• @Wrench
    link
    66
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    So how is this any different, in their minds, from stealing?

    They take a loan out to buy a car. They clearly have 0 intention of paying that loan off by citing some sovereign citizen encantation.

    How can they reconcile that in their heads?

    “I deserve free things at the cost of others, because I’m clever”?

    Scum, regardless of your libertarian philosophy.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      495 months ago

      In their minds, they’re not stealing, they just paying with unexpected money.
      They’re saying “send the bill to my secret government trust account”, since they think everyone secretly has one of those that the government opened when they were born and use for Purposes™.

      Sometimes they just think they’ve found a loophole. It’s not stealing because it’s legal.
      If someone offers you a car for free, you’d be silly not to take the offer,even if afterwards they say they would have liked you to give them a pile of money.

      • @Wrench
        link
        385 months ago

        They’re saying “send the bill to my secret government trust account”, since they think everyone secretly has one of those that the government opened when they were born and use for Purposes™.

        If they really don’t think they’re stealing, then they would be transparent about their method of payment up front. I very highly doubt they would have received financing if they communicated that expectation while applying.

        So it seems more like bad faith excuses than actual belief in what they’re doing.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          215 months ago

          I can’t speak to their intent or internal state of mind, only to what they seem to say they’re trying to do.

          I can say though, that I wouldn’t assume consistency or rational action to be things I would expect of people who think the capitalization of their name is the difference between them and a shell corporation opened under maritime law by way of their “berth certificate”.

          Either way what they’re doing is fraud.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          35 months ago

          I would guess that they were told by some “guru” how exactly to do it, and never questioned the magic words.

    • @olafurp
      link
      105 months ago

      It started with alternative science, now we have alternative law.

  • @shyguyblue
    link
    English
    515 months ago

    I’ve noticed that these companies are starting to call out the sovCit scam by name, so it seems they’ve had a gut-full as well…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      45 months ago

      I know it’s a play as old as time but I’m sure the shit EXPLODED in the internet age. I’d bet most companies have a form letter at this point.

    • @uranibaba
      link
      255 months ago

      Saying authorities have rejected their defence seems… counterproductive? Their whole argument is that they don’t accept the court’s authority.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        This seems more like a polite “We see what you’re trying to do and in court you may not realize you will not win” than a “pay us now” letter. I’d guess this is more so that the company can show the court they tried to be reasonable. Doesn’t matter either way how the person responds, unless it’s with a payment.

    • @ajrwill
      link
      215 months ago

      This was satisfying to read, thanks for sharing!

      • @BonesOfTheMoonOPM
        link
        295 months ago

        It’s hilarious that companies have dedicated sovcit reply letters.

    • @shyguyblue
      link
      English
      285 months ago

      New theory: They started it. Vertical integration for the win!

    • That’s got to be a fun job. Use the taser every time they use SovCit terminology, like a drinking game. See how many points you can rack up.

      Shit, I may have found a new calling.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        95 months ago

        You definitely can’t use a Taser as a repo and you have to be afraid of nutcases with weapons

    • admiralteal
      link
      fedilink
      55 months ago

      What lawyer is going to work with someone who thinks they can use “coupon” magic money to pay for contracted services rendered?

        • admiralteal
          link
          fedilink
          5
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          Fortunately, they don’t need to rely on their client paying them.

          Of course, a LOT of these sovcit cases are civil, and you generally only have that right to a free attorney in criminal court. Which is some stupid bullshit, but it is reality.

  • @lemmy_get_my_coat
    link
    155 months ago

    I think even if this stupid sovcit bullshit did end up being the magic words that somehow worked, I wouldn’t want to do it because of the sheer amount of paperwork involved.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      55 months ago

      I heat you there. I read all the paperwork they were about to fill out and remembered why I’m not a lawyer or accountant. Paperwork is not my thing

  • @crypticthree
    link
    105 months ago

    DJ Screw used to lean and see where that got him

  • @Hikermick
    link
    75 months ago

    Bones, I’ve been enjoying these sovcit posts. Some of these (maybe all) are years old, are there no posts from these folks when reality comes crashing down?

    • @BonesOfTheMoonOPM
      link
      185 months ago

      I just keep picking them out of my Facebook posts where I’m starting to annoy my friends with them lol, so it’s kind of a snapshot of whatever I saw. But they’re not very good about telling us their failures.