“Stay Out of the Courts” Arguments

This page was created as a place for arguments that our court system, as presently organized, cannot or will not decide cases in accordance with the U.S. Constitution, statutes and case law, or with the Michigan State Constitution, statutes and case law. We do not agree with these arguments but are willing to provide this forum for their airing. Most of these arguments fall into the following categories:

1) The United States government and the Michigan government are not true governments at all, but simply corporations.

2) The courts make decisions based only on the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).

3) An individual will lose every time unless he brings a lawsuit under UCC.

4) The only remedies for our defective governments and defective courts are common law grand juries or resort to international tribunals.


Get RId of Your Water, Electric, and Gas Smart Meters Forever

Stay out of the courts. The courts are working for the corporations, are based upon extortion, and are corrupt. You have no voice there. You will get no remedy there. It is not a real court.

Use contract law. See this video and corresponding documents linked below. I followed a similar process. A smart meter was never installed at my home. But all of my neighbors have one.


1 thought on ““Stay Out of the Courts” Arguments

  1. On January 5, 2016, I filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, Consumer Protection Division.

    I will send this organization the complaint if anyone would like to read it; then someone from this organization can post it for other consumers to read.

    In essence, the billing rules, are unconstitutional. They denied customers their fundamental rights of “procedural” due process of law under the state and federal constitutions.

    The constitutions are applicable to government. Consumer Energy, is a state actor, thus would be required to follow the state and federal constitutions.

    Even if the courts found that consumer energy was not a state actor, the billing rules don’t provide the fundamental “procedural” due process of law, thus, the rules are avoidable.

    Moreover, the rules are so vague, that on this basis, they are unconstitutional.

    I wrote the Federal Trade Commission since CE did not follow the rules, the MPSC and CE were complicit in getting rid of my billing disputes, and as a result, CE keep sending me notices that credit action would be taken.

    Consumer Energy started changing the contract, using standards contrary to contract law. They wanted me to pay almost $600 even though this was an overcharged of about $500. Their meter was broke and they expected me to pay for it.

    I wanted my R 460.154 hearing. I learned that the hearing officer is a notary public by definition of R 460.12 (2)(v). I thought I would be getting a legal decision. It was no such thing. The hearing rule was wrapped up in legal language, which deceived me in believing that this hearing would be resolved on law.

    If these billing disputes were resolved in a court of law, CE would have to file the complaint, and prove to a court judge why the customer owes it before CE or any other utility company can shut-off one’s electricity.

    The rules are one-sided and favor the utility companies, when in a court of law, there is a court judge who is impartial and hears both parties.

    The MPSC is not a court of law. It’s an agency that has been given limited powers, unlike the court system that can provide an equity remedy, for example.

    At this time, I find that neither CE, R 460.154, (hearing between CE and the customer), is legal, and do not find in the rules that the MPSC has any legal authority to resolve billing disputes.

    The rules have to be challenge on constitutional grounds though the 5th and 14th Amendments to the US Constitution.

    I filed with the Trade Commission since I saw no way for the Michigan customers to get their legal rights enforced. It’s too political to get anything done though the state. One of the chairperson at the MPSC is a former Consumer Energy CEO, then turned lobbyists, and now a chairperson at the MPSC. This chairperson was picked by Snyder, with the consent of the Senate which is Republican.

    I would think that the Attorney General would represent the people on this issue. He hasn’t and the question is, why haven’t you done so.

    The complaint states that Consumer Energy attempted to take money that it was not entitled to when it engaged in bill manipulations, changed the customers’ contract rights, made false legal statements to the customer and the BBB, and engaged in unauthorized activities, omissions, and made ongoing threats to by pass the customer’s rights to a hearing.

    I also included the comments pursuant to the MPSC hearing comments that I downloaded from this cite.

    If someone is willing to post the complaint and its supporting documents, and rules, etc. please contact me at trsundquist@yahoo.com. I am no good at uploading documents though the computer, so I can mail a copy to someone who has the expertise in this area.

    Theresa Sundquist

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s