strawman
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
In care of:
XXXXXXXXXXX
Red Lodge
Bury St Edmunds
Suffolk
Near: [IP28 XXX]
15th January 2011
To:
Bailiff Manager
Rossendales Ltd.
Wavell House
Holcombe Road
Helmshore
Rossendale
BB4 4NB
Re: 5566260
Notice of Request To Cease Harassment.
Dear Sir,
I am in receipt of your letter dated 13th January 2011. You are seriously misinformed. For maximum
clarity, I will list the relevant issues here:
1. You appear to be making demands on me, in spite of your correspondence being addressed to a
‘person’ which does not exist. Your payment giro slips make this perfectly clear as they bear the
name of your company. This is a demand between two parties and for it to be valid, there has to be a
valid contract agreement between those two parties, bearing the wet-ink signature of both parties. I
am not aware of any such contract, so I need you to confirm the alleged debt by sending me a certified
copy of a contract between myself and Rossendales Limited. If you do not, or can not provide any
such contract within the next fourteen days from the date of this letter, then it constitutes binding legal
agreement on your part that no such debt exists between Rossendales Limited and myself and estoppel
is therefore established beyond any shadow of doubt. No third party can be involved in this matter,
just Rossendales Limited and myself.
2. You claim that your actions are based on a Liability Order. I have seen no such order, so you need to
send me that Order or a certified copy of it, to verify your claim. No court has ever provided me with
any such written Order, which seems remarkable in the light of your claim.
3. You need to be aware that I attended Bury Magistrates Court on 18th November 2010 in connection
with the matter of Council Tax which was the concern of Forest Heath District Council. When I was
in court I provided the relevant details, including the fact that estoppel had already been established
between myself and Forest Heath District Council in the matter, and the ruling of the Court was that I,
the human was NOT the person who was the subject of the Council Tax application by Forest Heath
District Council, and as a consequence of that, I was required to leave the court as I was not involved
in the matter in any way. Please be very careful to note that the Court has ruled that I AM NOT THE
NAMED DEFENDANT in this matter. Consequently, any attempts to persuade me to make any
related payments is an attempt to get me to pay the debt of some other person. Actually, considering
97