Dear Sirs
Totally unhappy with the current course of events where you have been removing my services without warnings what so ever not just once but also 2 weeks ago causing untold disruption which I believe to be an infringement of my rights that I have paid for, I am trying to re-instate my site another way.
In an effort to gain temporary resolution I opted to change the DNS configuration to another server so as to avoid further problems at this time, this has also been prohibited as pictured below “stating the domain has expired”and we would like to know why??
Clearly from the picture below this, it has not expired!
The domain name belongs to me and as the owner can point its DNS to other servers resolving your problem as the host server to the website.
31 Cherry Tree Rd, Blackpool FY4 4NS
T: 447523287267
F: 441253928008
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2012 10:09 AM
Subject: Fw: Network Solutions Support Information: OPG.ME

For the attention of Tom Lam, NORMA WHEELER & colleagues.

03.06.2012  further follow up correspondence


Dear Sirs

With reference to the so called court order;


1.       Unsigned                                            therefore invalid – needs to carry a signature

2.       Un-served                                          therefore invalid – under UK court rules

3.       Unlawful  -    Denied consent        therefore invalid – Requires the consent of both parties

4.       Denied due process                        therefore invalid – Due process to Jury court refused



Under UK court rules the above so called court order is not enforceable and is not valid.


Its lack of a signature also shows it’s invalidity to carry any weight of law.

Under UK rules there needs to be proof of service and there is none.

In a statement by me to the court read by the Judge consent required by both parties was refused by me, removing authority of the court jurisdiction.

As a Jury court was refused also, due process has been denied and thereby unlawful proceedings conducted in an act of Treason.

It was not issued in a constitutionally formed court of common law with a requested Jury.


This so called order is not appealable as its authenticity does not exist and if it was appealed you would be demonstrating your consent which was openly refused in writing.


I cannot emphasize enough the total lack of authenticity this so called order lacks.


I am not in a position to advise you any further about this, it must be for yourselves to judge if their or your actions are lawful. If you can see that this worthless paper carries no weight without the force of law behind it we ask that in all respect you re-instate our domain without further delay.


We do not want you to become embroiled in this serious dispute without legitimate reasons and there are none in existence here for you to take the actions you are.


Mike: Clarke




Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 12:03 PM
Subject: Fw: Network Solutions Support Information: OPG.ME
Dear Norma Wheeler
Please read the information below sent to your colleagues.
We write in connection with the letter from Sarah Sharp of Pannone LLP, providing some of her clarification on an order from a Judge without a signature.
If I provided the company PANNONE LLP with a cheque to the sum of £43,000 in which they claim approximately to be their costs in this matter and that cheque was provided without a signature, would you, they or anyone for that matter consider that cheque to be valid and usable?
I think you will find in law and in commerce it is not valid or usable.
Therefore on this point alone the order is invalid. Its invalid because of the Judicial dictatorship corruption going on in the UK.
Our website is exposing these facts to the public. The lack of a signature is there to protect the Judge whom I might add has committed an act of Treason;
  • Read article 6 section 2 listed upon the Civil Liberties Protection and Human Rights. Section 2. There must be a hearing before an independent and impartial court or tribunal established by law (including unbiased jurors) . The right to a fair trial is fundamental to the rule of law and to democracy itself. The right applies to both criminal and civil cases.
  • Any judge that acts as a judge in Family Court is presiding in an unconstitutional court and is therefore committing the crime of Trespass of Treason against your Civil Rights and against the Constitution - THE LAW OF THE LAND!  Especially when consent has been denied to that hearing and also a request for a jury also denied
It is our sole contention that with a signature on that order I can proceed against that JUDGE whom is acting with impunity without their signature upon their order.
My mother has suffered systematic abuse by these people where upon we have proved beyond reasonable doubt her capacity to make her own mind up and has had such capacity all along, proved by 4 reports by 3 doctors over an 11 year period. There has been an overall miscarriage of justice due to shortcomings of UK procedures now in place, leaving us living in exile. The only exposure we have is our website and a potential television program soon to be in the making, by Channel 4 Television.
We assume you also may be a mother and have a son, presumably you would not like these matters brought upon you and that is our cause, to stand and fight for the HUMAN RIGHTS ACTS to be observed and more over the common laws of our land under the constitution to be observed.
You do not need to look far to see the injustices here.
Please fall upon the right side of Justice and it will no doubt prevail in the end.
This matter is not about money, its about CIVIL LIBERTIES and the denial of such in corrupts manners.
I love my mother and I trust you are human enough love your close relatives the same.
Under common laws she is being protected, but those laws are and have been undermined over the years to create this living hell.
Mike & Ann of the Clarke family.
Sent: Saturday, June 02, 2012 9:48 AM
Subject: Fw: Network Solutions Support Information: OPG.ME
Dear Sirs
Additional information.
  1. We have written to the court also four times to ask for a signed copy of the Judges order. There has been no response.
  2. If you ask the company to provide proof of service in order to validate their so called order it will not be forthcoming.
  3. We expect your country and mine to adhere to common laws of the land under the Magna Carta and Bill of Rights, this order does not!
  4. You now have the evidence here before you in my last 2 emails to prove the invalidity of the so-called order.
    31 Cherry Tree Rd, Blackpool FY4 4NS
    T: 447523287267
    F: 441253928008
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 11:24 PM
To: Tom Lam
Subject: Re: Network Solutions Support Information: OPG.ME
Dear Sirs
Reference your suspension of domain status. WWW.OPG.ME
The “Commercial lien” referred to was served under common law and not statute law.
Statutes under BLACKS LAW dictionary are a legislative rule of society given the force of law under the consent of the governed and in this case read our site where consent was refused.
The court order was obtained illegally as consent to the administrative hearing was refused and a trial by a common law court under control of a jury was requested and refused. Its refusal is a denial of due process and if you read the site, complaints have been sent to the attorney general and the office of Judicial complaint stating that an act of treason has been committed by the judge and a felony also.
Matters are at a truly dire state and the site is a reference site for high up UK officials examining the content of its complaints, of which they cannot do whilst you have it under hold.
Take notice that whilst the unlawful court order is being looked into we advise that the site needs re instatement and if you continue its “on hold” status we will have no option but to serve NETWORK SOLUTIONS the value of the site now standing at £9.1 million pounds, some $15 million dollars.  You are now causing us to suffer a serious TORT under common law and thus we are entitled to make such a “Commercial Lien/Claim” against your company.
If the your company chooses to read the content thoroughly one will discover that their so called court order is not worth the paper its written on and as such is also under UK jurisdiction not USA.
TAKE NOTICE you have hereby been advised of our position on this matter in this email.
We expect it to be looked into with expediency, for every hour the site is down is causing untold duress and stress.
As a further matter to take into consideration the court order they refer to has of yet, not been served and as such carries no validity in law by the UK court rules & until such time that it has and when it has, it also is illegal alongside being addressed to the legal fiction MICHAEL CLARKE not the Sovereign human being Mike: Clarke.
There are several items to consider not just one in this very instance but your involvement in this matter will, if not resolved very urgent will result in our issuing you the effective Commercial Lien claim value that we are now currently preparing!
You are being duped by the solicitors whom if you check our site, are under investigation by SOLICITORS REGULATION AUTHORITY in the UK for improprieties where my mothers finances are concerned.
  1. Court order not worth paper its written on due to the court convened in an illegal unconstitutional manner.(Required consent, refused!)
  2. Court orders carry no validity in any event until served in person, which it has not.
  3. The court order cannot be served as I have revoked my legal fiction person status with UK. I am a sovereign, human, flesh and blood being.
  4. The court process was denied due process also illegal being looked into currently.
  5. Our right to free speech is now being denied by you under an illegal order of no validity and so the action taken by you is your sole responsibility.
We expect an urgent response.
31 Cherry Tree Rd, Blackpool FY4 4NS
T: 447523287267
F: 441253928008
From: Tom Lam
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 8:32 PM
Subject: FW: Network Solutions Support Information: OPG.ME

Dear Registrant: has received the attached court order concerning the contents found on the website: OPG.ME.


Pursuant to our Terms of Services and the Court Order, we have disabled the domain name OPG.ME, effectively disabling the website. You are able to access the hosting services and remove the offending content as outlined per the court order. If you chose to do so, please respond to this email that the content(s) have been removed and we will remove the hold on the domain.


The domain shall remain in a hold status until such time as we have been advised by you and have confirmed the content has been removed or until such time as we are presented with a valid court order instructing us on the release of the domain or website.


If you have any questions, please respond to


Kind regards,




Tom Lam

Executive Escalations Manager







From: Sarah Sharp
Sent: 22 May 2012 09:32
To: ''
Cc: Melanie McGuirk
Subject: RE: Network Solutions Support Information

Dear Sirs


We write further to your emails dated 18th and 30th April 2012 regarding the website


You state that your legal team cannot remove the website because of freedom of speech and that we need to file legal action against OPG to prove slander or defamation.


Please find attached a copy of the final injunction we have obtained on 2nd May 2012 against Mr Clarke, the author of the content of the website. The injunction restrains Mr Clarke from maintaining existing text and or postings on the website which refers to or affords any link to any document referring to the "Commercial Lien" or which in any other way suggests members of Pannone are indebted or liable to Mr Clarke or his mother.


Please also find attached to this email a schedule titled "Index to bundle of documents evidencing interim injunction breaches for hearing on 2nd May 2012". This schedule sets out the 57 entries/postings on the website at which reference is made to the so called "Commercial Lien".


Given that these postings breach the court injunction we have obtained against Mr Clarke we request that the site be disabled or these entries and hyperlinks removed.


We await your urgent response.



From: Network Solutions []
Sent: 18 May 2012 16:58
To: Sarah Sharp; Sarah Sharp
Subject: Network Solutions Support Information

Hi Sarah Sharp,

I apologize for the delayed response. Regarding your concern, you may send your documents over to

Network Solutions values you as a customer. We hope you find this update helpful. However, if you have any additional questions, please don't hesitate to contact our Customer Service Department.

As a Network Solutions Customer, you are entitled to unlimited access, day or night, to skilled Customer Service Representatives. To reach us, call 1-888-642-9675. If you are calling from outside the U.S. or Canada, please call 1-570-708-8788. Thanks again for giving us the opportunity to serve you.


Network Solutions Support
Network Solutions