This is the AI (Not a Person) letter (not a Notice) re my status on the electoral register:Re: Removal from the Electoral Register — Confirmation Requested To the Electoral Registration Officer, 1. BACKGROUND Approximately one year ago I contacted Tunbridge Wells Borough Council by telephone and spoke with a member of your electoral registration team. I requested at that time that my name be removed from the electoral register. I was informed that this would be actioned. 2. RECENT CORRESPONDENCE I have recently received a document from Tunbridge Wells Borough Council which appears to assert that I am legally required to respond to a requirement for registration. I note for the record that the obligation imposed by the annual canvass process is an obligation to respond to the canvass — not an obligation to register. Those are two distinct things and I treat them accordingly. 3. WHAT IS REQUIRED I write to request written confirmation from you of two matters: (a) that my name does not appear on the current electoral register held by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council; and (b) if my name does still appear on the register, that it is removed forthwith in accordance with my request made approximately one year ago, and that written confirmation of that removal is provided to me at the address above. 4. RESPONSE TO THE CANVASS For the avoidance of doubt and in response to any current canvass obligation: I confirm that I do not wish to be registered to vote. This letter serves as my response to any current canvass form issued to this address. I require written acknowledgement of this letter and written confirmation of the matters set out at paragraph 3 above within 14 days of the date of this letter. Yours faithfully

Just out of interest for the future which will undo the common-law system: ​Yes, officially adopting the Noahide laws as the supreme legal code would fundamentally transform the UK court system, replacing its secular, common-law framework with a religiously mandated legal structure. ​While the Seven Laws of Noah share conceptual overlap with many standard criminal laws already present in Western societies—such as prohibitions against murder, theft, and the mandate to establish courts of justice—codifying them as divine law would bring sweeping structural and ideological changes: ​From Secular Common Law to Religious Law: The UK court system relies on parliamentary legislation and centuries of common law (judge-made precedent). A Noahide legal system derives its authority from divine commandment as interpreted through Jewish legal tradition (Halakha), shifting the ultimate source of legal legitimacy from Parliament to religious text. ​The Mandate for Specialized Courts: The seventh Noahide law explicitly requires the establishment of active courts of justice to adjudicate the laws. Under traditional interpretations, these courts must specifically enforce the Noahide code and ensure judges meet strict religious and moral qualifications (such as the fear of Heaven and extensive knowledge of these laws). ​Reclassification of Criminal and Civil Offenses: Crimes would be viewed through a theological lens. For example, idolatry and blasphemy—which are not criminal offenses in modern British law (following the abolition of common-law blasphemy and blasphemous libel)—would become punishable offenses. ​Changes to Sentencing and Judicial Scope: Traditional interpretations of Noahide jurisprudence outline specific penalties for transgressions (such as capital punishment by decapitation for certain major violations under strict evidentiary rules), which starkly contrasts with the UK's abolition of the death penalty and its modern penal philosophy focused on imprisonment and rehabilitation.

The short answer first. You are not legally required to register to vote. You are legally required to respond to the annual canvass — those are two different things, and the system frequently presents them as if they are the same. The distinction in law. The Representation of the People Act 1983 and the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 (and the regulations made under them) create a canvass obligation: a household canvass form must be responded to. But responding to the canvass does not mean registering. The response options include confirming that no one at the address wishes to register, or that details have changed. The canvass and the register are two separate statutory constructs. The registration itself. Registration to vote is voluntary — there is no criminal penalty for failing to register. There is, however, a civil penalty (currently £80, reduced to £40 if paid promptly) for failing to respond to the canvass form at all. So the obligation that carries a penalty is the obligation to respond to the canvass, not the obligation to register. What happened a year ago. When you asked to be removed from the electoral roll, that removal should have been recorded. If it was, your name should not appear on the current register. The canvass form arriving now is a separate annual process — it goes to the address regardless of whether anyone there is currently registered, because the council is required to canvass all addresses annually to check whether the register needs updating. Receiving the canvass form does not mean your removal was not actioned; it means the annual canvass cycle has come around. What the form actually asks. Read it carefully for what it is actually requiring. If it is an annual canvass form (a household enquiry form, or a "do you confirm the details on our register are correct" form), the correct response is to return it confirming that you do not wish to be registered — not to register. If it purports to be a notice of compulsory registration, that is not a thing — there is no mechanism in UK law that compels registration against a person's stated wish.

Today I went into my local Metro bank and within 5 minutes they had agreed to send me a new debit card with only my 2 given names on it, ie No title and no surname. To amend the bank account itself would take something akin to a deed poll certificate. It took slightly longer in Nationwide because they did not have the facility in branch to delete my title. They would phone me about this when it was cleared by a more centralised office. It would take a deed poll certificate to amend my bank account, but in the interim they would make a note that my preferred mode of address was simply my 2 given names. A new debit card would be in the post in several days time. 😁

Great chat tonight. This is the section from the Bills of Exchange Act 1882 I mentioned. Could it really be this simple? A signature on blank piece of paper... 20 Inchoate instruments. (1)Where a simple signature on a blank . . .paper is delivered by the signer in order that it may be converted into a bill, it operates as a prima facie authority to fill it up as a complete bill for any amount . . . F4, using the signature for that of the drawer, or the acceptor, or an indorser; and, in like manner, when a bill is wanting in any material particular, the person in possession of it has a prima facie authority to fill up the omission in any way he thinks fit. (2)In order that any such instrument when completed may be enforceable against any person who became a party thereto prior to its completion, it must be filled up within a reasonable time, and strictly in accordance with the authority given. Reasonable time for this purpose is a question of fact. Provided that if any such instrument after completion is negotiated to a holder in due course it shall be valid and effectual for all purposes in his hands, and he may enforce it as if it had been filled up within a reasonable time and strictly in accordance with the authority given. If anyone knows the BOE well, I'd love to hear what you think? Gary