Final Notice of Dishonour and Second Challenge to Jurisdiction

Sent by Special Delivery – Without Prejudice – All Rights Reserved

To: 

The Clerk to the Justices 

North and East Devon Youth Court (5300) 

Sitting at Barnstaple Magistrates’ Court 

The Law Courts, North Walk 

Barnstaple,

EX31 1DX

And: 

Torridge District Council 

Riverbank House 

Bideford,

Devon,

EX39 2QG

FAO:

• James Spear – Paralegal

• Phil Gilbert – Community Safety Officer

• Chris Parkhouse – Licensing Officer

• Staci Dorey – Monitoring Officer

From: 

Jason : (Family Tyldesley) 

Zen Jungle Retreat 

Wooda Lakes,

Pancrasweek 

Holsworthy,

Devon,

EX22 7JN

Date: 11 June 2025

Re: Unproven Statutory Claims and Jurisdictional Challenge

Court Reference Nos: 502500030128 & 502500030055

Council Ref: LIT/001/2024

New Hearing Date: 20 June 2025 at 2:00 PM

Dear Sirs,

This communication stands as a final lawful notice and second formal challenge to your attempted proceedings in the above matter.

You are already in dishonour by omission following your failure to lawfully respond to my first jurisdictional challenge and affidavit of truth, issued and served on 21 April 2025, and previously included in full correspondence bundles sent to both the court and council.

✦ STATUS: YOU ARE IN DISHONOUR AND WITHOUT PROVEN AUTHORITY

To date:

• No proof of jurisdiction has been provided,

• No lawful contract or joinder has been evidenced,

• No lawful rebuttal has been returned,

• The hearing listed for 3 June 2025 was attended only by you, in absence of consent.

Now, a second hearing has been scheduled on 20 June 2025, as if jurisdiction has already been established.

This is an unlawful administrative assumption.

✦ JURISDICTIONAL CHALLENGE REMAINS UNREBUTTED

The first bundle clearly demanded:

1. Proof that statutory jurisdiction applies to the living man without circular logic.

2. Proof that I, the living man, have lawfully and knowingly consented to statute.

3. Evidence that I agreed to represent the legal fictions being summoned.

To this day, no such proof has been provided.

According to lawful principle:

"That which is not rebutted is deemed admitted." (Qui non negat fatetur)

"The burden of proof lies upon him who affirms – not on him who denies." (Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat)

Thus: Your lack of evidence confirms that none exists.

✦ MAXIM OF LAW: INDIRECT ASSUMPTION IS FRAUD

Quod non valet directum, non valet per obliquum “What cannot be done directly, cannot be done indirectly.”

You cannot lawfully restrict my inalienable rights through presumption, administration, or silence.

If you cannot directly prove that I consented to statute, then it is unlawful to infer, presume, or assume that jurisdiction exists through your own internal mechanisms.

✦ NON-ATTENDANCE IS LAWFUL AND FINAL

As jurisdiction remains unproven, I give formal notice that:

• I shall not attend the hearing on 20 June 2025.

• Any attempt to claim or imply dishonour or default from that non-attendance will constitute fraud and misrepresentation.

• No lawful obligation to attend exists unless the court or council can lawfully prove its standing, which you have failed to do.

✦ UNLAWFUL ACTIONS TAKEN IN ABSENCE OF LAWFUL PROOF

It appears from your notice that a hearing has been administratively convened and rescheduled in my absence, without any lawful rebuttal to my prior challenge and affidavit.

This constitutes an unlawful proceeding and may amount to trespass, misrepresentation, and collusion under colour of law.

You are hereby required to provide within 7 days:

• The full names, job titles, and capacity in law of every individual present at the previous administrative hearing or involved in the decision to proceed,

• Confirmation that each of these individuals accepts personal liability for their actions in the absence of proven jurisdiction,

• Any minutes or transcripts from the session, including who directed the adjournment and why it was actioned despite the lawful rebuttal on record.

Failure to provide these details will be taken as concealment of liability and wilful trespass, and will be relied upon as evidence in any lawful proceeding under common law.

✦ NOTICE OF PERSONAL LIABILITY

Should you attempt to proceed in the absence of:

• Lawful evidence of claim,

• Proof of jurisdiction and contract,

• And express consent from the living man,

You will be personally liable for:

• Trespass,

• Fraud under colour of law,

• Abuse of process,

• Unlawful harassment and harm.

✦ ACTION REQUIRED WITHIN 7 DAYS

You are required to respond with:

• Lawful evidence of claim,

• Contract with wet signatures,

• Proof of joinder and jurisdiction.

Failure to respond within 7 days will confirm:

• Permanent estoppel by acquiescence,

• Your full commercial and private liability.

✦ PRIOR JURISDICTIONAL NOTICE INCLUDED FOR THE RECORD

Enclosed with this notice is a full signed copy of my previously issued:

“Notice of Challenge to Jurisdiction and Motion to Dismiss” Dated: 21 April 2025 Sent to: Barnstaple Magistrates’ Court and Torridge District Council

The original bundle included, and continues to include:

• Affidavit of Truth and Statement of Standing

• Schedule of Fees and Trespass Invoice

• 28 Lawful Questions for Clarification of Jurisdiction and Claim

• Summary of Conditional Acceptance and Offer of Remedy

• Notice of Non-Consent to Represent the Legal Fiction

It named the following parties directly for accountability under law:

• James Spear (Paralegal)

• Phil Gilbert (Community Safety Officer)

• Chris Parkhouse (Licensing Officer)

• Staci Dorey (Council Monitoring Officer)

• The Clerk to the Justices – Barnstaple Magistrates’ Court

This bundle stands unrebutted, in full force and effect, and is formally resubmitted as part of this final notice of dishonour.

✦ JURISDICTION IS THE FIRST AND MANDATORY BURDEN OF PROOF

“Jurisdiction is the power to decide a case, and if it is not proved at the outset, everything that follows is void.”

It is a foundational principle of law that no court may proceed until jurisdiction is first lawfully established. This applies before any enforcement, warrant, hearing, or penalty. Any act of enforcement, hearing, or punishment prior to or without proven jurisdiction is:

• A nullity in law,

• A breach of natural justice, and

• A trespass on the inalienable rights of the living man.

You are hereby placed on notice that any attempt to issue or enact a warrant, judgment, penalty, or order in the absence of lawful, verifiable jurisdiction will be treated as criminal misconduct, trespass, and actionable harm under common law.

✦ JURISDICTION CHALLENGED, CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE UNANSWERED

It is a matter of settled legal principle that:

“Once jurisdiction is challenged, it must be proven before the court may proceed.”

Jurisdiction has been formally and repeatedly challenged in this matter — initially, and again herein — through:

• Affidavit,

• Notice of Conditional Acceptance,

• Challenge to Statutory Authority,

• Demand for Lawful Proof of Claim.

This challenge remains unanswered and unrebutted, meaning jurisdiction has not been lawfully established. Without such proof, no valid order, summons, penalty, or enforcement action can proceed.

I have conditionally accepted all claims subject to lawful proof of jurisdiction and lawful claim, and that acceptance has gone unanswered in breach of natural law and due process.

Further, I observe a repeated conflation between the legal person “JASON BRIAN TYLDESLEY” and the legal entity “Zen Jungle Retreat Ltd”, with no lawful contract, no evidence of consent, and no agreement to represent either fiction.

As I do not consent to represent these parties, and no lawful joinder has occurred, no liability or obligation can lawfully attach to me, the living man.

In the absence of rebuttal, these facts stand in law, and you are bound by estoppel from proceeding further.

NOTICE TO AGENT IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPAL

I am not a person. I do not consent. There is no contract.

All rights reserved.

Signed,

Signed by Jason on 11th June 2025