Reply – Re: CR(tm) "process"
Your Name
or Cancel
In Reply To
Re: CR(tm) "process"
— by liberated liberated
It appears a presumption on their part that you were seeking a benefit under some Act. Seems the CR(tm) should have been sent to the originator/claimant and not the court. The CR(tm) process then becoming a part of the turnabout package.

While it may be to some that the return of the PMO is refusal of tender thus discharge of claim, there is nothing that compels anyone to accept "new" terms to a previous contract. That said question to the Land court....Do you have a claim against me, if so , how so? If not, then who is bringing the claim as I do not understand the proceeding?  Still think the CR(tm) goes to the claimant not the court although a CR(rm) could go to the claimant on the original contract and CR(tm) to a court if the court has issued and order that you can then A4V, sent to the judge, so you have an attorney in play (the judge) that can be spanked by the Supreme Court.

Since the Supreme Court is a future step your communications, from what you have been posting, don't appear to be directed at any attorney bringing the claim to get settled.