George Tsigarides - The Stupid FOI archives

[AndyPandy]

What do we think the story so far is ? This is my take and just pure speculation on my part but reading between the lines ...

Worked for HMRC, took out a season ticket loan but didn't use it to the purpose intended, then attempted to pay it back using a We'Re cheque (probably used these to attempt to pay utility bills as well !!) which failed spectacularly and was subsequently dismissed for gross misconduct.

Now can't get a reference from HMRC which has left him not a little angry, but instead of putting the blame where it fairly lies (with himself) throws all his energies into FOI's to prove he was right and the cheque should have been accepted ??

[#six]

That would make some sense. However he seems to have it in for everybody. Many of his requests are not HMRC or were bank related but run of the mill freeman woo. I tend to agree on your points about him being sacked I just can't work out the reasons for the rest

[daveBeeston]

I've just found what would appear to be George's thread over on the MSE website http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/sho ... ?t=5301291 and it would appear HMRC sacked him in September last year.
His threads all seem to be about how to obtain credit with poor credit rating, mortgage defaults or how to avoid paying, im not 100% sure he is into the freeman woo i just think he is someone who has had financial trouble and is now just trying to be a pain to as many organizations as possible as a misguided attempt at revenge.

[SteveUK]

I think he's as wood up as they get. It's his terminology. Dipped into all his were nonsense are UCC, Maritime, Contract, Geneva convention, bankrupt state etc etc.

He's into it in a big way

[notorial dissent]

And you're going to be of swilling the local product. Oh. My. Unchaperoned. Safe travels and drink one for me, I know you'll suffer through.

George is the type of individual, usual two or three year olds go through this, who asks a question with a specific answer in mind, and when he doesn't get it he tries again and again, and again, since they aren't giving him the answer he wants.

[NYGman]

I think George believes that perhaps he isn't asking the question with the right magic words, or the person reading those magic words, doesn't understand them like they should, so it warrants a followup to fix

[mufc1959]

Oh dear ...

https://www.asktheeu.org/en/user/george_tsigarides

[SteveUK]

Georges euro rejection has caused him to redouble his efforts on our fair shores.

Today's garbage is directed at the attorney generals office, and the Americans & Vatican are now set in his twisted sights.

From: George Tsigarides

8 June 2016

Dear Attorney General’s Office,

I will be grateful if you would confirm the following please:

1. Does the AGO hold records that confirm or otherwise, that all courts in America are Vice-admiralty courts in the Crown' s private commerce.

2. Does the AGO hold records that confirm or otherwise, that the definition of
"Courts of Exchequer" (for the Treasury of the Vatican) are Vice-admiralty courts in the Crown's private commerce.

Thank You.

Kind Regards.

Yours faithfully,

George Tsigarides

Link to this

[SteveUK]

And of course, being election season- it's time to wheel out the old 'power of attorney ' junk at the doorstep of the electoral commission.

His last question is a treat to behold.

From: George Tsigarides

8 June 2016

Dear Attorney General’s Office,

I will be grateful if you would confirm the following:

1. Does the AGO hold any records that confirm or otherwise, that those registering to vote have given (granted) general power of attorney without restriction, reservation or limitation to the United Kingdom government to act in their stead once in office, and without any recourse.

2. Does the AGO hold any records that confirm or otherwise, the significnce and meaning of putting a X to vote.

[#six]

If at first you don't succeed, try, try, try again and then get shouty. That will show them

Dear Southern Water Services Limited,

FAO Mark -

I note that instead on following the correct process, in that, Southern Water do not send WeRe bank cheques for processing under the special presentation option, which should allow WeRe Bank cheques to clear.

Duly Noted.

Please note what I have recently discovered (and if you pay close attention and do your own research, you should get the shock of your life):

LEGAL TENDER IS LAWFUL MONEY WHEN PRESENTED IN A COURT OF LAW IN ORDER TO
SETTLE A DEBT.

LEGAL TENDER BOTH AS DEFINED ON THE US DOLLAR FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES AND THE
BANK OF ENGLAND’S NOTES ARE PROMISES TO “PAY ALL DEBTS”.

LEGAL TENDER IS THE OFFERING OF “PROMISSORY NOTES”.

LEGAL TENDER IS THEREFORE A “PROMISE TO PAY”.

A CHEQUE IS ALSO A PROMISE TO PAY.

A CHEQUE IS AN “EVIDENTIAL IOU”.

A CHEQUE IS BOTH A “PROMISE AND AN IOU” AND IS LEGAL TENDER.

LEGAL TENDER AS INFERRED / REFERRED TO BY THE LEGAL TENDER ACT AND COINAGE ACTS AND
AS REFERRED TO BY THE ROYAL MINT AND US TREASURY AND NY FED IS INHERENTLY MISLEADING
BECAUSE LEGAL TENDER IS NOT A PROMISE FROM THE GOVERNMENT OR THE US/UK TREASURIES,
OR THE GOVERNOR AND COURT OF DIRECTORS OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND OR THE NY FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD TO MAKE PAYMENT.

BUT IS IN FACT A PROMISE LODGED ON THE ONLY ENTITY WHICH CAN GENERATE SUCH SUMS FROM THE DIRECTION OF ITS ENERGIES THAT BEING “FROM THE CITIZENRY, OR SUBJECTS OF SAID NATION STATES.

THE GOVERNMENTS' PROMISES ARE THEREFORE GUARANTEED ULTIMATELY BY THE PEOPLE (YOU AND ME - AS WE ARE THE GUARANTOR, GRANTOR & SURETY ON THOSE PROMISES).

THERE IS ONLY ONE FORM OF LEGAL TENDER AND THAT IS THE PEOPLE (YOU AND ME).

Thank You.

Kind Regards.

Yours faithfully,

[notorial dissent]

Why would/should the AGO's office have records about the courts in the US, much less care?

Why would/should the AGO's office have records about the courts of the Vatican, much less care?

I know where he thinks he is going, but that is not the question he asked.

The Election Commission stuff makes even less sense.

He really does seem to have it in for Southern Water. He does show that he DOESN'T know the difference between a Bank Note, an IOU, a Promissory Note, or what a check is. No big surprise. He also DOESN'T comprehend the concept of legal tender, in that you just can't arbitrarily declare something legal tender.

In other words Tsigey is not only vexatious, but ignorant as well as just plain S T U P I D.

I wonder how long it will take Southern Water to politely tell him to FOAD?

[littleFred]

The shouty stuff is copy-pasta from Peter's Yalta bite size.

[SteveUK]

He's not even asking a question anymore (the whole point of foi).
I think he sees this as a way to release his stupid monologues

[AndyPandy]

Oh dear ...

https://www.asktheeu.org/en/user/george_tsigarides

You know you shouldn't but you can't help yourself

[Footloose52]

But George seems to have made just 9 requests in 8 days before getting himself banned as vexatious on ask the EU.

That really makes me wonder why on earth What do They Know have allowed him to run up 106 requests in 50 days where they are almost exclusively vacuous and in some cases quite vexatious requests.

[AndyPandy]

But George seems to have made just 9 requests in 8 days before getting himself banned as vexatious on ask the EU.

That really makes me wonder why on earth What do They Know have allowed him to run up 106 requests in 50 days where they are almost exclusively vacuous and in some cases quite vexatious requests.

Why not do a FOI request and ask them !

[noblepa]

They're being far too tolerant.

Yes.

Southern Water do have a page on Ways to pay your bill. This includes instructions on paying by cheque, which is easily understandable by people with ordinary bank accounts.

SW could complicate their instructions by explaining that they won't accept cheques written on the side of cows (even for ordinary banks), nor will they accept cheques drawn on banks other than those authorised by the FCA, nor will they ...

And if every supplier did this, life could get complicated for ordinary consumers who just want to pay their bills in ordinary ways.

The problem with that page is that it assumes the reader is not an idiot. More importantly, it does not provide any qualifications as to what makes a cheque acceptable. Their description does not provide a means of differentiating a WeRe cheque from any other, legitimate cheque.

Further, as others have pointed out, there is no law (statute or common) that requires a business to accept any cheque at all. I have also encountered instances when someone has repeatedly given the business cheques for which there were insufficient funds on deposit. In these cases, the vendor may tell the client that they will only accept certified bank cheques or postal money orders; no personal cheques.

[Footloose52]

George has a reply from Southern Water (My bold)

Dear Mr Tsigarides

Re: WeRe Bank Cheques

Thank you for your email received 8 June 2016, I have been asked to
respond as a senior member of the Directors Review Team, within Customer
Relations.

While I note the further comments in your email I can only confirm that as
previously advised by my colleague Mark, we will not accept a WeRe cheque
as a form of payment for a water services account. It is not deemed as
legal tender and we do not have to accept this as such.

At this time, whilst I acknowledge the strength of feeling you have
regarding your experiences with Southern Water and whilst we strive to
resolve all of our complaints to our customer’s satisfaction, our
complaints procedure has now been exhausted in relation to the matter of
the WeRe cheques. There is nothing we can add to our previous comments and
we will not be corresponding further on this matter.

Yours sincerely

[notorial dissent]

A rather pleasantly worded FOAD letter, but a FOAD none the less, not that he will head it, they didn't give him the answer he was fishing for.

[SteveUK]

Georges rein of terror is coming to an end. That's a couple of knock backs now.

I hope they don't ban him - it's comedy gold.