Speeding fine - Question for group

[Bulletproof Monk]

Dear all,

I've run into a small problem, more of an annoyance as I already have an agreement with the transport minister for right to travel/ notarised dishonour etc. I'm pretty sure what to do next, but wanted to run it past the group, no not you JRB.

Here's the problem.

Last month I conditionally accepted for value and returned a speeding ticket. There was absolutely no proof of claim, I didn't enter the controversy, and it was all heresay.

I received it back about a week later with a stamp saying it had been scanned, however the enclosed letter said my intention was not clear. It was another offer.

So I again returned it with the additional line "I accept your offer to get me to explain anything upon proof of claim that this matter has not already been settled in the private".

Today I received it all back again, with the original notice and a new letter saying:

"Your notice of conditional acceptance can not be accepted. You retain the right to either elect to have your submission considered by court or expiate the notice by making payment in full on or before the due date on the attached payment advice slip."

Now, looking at what they're really saying here...they can not accept the notice of conditional acceptance", I think that's because it in itself has no commercial value with which they can cancel the debt. I didn't mark the original debt instrument/presentment.

I think I should have applied the Accepted for Value stamp directly to that, and then the accounting side would have been closed. Acceptance OR payment, (as the notary manual states for acceptance of commercial paper), and may consist of your signature alone.

What do you think?

Am I compromising myself in any way now by doing the full acceptance, and tendering my private excemption or is this the way to go?

If they issue court orders, I've dealt with them before at the register of the court, and didn't have to go, so not too worried there.

Any suggestions/comments?

Bulletproof

[Codee]

Looks like to me they are trying to offer you their dishonor. Ever think about accepting it again?

I don't do that stuff on traffic tickets... I do SMJ. So if it doesn't work out... go SMJ. It is never waivable and can be raised in a collateral attack. A ticket in Cal. way over here cannot be prosecuted on. Only a formal complaint.

I feel like I am talking apples to oranges here though. You seem pretty set in commercial acceptence and from what I hear from you it is working.

GOOD LUCK!!!

[weishaupt1776]

If your doing the commercial paper deal(which I don't do), don't you have to tender an instrument such as a bond/BOE w/the CA4V?

[Bulletproof Monk]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

If your doing the commercial paper deal(which I don't do), don't you have to tender an instrument such as a bond/BOE w/the CA4V?

That's why I thought it best to "accept" their present, and stamp it, so that the accounting can be adjusted. My signature being the consideration.

It's also interesting their language usage:

Your Choices:

ELECT TO BE PROSECUTED FOR ANY AND ALL OF THE OFFENCES.

EXPIATE ALL OR ANY OF THE OFFENCES (NO DISPUTES)

This definition from wikipedia:

Expiation means “to atone for.”

The atonement is a doctrine found within both Christianity and Judaism. It describes how sin can be forgiven by God.

Now, I've asked his/her forgiveness, and didn't get a reply within 72 hours, so now I'm off to the Notary to do the Protest, but the problem is the service...where to deliver it to...the Pope, c/o the Vatican maybe?...after all if you follow the steps back enough, doesn't he rightfully own the world?

Now if sin can be forgiven by God, then isn't that the same as using my private excemption?

Where's the proof of claim that God hasn't already forgiven me?



The governmental view of the atonement (also known as the moral government theory) is a doctrine in Christian theology concerning the meaning and effect of the death of Jesus Christ and has been traditionally taught in Arminian circles. Drawing primarily from the works of Jacobus Arminius and Hugo Grotius, the governmental theory teaches that Christ suffered for humankind so that God could forgive humans apart from punishment while still maintaining divine justice


This is from their own Act that governs the notice:

16—Withdrawal of expiation notices
(1) The issuing authority may withdraw an expiation notice with respect to all or any of the alleged offences to which the notice relates if—
(a) the authority is of the opinion that the alleged offender did not commit the offence, or offences, or that the notice should not have been given with respect to the offence, or offences; or
(ab) the authority receives a statutory declaration or other document sent to the authority by the alleged offender in accordance with a notice required by law to accompany the expiation notice or expiation reminder notice; or
(ac) the notice is defective;

I've already sent the "other document", that being the CA4V.

All that said..it's still heresay and SMJ as Codee rightfully said.

Bulletproof

[fulltitle]

Originally Posted by Bulletproof Monk

Dear all,

I've run into a small problem, more of an annoyance as I already have an agreement with the transport minister for right to travel notaised dishonour etc. I'm pretty sure what to do next, but wanted to run it past the group, no not you JRB.

Here's the problem.

Last month I conditionally accepted for value and returned a speeding ticket. There was absolutely no proof of claim, I didn't enter the controversy, and it was all heresay.

I received it back about a week later with a stamp saying it had been scanned, however the enclosed letter said my intention was not clear. It was another offer.

So I again returned it with the additional line "I accept your offer to get me to explain anything upon proof of claim that this matter has not already been settled in the private".

Today I received it all back again, with the original notice and a new letter saying:

"Your notice of conditional acceptance can not be accepted. You retain the right to either elect to have your submission considered by court or expiate the notice by making payment in full on or before the due date on the attached payment advice slip."

Now, looking at what they're really saying here...they can not accept the notice of conditional acceptance", I think that's because it in itself has no commercial value with which they can cancel the debt. I didn't mark the original debt instrument/presentment.

I think I should have applied the Accepted for Value stamp directly to that, and then the accounting side would have been closed. Acceptance OR payment, (as the notary manual states for acceptance of commercial paper), and may consist of your signature alone.

What do you think?

Am I compromising myself in any way now by doing the full acceptance, and tendering my private excemption or is this the way to go?

If they issue court orders, I've dealt with them before at the register of the court, and didn't have to go, so not too worried there.

Any suggestions/comments?

Bulletproof

Without Prejudice.
Why not just send it back refused for cause?

[Bulletproof Monk]

Originally Posted by fulltitle

Without Prejudice.
Why not just send it back refused for cause?

Wouldn't that be a dishonour? Their accounting is still out of balance. They need an acceptance to settle dont' they?

Their other option:

"IF NO CHOICE IS MADE: If no choice is made for an offence, you will (without a court hearing) be convicted of the offence and the unpaid fee will be your fine. Court costs will be added."

This is clearly referring to dishonour of a debt instrument. It backs this up in the Notary Manual in the section on Presentment / Acceptance and protesting commercial paper.

It states "acceptance or payment" - and may consist of your signature alone.

Bulletproof

[Shoonra]

You persist in seeing a traffic ticket as "an offer". It is not.

You were given a ticket, telling you to appear in court on a certain date to answer the policeman's accusation, as a form of release on your own recognizance.

You have two, and only two, options, and trying to use any magic words when given the ticket or now will not change that:
(1) Show up in court on the specified date to dispute the policeman's charges; or
(2) Save yourself some time by effectively pleading guilty by sending in the specified fine now, so you don't have to show up in court.

Trying to pretend that there is no ticket is only going to make for more problems.

Originally Posted by Shoonra

You persist in seeing a traffic ticket as "an offer". It is not.

You were given a ticket, telling you to appear in court on a certain date to answer the policeman's accusation, as a form of release on your own recognizance.

You have two, and only two, options, and trying to use any magic words when given the ticket or now will not change that:
(1) Show up in court on the specified date to dispute the policeman's charges; or
(2) Save yourself some time by effectively pleading guilty by sending in the specified fine now, so you don't have to show up in court.

Trying to pretend that there is no ticket is only going to make for more problems.

You're missing a third:

(3) You can appear in court and make a deal with the prosecutor. That's what I do. I know they want their ransom. So what? Sometimes you need to give the pirate his extortion. If you get a reasonable prosecutor, he'll give you a lower fine and one w/o consequence (points, etc).

[Shoonra]

Originally Posted by karkinos

You're missing a third:

(3) You can appear in court and make a deal with the prosecutor. That's what I do. I know they want their ransom. So what? Sometimes you need to give the pirate his extortion. If you get a reasonable prosecutor, he'll give you a lower fine and one w/o consequence (points, etc).

Valid suggestion. Thanks.
In any case, cannot ignore or try to refuse a traffic ticket.

[Bulletproof Monk]

Originally Posted by Shoonra

You persist in seeing a traffic ticket as "an offer". It is not.

You were given a ticket, telling you to appear in court on a certain date to answer the policeman's accusation, as a form of release on your own recognizance.

You have two, and only two, options, and trying to use any magic words when given the ticket or now will not change that:
(1) Show up in court on the specified date to dispute the policeman's charges; or
(2) Save yourself some time by effectively pleading guilty by sending in the specified fine now, so you don't have to show up in court.

Trying to pretend that there is no ticket is only going to make for more problems.

Actually, the expiation notice (not a ticket) does not tell me to appear in court, it's merely trying to extort non existant money from me by way of trying to get me to enter their controversy...

As for pleading guilty...to what?

So in reply to your answer: "objection, SMJ and heresay, not admissable".

Bulletproof