I'd say, if you can't find an alternative water supply ( like drill a narrow deep hole outside , there could be an underground water supply ! ) It's your best chance to represent yourself ALWAYS .
So called ' lawyers ' are working with the state and they will only help to stitch you up in court : it's their actual job and they wouldn't be allowed to practice long , if it were not.
Don't mix up fiction with real life .
Good on you for trying to challenge it though , regardless of the outcome .
As long as you aren't risking being charged 'costs' , you have to have a go at representing yourself.
The important thing is to expect 'the court thing' to be a farce, then you won't feel too bad about it, when it proves to be so.
If there are any penalties involved though in challenging it, best accept the situation and keep doing what you can in the greater cause.
After all the control of our supply of utilities and billing by corporation , is just a symptom, not the 'disease'.
Best wishes .
Thank you. I don't know how to write up "court paperwork" in common law language. For example, the radiation trespasses from the easement to our property through air and walls. The radiation assaults our health. Radiation is not a person. Chris Harder is the Water Director who supposedly vetted the wireless smart water meter, Sensus Flexnet. Chris supposedly did the research. It was found to be false research either on purpose or he had an innocent oversight.
Chris Harder says the peak power average is 38 million times less than the FCC limit. That is false. The truth is, I found the MPE calculations sheet for the Sensus Flexnet. At peak power it is 28.4 to 29 miliwatts per centimeter squared. The FCC limit for a cell phone is 20 miliwatts per centimeter squared.
The Environmental Health Trust et. al v the FCC is a landmark lawsuit brought to court on January 25th. The FCC was sued as the EHT submitted an 11,000 page document with evidence of radiation harm from New technology. The FCC has not completed new safety tests since 1996.
So would I write: It is Water Director Chris Harder's responsibility to ensure that the radio frequency radiation is at a safe limit. My assumption is that there was an innocent oversight on his research, since the peak power is measured ABOVE the FCC limit. Since Chris Harder is responsible for the radiation, if the Sensus Flexnet is installed, then Chris is trespassing from the easement to our property. Chris is assaulting our health with radio frequency radiation.
Privacy: Chris Harder wrote that he will not share data to third parties, except if by law. We don't consent. I am aware that Big Tech wants the law enforcement to determine pre-crime through surveillance. We don't want to give big tech our data for free. Our data is our product and it costs $1 a byte.
So I guess I would write: Our data is not for free. If Chris Harder et al and law enforcement wants our data, then please write a check for the appropriate amount. I.e. 1 million bytes in a megabyte.
Chris Harder says there is no surveillance, since they don't have details. I.e. Sally went to the restroom and now she's taking a shower. Chris says they observe to see if there is regular high consumption use on a certain schedule. If there is, it's assumed that a resident is watering on NOT scheduled irrigation days and will be fined. I call that surveillance too.
So I guess I write: We do not consent to surveillance by Chris Harder et al on our property.
A number, 1,000 customers and counting have complained of higher water bills after install, doubled and tripled.
We do not consent to the install when the product, Sensus Flexnet, is faulty as it has over-calculated water consumption to prior customers.
Not sure how I would write this into appropriate documents that make me sound like a lawyer.
Do you know of any links to free sample documents?
Or links to common law language tips?
Oh my God Laila , I don't know anything about common law jargon and I'm sorry I didn't see your reply earlier too .
What you've proposed seems really good to me. I can only suggest that you hand that in in writing and ask for a written judgement / response to each of the points you've raised .
( In writing not least because I think if you tried to speak them, the ,meaning would be lost and /or they would not be obliged to either consider them or to address them .)
As to to speaking , I'd say you could start by declaring the written points and summarizing them as best you can, stating at the conclusion of each as you 've said in writing ''I do not consent to each matter '' and you ask each point to be addressed in any judgement .
There is a video , which is the first one on The Warrior website, called '' A Warrior Calls'' , in which he provides templates for Common Law usage for legal documents .
I'm so sorry not to be of any help. But I hope so much for you in this and that you manage to win it for you and for all of us .
I'm in the UK, so we haven't got to the stage of compulsion yet that prevails in the U.S. So I also know nothing of the issues involved.
I'd just add though that the law of all countries is supposed to be based on '' Ordinary Common Sense and Fairness as The Overriding Objective '' and I think that is always a good thing to remind any court system of !
And the simple fact that this Corporation is attempting to take away , what must be the right to make Private Life choices, and to have a private life ! by using the law to install intrusive and potentially damaging devices, and without even a reason able excuse for doing so , rather than ordinary metering, is surely utterly against everyone's sense of natural justice .
All the best and every well being to you Laila. Good on you .
Thank you Penny. Great advice. I'll check out the warrior calls video for further advice. Yes, there's a surveillance state taking place here in the US. The SMART electric company meters are already wire-tapping and data mining. Packets of reports, mostly from California, complain of ill effects from the SMART meter where some got real sick and some were hospitalized. People with pacemakers or other devices in the body have almost died from pulsating radiation because it stops the pacemaker.
Yes I agree to submit in writing instead of by phone call. That is more legally upheld. Yes it is important to ask for a response to each point. Important to say at top, we do not consent to each issue.
Thank you for your help.
All the best,
@Laila Talley Gawd , that'll be us tomorrow, because there is no concerted opposition to the 'proposals' while they are not common enough to become compulsory , we are left to fight on our own, as individuals later . The so called '' opposition'' has a lot to answer for Imo, they are far worse than the 'devil we know '.
Another idea that occurred, is to make sure you check for yourself, exactly what the alleged ' law' giving the alleged right to make private citizens accept any utility company's terms of service, ( it's not like you can choose not to have water / fuel ) is , or is not ! in the first place .
Eg as I found with the so called 'laws ' said to make the public subject to Alleged 'virus ' protections : THE ACTUAL Acts / Reg. s CONTAIN NO SUCH THING !
Yet people universally believe the ''stories'' that the public are being arrested and fined ........clearly these are absolutely fake stories, to instil fear of non-compliance , where it is expressly illegal ( yes it is ! in all countries ) to impose what are Health and Safety AT WORK, ONLY, matters, on the public .
It's so brave of you to do this, truly, you are as rare as hen's teeth, in the sheer guts and determination dept. ! I am so full of admiration and v. proud of you, as are we all .
Love and felicitations .