| Iain Stamp and Matrix - scammers 13:17 - Jun 10 with 657 views | saint901 |
Part of my work is to help those exposing financial scams and scammers.
Recently the above "gentleman" via his company called Matrix Freedom have lost in the High Court in a claim that some 200 people can have their mortgage repayments repaid to them as the lenders are in contravention of "sovereign law".
The case was dismissed with the Judge remarking that the attempt to deceive the Court and the also certain deceiving of clients, was a matter that merited a criminal investigation.
The basis of the claims is that for an individual to be subject to the law of the land, he/she must be a citizen (in the UK a "subject") and that because the birth certificate prints a surname in capital letters, he/she is not a citizen/subject. As such the laws of the land cannot apply.
The 200 or so people Stamp and crew persuaded to go to Court, now face huge costs.
In the meantime, Stamp and his "sales force" claim to be collecting £500k a month in fees. (Minimum fee is £3,000 or 1% of loan, whichever is higher).
The "sovereign citizen" route to avoiding the consequences of actions that breach the law of the land, has been in the USA for many years and to date NO CASES HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL.
It now appears that Stamp and crew (who have a history of repeated business failures) are trying it here and as can be seen from the case in question, the High Court struck them down and warned other Courts to dismiss claims as vexatious and without merit. That means that attempting to being a new case risks the individual being in contempt of Court and facing fines/jail time.
These scheme prey on the desperate and vulnerable. The ONLY guarantee is that a criminal gets a fee.
If you are having issues around debts then there are some steps to follow.
First - speak to the lender. They usually have plans to help people/
Second, try Citizens Advice or Step Change.
If the issues is tax related, speak to the Low Income Tax Reform Group who will put you in touch with charity based tax services.
Third, NEVER engage with these people or those like them. |  | | |  |
| Iain Stamp and Matrix - scammers on 13:30 - Jun 10 with 609 views | Jellybaby |
Banks charging interest on money they don’t have would make a good investigation, interested in that scam 901? | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| Iain Stamp and Matrix - scammers on 14:23 - Jun 10 with 550 views | saint901 |
Help me out by explaining what you mean please.
Incidentally, I'm assuming that you're not trying to defend this individual and his practices? | | | |
| Iain Stamp and Matrix - scammers on 16:08 - Jun 10 with 502 views | Jellybaby |
| Iain Stamp and Matrix - scammers on 14:23 - Jun 10 by saint901 |
Help me out by explaining what you mean please.
Incidentally, I'm assuming that you're not trying to defend this individual and his practices? |
No, I won’t defend this, I am aware of some who use the Magna Carta to say we have sovereign will and therefore don’t need to pay certain bills, but mortgage non compliance is quite a dangerous game to play depending on your financial situation. Non compliance would need to meet a critical mass of around 10 - 15% as it did with the poll tax before any change could be enacted, I think we are a long way from that.
It does lead to interesting questions around authority and self policing as we see with £250 m of unpaid ULEZ fines, presumably most of these will go unpaid, that’s another scam you could get involved in Sir. | |
| I wholly disapprove of what you say and will defend to the death your right to say it. |
| |
| Iain Stamp and Matrix - scammers on 09:26 - Jun 11 with 304 views | saint901 |
My understanding of Magna Carta is that it was a device to protect the landed aristocracy from the predations of the then king. It worked for about three to five years and was then ignored by all sides leading several "baron wars". I'm aware that some people think it was a "citizens charter" but the majority of the UK population at the time were serfs and peasants who were basically seen as the property of the local baron/lord, whatever. Hardly a sound basis for any legal argument in 2024.
The case involving the scammer Iain Stamp looked at the alleged rights conferred by Magna Carta and decided that they did not exist and probably never existed. Further that thinking they did and advancing that argument in Court is likely to lead to the case being dismissed very early as "vexatious" and if pursued, risks being in contempt of Court.
The point here is that Stamp persuaded 200 people to take a case. He supplied all the legal papers (the Judge remarked that 200 people n exactly the same situation and who wrote exactly the same claim was - literally - unbelievable). Those 200 have paid Stamp at least £600k and now face costs.
I'm also aware that the mortgage lenders involved will have informal means to make those 200 known to all lenders and that should any of them attempt to find another mortgage or remortgage, they will face some difficulties. This form of "blacklisting" is illegal but happens. Am I interested in helping a team who would report this should it happen? Yes.
As for ULEZ, I understand that some people don't like the mayor of London extending the boundary of the scheme and have resorted to vandalising cameras and not paying fines. What is there to investigate? Criminal damage of property? Non payment of fines will end in County Court and a CCJ which will impact their credit scored for decades. Can it defended legally? Probably but I have no idea about chance of success.
Can it (ULEZ) be defended as an infraction against the sovereign rights of people?
Well an individual who is in effect his/her own nation, adhering to rules which they make and/or decide to adopt, cannot be 100% true to that ideal unless they live alone n a place where they never interact with other people, use services or otherwise impinge upon the rights of others. Where is the line drawn and by whom?
The Mayor of London (elected by the people) has made a decision and set a rule. Breaking it has consequences. Challenge the consequences by all means available - legal or otherwise - but be prepared for the voice of the majority who elected the mayor and gave him his powers to be a more powerful force.
I see no deception in ULEZ (but am always ready to be educated).
The key point here is that scammers like Stamp are making millions from trotting out what the Judge called "elderly statutes" which probably never had the effect claimed, have been superceded by more recent law and will not do anything except lead to a lot of cost.
I have to admire Stamp for monetising a conspiracy but I despise the way he profits from the weak, vulnerable and gullible. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
