"Ceylon" the UK's top Goodfer nothing

[rumpelstilzchen]

ceylon cromlech 18 3 13

Now, that was funny.

[Hercule Parrot]

This was one of the "victories" that Haining talked about in the Bali Maan video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvEXjs_oJd0&spfreload=10

.
That’s hilarious and it has to be the first time I have ever seen nob head Mark Ceylon Haining without those shades on his thinning head.What kind of a key was that the locksmith used?
I believe the guy known as Bali Mann is actually Balraj Maan.

It's a guilty pleasure, but I do enjoy seeing GOOFy mobs coming into contact with reality. What sort of magical unicorn world do they live in, if they think they can deliberately instigate a physical struggle with bailiffs and then complain about being assaulted.

[wanglepin]

Posted by Mark Haining /Ceylon, over on Goofers
Enforcement for Lichfield District Council
This caller from Response informs this enforcement officer that they have instructed the anonymous lady

to totally ignore correspondence and or any visits from Bristow and Sutor and to keep all her doors and windows locked, because she is not going to talk or deal with you at any point.

The enforcement officer Mr Neil McKelly of Bristow & Sutor informs the caller

You do know it is not bailiffs anymore.. bailiffs ceased to exist about a year ago in April and now it is now Enforcement, Tribunal Court Enforcement.

Caller then goes on to “educate” Mr Neil McKelly about court stamps, fraudulent signatures and warrents etc.
http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... RzdGTTF98E

[littleFred]

I laughed at that video: an ignorant bloke from Response "informing" the enforcement officer of the laws relating to his job. But the Response bloke probably told the woman this same junk, and she probably believed him.

I approve of people knowing their rights, and ensuring that enforcement officers act within the law. But when Response invent their own version of the law and want that to be complied with, they are not helping the (alleged) debtor. They are likely to harm the debtor, by focusing on incorrect junk (wet signatures and seals that emboss the paper) instead of relevant factors.

[Normal Wisdom]

I haven't listened to the video yet but over on GOODF it's being portrayed as some kind of vindication.

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... Rz0Ero2_zI

[littleFred]

It's on YouTube so it must be true.

This single video says it all, because the vast majority of these so-called warrants quite simply are not warrants at all. It was great to listen to a clear and precise explanation as to what a real warrant looks like. These utility warrants just as well be bags of confetti, because technically that's all they are.

The rules about warrants are given in CPR and various Acts of Parliament. There are different types of warrants with different rules, but an embossed seal is never required. These are the rules that courts will use, if a warrant's legitimacy is questioned. Not the junk rules invented by Response or parroted by them from Mr Ebert or other source.

The second video on that thread Equita Bailiff Phone Call With Robbie 27th March 2015 is 12m 45s of my life I'll never get back. The Response bloke (the man Jonathan Dow not Mr Jonathan Dow) is being chased for an unpaid parking ticket. He either appealed and lost, or didn't bother appealing. I suppose his £35 ticket has by now escalated to about £400. His message to Equita is basically "don't bother trying to collect."

He tells us that some Response member have bought Lordship titles so they can access various information such as birth certificates. Perhaps he doesn't know that in the UK, anyone can buy a copy of anyone's birth certificate.

[Normal Wisdom]

I haven't listened to the video yet but over on GOODF it's being portrayed as some kind of vindication.

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... Rz0Ero2_zI

I've watched the video now. Man I could just explode with frustration sometimes. Where do these idiots get this stuff from? Is it just that it's been repeated so often in the "freeman" circles that it has become accepted as fact? They don't even seem to point to any evidence of their claims. At least the bloke that was arguing with me about promissory notes provided a link to some legislation (even if his interpretation of it was completely back-to-front).

And don't get me started on Council Tax being voluntary.

[vampireLOREN]

[quote="littleFred"]It's on YouTube

I just watched this complete and total Lunatic and am amazed at his depth of foolishness.
The only plus was that there appeared to be a sideways view of a right buttock over his left shoulder hopefully breaking wind into his face.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Here is a recent Irish High Court judgment where the defendant attempted to discharge his mortgages using GOODF type arguments. Surprise, surprise, he failed.

http://courts.ie/Judgments.nsf/09859e7a ... enDocument

Methods used that failed:
Defendant's name is copyright, €10,000 per use payable in advance.
No Contract Return To Sender.
Unrebutted affidavit stands as the truth in commerce.
The bank did not lend any money, it was created.
Affidavit of Truth. Affidavit of Specific Negative Averment. Notice of Fault and Opportunity to Cure. Notice of Default and Dishonour. Affidavit of Non-Response. Actual Constructive Notice of Conditional Acceptance. Notice of Fault.
Defendant invoiced plaintiff for €7,000,000.
Letters from plaintiff demanding payment of mortgages were returned with "with lines drawn across them looking somewhat like the lines on a cheque." Below the lines was written:

“Accept for value. Return for value. Exempt from levy. Exemption ID 5466679 M. By G. Peacock, authorised representative. Deposit to Irish Exchequer and charge same to Gavin Peacock 54 – 66 – 67 – 9 M.”

Letter sent by defendant demanding proof of debt:

“1. Validation of the debt – the actual accounting.
2. Verification of your claim against me i.e. a sworn affidavit or signed invoice.
3. A copy of the contract binding both parties.”

Followed ten days later with:

“I now claim notice of my lawful right to dismiss this debt on the provision of your lawful obligation to provide documentation to substantiate your claim.”

Letter sent fifteen days later included:

“Unless you can furnish me, a proof of claim and signed affidavit, within the next (10) ten days of the date of this letter, it shall be taken as your lawful admission that the debt has been discharged/extinguished under the accepted and appropriate terms regarding primarily liability of instruments and the account is settled and closed. You will admit and agree that:
That I as the depositor for this account, that the Anglo Irish Bank risked none of the Anglo Irish Bank’s assets at any time regarding this account and that the Anglo Irish Bank failed to disclose these facts to me.

Followed one month later with “Notice of Irrevocable Estoppel by Acquiescence” stating:

“Letters dated 1st September, 2011, 11th September, 2011, 7th October, 2011. With provision by Anglo Irish Bank for validation of debt. Verification of claim and valid contract to bind both parties. I hereby serve notice that Anglo Irish Bank’s failure to provide Proof of Claim has created a permanent and irrevocable estoppel by acquiescence, forevermore barring Anglo Irish Bank from bringing any and all claims, legal actions, orders, demands, law suits, costs, levies, penalties, damages, interests, liens, and expenses whatsoever against Gavin Peacock™.”

The court was having none of it:

Conclusions
85. The plaintiff through its own letters and through its solicitors made it clear that they did not accept any of the assertions made by the defendant in the correspondence.
86. The defendant attempted to unilaterally impose terms upon the plaintiff by declaring that unless the plaintiff responded within a certain time they would be deemed to have agreed to the terms set out in the various documents. The plaintiff did not accept any of these terms. The defendant was not entitled to unilaterally impose any such terms on the plaintiff. In the circumstances, I am satisfied that no settlement of the debts owed by the defendant to the plaintiff occurred as a result of this series of correspondence.

87. The plaintiff did not acquiesce in any of the terms stipulated by the defendant. The plaintiff at all times made it clear that it did not accept any of the terms suggested by the defendant. There was no representation by the plaintiff that it agreed to any such terms. Accordingly, the plaintiff is not estopped from seeking to enforce repayment of the loans by virtue of any of the correspondence which passed between the parties.

88. The various letters and “affidavits” failed to set out any realistic defence to the within proceedings. In the circumstances, the defendant has failed to establish that he has any bona fide defence to the plaintiff’s claim herein. The plaintiff is entitled to judgment as against the defendant in the sum of €2,325,362.12.

[vampireLOREN]

I expect you must have seen this https://youtu.be/Hl8bTCVkLz4
Having no desire to go in to the depths of this.....the efforts of this band of brothers is
disturbing. Here we see The Admirable Tom and his lovely wife, Mr Sociable Leigh ( where's my longboat ) and Britain's great independent documentary film maker "CEYLON".
These people are dangerous.

[Normal Wisdom]

I expect you must have seen this https://youtu.be/Hl8bTCVkLz4
Having no desire to go in to the depths of this.....the efforts of this band of brothers is
disturbing. Here we see The Admirable Tom and his lovely wife, Mr Sociable Leigh ( where's my longboat ) and Britain's great independent documentary film maker "CEYLON".
These people are dangerous.

I've seen the videos arriving every day or so (I think we're up to 5 now) but I just haven't felt strong enough to suffer so much collected nuttery.

[Bones]

I wonder how much Ceylon makes behind the scenes. SovCit seems to be a very profitable business with no end of people willing to spend money to get out of debt

[Normal Wisdom]

I wonder how much Ceylon makes behind the scenes. SovCit seems to be a very profitable business with no end of people willing to spend money to get out of debt

GOODF now has 75,000 members (presumably not all active) so if 10% of them make donations that's a start. I also wonder if he gets paid for speaking engagements. I am sure he doesn't work otherwise and the last job he had was as owner of a travel agency which failed (all the government's fault) and it appears that this is what finally tipped him fully into the freeman lunacy.

The same goes for Guy Taylor. Unless he is still printing his own cash both he and Ceylon are making money from this nonsense somehow. In fact, Guy seems to be the driving force behind rapidly expanding the business.

[PeanutGallery]

In regard to GooDF's members, a cursory look at the "who's online" section at the bottom of the forum indicates that one of their members is registered as "Google Adsense [Bot]" which suggests that the account registration process allows for scripts (simple computer programs) to register an account and login. Having never registered an account there, I simply cannot say how secure the process is.

This may have helped to inflate the numbers. As no doubt would the propensity Ceylon and the other moderators show for banning anyone who does anything considered contentious, like asking questions about if this scam will work or encouraging other members to look behind the curtain.

[notorial dissent]

I find it incredibly amusing, not to say hilariously ironic, that an organization that is dedicated to getting the FOTL crowd something for nothing, is dependent on this same crowd of freeloaders to pay dues!!!! I wonder if that is why they are chronically short of funds and are always begging?

[notorial dissent]

I would suspect they are visited by a very large number of webbots of one kind or another, and I seriously doubt their numbers, kind of like the numbers reported as opposed to actually showed at various paytriot gatherings of righteous indigestion.

[Bones]

I find it incredibly amusing, not to say hilariously ironic, that an organization that is dedicated to getting the FOTL crowd something for nothing, is dependent on this same crowd of freeloaders to pay dues!!!! I wonder if that is why they are chronically short of funds and are always begging?

Selling ways of getting out of debt seems very profitable, no end of people willing to buy the latest "snake oil". Sovcit's seem very gullible and believe anything they are told

in some of the ceylon films he is sitting in a range rover and in others appears to be a bmw or Mercedes

[notorial dissent]

True, in that they won't pay their bills or anything they owe but will spend their last dime on the latest get something for nothing scam, says a lot about them. As to the car bit, lots of the get rich in real estate gurus over here use that ploy, along with big houses and such, none of which they own, but they put on a good show with stuff they've begged, borrowed, or stolen.

[Bones]

Ceylon telling a group of people how big the fish was that he nearly caught

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... UdGvJMvYtw

[wanglepin]

Ceylon telling a group of people how big the fish was that he nearly caught

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... UdGvJMvYtw

"and my debt went away but when it came back it was twice the size 'just like that' . spoon jar jar spoon".
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWmAT7cwhxo