I am just watching meeting of 18th sept. Somebody asked Peter about detox (vax) I believe. Have a look here https://augmentednac.com/en/science All I know about it is there. No connection no other knowledge.

Hi everyone,I’ve noticed that I’m not seeing any StreamYard links for tonight’s meeting — or for the rest of September. Can someone confirm if these will be posted closer to the start time, or if there’s been a change in how links are shared? Thanks for clarifying so I don’t miss anything. 🙏 — Aurea

I’ve just come out of trial with LC Asset 2 S.à.r.l. (using Link/Kearns) at Ipswich County Court (01/09/2025). The judge excluded my bundle as “very late,” even though it was filed three clear days before trial as per court directions, saying it was 1 day late, but not before 14 days evidence disclure. The claimant also filed late and the judge hadn’t even seen their 170 pages of exhibits, but they were still allowed to email them directly to the judge during the live trial. I produced a Debt Satisfied Letter in court — a decisive document from the claimant’s own agent — but the judge refused to look at it. My other defences (no executed credit agreement, defects in the deed, FCA/FSMA authorisation) were not addressed. 🔑 The Frischmann v Vaxeal Holdings SA Case I relied on Frischmann v Vaxeal Holdings SA [2023] EWHC 2698 (Ch). This case is a modern authority on proving legal assignment. Here’s why it matters: In law, the ratio decidendi (“the reason for deciding”) is the binding holding of a case. I cited Paragraph 1, 64, 66. By contrast, an obiter dictum (“a remark said in passing”) is a side comment: it can be persuasive, but it isn’t binding. DCA cited Paragraph 17 In Frischmann, the holding (ratio decidendi) was clear: The deed itself must be proven in evidence; The deed must clearly identify the specific debt; A notice of assignment alone is not sufficient to prove legal title. The claimant’s solicitor, however, quoted a side passage (an obiter dictum) suggesting that notice could be enough, and the judge accepted this without checking the case herself (she even misnamed it as “Fishman”). That means the judge adopted dicta, not the binding holding, and therefore misapplied the law. --- 🚩 Why I’m Appealing The judge decided the claim in favour of the claimant on the “balance of probabilities,” but ignored: The Debt Satisfied Letter; The absence of an executed credit agreement; The deed’s failure to identify my debt; FCA authorisation issues.

I need some help location a couple (now more than a couple) of documents. I then need to ask some questions in relation to the documents. The documents are mentioned in @Dave DimeBar s document attached which appeared last year. I have now returned to it🙄 Having come here for trusts I am now realising they are part of a package so I am doubling back and learning all the stuff I ignored this past 12 months. I need to tell THEM who I am. And what I do and dont do In the attached doc there is mention of the following, two of which I have found and two (er five) which I cannot. LND found is this the affidavit mentioned in the doc? Security agreement Found Hold Harmless agreement Not found Rescind of Signatues and Contracts Not found NO WAIT THERES MORE Certificate of Annexure Not found Affidavit of Non Corporate status Not found Power of Attorney In Fact Not found I need to know Are all seven still current? If yes where to find the last five I am first to admit that I frequently initially get the wrong end of the stick here. BUT it strikes me that @Dave DimeBar s document and the documents to which it refers are foundational to everything that is done here. SHOULD THIS DOCUMENT AND ALL OF THE OTHERS BE IN THEIR OWN CLASSROOM? Perhaps they already are and I missed that too 😉 I understand there are seven undesirables that I need to serve the LND on. I assume I also have to serve the other docs on them as well. Do I hit them up all at once or is there a timetable. I know there is another doc to be served a certain amount of time after the LND sort of a "Did you here me mother" belt and braces thing. Love to all

Has anyone has successfully removed themselves from both the open and full electoral register and how has this been achieved..Ive seen some advise about sending a letter to the atourney general but the general feedback from the council who holds the database of the electoral register is, "your rights dont overide law." Ive also see some case law ( Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] which may be usefull to follow up as it emphasises protected rights under the Equality Act 2010, UK GDPR, and Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, but wanted to see individuals perspectives on what has been successfull for them....and whether or not this is detremental to obtaining credit?