Have just found this on baliffadviceonline.co.uk
A warrant or liability order must have a ‘court seal’ and a ‘wet ink’ signature.
One of the most popular (and inaccurate) Freeman on the Land theories.
There is no such document as a ‘Liability Order” and further information on this subject can be read here.
With a warrant of control for unpaid court fines there’s no requirement for a bailiff to have possession of an actual warrant.
On the matter of ‘wet ink’ signatures, Rule 109(3) of the Magistrate Court Rules 1981 states:
“Where a signature is required on a form or warrant other than arrest, remand or commitment warrant, an electronic signature incorporated into the document will satisfy the requirement.”
The site seems carefully worded and seems to be set up to rubbish sites such as this so I am thinking a lot of stuff on there might be rubbish.
I wondered if anyone on here has ever been challenged by bailiffs after telling them their paperwork needs an embossed court seal and wet ink signature.
In some ways if the signature doesn’t need to be wet ink it is better as we could have many cases where people have made themselves liable to be sued and/or charged with fraud, perjury etc
We all know many people on here successfully deal with baliffs so I am suspicious that baliffadviceonline.co.uk is there specifically to discredit the truth.
I know from experience dealing with council type bodies who are acting immorally even on non-debt matters that getting fussy with them and telling them what laws/statutes/etc they are breaching or on the verge of breaching tends to get them to back off fairly sharpish and send a letter “closing the matter”.
What is on there is correct & no I do not have any connection to that site.
Court seals dont’ have to be embossed and some dont’ need to be signed. If they do need to be signed it don’t need a wet ink signature.
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ … als_stamps
[ https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/court_seals_stamps ]
Speeding ticket , the courts and councils are private corporations and “their rules ” state no paperwork requires a signature nor a seal as the whole charade is fraudulent , a unsigned liability order or warrant carries no lawful standing and has no authority , yet with a wet vicarious signature all liabilities are with the one whom gave it authority then any issues are with them and can be held accountable.
As they print off their worthless documents and distribute to the clowns whom attempt to extort monies from us then there “sites” are going to emulate their fraud . if questioned of its validity no signature to hold responsible for the “printing errors” .
Didn’t the signed/wet seal thing come from legislation to do with a Police warrant that when interpreted correctly applied to all warrants?