Libel of Review and Attachments

[David Merrill]

I recently edited this package of documents.

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/946...eview52012.pdf

I trashed the old one so if you come across the link and it fails, please let me know. I will replace it with the nearly identical link that is updated.



Thanks!

David Merrill.

[Frederick Burrell]

Thanks David

[David Merrill]

Thank you, all of you!

[Himself]

I recently edited this package of documents.

Libel of Review and Attachments.

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0B1E...NWE4MzJh&hl=en

I trashed the old one so if you come across the link and it fails, please let me know. I will replace it with the nearly identical link that is updated.



Thanks!

David Merrill.

These links in the post are no longer valid. Do you have a more recent copy? Much appreciated.

[David Merrill]

These links in the post are no longer valid. Do you have a more recent copy? Much appreciated.

Thank you for letting me know! I have repaired the link in the opening post as well.

[Himself]

Thank you for letting me know! I have repaired the link in the opening post as well.

Perfect. Thanks David!

[Alsailssouth]

Hi David. I'm a new guy and if you look I access your site from 2 places (home and work). I read the presentments. I read that to understand what's going on that I needed to read all of YOUR FIRST (?) posts on each thread. I'm trying to get up to speed to understand all I can. Thanks so much for all the work you've done here, which is readily apparent. I'm not a BB guy, but I guess I'll have to learn all that as well if I want to be successful.

[David Merrill]

Hi David. I'm a new guy and if you look I access your site from 2 places (home and work). I read the presentments. I read that to understand what's going on that I needed to read all of YOUR FIRST (?) posts on each thread. I'm trying to get up to speed to understand all I can. Thanks so much for all the work you've done here, which is readily apparent. I'm not a BB guy, but I guess I'll have to learn all that as well if I want to be successful.

I think I will have to get to work in getting this new rendition up to speed!

[looking for truth]

Hi All! I was thinking about the opening of the letter creating an appearance, and want to question that.

If I open a third party debt collector notice and respond, I am a man, appearing as upper case name, and conditionally accept upon proof of claim and so forth, then yes I am responding by appearing as the upper case name, BUT, I have created a diversity between the two.

Also instead, if I open a third party debt collector notice and respond, I am a man, appearing as upper case name, I could say "your notice was addressed to my transmitting utility but your notice says" "You are charged" or "You owe $xxxx.xx" or "You are summoned", "please send this notice to You". Avoiding the presumption of joinder at all.

So I am just not convinced as yet that joinder occurs by the simple opening of the letter. If its an issue of it being mail fraud if you are opening mail that you didn't honestly believe directly concerned you, then how about the bills of exchange act allowing for the "acceptance by intervention for honour" and you having opened it to see if you could assist?

looks like a very good site, I am enjoying the info.