Conditional Acceptance Of Hearing

What do you want from your hearing and how would you communicate it?

Whilst the Court room and the court building is the public’s, the court is your court…so what do you want to do in your court?

Some might go to their court to complain that there’s no “wet ink signature” on the received paperwork, some might complain that it’s not from a man/woman, and there may be endless other reasons why there is a belief that the matter is invalid. Such beliefs and approaches will typically create controversy rather than attempting to resolve the matter between your PERSON and the opposite party.

Do you not want to have an agreement between the parties BEFORE you go into your court? Why would that be important? With that agreement that has resolved the matter, do you not want the adjudicator merely to dismiss the action? In fact, does that agreement between the parties mean that the court no longer has subject matter jurisdiction? It should, unless you agree to give it all up by your actions.

With an agreement in place, whether using a 3 step process of some form, a template process from Aussie Speeding Fines or any other 3rd party, the adjudicator could still try to sweep the agreement from underneath you. What’s wrong with that? Nothing at all, the court adjudicator is merely doing their job and testing to see if you truly believe you have an agreement in place.

A test by the adjudicator may consist of questions like:

1) What’s this nonsense about Mr Jones? or
2) I don’t see any agreement here? Are you going to be here for the hearing on such and such date? or
3) This doesn’t make sense to me! or
4) What do you want me to do Mr Jones?
5) What are you doing here today Mr Jones?
6) How do you plead Mr Jones?

These simple questions and others are aimed to test a party who has sent in paperwork into the court file, whether part of a comprehensive process or not. The key here is that you must bring in a record that shows agreement between the parties – this is a very key step that many completely miss. Instead, some try to argue a matter on the day which forces the adjudicator to make a determination for you. Your arguments in court are merely hearsay and can mean very little or have no influence with the adjudicator – esp when the opposite party has brought in all the required law, documentation and communications.

Assuming you have an agreement in place (eg by running a 3 step process that the opposite party has not performed reasonably to the stipulations therein) which we may call a “record between the parties” created by due process. The record has been submitted into the court file prior to the hearing (hopefully by your 3rd party presenter), then it may make sense to enter a “Notice of Conditional Acceptance of Hearing” to the court to provide notice on exactly why you’ll be there and in what capacity (Public or Private).

The only thing one would want the court to do is merely enforce the record between the parties that has resolved the matter. Not for one to go in and make argument, create controversy, make other unrelated arguments, make comments about something etc. An example public side Conditional Acceptance of Hearing could be:


 

Reference No: 20150601BPJ

Bob Jones

Aggrieved Party

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL— NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL IS NOTICE TO AGENT

NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE OF HEARING FOR CASE NO. 123456/15 AT THE Orange Magistrates Court SCHEDULED FOR 1st August 2015

Date: 1st July 2015

RECIPIENT(S):

REGISTRAR / Presiding Magistrate (Case No: 123456/15)

c/o Orange Magistrates Court

51 Main Street, Orange, NSW, 2800

PLAINTIFF

IAN RESPONDER

Orange City Council

PO Box 35, 135-137 Byng Street, Orange, NSW 2800

c/o Berry Mason Lawyers

49 Main Street, Orange, NSW

SERVICE BY:

Australia Post service Registered Post: 1111111 (Orange City Council), 11111112 (Plaintiff) with Delivery Confirmation

c/o Sarah Brown, Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records, 1 Main Street, Orange, NSW, 2800

Re: CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE OF HEARING FOR CASE No. 123456/15 AT THE Orange Magistrates Court

Dear REGISTRAR, Presiding Magistrate, Plaintiff,

Comes now Bob Jones an Aggrieved Party, hereinafter “DEFENDANT”, whose rights, titles, privileges, interests, property and remedies regarding CASE No. 123456/15 at the Orange Magistrates Court are being interfered with.

Recipient(s) are hereby given legal notice that the DEFENDANT conditionally accepts the hearing scheduled on 1st August 2015 or any future hearing as it relates to Case/Account No. 123456/15 in the Orange Magistrates Court upon proof of claim that the hearing is not merely:

  1. for the court to take judicial notice of the record between the parties, original record previously submitted by Sarah Brown, Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records by registered post 2222222 on 25th June 2015, a copy of that record attached herein at Attachment ‘A’; and

  2. for the court to enforce the record between the parties showing the PLAINTIFF’s consent and approval to the stipulations therein; and

  3. for the purpose of publicly ratifying the record between the parties and the stipulations therein; and

  4. to have any other party that interferes with, obstructs and/or the trespass in the record between the parties that has resolved the matter(s) become personally liable for a tort; and

  5. To have the court award reasonable costs to the DEFENDANT, a record of reasonable costs will be entered into court on the day of the hearing.

Delivery of this Notice constitutes notice to recipient(s).

Sincerely,

_____________________________________

Bob Jones,

Aggrieved Party

All responses to be directed to Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records whose business it is to keep such records.

Enclosures:

Copy of Record between the parties is attached at Attachment ‘A’ (original record sent to court file for case 123456/15 on 25th June 2015 by Sarah Brown, Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records)

Attachment ‘A’ – Record Between The Parties

a) copy AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE dated 13 February 2015, by Sarah Brown Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records; and

b) copy NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND CONSENT TO STIPULATION AGREEMENT TO THE FACTS dated 11 February 2015, by Bob Jones; and

c) copy AFFIDAVIT OF NON-RESPONSE/NON-PERFORMANCE (two leafs) dated 10 February 2015, by Sarah Brown, Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records; and

d) copy AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE (one leaf) dated 28 January 2015, by Sarah Brown Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records; and

e) copy NOTICE OF FAULT: OPPORTUNITY TO CURE (two leafs) dated 26 January 2015, by Bob Jones; and

f) copy AFFIDAVIT OF NON-RESPONSE/NON-PERFORMANCE (one leaf) dated 25 January 2015, by Sarah Brown, Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records; and

g) copy AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE (one leaf) dated 12 January 2015, by Sarah Brown Third Party Presenter/Acceptor and Custodian of Records; and

h) copy NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE (three leafs) dated Nunc Pro Tunc to 3 January 2015, by Bob Jones; and

i) copy AFFIDAVIT OF SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT (two leafs) dated 10 January 2015, by Bob Jones; and

j) copy Infringement Notice dated 1 January 2015 by Orange City Council marked “CONDITIONALLY ACCEPTED”


So what about some answers to those “test” questions when in court? Some considerations below for a public side hearing:

1) What’s this nonsense about Mr Jones?

A: I conditionally accept your offer upon proof of claim that there is not agreement between the parties making your offer moot”

2) I don’t see any agreement here? Are you going to be here for the hearing on such and such date?

A: “I conditionally accept your offer upon proof of claim that there is a record in opposition to the record that is before the court that shows agreement between the parties and I conditionally accept your offer to be at the hearing merely to have this court provide evidence that this court has not lost subject matter jurisdiction and that there is not agreement between the parties”

3) This doesn’t make sense to me!

A: I conditionally accept your offer upon proof of claim that the record between the parties has not resolved this matter, is there a record in opposition to the record that is before the court?

4) What do you want me to do Mr Jones?

A: Thank you your honour, I require you to enforce the record between the parties and dismiss this case.

5) What are you doing here today Mr Jones?

A: To have this honourable court enforce the record between the parties and dismiss this case. Is there a record in opposition to the record that is before the court?

6) How do you plead Mr Jones?

Why would you plead guilty or not guilty, there is an agreement in place that has relieved the court of subject matter jurisdiction. By pleading not guilty you are saying that you are guilty but do not want to pay as per – https://therunawaycontract.net/…/not-guilty-do-you-know-wha…/ so be careful of the words used. You could say: I plead guilty to all the facts and plead that this matter is resolved between the parties.

Notice that there is reference to the “Record” and not the “contract” between the parties. Contracts are dynamic and you could easily have your contract ripped out from underneath you by your actions. Hence, all you want the court to do is enforce the record that shows agreement.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s