Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access (NOROIRA)....where did these bizarre notices come from ??

[tomtubby]

During this past week I have noticed on a number of forums a significant number of posts from debtors querying WHY the Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access (or NOROIRA) are being ignored by the bailiff. At least half a dozen posts have stated that the notice has led to their car being taken away.

 

And yet.....those people 'peddling' these notices continue to encourage debtors to display them !!!!

 

When the new fee scale is introduced on Sunday the position cannot be clearer..... as all wrongful levies will in future be rendered "irregular" and not "illegal" with the resulting impact that any claims for damages for trespass will be almost impossible. Also, the warrant will of course not be rendered invalid.

[tomtubby]

Since starting this thread I have received messages from over 25 solicitors, various police officers and so many debtors all thanking me for this thread and for exposing the failure of these notices and most importantly, their origins (in particular....the 'newer version').

 

With over 3,000 visitors having already viewed this thread it would seem that all of my hard work has been worth it.

[brassnecked]

Excellent TT it shows that CAg has clout and credibility, hopefully the Enforcement Companies will work with us and realise that we aren't out to have a go at them for it's own sake merely to ensure debtors are threated fairly.

[Coughdrop]

It's always good when your work is 'officially' recognised by the police and such like, but what is particularly good here is that from what I read of the sites promoting these notices, the truth is being revealed and debtors are not being led blindly from what they're reading. That's real reward for your work, thanks!

[Bailiff Advice]

Who was the 'author' who drafted the original Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access (NOROIRA)?

 

The above Notice of Removal of Implied Right of Access was drafted by a gentleman by the name of Mr Mike Dobson (or; to use his Freeman on the Land ‘strawman name’) Mike:of the clan Dobson him . This was confirmed by him on 23rd February 2010 when responding to a question on the 'Freeman Ireland' forum (link below):

 

http://freemanireland.ning.com/forum/topics/implied-right-of-access

 

As you will see Mr Dobson (Mike: of the clan Dobson) displays a copy of the original Notice of Implied Right of Access on the forum and in his post he states the following:

 

 

'Hello all

 

This is a slightly amended version of a copy of my original which I am pleased to say has found its way all over the internet!! Many people have used it with success.

 

I wrote the original over a year ago after a conversation with John Harris.

 

It was used to scare of Bailiffs from the council and it certainly works. You must put a copy up at the boundary of your private estate and the public access way/street.

 

If they come to your door, politley inform them they are trespassing and they have 60 secs to leave before you call the Police!

 

Worked for me on more than 5 occassions!!!'

 

I started this thread in March this year before the new bailiff regulations came into effect. When the last post had been made the thraed had received approx 3,000 views. I noticed yesterday that the thread had been viewed over 7,500 times so clearly this subject if of huge interest.

 

After writing this thread I received so many messages and emails thanking me for providing the 'background' to these notices and given the huge public interest in the subject I think that it is important to provide some additional information about the 'author' of the notice; Mike Dobson.

 

As viewers will see from the Freeman Ireland link above dated February 2010 Mr Dobson states that he had a 'showdown at Leyland Magistrates'. In fact it would now seem that Mr Dobson had called police to his home in November 2009 after bailiffs had arrived to re-possess the property and a search was undertaken of the property.

 

The post below is copied from the CPS website.

[Bailiff Advice]

"On 18 November 2009, Lancashire Police conducted a search at a house in Bamber Bridge, Preston, the former home of Michael Dobson which had been repossessed. Amongst the items seized were a computer tower and a hard drive which were examined by officers of the North West Counter Terrorism Unit in June 2010. The computers were both found to contain files with recipes for explosives and instructions for making explosive devices.

 

Mr Dobson was arrested on 22 September 2010. He was charged with six offences contrary to section 58(1)(b) Terrorism Act 2000 of possessing records of information likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism in relation to documents found on both his computer and his hard drive.

 

When the case was listed for trial on 6 December 2011, Mr Dobson changed his pleas to guilty, although he gave no explanation for the offences. In sentencing Mr Dobson on 23 January 2012 at Preston Crown Court, HHJ Russell QC told Mr Dobson: "You have been very foolish – this sort of material though readily available should be of no interest to any sensible law-abiding citizen. You are a man of independent views – which you are perfectly entitled to hold – but you must appreciate that the law applies to you as it does to anyone else – and you must obey the law of the land".

 

Mr Dobson received concurrent sentences of 18 months' imprisonment on each of the six offences.

 

http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/prosecution/ctd_2012%20old%20copy.html

 

 

NOTE:

 

At the time of the CPS report there was a further charge pending against Mr Dobson but due to reporting restrictions this could not be made public at the time.

 

The CPS confirmed that a search of the property in 2009 had found computers with files with recipes for explosives. During the search the police also found that Mr Dobson had a part of the property set up to grow cannabis which was valued at £13,000.

 

In May 2012 whilst serving his prison sentence he was brought back to court in relation to this second charge. During the hearing it was heard that Dobson had been researching the Freeman on the Land movement, and told the court he did not believe he was breaking any laws in growing the cannabis at the property. He told the court:

 

“The particular view I held at that time was that money is a fiction.”

 

He was sentenced to a further 10 months in jail to run consecutively with the sentence he is already serving.

[Bailiff Advice]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]54937[/ATTACH]Can I make a point very clear here.

 

The author of the '2009' version of the Notice of Implied Right of Access was Mike Dobson. This is the notice that is commonly used by almost all Freeman on the Land (and similar) movements.

 

He was not in any was responsible for the 'bizarre' notice that was released on the internet in February 2013 (a copy of which is above).

 

The 'author' of that notice (which goes by the initials of NOROIRA) is believed to be the owner of one particular website and separate forum that is very well known to many on here.

[renegadeimp]

It might just be me being tired, but are they claiming that they are relying on judgements from the 1800's?

[brassnecked]

It might just be me being tired, but are they claiming that they are relying on judgements from the 1800's?

Yes in some cases they do

[fletch70]

There is of course no reason why a judgement or statute from the 1800's shouldn't still be valid unless of course a higher court or parliament have changed it.

[brassnecked]

There is of course no reason why a judgement or statute from the 1800's shouldn't still be valid unless of course a higher court or parliament have changed it.

 

Very true but the links to the case and it;s application may be out of context, if not overruled, at some point in history.

[p3t3r]

i have deleted the contents of this post because I thought I was posting in a different thread.

 

i can't see an option to delete entirety of my post.

 

sorry.

[fletch70]

The problem with, as I see it, trying to use the ECHR is that many of the clauses have get outs in that they say things like except for.... and silly little words like democracy. BTW I do not believe that any of us live in a true democracy just a flawed version of it.

Talking of laws being over ruled there is one that I know of that is very old and that is to do with the monarch not being allowed to marry or be catholic, the right of succession has only recently been changed. Old laws can still be valid

[Bailiff Advice]

With two others threads now having debates about ECHR etc it must surely be this thread should not suffer the same fate.