels. Therefore she has already accomplished Pottapaug's prediction.

[notorial dissent]

It does sound like she is going to become a repeat customer though.

[Pottapaug1938]

It does sound like she is going to become a repeat customer though.

... and for a significantly longer stay.