It has taken 5 months for Paul Murphy to finally get an answer to his Freedom of Information request on 18th May, 2015, concerning the number of household that paid Irish Water's first bill.

See thejournal.ie article of May 28th, 2015 'Irish Water thinks it’s better you don’t know how many bills have been paid' for full story of Paul Murphy's effort to get a simple question answered.

The Reply to Paul Murphy

Paul Murphy published this letter in Anti Austerity Alliance's facebook page on Oct 20, 2015. He said

"Remember when Enda Kenny refused to give us the payment levels and told us to "toddle along" to Irish Water? Remember when they refused to answer as well? Remember that then they refused an FOI request? Remember a question to Minister Alan Kelly about it was ruled out of order for no good reason by the Ceann Comhairle?

Now we know why.... Five months later, after an appeal, we have the figures from Irish Water for payment levels on 18 May. 30% payment - 70% non-payment. No wonder they wouldn't tell us, they had to try to bully some more into paying.

Now, what journalists and others should be asking is, why haven't they released the payment levels for the second bill? Instead of doing that, they have talked about "projected" levels of payment. They don't need to do any projecting - just tell us how many have paid the second bill."

Mr Murphy explained on the same page that the letter was signed Ervia because "Ervia is state owned, Irish Water is a subsidiary of it. That's why they signed off on the letter."

Source: fliuch.org

Now that I’ve received an Irish Water Ltd bill what should I do?
We recommend you print this sticker (or print these words on a piece of paper) and stick it over the window of the envelope (and add some extra sellotape) and pop it in the nearest mailbox.

Remember, printed, not handwritten.

I do not recognise you

What many people don’t know is all the courts (and Garda (police) districts and government departments etc.) are actually registered as limited companies. Don’t believe us? Go to this website and do a search:

https://mycredit.dnb.com/search-for-duns-number/

Now do you believe us?

So the reason we say I Do Not Recognise You is because they are presenting themselves to us as something they are not – they are not some powerful entity – they are corporate entities – it’s all fiction and you as a living, breathing being will not recognise any of them as being equal or superior to you in any way – you are not a company and will not grant any company the same standing you have – you will not give them the recognition they demand.

What a lot of people don’t know (and can’t understand) is that when you were born you were ‘registered’ (you were assigned a number) and ‘assigned’ a name – but as a living (sovereign) being you do not have to accept the ‘system’ of registration and naming they use.

Have you ever heard of people recording a birth, like making a record/a note, of a birth? When did we move to registering births? That’s for another day.

You are not your name. You may answer to that name but if you were to ‘register’ a different name you would still be the same living human being that previously answered to a different ‘assigned’ name.

No matter what name you have been assigned (or assign to yourself) you are not that name – you are a separate living entity that just happens (if you want) to respond to that name.

Something else to think about: When you ask for your Birth Certificate what do you get? You get a Certified Copy of the Original – what would happen if you asked to see the original?

I also do not recognise any fictional legal title/name that was bestowed on me at birth without my consent. Therefore I do not have to answer to any name/title or otherwise that can only exist on paper.

I will not and do not recognise you.

We know this all sounds a bit strange at first but if you do a Google search you’ll find thousands of websites with the same information – and many websites that claim it’s all rubbish – but the problem with the websites claiming it’s rubbish is that they never offer any coherent argument against this ‘rubbish’.

I do not understand your intent

This expression has a double meaning. I Do Not Stand Under Your Intent.

What is their intent?

Their intent is to make you grant them Subject Matter Jurisdiction (SMJ) – what is that?

Simply put it’s them trying to make you subject to them, subject to their demands, subject to their rules, subject to their ‘bills’ (subject to their legal system etc).

A fictional non-corporeal (incorporated) entity cannot make demands on a living being without that living being granting them some kind of power – some kind of jurisdiction over the subject on this (living) matter. Their power/authority can only work if you ‘surrender’ to them. Notice how we put the ‘corp’ bit in bold? They have a body – a non-living, fictional body whereas you are a living body (with a fictional name assigned to you to try to make you think you’re under their legal system/jurisdiction).

I do not and will not understand your intent.

I do not have an international treaty with you

Because you are a living/breathing sovereign human being, and not a legal corporate fictional entity (like the name assigned to you at birth) you are actually in a different jurisdiction to them (common law) and not stepping into their ‘legal jurisdiction’.

One jurisdiction can only have contracts/treaties with other jurisdictions if they have an International Treaty to contract between the (non-living) corporation and the (living) human being. “I do not have an International treaty with you” is saying that we do not have a contract – we cannot have a contract unless we agree and therefore create an International Treaty.

No assured value

You did not order any goods, or services (even if those goods/services were given to you).

You did not order them, you did not enter into a contract for them – they have no monetary value that you agreed to.

You are stating that you are not agreeing to the value assigned to those goods and services that you did not enter into a contract for.

If you had willingly, conciously, agreed to enter into a contract for certain goods or services then they could bill/invoice you and make demands for payment from you (to an extent).

There is no assured value – so there is no debt owed.

No liability

This follows on from No Assured Value – if there’s no assured value then there can’t be any liability or obligation.

There can’t be a liability simply because there is no evidence of harm, loss or injury caused to another human being and there is/was nothing of any substance or value ever exchanged. By returning a letter (an attempt to make you contract) with No Liability on it you are not accepting any claims of liability from any corporation.

If a valid bill/invoice is issued after a contract was willingly entered into by consent and a being accepted the terms and conditions and received the services and/or goods, and then decided not to pay thereby causing another being some loss, then there is a liability simply because something of value changed hands and a contract was dishonoured resulting in loss.

We know that this may all sound like something from a cult or a ‘freeman’ or ‘sovereign man’ website and we don’t deny that it is extremely similar to what they say but we are keeping our focus only on Irish Water Ltd. Yes this way of thinking, this process, is used by others in other circumstances (successfully) but we are staying as focused as a laser beam on Irish Water Ltd.

Most people don’t know that most Common Law originates often from hundreds of years ago – laws that were never repealed or abolished like the Cestui Que Vie Act from 1666 (just an example).