FRAUD ON THE COURT IN BRIEF: Those instigating Fraud on the Court do not pay the court’s fees to obtain fake warrants or court’s orders used to deprive law abiding citizens stealing properties, land, money and assets. Invalid court’s papers are then used to secure unlawful entry and adverse occupation of residential premises by means of violence combined with the creation of a sense of authenticity through the invention of false court’s documents which appear to be factual. Fraud on the Court involves (with intent) a serious abuse of the court’s process and “contempt of court” (Common Law). The victims are routinely ignored by the already overstretched police and other law enforcement bodies who are unable to investigate thoroughly and independently. No matter what undeniable evidence is provided, there is no redress for the victims who are told that this scam is ‘it’s a civil matter’. It is a matter of fact that when victims DO REPORT this crime NO ONE INVESTIGATES. The only option left is to go back in the hands of the same staff in courts who are perpetrating the scam. FRAUD BY CONCEALMENT: The victims are denied inspection and copies of data from the court’s file which remain concealed. Victims are also crucially denied access to and release of the computerised court records where all the documents and interactions with the court of any party into the proceedings are recorded. The nature, extent and sophistication of this fraud, is far beyond the comprehension and reach of the average litigant in person and law enforcement officers by the police force. We are asking for the full support of: All Her Majesty the Queen’s servants who are designated to ensure a fair and just society against this serious organised crime. We are demanding urgently a Public Inquiry to investigate fully and independently the seriousness of the crimes involved by using Fraud on the Court. The non-payment of the court’s fee is not only a major deception and fraud on the on the public purse but also on the individual. This theft on the public happens in a time when the UK court’s system is crying for more funds. The recent sharp increase in the court’s fees have already reduced considerably the access to justice for the most vulnerable that cannot afford to pay. Fraud upon the court is devastating for the victims waiting and hoping to receive relief from the courts. The victims lose their homes, their assets, their jobs, their companies and ultimately their liberty and health in breach of their fundamental statutory rights. This adds burden on the already struggling NHS and Social Security systems whilst the income from many tax payers is lost. This scam is often used by banks, legal professionals, private companies, and dishonest landlords and council officers aided by court’s officers. Meanwhile criminal convictions and assets stripping founded on complex illegalities and irregularities send every day honest hardworking families and people left penniless and homeless in the streets begging for help. Innocent families and people are held hostage with children and frail old people ending up homeless and traumatised as victims of Fraud on the Court. Those few victims of Fraud on the Court who persist in chasing justice are being passed between agencies without any result or redress. Stealing from people is a crime. Taking away their assets and homes making people homeless with Fraud on the Court is a very serious and sophisticated crime for which there is no defence for the victims. Fraud of any kind is a crime and Fraud on the Court is one of the worst. An unpunished crime encourages new ones. Those committing Fraud on the Court are still there and get away with impunity. It is only a matter of time before someone you know will become the next victim. In the public interest, in order to strengthen the fairness, accountability and transparency and in name of justice join by signing this petition for a Public Inquiry and ask for the Parliament’s full support to investigate and stop the Fraud on the Court in the UK. Any person who believes to be a victim of Fraud on the Court can send their opinions contacting UK PEOPLE at a new email address to come as ODDLY our 1st email address has been hacked and the account disappeared mysteriously from Google.....Strange he.... ?!? Useful links: The Fraud Act 2006 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/contents The Protection from Eviction and Harassment Act 1977 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/43/contents The Tort (and interference with Goods) Act 1977 - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1977/32/contents Fraud on the Court - What is it? - http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/fraud-on-the-court.html Fraud on the Court - Some stories of honest families plainly wronged - here: The next phase of the Crawford Castle - (Type and search for 'The next phase of the Crawford Castle' to watch one of our selected videos on Youtube) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLtdNlwPckQ Fraud on the Court - Evictees and families Unite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfkSW4LvvXM Civil Matter or Criminal Matter? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jG045tnTaI The drama of the Jackson's Family exposed on BBC - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxHHaOOBzyU

This is important because many young people are being taken advantage of through these types of apprenticeships that require no skis to lean and can be completed in as short as time as two months. There are companies who are keeping individuals on for longer to earn the funding and gain cheep or free labour. This is unfair and unjust because these apprenticeships are meant to teach you new skills and offer you a chance at progressing. These types of apprenticeships give you next to none of those. This is what happened during my apprenticeship. My original tutor was let go because they entered into an agreement to keep me there for over a year so the company could earn the funding as they were struggle with money, I was told this by my new tutor. I was on three pounds per hour for nearly six months, being told they would promote me to a supervisor position because of my hard work and dedication. This never happened, there was no progression and I learned nothing new about the customer service industry. After my apprenticeship had ended I felt a lack of confidence in myself due to the amount I had been exploited in my place of work. After seeing a documentary two years later I learnt the horrid truth of the sheer amount of companies that set up these apprenticeship schemes, taking full advantage of young, vulnerable individuals. I feel that these types of action should are going against the purpose of apprenticeship schemes. These schemes are are being used against young people, lowering their confidence, prolonging training to enhance profits whilst maintaining false promises. The skills in a customer service role such as retail, hospitality and administration take weeks to learn not a full year. Please let us only allow apprenticeships that can develope young people into supervisors, managers or teach them a trade whilst nurturing their confidence and knowledge.

Cambridge City Council made a commitment to a fossil free future in October 2015, pledging to end investment in fossil fuels and carbon-heavy buildings. This was done with cross-party supported and formed part of a global movement for divestment from harmful fossil fuels. http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Landmark-pledges-sees-Cambridge-City-Council/story-28044516-detail/story.html Around the same time, the executive councillor for Finance and Strategy agreed to a deal with the Eastern Procurement Purchasing Organisation to take over energy supply to the council. At this point, the opportunity to make a deal with suppliers who deal exclusively in renewable energy was lost. However, there will still be a chance for the executive councillor to choose between a 100% renewables tariff and a non-renewables tariff, before the deal is finalised. It's worth noting that all suppliers are obliged to provide around 30% of their energy from renewable sources under the Renewables Obligation rules, but most of the major suppliers charge extra for this energy anyway. http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/domestic/buying-green-electricity Cambridge City Council currently consumes approximately 10,000,000 kWh of gas and approximately 8,000,000 kWh of electricity per annum. This equates to around £260,000 for gas and £1,000,000 for electricity on the current contract. Finally, the current executive councillor for Finance and Resources is standing down in May, so there is certain to be a new councillor in this role who comes to the role with the freedom to change things. The incumbent has shown little appetite for environmental concerns, claiming for example that a target of going zero-carbon by 2050 was ambitious when it is a bare minimum under the terms of the COP21 agreement in Paris. The new executive may be open to persuasion and a strong petition on this particular matter will help.

Queens Park is a community friendly park located in Glasgow's southside. It is used and loved by families, dog walkers, nature enthusiasts and children on a daily basis. Surrounded by schools and several diverse neighbourhoods this park is the heart of these communities. The most recent attack on a young woman is hugely upsetting and potentially, avoidable. In June 2016, I met with Glasgow City Council officials as a result of this campaign at that time. Their answer was 'no' to lighting for the park. This latest incident is one of a series of attacks over the years. Yet in Glasgow Green - 2 miles or so away- there is night time lighting that helps more people using the park feel safer. As anyone in Scotland will attest the days can be short and daylight scarce. Avoiding a community park after dark is not always an option. These incidences and attacks could be reduced or eliminated by proper lighting on footpaths and major thoroughfares crossing the park. I have created this petition to ask Glasgow City Council to install PROPER and sufficient lighting on these routes to fully light these paths and effectively increase the safety of everyone using Queen's Park.

British Red Cross is eager to sell our Knutsford War Memorial to McCarthy & Stone, which has stated it will sign the final document as soon as it has Cheshire East Council permission to DEMOLISH our Knutsford War Memorial. In the centre of commemorations for those who lost their lives during the Great War, our Community's Knutsford War Memorial, is being put up for sale for DEMOLITION, by the British Red Cross, which documents seem to show, was paid £275,000 to move in during 1995. (Yes that transaction is the wrong way round. We should all hope to buy our homes in such a way) British Red Cross has, I understand, not paid rent for that property during the subsequent 22 years. Nor has it paid any money to buy it. In any case it was not for sale. Some time ago (6/7 years?) it removed the (NHS agreed?) elderly day services and the nursery. The Community of this area has certainly NOT agreed - and not been consulted - about this proposed taking for demolition of its own community property. Knutsford War Memorial - our community-built-and-paid-for, war memorial - needs to be returned into the hands of the community which raised the funds pay for it.. and subsequently to extend it, for use of the local community. No Secretary of State for Health - nor any of his subsequent NHS Agents - had the right to take our War Memorial. Its all in the title - 'Health'. There was - on the other hand - a duty, when they ran our hospital, to preserve our War Memorial and to allow ongoing access to our War Memorial.. until it was returned, fully, to the hands of this Community in and around Knutsford. This Community has never been approached nor has it agreed to sell our War Memorial, which is the physical recognition by this Community of our war - and other - losses over the last century of wars.

It is stressful for people to have to drive around, for example with a sick relative, or going to work, going for treatment or trying to visit a loved one. Imagine how you feel if you are a grandmother, taking your grandchild to hospital after he/she sustains a painful injury only to find yourself looking for a parking space for 40 minutes. You find a space but have a twenty minute walk, carrying one child, another child in hand. You have a long wait for treatment then get two fretful children back to your car. It has been bashed, and you have a parking ticket. Yes, this really did happen. The effects of that experience stayed with the grandmother for days after the event. Imagine taking a loved one for exhausting radiotherapy. You drive round and round. You and your loved one end up with stress over and above the anticipatory stress about the treatment. This happens at every visit. Imagine trying to get to work. You cannot car share. You have children and carers to drop off/pick up before your shift starts. You get a parking space eventually, you rush a fifteen minute walk before your shift begins, but find the inevitable parking ticket at the end of your shift. People do not live simple hassle free lives in today's world. These example do not fit with government policy in relation to exercise, or reducing pollution. These situation do not harmonise with policy to improve well-being. We need action now.

We cannot have animals being sold on social network sites alongside second hand furniture, we must know where our animals have come from, any illnesses, who their parents are, and make sure animals aren't bought and sold for sport. There is no history regarding these poor animals, and no checks in place to make sure the people buying them are capable of looking after these animals. Barring these poor animals from Gumtree & all marketplace websites would make it so much harder for people to abuse these sites to sell ill animals, or to gain access to animals to use as bait or for sport.

In an allegation of assault or aggravated burglary the witnesses and victims do not currently have automatic anonymity and therefore put themselves at extreme risk of retribution from the family and friends of the perpetrators of the crime who may decide to take the law into their own hands. The law as it stands provides no real incentive for people to do their civic duty. Giving evidence from a remote location would avoid innocent witnesses and victims having to endure the fear and real danger posed by visiting a courtroom where the perpetrators of the crime and their family and friends are present - this should be an automatic right rather than a privilege. The principle of open justice can act as a bar to successful prosecutions because of the natural fear a witness may have in the case of a gun or knife or other violent crime so if the default position in these cases was changed to one where the Police and or CPS should have to apply for open proceedings rather than the existing system where the onus is upon the witness to declare their fear then potentially more people would be willing to testify. Safety aside, the impact on the long term wellbeing of victims of violent crimes and their families in crimes of this type may not be fully understood and certainly may be underestimated. The CPS guidance on this matter talks of the police establishing whether a witness is in fear, yet this may only become apparent once the proceedings are in train and may be exacerbated by the behaviour of the defendants and their families and contacts during the proceedings. In instances like this, it is too late to offer protection – the names of the witnesses have already been disclosed; the witnesses may well have been seen by defendants, their families and associates, because of the poor design of many Courts. The ECHR should serve everyone; the current system seems to favour the protection of one group at the expense of the other. Victims of violent crime have already suffered at the hands of their perpetrators. The purpose of a court of law is to establish whether a crime has been committed and whether those accused were indeed the perpetrators and we, rightly in my view, have a presumption of innocence until guilt is proved but I am not sure how an innocent man or woman would be disadvantaged if they didn’t know the names of the witnesses but relied upon their counsel to interrogate a witness via , for example, a live link to a remote location with the witnesses behind a screen thus serving the purposes of justice and the protection of the innocent.

In a recent statement, Christine Blower, General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said “Teachers’ workload is currently at unprecedented levels and is driving many teachers from the profession. Our latest survey shows that 48% of primary teachers, 61% of secondary teachers, and 49% of leadership members are considering leaving the profession within the next two years. These should be alarming figures for the Education Secretary. Such a ticking time bomb simply can’t be ignored." (See more at: http://www.teachers.org.uk/news-events/conference-2016/workload-dfe-working-group-reports#sthash.UAKpV2Go.dpuf) One excellent primary school teacher told me that for her the crunch came when her eight-year-old daughter bought an alarm clock and set it for 6am so that she could get to see her mother: who had been working 65 hour weeks in a school in special measures. Teachers are, on the whole, a dedicated and caring group who will always be willing to go the extra mile for the sake of the children: but what is being asked of them is not only impossibly time-consuming but utterly counter-productive, stealing valuable teaching time and preventing more creative approaches which would do far more to improve children's motivation and progress. The excessive - one might almost say paranoid - amount of testing, assessment and accountability is recognised by parents to be unhelpful, stressful for children and unnecessary. Any teacher worth their salt is well able to give an accurate assessment of a child: equally, or more accurate and comprehensive than any one-off test. (A recent article on Finnish schools in The Week demonstrated very good results from minimal testing.) It is welcome news that the Government has conducted a survey into teachers' workloads, prompting 44,000 responses from teachers, which recognises the extent of the problem: and it is most encouraging to know that Nicky Morgan is on side. Announcing the plans to the NASUWT teachers’ union conference in Birmingham, Mrs Morgan, the first Conservative Education Secretary to speak at a union’s conference in nearly two decades, said: “Nothing is more damaging to the profession than wasting the passion and expertise of teachers and school leaders on unnecessary tasks. “That’s why I’m publishing the results of the three workload review groups on marking, planning and data collection – the three biggest concerns raised by teachers through the workload challenge. These reports are a great example of the profession taking charge of their own development and I want them to make a difference to the lives of teachers. “I am pleased to say I am accepting all the recommendations for government in full.” (Read more: http://www.northumberlandgazette.co.uk/news/local-news/mp-hails-plans-to-cut-teachers-workloads-1-7847559#ixzz45tPis7CX) Nicky Morgan has pledged to monitor the situation to ensure that this report is not allowed simply to be a 'word document' but a tool with power to change a tragic and unnecessarily damaging situation. Please sign up to encourage her to do this. And it's urgent: children are being sold short and so many teachers broken. And many more are likely to vote with their feet. Please sign now.

The Hove Museum is an integral part of the culture and community of Brighton and Hove. It is part of the lives of the residents of Brighton and Hove and thousands of visitors too. It is a beautiful and historic building which houses an eclectic mix of exhibititions which enrich and enhance the lives of all who visit it. The Gardens are equally integral and are used by hundreds of residents each day for picnics, dog walking, children's games and quiet time. The Commmunity will be irreparably damaged if this is taken away.

Last week, I travelled to England at the invitation of Lord Ken MacDonald. I told my story to show the UK and the US that I am not the kind of person they want to murder. I spoke to members of Parliament, who have written a letter on my behalf. But, Phillip Hammond and Teresa May would not meet with me. Nor would anyone else in the UK or US governments. From them, I received only silence. Many people have already been killed in the strikes targeting me. When I leant my vehicle to my nephew, it was targeted by a missile and he was nearly killed. When I accepted a friend’s dinner invitation, his house was hit just before I arrived, killing three people. When my colleagues met to resolve a local dispute, they were targeted and 40 innocent people were killed. My children are terrified that next time they will succeed and kill me. But I am worried that they will become victims too. Please take me off the kill list.

The Cabinet Office has responded to a petition on the parliament.uk website: Call a General Election in 2016. The wording of the response makes it clear that although over 100,000 signatures have been reached, the petition is unlikely to be debated: "The accusations made about the Government and Prime Minister in this petition are wrong, and the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act means no Government can call an early general election any more anyway. The Government and Prime Minister have never sought to mislead the public. Nonetheless, the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act, which came into force in 2011 under the Coalition Government, removed the power to set the general election date, and therefore to call an early general election, from the Government and gave a power to the House of Commons to call an early general election in certain circumstances. An early general election can only be called under the Act if either a motion (as worded in section 2(2) of the Act) that there shall be an early parliamentary general election is passed by the House of Commons with at least two thirds in favour of the motion; or if a motion of no confidence (as worded in section 2(4) of the Act) is passed by the House of Commons and the House does not pass a motion of confidence (as worded in section 2(5) of the Act) in the Government or an alternative Government within 14 days. Aside from these triggers there is no way to replace the Government through an early General Election. Cabinet Office" Justifications for a vote of no confidence involve, but are not limited to: the victimisation of the disabled and working class, the erosion of public services, a blatant disregard for the value of our NHS workers, and the hypocrisy of a Government which moralises on tax evasion but fails to bring neither its own members nor its friends in big business to account, and a failing economy which is focused on financial irregularity and the dismantling of British industry. The British people do not deserve another 4 years of a Government which gained its mandate on a low percentage vote and promises which have now been broken. We urge you to be the catalyst for action and to press for a "No Confidence" vote in Parliament amongst your peers both within and without the party.