Author: ROGUE MALE

Sovereign Being Under Natural Law. Educator. Anarchist. Occasional podcaster. Co-producer & protagonist in the film, The Great British Mortgage Swindle. Founding Trustee of Universal Community Trust. Lives in Bernicia & Deira, one of the Stolen Ancestral Lands of Northern Britain.

Covid1984 & the Mask of Death

Why Everyone should be Exempt from wearing a mask. 

Loose particles in mask may lead to pulmonary disease

I was born in Huddersfield, a town where the chief industries were engineering and textile manufacture. My dad worked in one of the many factories and the valleys were replete with woollen mills.

Whilst there can be no doubt that chemical and/or metallic fibres would have been present in the factories, which would have been breathed in by those working in them, often to the detriment of the workers’ respiratory health, this brief article will be focusing on the mills for the purposes of a comparison to the effect of wearing a fabric mask and its effects on the lungs. 

Britannia Mills, Huddersfield.

Back in 1984 I had a summer job working for Tower Spinning Company near Crosland Moor, Huddersfield which was a mill engaged in the manufacture of woollen yarn. When you went up to the floors which housed the spinning machinery, the air was replete with particles of fabric and dust which hung in the air. Some of the workers would be working 12 shifts in such an atmosphere. Studies have repeatedly demonstrated that,

“When textile workers were exposed to organic dusts from textiles in the workplace, both reversible and irreversible pulmonary conditions, such as asthma and COPD developed.”

As the attached study states, wearing a mask causes “high inspiratory flow” – i.e those individuals are breathing harder. This logically means that the individual will be breathing in whatever lies in the mask. 

From this, the question arises, how secure are the fibres, debris and other particulates attached to cloth masks?

“Research on synthetic fibres has shown a correlation between the inhalation of synthetic fibres and various bronchopulmonary diseases, such as asthma, alveolitis, chronic bronchitis, bronchiectasis, fibrosis, spontaneous pneumothorax and chronic pneumonia.  Cellular proliferation made up of histiocytes and fibroblasts were found in the lungs of those exposed to synthetic fibres in ambient air.  Focal lesions in the lungs showed granulomas and collagen fibres containing both fine dust and long fibres.  Some of the lung illnesses from this exposure could be reversed, while others had already proceeded to pulmonary fibrosis.”

 

The study shows the fibres and deposits in the masks people are wearing, sometimes for visiting shops and sometimes in their places of work are not secure. People who wear them frequently touch or adjust them are in fact breathing in tiny particles of fibres that can lead to lung infection, with pulmonary fibrosis being a real danger.

“Research on synthetic fibers has shown a correlation between the inhalation of synthetic fibers and various bronchopulmonary diseases, such as asthma, alveolitis, chronic bronchitis, bronchiectasis, fibrosis, spontaneous pneumothorax and chronic pneumonia.  Cellular proliferation made up of histiocytes and fibroblasts were found in the lungs of those exposed to synthetic fibers in ambient air.  Focal lesions in the lungs showed granulomas and collagen fibers containing both fine dust and long fibers.  Some of the lung illnesses from this exposure could be reversed, while others had already proceeded to pulmonary fibrosis.”

The report’s conclusions are stark:

“Surgical personnel are trained to never touch any part of a mask, except the loops and the nose bridge.Otherwise, the mask is considered useless and is to be replaced.Surgical personnel are strictly trained not to touch their masks otherwise.However, the general public may be seen touching various parts of their masks.Even the masks just removed from manufacturer packaging have been shown in the above photos to contain particulate and fiber that would not be optimal to inhale.

 

Both cotton and polymer clothing have been well-tolerated without pathology when covering any other part of the body, except over the only entry points/gateway to the respiratory system.Inhalation risks, such as the constant ventilation of the respiratory process, increased by the greater effort to attempt to fulfill bodily oxygen needs, with mostly and closely covered orifices are of great concern for those who would want to protect pulmonary health, without inhalation of unwanted particulate.

 

When partial airway obstruction, i.e. masking, is added, deeper and more forceful breathing occurs.When this phenomenon is combined with the particles found herein on microscopic examination of the face side of newly unpackaged, never worn masks, there can arise the risk of a dangerous level of foreign material entering lung tissue. Furthermore, worn masks can only either lose these particles to lodge in the lungs of the wearer, or they would accumulate during use, to the burden (both biological and debris) of non-mask material carried on the inside of the mask.

 

Further concerns of macrophage response and other immune and inflammatory and fibroblast response to such inhaled particles specifically from facemasks should be the subject of more research.

 

If widespread masking continues, then the potential for inhaling mask fibers and environmental and biological debris continues on a daily basis for hundreds of millions of people.This should be alarming for physicians and epidemiologists knowledgeable in occupational hazards.

Conclusion: the usage of masks is deleterious to one’s respiratory health, just as working in textile mills was conducive to people developing incurable lung disease.

On top of which, we should also be aware of the psychological impact of the mask on the younger generations:

 

Source: “Masks, false safety and real dangers, Part 1: Friable mask particulate and lung vulnerability” by Boris Borovoy, Colleen Huber, Q Makeeta.

Download the report: MasksfalsesafetyandrealdangersPart1.doc

___________________________________________

Special thanks to David R for his continued support.

3

Church & Schools in Collaboration of Cruelty

With Criminal UK ‘Gov’ over Covid-1984:

  • Archbishop of Canterbury places state higher than God.
  • State is deliberately engaging in  satanic practice to terrorise people into accepting the removal of their rights.
  • Church cruelly abandons its flock and imposes cruelty on the elders. 
  • Church of England Schools Engaging in Child Abuse. 
  • Education is the Antidote to Tyranny.

 

An overview of the State of Church & Schooling – Autumn Term, 2020.

When the Archbishop of Canterbury places the criminal UK ‘gov’ as a higher authority than God, the Church of England is in serious trouble. This fact cannot be overstated for it may even usher in its very demise. A price that will be necessary for its engagement with and support of the false state. In fact, this is true of every single church which has unquestioningly followed the ‘gov’s’ Covid-1984 psyop and closed its doors to their congregations, at a time when the sanctuary and community of church was never more needed. (At least, in modern memory). It is a scandalous breach of trust:

 

Sadly, it will come as no surprise that many (if not most) of the Church of England’s own schools have chosen to impose a muzzle requirement on their pupils.

One such COE school actively punishes those who refuse to wear masks,

“Despite being issued with two washable black masks in a hygienic storage bag and being explicitly made aware of where and when to wear them – a small minority of pupils at St. George’s Church of England Academy in Blackpool are said to be continually flouting the rules.  These pupils, say the school, ‘purposefully are being defiant’. The consequence of this defiance is that their peers and school staff are being put at risk as the Covid-19 pandemic continues.” Lytham St Annes News

Here’s a curious picture of the head teacher responsible for this act of child cruelty. Presumably, the shot was taken on the stairs in order to elevate him in some way. Perhaps it was staged that way because he is somewhat lacking in the height, as well as the heart, department?

 

To any right-thinking individual, a number of questions arise from this, of which, these are but a few:

  • What is the effect of the muzzling of the youth of Britain?
  • What does this tell them other than they are held in contempt by those who are entrusted with their education and well-being?
  • The muzzling means that they literally have no voice. What does that teach them about the regard the state and the compliant staff have for them?
  • Why are they are to be muzzled like vicious dogs?
  • What of the long term impact on the psychology of those young minds?
  • What subtle codes and symbolism are at play when one enters the #Masquerade ?

What are we to make of the despicable attempt to restrict their very breathing? To deny them oxygen when it is their natural, god-given right to breathe the air of the planet they live on is so anti-nature as to be nothing short of satanic (that which inverts the truth, or word of God). And, as incredible as it is,  the Church of England is actually endorsing this by way of its complicity with the criminal UK ‘gov’.

Where are the hard nosed, fiery preachers, banging on the pulpit about the state being the anti-christ and urging their congregations to hug one another? Or, raising ire about the way the young people are being treated and the very real threat of the New World Order?

The madness is everywhere:

 

A real education is not a process of indoctrination: in its truest sense, an education should provide the individual with the ability to apply critical thinking to any situation. Most of what passes for an education in the state system is, in fact, a form of brainwashing whereby the emphasis is on what to think, not how to think. In this sense, the schooling system is a fraud. 

A fraud that is peopled by those who fraudulently present themselves as dedicated, intelligent and caring teachers, when they are apologists for the state. Here, a Maths teacher spouts false information and engages in Covid-1984 fear mongering:

Whilst I am no longer a teacher, I do have friends who work in the state system. One has told me that in his secondary school, the teachers have been instructed to wear a mask when they walk from their cars to the classroom. They have also been instructed that any books they are taking home for marking, should be placed in a sealed bag and quarantined for 48 hours before the teacher can handle them. 

In addition, the school’s head teacher states that:

Additional modified rules to ensure we adhere to social distancing and hygiene protocols are as follows:

  • Arrive on time to school and go straight to your classroom –do not wait for friends around the site or on corridors
  • Enter the classroom quickly and quietly and wipe your table and chair (including the tops of the metal legs) thoroughly using the wipes provided
  • Use the hand sanitiser on entry to the classroom to clean your hands thoroughly.
  • Try to maintain a 2metre distance from all adults and from all students not in your group(other year groups who will be wearing different coloured badges for clarity)at all times
  • Pay close attention to markings on the floor/walls or barriers to follow the one-way system around the school site
  • When moving around the site, walk sensibly, calmly and purposefully following the one-way system strictly.
  • Remain at least 1 metre away wherever possible from the person in front and behind and do not seek to talk or mix with anyone from another year group.
  • Be mindful that lessons will be going on for other year groups and you should be careful not to disturb these
  • Stay in your allocated year group zones during break and lunchtime. You may not wander outside of your zone at any point nor enter another year group’s zone at any point
  • Avoid skin to skin contact with any other student and never spit in school
  • Maintain excellent hand hygiene. All students must wash their hands regularly for 20 seconds –(remembering the importance of drying)at the following times:
  • Before leaving home
  • On arrival to a classroom/area
  • After using the toilet
  • After breaks/sporting activities
  • Before food preparation
  • Before eating any food (including snacks)
  • Maintain good respiratory hygiene, adhering to the protocol of “Catch it –bin it –kill it”, using the lidded bins provided. Tissues will be available for students to aid with this.
  • In the event of not being able to quickly source a tissue, students should ensure they sneeze into the crook of their elbow
  • Do not leave your seat during lessons
  • Students are not to go to the toilet in lesson time unless they have a toilet pass or it is deemed an urgent situation. If a student does visit the toilet in lesson, this must only be done when their teacher agrees it issafe to do so.
  • Students are expected to strictly follow all instructions and should use hand sanitiser when returning to the lesson
  • When using the water fountains around the site, please observe 2 metres social distancing when queuing, sanitise your hands after use and use the station only as a re-fill station and do not drink directly from it
  • Leave the school after your final lesson of the day in an orderly fashion, calmly and quickly and when asked to do so by a member of staff, following the one-way system
  • All students are expected to behave in line with our usual standards of behaviour and expectations. We expect all students to respect one another, to respect all members of staff and to follow all staff instructions at all times.This is even more crucial during a time when keeping children and staff safe through carefully planned and executed social distancing is of paramount importance.

Again, what kind of psychological and educational issues emerge as a result of this? What price an epidemic of Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD)? What will be the effect on the abilities of the pupils to read others’ facial expressions, when they cannot see their smiles, share their grimaces or observe a wee blush?

Conclusion:

There we have it: the church and the so-called education system have revealed themselves to be fraudulent, a fact which will not surprise those who have been paying attention to a world in which everything has been inverted.  Thus, the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, is not only dancing to the Devil’s tune, he is in league with all of those forces that are opposed to the truth, the word of God.

Similarly, every teacher that complies with the patently ridiculous ‘regulations’ is in breach of his/her duty of care to all the children placed under his care and guidance.

To comply with the forces of tyranny, as history shows us, does not bode well for the collaborators.

True spirituality will not be found in the church for that institution has proven itself to be a fraud.

It is not complicity but love and fearlessness in the face of the tyranny that is the antidote to these dangerous times we are living in:

 

 

 ____________________________________

Much appreciation to David R for his continued sponsorship of the RM site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2

Fraud: BOS Attempts Possession without original Deed

And Fails.

Fraudulent Possession Claim Exposed.

Judge rules, No Valid Deed, No Claim as Bank says the mortgage deed is “lost”.

The following screenshots are taken from a website, entirelylegal which was posted under the headline, “Liverpool woman battles Bank of Scotland for alleged mortgage fraud.” It shows how crucial a genuine mortgage deed is to a bank’s possession claim. It was posted on the website at 11:17am and then removed within an hour. 

Now why might that be the case?

One of the key elements to TGBMS class action is the demonstrably fraudulent mortgage deed. In this protracted battle with BOS, Geniene Azalea has been demanding that the bank provide the original deed in order to prove its possession claim against her home.  

“At the 15 minute hearing, Judge Langley ordered that the BOS produce said document, within 14 days.

 

The 2 weeks came and went, and 21 days after the original hearing, Geniene wrote a 26 page counter claim requesting that the case be struck out as the bank could not produce the deed, as she had some evidence that it had been securitised (sold) on the stock exchange, potentially many times, along with many other discrepancies on her mortgage. Miraculously, this woke the bank up, who immediately requested a hearing for extra time. Once again, Geniene appeared in court, where she heard the BOS ask for 2 years to find the deed as it had been ‘lost’. Judge Langley adjourned the case for 12 months, with liberty to restore’ should the BOS find the deed.”

 

 

 

Given the rigged judicial system, this is a stunning victory. Without a valid deed, the bank’s possession claim amounts to nothing less than a fraud.  A fraud perpetrated on Geniene and on the court.  That is a fact that the judge has appeared to downplay, issuing an order that understates the implications of the bank’s actions. 

The elements of the fraud are laid out in this previous article and need to be understood by anyone who has a mortgage, particularly right now for the reasons detailed in this article, Covid1984 & TGBMS, on how, from 1st November, 2020, millions of householders will be facing possession claims against their homes. This situation is looming large and, for now at least, no one is focusing on it as a consequence of the smokescreen created by the covid1984 psyop. 

____________________

Further reading and viewing:

The commercial lien as common law remedy to banking fraud

Magna Carta 2020 Declaration of Rights

Watch TGBMS for free

Liverpool woman battles Bank of Scotland for alleged Mortgage fraud

 

As ever, special thanks to David R for his greatly-appreciated support of this site.

 

14

The Great Global Pandemic Swindle: WHO Deception

Addendum

My previous article Covid-1984: the Pandemic That Never Was provided a standard dictionary definition that included the etymology of the word ‘pandemic’.

However, just today in fact, I came across the following article that reveals, were it needed more, the dystopian times we are living in. The ‘Kill Bill’ and Melvin Gates’ funded World Health Organisation (WHO) falsely claims to have redefined the word pandemic back in 2009:

WATCH: The Jab – How the WHO Faked a Pandemic to Sell Vaccines In 2009 the W.H.O changed their definition of “pandemic” in order to create an artificial panic and sell billions of doses of untested flu vaccines, ruining at least 1300 young lives.

 

 

This brilliant short video from the Children’s Health Defense concisely summarises the corrupt tragedy of the H1N1 vaccine, and how that situation should serve as a warning to the whole world today.

A brief summary:

  • Governments all over the world sign “sleeping contracts” with pharmaceutical firms to buy flu vaccines in the event of a pandemic.
  • In 2009 the World Health Organization changed its official definition of “pandemic” to a much looser one (with no requirement for anyone to have died).
  • Just weeks later they declared the H1N1 flu a “pandemic”, despite minuscule numbers of deaths
  • This triggered sleeping contracts worth billions.
  • Governments were legally obliged to buy up and distribute untested flu vaccines.
  • The vaccines caused serious, life-long side effects in over 1300 children.
  • Legal immunity meant no pharmaceutical firm paid any compensation, instead reparations were paid by taxpayers
  • Many of the scientists who advised the WHO declare a pandemic were later revealed to have financial interests in vaccine manufacturers.                               This shocking recent history has been totally memory-holed in the mainstream, but serves as a dress rehearsal for our current “crisis”. Watch the video, share it widely. It has, quite obviously, never been more important or more relevant.”

Source: Off-Guardian

Further reading: How to create your own CG “novel virus” just like the WHO’s Sars CoV2= its not real.

0

Covid-1984: the Pandemic That Never Was

Covid-1984: The Great ‘Global’ Corona Swindle

When we remind ourselves of the definition of pandemic, we can see immediately that Covid-1984 was, is and never can be deemed as such: 

“A disease that quickly and severely affects a large number of people and then subsides is an epidemic: throughout the Middle Ages, successive epidemics of the plague killed millions. Epidemic is also used as an adjective: she studied the causes of epidemic cholera. A disease that is continually present in an area and affects a relatively small number of people is endemic: malaria is endemic in (or to) hot, moist climates.

 

A pandemic is a widespread epidemic that may affect entire continents or even the world: the pandemic of 1918 ushered in a period of frequent epidemics of gradually diminishing severity. Thus, from an epidemiologist’s point of view, the Black Death in Europe and AIDS in sub-Saharan Africa are pandemics rather than epidemics.”

Thus, it is plain to state that ‘Covid-1984’ cannot be termed a pandemic on the simple basis it is not widespread and did not kill millions. Therefore, the perpetuation of Covid-1984 as a deadly viral threat to mankind is a monstrous fraud: 

A Koch and Bull Story

Furthermore, the purported Covid-1984 virus has not even been isolated in accordance with Koch’s postulates: an essential requisite in the identification of a a virus,

“For two centuries, Koch’s postulates have set the gold standard for establishing the microbiological etiology of infection and disease. Genomic sequencing now brings finer resolution to both bacterial strain variation and the host genetic state that may predispose to disease […].

 

Developed in the 19th century, Robert Koch’s postulates are the four criteria designed to assess whether a microorganism causes a disease. As originally stated, the four criteria are:

(1) The microorganism must be found in diseased but not healthy individuals;

(2) The microorganism must be cultured from the diseased individual;

(3) Inoculation of a healthy individual with the cultured microorganism must recapitulated the disease; and finally

(4) The microorganism must be re-isolated from the inoculated, diseased individual and matched to the original microorganism.

Koch’s postulates have been critically important in establishing the criteria whereby the scientific community agrees that a microorganism causes a disease.” Source

None of which has been carried out to identify Covid-1984. Even the FDA admits this,

“no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available” CDC 2019-Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel, page 39, last paragraph.

Therefore,  the virus itself has not been even been forensically identified which will lead the critical thinker to ask, does it actually exist? 

Only in the minds of those who have swallowed the propaganda.

If there is no evidence it exists, then what about the PCR ‘test’?

Given the polymerise chain reaction (PCR) and antibody test does not test for a virus or disease, anyone they want can test positive. Koch’s postulate has not been applied. So what are they ‘testing’ for? Could it be they are looking to extract your genetic material, your DNA? And, if so, for what purpose? Is mankind the virus they are testing for?

In any event, the PCR test is fatally flawed for the purposes of ‘identifying’ Covid-1984:

“ (Kary) Mullis passed away last year at the age of 74, but there is no doubt that the biochemist regarded the PCR as inappropriate to detect a viral infection.

 

The reason is that the intended use of the PCR was, and still is, to apply it as a manufacturing technique, being able to replicate DNA sequences millions and billions of times, and not as a diagnostic tool to detect viruses.” Source

 

Thus, the ‘test’ results in 50-80% false positives. 

These false results are then used to impose further unlawful local lockdowns.

Yet, what if the test is simply reading people’s DNA and is merely identifying a gene sequence that is found in all mankind? What if it is showing nothing more than the exosomes that exist in all of us?

“You could have 80% false positive… they couldn’t do a real analysis of false positives in terms of determining whether a test is correct or not because that requires a gold standard and the only gold standard is purification of the virus.

 

So, we get back to the fact that the virus is not being purified. If you could purify the virus, then you could take a hundred people who tested positive and you could search for the virus in them. And if you found the virus in 50 out of a hundred and not in the other 50, you could say that the test is only accurate 50% of the time.

 

But we have no way to do that because we haven’t yet purified the virus. And I don’t think we ever will.” David Crowe– Canadian researcher, with a degree in biology and mathematics, host of The Infectious Myth podcast.  Source

 

COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically MeaninglessThough the whole world relies on RT-PCR to “diagnose” Sars-Cov-2 infection, the science is clear: they are not fit for purpose

How can there be a forthcoming “second wave” when there was never a first wave? And, when the genetic sequence the World Health Organisation is claiming is COVID-19 is the same genetic sequence found in the human chromosome 8?

In the meantime, stupid is as stupid does and the masquerade continues, though not for much longer, I’d warrant:

noun

a false show or pretence: his masquerade ended when he was arrested.

• the wearing of disguise: dressing up, role playing, and masquerade.

“verb [no object]

pretend to be someone one is not: a journalist masquerading as a man in distress.

• be disguised or passed off as something else: the idle gossip that masquerades as news in some local papers.”

It’s interesting to note that just as the mask is slipping off the face of state fascism, the populace are encouraged to don their muzzles:

 

The Covid-1984 plandemic is being used as a cover for the usurpation of constitutional law by governments the world over.  Magna Carta 2020 is the antidote to Covid-1984 psyop.

The likes of the global banksters and their accolytes like ‘Kill Bill’ Gates would do well to shift their focus from the Georgia Guidestones to the God-given truth as articulated down the years by men like John Lilburne:

“All and every particular and individual man and woman, that ever breathed in the world, are by nature all equal and alike in their power, dignity, authority and majesty, none of them having (by nature) any authority, dominion or magisterial power one over or above another.”

 

 

Further resources: 

Covid-1984 is “bollocks”, according to this NHS worker. 

Mark Devlin interviews Dr Mohammad Adil on his ‘Good Vibrations’ podcast. 

____________________________________________

Special thanks to David R for his unstinting support of the Rogue Male site and Michael O’Bernicia for his vision and inspiration.

2

Covid-1984 & The Great British Mortgage Swindle

Millions of Britons Facing Eviction As A Result of Pandemic Hoax.

On 31st October, 2020 the current moratorium on mortgage possession claims will come to an end.

Simultaneously, the UK ‘gov’s’ furlough scheme will end.

Any critical thinker will know by now that the Covid-1984 psychological operation (psyop) has many elements to it. One crucial element has been to provide a smokescreen for the controlled demolition of the economy which has resulted in millions of people losing their jobs and businesses. Which was one aim of the ‘plandemic’.  Covid-1984 is a highly effective psyop that has injected fear into a populace that has been brainwashed by the mainstream:

 

 

 

Across these lands, people have already gone into default on their mortgage payments and once three months arrears have accumulated, the bank will claim the right to bring a possession claim in one of the rigged system’s ‘County Courts’. That is problematic in itself in the event that it proves to be true the Queen has been deposed, for then all public, judicial and privy Council oaths will be nullities. No court will be operating under the aegis and authority of the Crown and that would make them unlawful, for they would be unable to provide a lawful jurisdiction without a valid seal. Either that or they will continue to fake their authority. 

It is reasonable to state that many of the UK’s 11 million mortgagors will have been unable to make the payments on their fraudulent mortgages during the last 6 months and that this total is only going to get larger as a consequence of the Covid-1984 hoax.

Once the furlough payments come to an end, the wave of arrears will reach tsunami proportions. Potentially, or probably – take your pick – millions of homes will be under threat and with an average of 4 people per household, the threat of eviction and homelessness to the people of these lands could be in the tens of millions by the end of 2020.

In fact, right now, in the ‘USA’, the banks are lining up their targets for ‘repossession’, beginning with the hotels:

Payments on nearly one-fourth of all loans backed by hotel real estate are delinquent by at least 30 days, signaling an imminent and unprecedented wave of foreclosures, according to the American Hotel & Lodging Association (AH&LA).”  Source

Also in the ‘USA’, millions of defaulting mortgagors are already facing the threat of eviction:

In North Carolina, a 9,000-case backlog is set to resume on 21 June.

 

Michigan’s State Court Administrative Office estimated when its moratorium comes to an end this month, 75,000 evictions will be filed.

 

In New York City alone, a coalition of advocates estimated that 50,000 evictions will be filed once Governor Andrew Cuomo’s statewide moratorium ends.

 

“Eviction was always too high in this country, but these are extreme numbers,” said Emily Benfer, a visiting professor of law at Columbia University and a former housing lawyer.

 

“The United States can expect an avalanche of evictions and it will negatively impact entire communities… We will be recovering from that for generations to come without federal intervention.”  Source

It is highly likely that the same will begin over here and will snowball in severity as of 1st November, 2020.

However, it is not inevitable. When, not if, the resistance to the tyranny reaches the required number and enough people are standing up to the fraudulent possession claims of the banks and their whoring corporate lawyers, then the Great British Mortgage Swindle will come to an end.

Be assured, there is going to be resistance on an unprecedented scale as more and more Britons wake up to the Covid-1984 fraud. Should any reader be aware of family or friends who are about to slip into mortgage default, then please share this article with them, encourage them to watch the Great British Mortgage Swindle documentary, to sign up for the newsletters and join TGBMS class action.

Further reading: how and why your mortgage is void in 600 words

________________________________________

As ever, many thanks to David R for his continued support and sponsorship of this site.

1

Mortgage Fraud: Hidden in Plain Sight.

I’ve previously written in substantial length about the Great British Mortgage Swindle and the components of its multi-layered mortgage fraud. 

To the average man in the street, the one who falsely believes he was the recipient of a loan from a mortgage provider, it is far too complex for him to get to grips with. As far as he is concerned, part of him knows it is a fraud on the simple basis that no matter how much he pays, the ‘debt’ hardly diminishes on account of the compound interest he is forced to pay. For those in authority, who sit on the banking gravy train and consequently have no incentive to do anything about the fraud, it’s of passing interest at most.

The Gravy Train as epitomised by politicians of any persuasion.

 

 

 

The demonstrable fraud that forms the basis of the unprecedented representative action against the Chief Land Registrar lies in the very deed of mortgage itself.  The dictionary definition of the term makes it plain: it a ‘dead pledge’ or promise.

 

mortgage | ˈmôrɡij |

noun

a legal agreement by which a bank or other creditor lends money at interest in exchange for taking title of the debtor’s property, with the condition that the conveyance of title becomes void upon the payment of the debt. (My emphasis)

Aside from the issue of the fake loan of “money at interest”, it is common sense that the mortgage can only be against the “debtor’s property”.  In other words, an individual can only grant such a charge over his home if it is truly his – he has first to be the beneficial owner before he can sign (execute) the deed, let alone a “debtor”. 

Due to the fact that his conveyancing solicitor instructed him to do so at a time when the house was palpably not in his ownership, that deed is provably illegal, ab initio. And, most significantly, the so-called ‘mortgagor’ can prove it. 

This is why the solicitor illegally instructs him to execute but not date the mortgage deed.  

Thus, the fraud is hidden in plain sight, as an esoteric* element that is often over-looked and/or dismissed on the ground it is the ‘common practice’.  The appeal to common practice is a fallacy and therefore cannot be relied upon as a defence.  The reasoning is clear: just because something is done in a particular way does not make it lawful or, indeed, legal.  

*esoteric | ˌesəˈterik |

adjective

intended for or likely to be understood by only a small number of people with a specialized knowledge or interest: esoteric philosophical debates.

The Land Registry, the Conveyancing industry and the banks will each argue that regardless of the facts, the deed is legal. 

My colleague and co-producer of TGBMS, Michael O’Bernicia, brilliantly distills it down to this:

“There is one question knocks out their deed argument: what is the one legal requirement of proving that a mortgagor has granted a legal mortgage?

 

That they signed an equitable mortgage deed, capable of being registered as a legal mortgage, as per the provisions of s1 LPMPA 1989 in front of an independent witness, who attested to the signatures.”

Further, 

“Without which components of the deed is it incapable of being registered as a legal charge?

 

Answer: The signature of the mortgagor and the date of execution [not completion].

 

Therefore, the LR assumes that the date on every deed is the date it was signed and common practice does not provide a defence to the falsification of it on the date of completion.

 

An undated cheque is always sent back to the maker, who is the only party who can amend the instrument. however, whilst post-dating can be acceptable with a cheque, the same is not true of deeds, unless more than one party is signing and they are in different locations.

 

However, since an undated deed cannot be registered, even when it is signed; just as an unsigned deed cannot be registered, even if it bears a date; the law presumes that the acts of signing and dating are indivisible, on the ground that Southern Pacific Mortgage case ruled that the entire mortgage transaction, from execution to completion, is indivisible, which naturally means that no right to grant an interest arises until completion.”

Then, of course, we have the etymology of the word ‘mortgage’ itself which makes it plain that there is something inherently nefarious about the whole swindle:

“late Middle English: from Old French, literally ‘dead pledge’, from mort (from Latin mortuus ‘dead’) + gage ‘pledge’.”

The adage, if you want to hide something, hide it in plain sight was never so apt.

And that is aside from the issue of ‘mortgage monies’ as created out of thin air:

 

 

Or, as Henry Ford put it:

“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

Little wonder that the so-called ‘education system’ does not teach its inmates anything about the creation of ‘money’ by way of fake debt. It is in the interests of the bankster and their accolytes for their fraud to remain hidden. In psychological warfare (which is is what it is, on every level) it is important to maintain the cover-up; which is why groups like this are created to steer people away from the facts and into a limited hangout of hidden trusts that can never be substantiated and false promises of  ‘golden keys’ that will magically open up the rigged court system for those ‘in the know’. But only if you pay them thousands first.

Mortgage fraud exists on an industrial scale: it’s a huge scam, one of financial enslavement, which is entirely dependent on the masses remaining ignorant to its hidden practices. 

The solution: watch TGBMS, get educated and join the class action against the Land Registry.

As ever, many thanks to David R for his stalwart support of this site.

If you haven’t done so already, here are the links to join the class actions and upload your void mortgage documents, for the singular purpose of providing us with sufficient evidence of institutionalised mortgage fraud.Join the TGBMS Class Actions:

https://forgedsignatures.com/tgbms-claim

5

Barclays Suspends Possession Claims as TGBMS Pressure Mounts

For the last 6 months, a claimant in the Representative Action against all UK mortgage companies (“V”) has been demanding that Barclays Bank Plc (trading as The Woolwich) provide her with the legal contract that complies with Section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1989 (LPMP Act). In accord with the Law of Mortgages, said agreement must be signed by all parties.

They have repeatedly failed to provide it, which is not surprising as none exists – a fact which is endemic to every purported UK mortgage company. 

On top of that, the mortgage deed they are attempting to rely upon is a forgery on the basis it was materially altered after she had executed it, when the conveyancing solicitor added a false date before registering the instrument at the Land Registry. All of which renders it illegal under Section 1 of the LPMP Act.

Ironically, given the mortgage in question is an interest only one, whose period is up (there are no arrears), the bank’s solicitors went ahead last month and filed a possession claim at Nottingham County Court on the grounds that it was a “contractual claim” and not a monetary one. This was in spite of the fact that there is no valid contract in existence. 

A Cease and Desist Notice served on the lawyers, ‘Dentons’, informing them of the facts, was ignored. They went ahead and the possession hearing was listed for 16 December, 2019.

In the meantime, V wrote to the Bank Signature Forgery Campaign and James Ventress, Senior Policy Adviser to APPG on Fair Business Banking:

“Dear Mr Ventress

 

I write to you on the basis I have material evidence that the Woolwich/Barclays have committed signature forgery against me in regard to my purported mortgage with them. In the examples provided, the documents pertain to a remortgage with the Woolwich in 2006. As can be seen, the same signature has been used by multiple named individuals and multiple unnamed signatories, dates ranging from November 2005 to present.

 

Further to this, I have now been asking Barclays for documentary evidence that my mortgage is valid, in accord with the law of mortgages for many months. Barclays have refused to respond to the issues raised and handed the matter to their solicitors who have issued a County Court possession claim. Their response each time was to issue a copy of “Your Mortgage Offer”, each one with a covering letter signed by a different individual with the same signature. Each mortgage offer had an otherwise blank page at the back with only an unnamed signatory using the same signature. None of these was requested by me in my specific request for other documents proving a legally valid contract, as required at law by S2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989. In addition, I have material evidence that my mortgage deed has been forged on the basis it was materially altered following execution.

 

A notice of conditional acceptance requesting proof of claim was ignored by Barclays and along with a further Notice of No Response, they were deemed to have no legal standing by their solicitors. A Notice to Cease and Desist was issued pending the outcome of a Representative Action lawsuit, by the group, BanksterBusters, to which I am a claimant. This was ignored and the solicitors representing the bank have filed a court claim for possession, with a hearing date of 16 December 2019 issued.

 

I attach some of the signatures from documents and letters and look forward to hearing from you as a matter of urgency. Thank you for your assistance.

Yours sincerely”

Mr Ventress wrote back to ask for her consent to use the forged signatures that are contained in her mortgage documents and she has now been added to the investigation. 

Yesterday, the solicitors in question wrote to her, stating:

“[…] We refer to the possession hearing listed for Monday, 16 December 2019 at 11.30 AM.

 

Our client has decided that a moratorium on possession hearings will be in place over the Christmas and New Year period in relation to its mortgage accounts. 

 

We have therefore written to the court asking that the above possession hearing by adjourned to a date after 5 January 2020. You will receive notice of the new hearing date in due course. However, in the meantime, you do not need to attend the hearing […]”

Should the possession hearing be re-listed it naturally follows that an application to have it struck out will be made on the basis it would be a Fraud Upon the Court. An affidavit of truth will be composed in support of which. 

 

Conclusion:

 

The net is tightening for all UK mortgage companies and their lying lawyers. Anyone in a similar position should follow the example of V and remember, at all times, taking action will have positive effect. It is #TgbmsEffect. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TGBMS LINKS

 

Join the Representative Action: www.forgedsignatures.com

Buy the DVD (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=3aa64175f0&e=483727ac6f) 

Watch on Amazon Prime (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=d173e8fbab&e=483727ac6f) 

Book Cinema Tickets (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=588e7d8966&e=483727ac6f) 

Download Free PDF of TGBMS: Next Steps (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=464b61d3d1&e=483727ac6f)

0

#TGBMS: No Contract?

Common Law, Commercial Law and statutory law require contracts.

So, why haven’t you got a contract for your ‘mortgage’?

In the previous article, I focused on the fact that a mortgage deed cannot be materially altered after it has been signed and the sound reasoning behind it. The Great British Mortgage Swindle is also dependent upon the fact that there is no valid contract between the bank and the individual, in spite of the age old principles of contracts being required for such agreements to be valid. 

Richard Pym: CEO of bailed-out B&B, then CEO of UKAR.

It’s now 10 ½ years  since I asked Richard Pym, the CEO of the Bradford and Bingley PLC to provide me with the lawful bi-lateral contract, signed by a representative of the bank and myself. 

The response was to state that the deposit of the deed created the contract. 

A contract is an agreement and when the agreement is for the sale of land and property, it makes sense to have it in writing. 

Few could argue with that. 

Yet, when I presented in Nottingham County Court that long-established principle of law that for a contract to be valid there had to be consideration on both sides and that a written agreement, signed by all parties was required for the lawful creation of the ‘mortgage’, Richard Inglis (above, left), the man acting as judge claimed what I was stating had “no basis in English Law”. He also falsely adjudged the same of the commercial lien which had been served on said CEO.

He dismissed the arguments as “entirely without merit”.

This still sticks in my craw somewhat as without his void judgement, I would not have had my house violently stolen.

Of course, he was lying. To himself, to the court, to me and to his maker. 

The fact is that he and all the other judges who have falsely stated that there does not have to be a written contract in place for a bank to steal your home, aided and abetted by the police and the bailiffs, have time after time, revealed themselves to be as full of fallacy as a cowshed is full of shit. 

No merit in English Law? How could it be then that the Statute of Frauds 1677 S.4 states:

IV.  Noe Action shall be brought . . . F1 whereby to charge the Defendant upon any speciall promise to answere for the debt default or miscarriages of another person . . . F2 unlesse the Agreement upon which such Action shall be brought or some Memorandum or Note thereof shall be in Writeing and signed by the partie to be charged therewith or some other person thereunto by him lawfully authorized.

The Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 S.2(3) also makes this plain:

2(3) The document incorporating the terms or, where contracts are exchanged, one of the documents incorporating them (but not necessarily the same one) must be signed by or on behalf of each party to the contract.

Bouviers Law Dictionary on Contracts is equally clear:

6. – 2d. There must be a good and valid consideration, motive or inducement to make the promise, upon which a party is charged, for this is of the very essence of a contract under seal, and must exist, although the contract be reduced to writing. 7 T. R. 350, note (a); 2 Bl. Coin. 444. See this Dict. Consideration; Fonb. Tr. Eq. 335, n. (a) Chit. Bills. 68.

 

7. – 3d. There must be a thing to be done, wbicb is not forbidden; or a thing to be omitted, the performance of which is not enjoined by law. A fraudulent or immoral contract, or one contrary to public policy is void Chit. Contr. 215, 217, 222: and it is also void if contrary to a statute. Id. 228 to 250; 1 Binn. 118; 4 Dall. 298 4 Yeates, 24, 84; 6 Binn. 321; 4 Serg & Rawle, 159; 4 Dall. 269; 1 Binn. 110 2 Browne’s R. 48. As to contracts which are void for want of a compliance with the statutes of frauds, see Frauds, Statute of.  

https://www.constitution.org/bouv/bouvier_c.htm 

The requirement for a legally binding mortgage contract was brought into legislation 30 years ago as a result of the Law Commission’s recommendations.  On 24 January 1989 ~ The Lord Chancellor (Lord Mackay of Clashfern) addressed the House of Lords with his reading of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill [H.L.]. He stated the intention of ‘Clause Two’ (Section 2):

“The Law Commission recommended that contracts for the sale or other disposition of land should not be valid unless they are made in writing and that writing is signed by all the parties to the contract. The clause gives effect to that recommendation. It was made after wide-ranging consultation by the commission.

 

It seems right that contracts as important as contracts for the sale or other disposition of land be in writing. The clause removes the possibility of an oral, binding, but unenforceable contract. It ensures that all the parties to a contract must sign it. The clause has been drafted so as not to interfere with the usual practice of exchanging contracts.”

Hansard, vol 503 cc598-611

On Wednesday 12 July 1989  an article (now removed)  in the Law Society’s  ‘Law Gazette’ addressed the changes to the Law of Mortgages:

“… First, all contracts for the sale or other disposition of an interest in land will have to be in writing; it will not be possible to have an oral contract evidenced in writing. The danger of inadvertently creating a s.40 memorandum (for example, by a solicitor’s letter) is therefore removed. Solicitors could therefore discontinue the practice of making pre-contract correspondence ‘subject to contract’.

 

As has just been mentioned, there is no need to prevent the letter being evidence of an oral agreement and although contracts could still be created by correspondence, a solicitor has no implied authority to sign a contract on behalf of a client. 

 

Secondly, the signatures of all parties must be present; s.40 lacked this element of mutuality. 

 

Thirdly, non-compliance with the rule will make the contract void rather than unenforceable, as under s.40 …“.

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/property-points

On 26 September 1989 ~ The LPMP Act came into full cause and effect; s. 2(1) prescribes that a contract for a mortgage is required by law, with s.2(3) stating that a document incorporating the terms executed by both the mortgagee and the mortgagor, is also required by law.

Wherefore, on 26 September 1989 ~ the implied contract in every mortgage deed prior to the 1989 act no longer has legal effect, on the basis that s2 prescribes that it can only be expressed in writing, signed by both parties, with all of the fairly negotiated terms in a single document.

Paragraph 4.8 of the Law Commission Report No 164 titled ‘Transfer of Land Formalities for Contracts for Sale Etc of Land’ states:

“Signature

 

4.8 It was proposed in the working paper, and we now recommend, that the contract should be signed by all the parties to the contract or by persons authorised to sign on their behalf. One of the most frequently voiced criticisms of section 40 is that it is one sided; a person who has not signed any written evidence can choose to sue the person who has, even though he could not himself be sued. 

 

This want of mutuality in ability to enforce a contract involves an obvious measure of injustice; certainly it is contrary to the ordinary equitable requirements for specific performance, so that a somewhat strange anomaly may be detected in that this remedy may be ordered despite non-compliance by one side with the statutory formalities.

 

We do not believe that it will cause difficulty or noticeably increase expense to insist that all parties (or their agents) sign the contract.This would not only be in the interests of certainty and justice, but would also be in complete accord with current practice.”

The requirement that all parties sign a contract is also definitive in binding case law from United Bank of Kuwait Plc v Sahib & Ors [1996] EWCA Civ 1308 within which it states:

“The effect of section 2 is, therefore, that a contract for a mortgage of or charge on any interest in land or in the proceeds of sale of land can only be made in writing and only if the written document incorporates all the terms which the parties have expressly agreed and is signed by or on behalf of each party. In the present case it is not suggested that there is any such written document.” 

 

“I therefore conclude that by reason of section 2, the mere deposit of title deeds by way of security cannot any longer create a mortgage or charge.”

Furthermore Cousins Law of Mortgage (2010) 3rd Edition affirms that:

“… Where a purported contract for the grant of a mortgage on or after September 26, 1989 fails to comply with the requirements of section 2 of the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989, no mortgage will be created and, notwithstanding any oral agreement or deposit of title deeds, the creditor will have no interest in or rights over the debtor’s land […] It follows that the failure to comply with section 2 will provide a defense to any claim for possession pursuant to a mortgage.” (Page 610-611)

And Chitty on Contracts (2008) 30th edition, page 417 clearly states:

“iii. The effect of failure to comply with formal requirements – Effect of non-compliance…any agreement not complying with the requirements of s2 of the 1989 Act is a nullity.”

Fisher & Lightwood (Jul 2010) 13th Ed page 41 reveals ‘interim equitable mortgage phase’:

“… Defective legal mortgage … for an informally executed legal mortgage … to take effect as an equitable mortgage it must nonetheless comply with the [s.2(3) LPMPA] provisions … moreover as informally executed mortgages are frequently executed only by the mortgagor this may result in many such mortgages not creating any contract and security interest at all …”

 

Conclusion: the entire conveyancing industry has been manifestly breaking the law by failing in its duty of care to its clients. The case for which is clear. Given there is no consideration on the part of the licensed banks, any and all perceived debt or obligation to ‘pay’ is nothing more than an elaborate swindle involving some 11.2 million ‘mortgagors’. That fact also explains how and why the bank’s representatives never sign any contract or, indeed, put their names and signatures to any document.

The mortgage is a fraud: no consideration,  no debt and no valid deed. None of which is adequately explained by a conveyancing solicitor, rendering it all unlawful, whichever way one wishes to cloak it.

“Woe unto you, lawyers! For ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered.” — Luke. XI, 52.

TGBMS Links

Buy the DVD (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=3aa64175f0&e=483727ac6f)

Watch on Amazon Prime (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=d173e8fbab&e=483727ac6f)

Book Cinema Tickets (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=588e7d8966&e=483727ac6f)  

Download Free PDF of TGBMS: Next Steps (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=464b61d3d1&e=483727ac6f)

2

A COMMON LAW PRINCIPLE: NO RIGHT TO MATERIALLY ALTER A DEED

Centuries of Law to support the fact a deed cannot be altered (without expressed written consent) after it has been executed. 

A regular question that arises in regard to the industrial scale and multi-levelled Great British Mortgage Swindle is what right does the conveyancing solicitor have to add the date after the deed of mortgage has been executed?

The answer is none whatsoever.

There are countless common sense and  principles of law that apply to this matter.

The first form of a mortgage in this country was the shetar that was granted by the Iceni peoples of East Anglia to the Jewish money lenders over 1000 years ago:

The Jews, whom the Normans brought to England . . . [or who financed and followed the invasion – Ed.] brought a refined system of commercial law: their own form of commerce and a system of rules to facilitate and govern it.

 

Several elements of historical Jewish legal practice have been integrated into the English legal system. Notable among these is the written credit agreement—shetar, or starr, as it appears in English documents.

 

The basis of the shetar, or “Jewish Gage,” was a lien on all property (including realty) that has been traced as a source of the modern mortgage. Under Jewish law, the shetar permitted a creditor to proceed against all the goods and land of the defaulting debtor. . . Jewish law that debts could be recovered against a loan secured by “all property, movable and immovable” was a weapon of socio-economic change that tore the fabric of feudal society and established the power of liquid wealth in place of land holding. . . . Jewish Law, wherein personal debt superseded rights in real property had become the law of the land.”

 

“Foootnote 11: H.C. Richardson, The English Jewry Under Angevin Kings 94 (1960) (Jews liquidation of land obligations broke down rigidity of feudal land tenure and facilitated transfer of land to new capitalist class). Footnote 15: CF. 1 F. Pollock and F.W. Maitland, supra note 3 at 469… (alien to English law for creditor not in possession of land to have rights in it).”

 

“The Shetar’s Effect on English Law”, The Georgetown Law Journal; V. 71, P 1179 – 1200); Judith A. Shapiro.

As invidious as it may well have been, the king of the Iceni could not have granted a charge over his peoples’ land were they not actually in possession of said territories. 

That is common sense.  

It’s also a point that was made as recently as 2014 in the Supreme Court:

The purchaser was not in a position either at the date of exchange of contracts or at any time up until completion of the purchase to confer equitable propriety,” and,

 

“This case has been decided on the simple basis that the purchaser of land cannot create a propriety interest in the land, which is capable of being an overriding interest, until his contract has been completed.”

Scott v Southern Pacific Mortgages & Others [2014] UKSC 52.

 

So, what is actually going on when a conveyancing solicitor instructs an individual to execute a mortgage deed over a property that is not his and to leave the date blank (for him to fill in later)?

Firstly, he is giving illegal advice, as per common sense, the Law of Mortgages and the above Supreme Court ruling.  Any and all of which renders the deed fraudulent. 

Secondly, when he alters the deed post signing, he is engaging in an act of forgery. There is no law that permits him to do this. How could there be? What kind of legal system would accept that documents, financial instruments, wills, deeds, affidavits et al could be materially altered after they have been executed/signed without the consent of the signatory?

Were that to be allowed, we would be awash in an ocean of nonsense and illogicality. That is why the Supreme Court had to make such a conclusion. 

It may be reasonably argued that the current rigged game known as Her Majesties Courts and Tribunals Service operates in exactly that way – nonsense and illogicality rule throughout, particularly in regard to the banks and the special treatment they get when bringing a possession claim, even when presented with the facts. 

And that is putting it mildly.  

The following is taken from the research of  Darren Purcell to whom it must be duly credited, with thanks. 

“The rule in Pigot’s Case 1614” – Any material alteration to a deed after execution without the consent of all parties renders the deed void. This is a rule of law that has stood for 400 years without being superseded, it has had some minor alterations eg. it must now be a material alteration but this is still good law.”

The case came before the eminent 17th-century English jurist, Lord Coke.

 

The jury had found as a fact that the amendments (a) were made by a stranger, and (b) that they did so without the permission of Winchcombe. The Court further held that the amendment was not a material one.[5]

 

Coke held:

“when any deed is altered in a point material, by the plaintiff himself, or by any stranger, without the privity of the obligee, be it by interlineation, addition, rasing, or by drawing of a pen through a line, or through the midst of any material word, that the deed thereby becomes void.”

“Further, the Forgery Act 1861 states, Section 34 “Acknowledging recognizance, bail, cognovit, &c. in the name of another.”

Whosoever, without lawful authority or excuse (the proof whereof shall lie on the party accused), shall in the name of any other person acknowledge any recognizance or bail, or any cognovit, actionem, or judgment, or any deed or other instrument, before any court, judge, or other person lawfully authorized in that behalf, shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable . . . F1 to be kept in penal servitude for any term not exceeding seven years.”

Darren continues,  “All references I have come across in relation to alteration of deeds is that they are not allowed without consent, the rules are as set out in Pigots case 1614 (above), there is a presumption of the court that alterations to deeds occurred before delivery and vice versa with wills. The presumption needs to be rebutted.”

 https://www.gov.uk/…/practice-guide-68-amending-deeds  “… even in here its saying “all parties” must consent and then after registration a deed of variation or deed of rectification is needed to alter a deed.”

“Forgery and Counterfeiting act 1981 section 9, check out s.9(2) false if altered 9 Meaning of “false” and “making”.

“(1) An instrument is false for the purposes of this Part of this Act—

(a) if it purports to have been made in the form in which it is made by a person who did not in fact make it in that form; or

(b) if it purports to have been made in the form in which it is made on the authority of a person who did not in fact authorise its making in that form; or

(c) if it purports to have been made in the terms in which it is made by a person who did not in fact make it in those terms; or

(d) if it purports to have been made in the terms in which it is made on the authority of a person who did not in fact authorise its making in those terms.

(2) A person is to be treated for the purposes of this Part of this Act as making a false instrument if he alters an instrument so as to make it false in any respect (whether or not it is false in some other respect apart from that alteration).”

 

Lord Denning put it thus:

What is the common element in all these cases? It is, I think, best expressed in the definition given by East in his Pleas of the Crown, vol 2, page 822. He treats the subject, I think, better than any writer before or since:

 

‘To forge (a metaphorical expression borrowed from the occupation of the smith) means, properly speaking, no more than to make or form: but in our law it is always taken in an evil sense; and therefore Forgery at common law denotes a false making (which includes every alteration of or addition to a true instrument), a making malo animo, of any written instrument for the purpose of fraud and deceit. This definition results from all the authorities ancient and modern taken together’.”

“Furthermore, the Council of Mortgage Lenders Handbook Section 5.18.1 clearly states:

[…] the Mortgage deed must not be amended.”

Chitty on contacts 31st edition states,

“Alteration or Cancellation of a Written Instrument”

 

“25-020 Material Alteration. If a promisee, without the consent of the promisor, deliberately makes a material alteration in a specialty or other instrument containing words of contract, this will discharge the promisor from all liability thereon, even though the original words of the instrument are still legible.

 

The rationale for the rule is two-fold. First: “no man shall be permitted to take the chance at committing fraud, without running any risk of losing by the event, when it is detected” and, second, that the effect of the alteration renders the deed or instrument “no longer the deed or instrument of the party charged”.

 

Conclusion

The conveyancing solicitor has no right, in reason and at law, to materially alter a mortgage deed. Adding a date is included in that. It is only added to give the appearance that the law of mortgages has been complied with. 

He adds it because were it not dated, it would not be accepted by the Land Registry for the purpose of registration.

The conveyancing solicitor thus induces the individual to sign a legal document in which he falsely claims, at the time of signing, that the property is his. In the majority of such ‘registrable dispositions’,  and they run into the millions,  the deed falsely states that he, as the “beneficial owner” agrees in writing that moneys were received from the bank (which makes it a false receipt), that he is the “borrower” and that he therefore has the legal standing to secure the (non-existent) “loan” against his property. None of which is true. 

The Great British Mortgage Swindle is a fraud at every level and the Deed of Mortgage is a lie put to paper. 

Given the foregoing, those conveyancing solicitors who are paying attention may well be experiencing  a creeping sense of horror at the realisation that the common practice of the industry is nothing less than fraud. 

As ever, many thanks to David R for his continued support of this site and to Michael O’Bernicia for his unrelenting tenacity. 

TGBMS Links

Buy the DVD (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=3aa64175f0&e=483727ac6f)

Watch on Amazon Prime (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=d173e8fbab&e=483727ac6f)

Download Free PDF of TGBMS: Next Steps (https://thegreatbritishmortgageswindle.us20.list-manage.com/track/click?u=d15706cafc460fd76074a0069&id=464b61d3d1&e=483727ac6f)

9

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Baskerville 2 by Anders Noren.

Up ↑