My son was stopped for not wearing a seatbelt. He was exempt for wearing but did not have his certificate with him. Since he had not committed a criminal offence, he did not give his name to the police. He was taken to court, not for not giving his name, but for not wearing a seatbelt. When he attended the Magistrates Court, the case was dismissed as he produced his exemption certificate. The Magistrates asked him his name, and again he refused. My son applied Common Law which stipulates that, unless you have committed a criminal offence, i.e. doing tort to another individual, the Magistrates court does not have the power under Maritime Law, to 'do business with you'. If a defendant gives his name and details to the Magistrates Court, then he/she enters into a contract with the Court, hence is liable to comply with the rest of the session. As a result of not giving his name, my son received a fine of £360 which he refused to pay. He wrote to the Magistrates Court asking for the fine to be withdrawn as it had been given in his name which he had not given or uttered. He made it clear when he first attended the court that he did not wish to enter into a commercial lien with the court. This is Common Law which the Magistrates reject at all times. There have been cases where the police was called in the Court to arrest the defendant, but by explaining to the Police their rights under Common Law, the police arrested the Magistrates for being in breach of this Law and in several other cases, the case was dismissed. The Magistrates ignored my son's letters (2) asking the Magistrates to acknowledge the above, that he had not entered into contract with the court and hence the fine (which they addressed to HIS name which they had from other sources, was 'unlawful' and warned the magistrates (he addressed one letter to each of the magistrates with their names on the letter) that they could be done for purgery. No reply was received from the magistrates, instead they instructed a collection agency to collect the fine plus the agency's fees. My son did not open the door to the Bailliffs who attended and put a notice on the door to advise that should they return, they would be liable under Common Law and the respective text which ensues, which when displayed, deterrs the bailliffs. No further visits were made. Last week, the collection agency sent my son a letter informing him that the 'fine' had been returned to the Magistrates Court. Today a Notice of Enforcement arrived addressed to my son's full name with his address. This is from Marston High Court Enforcement Officers and Certificated Enforcement agents. The notice specifies the amount due, the details of the court judgement or order or ENFORCEMENT POWER BY VIRTUE OF WHICH THE DEBT IS ENFORCEABLE. The details are "A warrant has been issued by Her Majesties Courts & Tribunals Service. Driver of motor vehicle fail to give name/address". It is dated 26/03/2014. Furthermore if the fine is not paid by 25/11/14, the an enforcement agent will visit you.... and the usual procedure of seizing goods, etc... My son will not pay the fine, yet I am worried, as we are joint tenants but my son does not work but is not on benefits either. Although not an official carer, he has been looking after me and occasionally takes temporary work. He is not abusing the state by claiming benefits which he would be entitled to. I am concerned that if a bailliff gains access somehow if we leave a door open by accident, although temporarily, that MY belongings will be taken. I need your help, not as much as with a potential bailliffs's visit but more so with the corrupted Magistrates' decision which refused to withdraw the fine after imposing it in court, hence denying the Law of the Land of this country (Magna Carta). What can we do to expose the Magistrates?