Live Peasant

The Irish Are Educating Themselves

36 posts in this topic

Using the Irish constitution and Common Law to tell the Sheriff's representative to go away

Edited by Live Peasant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the Irish constitution and Common Law to tell the Sheriff's representative to go away

I would be interested to see how a non violence cooperative society is going to deal with this...

Of course, if property prices always go up then we wound't have this problem except that it does not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, given that I am not going to be spending 23 minutes of my life watching that video (or reading a transcript of it), would you care to summarize, in 50-100 words, OP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's brilliant. Is there a resource on the net which might list or point to similar conflicts of interest? Bet there is loads of it goes on by all the troughing old boys networks. I'll bet the majority is at least one step removed though (nepotism, honours, bribery). Makes you think though. Thanks for the link, it makes me want to read law. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, given that I am not going to be spending 23 minutes of my life watching that video (or reading a transcript of it), would you care to summarize, in 50-100 words, OP?

Yes Sir...

It basically says because the judge (the registrar) and the sheriff are the same person who act in different role (i.e. hat), there is no separation of judiciary and enforcement and hence the warrant is unlawful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good video. This seems pretty similar to the freeman on the land movement.

People seem to assume that those in authority will obey the law, much like the plebs try to do. Unfortunately, it seems they often take the piss.

It looks like the bank was chancing their arm, as was the sheriff. Good on these guys for calling their bluff!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would be interested to see how a non violence cooperative society is going to deal with this...

Of course, if property prices always go up then we wound't have this problem except that it does not.

Easy - contracts can be broken, but a social stigma may apply if you do. It doesn't give people the right to violate another, if a contract is broken.

This is where the minarchists get it wrong. Contracts should never be enforced with violence. They are just agreements which can be broken.

People may or may not cooperate with someone who breaks contracts, but it doesn't mean that people get to use violence to enforce them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

19.38 minutes.

"It was Ulster Bank went looking for this order tonight and as you know Ulster Bank has ownership of 70% of HM Treasury now" :o

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, given that I am not going to be spending 23 minutes of my life watching that video (or reading a transcript of it), would you care to summarize, in 50-100 words, OP?

Someone with a large mansion style house behind a gate and long driveway isn't paying the full mortgage repayments they agreed to pay, when they laid claim to such a nice property. Probably over 6 months of lenders forbearance, then months of lenders trying to reclaim property in court, sees a court order issued.

Some groups have formed believing the lender has made no loss over the mortgage because of securitization. Implying the debtor should be able to keep their fine house, and fresh young buyers should be forced to pay much higher prices with mortgage debtors in all the nice homes not having to suffer any consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a time machine!

The Irish protested evictions like this by landlords 150 years ago. Except the evictees way back then didn't borrow their arses into infinity and were trying to survive off their labour.

We can expect today's priced-outs to start their own protests against these evictees ... when?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We can expect today's priced-outs to start their own protests against these evictees ... when?

Don't start with the usual crap, these evictees and any priced-outs are both victims of the bankster elite, in-fights among commoners is exactly what the elite loves so we don't blame them.

Anyway, there are no priced-outs in Ireland anymore, thanks to the big HPC they have had over the last few years.

---

Edited by awake_eagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Anyway, there are no priced-outs in Ireland anymore, thanks to the big HPC they have had over the last few years.

There's posters in the NI forum and on the ROI thread priced out. Or not willing to overpay because so many people expect to be let off their mortgage debt.

In 2007 Ben Gilroy got an interest only mortgage with Start Mortgage. For four and a half years he's been paying a whopping two thousand eight hundred euros a month, but now he can't pay any more. He's in arrears for six months.

Upgraded to that house in 2007, happy to buy at the 452,000 Euros asking price. Put in 150,000 Euros of his own money, or 'profit' from the house he sold. Borrowed 310,000 Euros going with a really expensive subprime broker with a €650 PER WEEK mortgage, so he could get the house he wanted. Had missed payments on his small mortgage previously so explains that's the reason he had to go with a subprime lender. Not concerned with the high price of the house he wanted. He just wanted it. Probably expecting the HPI party to continue. Now wanting to prevent all those who acted as stupidly with debt having to deal with consequences, allowing house prices to become more affordable for people who didn't join the buying frenzy at ridiculous high prices.

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's no surprise the you tube rating system was scrapped when you see clips like this.

The 1% don't want this sort of info being seen by large numbers of the plebs. They might get idea's :)

Edited by Ned Coates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Using the Irish constitution and Common Law to tell the Sheriff's representative to go away

All very civilised and proper, but in a similar situation in the UK and US expect the militarised police to wield batons and tazers - you can question the finer legal points from your prison cell/hospital bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's brilliant. Is there a resource on the net which might list or point to similar conflicts of interest? Bet there is loads of it goes on by all the troughing old boys networks. I'll bet the majority is at least one step removed though (nepotism, honours, bribery). Makes you think though. Thanks for the link, it makes me want to read law. ;)

google" Free man of the land " it`s all about common law ,the main conflict of interest is that the banks pays the wages ( indirectly as they must pay a fee for the court order to be served ) of the judge

Edited by long time lurking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, there are no priced-outs in Ireland anymore, thanks to the big HPC they have had over the last few years.

As far as I can tell house prices in both the Republic and N Ireland have crashed all the way down...

...to the same prices as Britain.

50% off doesn't impress me at all, what matters are absolute numbers of £ and €.

Edited by Dorkins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Upgraded to that house in 2007, happy to buy at the 452,000 Euros asking price. Put in 150,000 Euros of his own money, or 'profit' from the house he sold. Borrowed 310,000 Euros going with a really expensive subprime broker with a €650 PER WEEK mortgage, so he could get the house he wanted. Had missed payments on his small mortgage previously so explains that's the reason he had to go with a subprime lender. Not concerned with the high price of the house he wanted. He just wanted it. Probably expecting the HPI party to continue. Now wanting to prevent all those who acted as stupidly with debt having to deal with consequences, allowing house prices to become more affordable for people who didn't join the buying frenzy at ridiculous high prices.

What a holier than than you viewpoint!

Usury is wrong. Look back at how earlier civilizations managed to keep debt down, debt jubilees for example. They're not new concepts they are part of an age old problem that we have not properly tackled yet.

Do you not think that because so many fallible people were enticed into the house price bubble that the banks should share some of the losses that they are trying to pass on to their borrowers. The lenders took advantage of human nature, they made enormous profits from it, they abused the system and brought the whole edifice crashing down. In fact the very people they deceived are amongst those having to bail them out through higher taxes and economic hardship.

Even on this web site there are some complaining that even though they foresaw the consequences of the bubble collapsing they are still complaining that they lost out because they didn't join in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Usury is wrong. Look back at how earlier civilizations managed to keep debt down, debt jubilees for example. They're not new concepts they are part of an age old problem that we have not properly tackled yet.

The ban on lending at interest helped keep backwards society more stable. Too often those taking debt they couldn't repay lost their freedom, lands and stake in society. A freeman has more of a stake in defending their country. The jubilees happened in countries where people did borrow, lost their freedoms, sometimes their children's freedoms, too, when those societies reached the stage of imploding with social unrest of more vulnerable to invasion.

It doesn't mean those who took out huge mortgages in 2001-2007 and can't pay them should gain over others who were not stupid. There is no ban on lending at interest here. They have no position to keep the fine homes they laid claim to at high prices, ahead of more cautious people. The lenders lent the money and it's the borrowers responsibility to repay it.

Lending is not sinful and the ban was overturned by Protestant reformers as gunpowder weapons came on the scene to rapidly replaced suits of amour and swords, allowing for new expansion requiring money and investment; the obligation to pay interest flows directly from the commandment to 'render to all their due."

With a ban on lending at interest large-scale industry and investment couldn't have taken place, for the decades of improving conditions the West has enjoyed. Islamic countries with bans on lending at interest have been fortunate to be sitting on most of the world's oil. Their societies would still be in middle-ages without the West's money because there would have been no industrial revolution or anything there.

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't start with the usual crap, these evictees and any priced-outs are both victims of the bankster elite, in-fights among commoners is exactly what the elite loves so we don't blame them.

Anyway, there are no priced-outs in Ireland anymore, thanks to the big HPC they have had over the last few years.

---

What you see in that video is an attempt to prevent the market being cleared by rule of law. Prices in Ireland are still way out of line with what people can afford. And rents are rising.

http://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2012/02/21/eviction-in-ireland-in-2012/

Ireland had about 900 properties in possession to the end of this year. The equivalent figure for the UK is about 35,000 (without bail outs that would probably be over 70,000). In 2010 Ireland had about 8 personal bankruptcies - EIGHT for the entire country!

Ireland is fantasy land. If the law is going to be defied like this it will become chaotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the gullible/greedy got suckered into the scam by the bankers the prudent have now been suckered into paying for the gullible/greedy by the banker`s ,but what every one needs to focus on is the fact the banker`s fraudulently rigged there bet so they could not lose

So the way I see it if nobody pay`s there debt and and nobody takes on new debt (the likes of us buy not joining the ponzi scheme ) the banks are going to starve without the central banks printing and that can`t go on forever ,as soon as wage inflation starts to take of that will be the end of printing and that cannot be a long way away

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, given that I am not going to be spending 23 minutes of my life watching that video (or reading a transcript of it), would you care to summarize, in 50-100 words, OP?

Under the Irish constitution a person's property is inviolable (i.e. the govt or anyone cannot trespass/take it) save for a legal process.

In Ireland's local government system - outside the two main cities - a judge grants a court order to repossess a home for a bank. And the same person (as sheriff - or his staff) then conducts the legal repossession on behalf of said bank - but effectively acting on commission for that bank. So it breaks the fundamental separation of the judiciary and the govt/private sector under Ireland's constitution which is founded on common law. So the repossession process outside Cork and Dublin is effectively unconstitutional!

That's it in a nutshell.

What's even worse is that the bank seeking repossesion is Ulster bank which is part of RBS and therefore owned by the UK govt. So you have the UK govt seeking to evict Irish people from their land and homes (something the Irish don't take too kindly given their history!)

People go on about the US constitution - but I think the Irish constitution is the greatest in the world. Guaranteed referendums on almost everything - its just wonderful. Unlike the Brits who are just subjects!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone with a large mansion style house behind a gate and long driveway isn't paying the full mortgage repayments they agreed to pay, when they laid claim to such a nice property. Probably over 6 months of lenders forbearance, then months of lenders trying to reclaim property in court, sees a court order issued.

Some groups have formed believing the lender has made no loss over the mortgage because of securitization. Implying the debtor should be able to keep their fine house, and fresh young buyers should be forced to pay much higher prices with mortgage debtors in all the nice homes not having to suffer any consequences.

The banks either knew or should have known about the legalities. As the banks arguably create fraudulent contracts all of the while, it is about time they tasted some of their own medicine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now