Arrogance and Threats

Banks are NOT your Agent

Steve Knight keeps banging on about Banks being our agents, and them holding money in trust for us.

I found this case law online:~

In citing the above cases, Alistair Hudson comments:

“It is not always that case that when one person receives another person’s property that there will be a trust. It is an established principle of banking law that when a bank receives money from a customer and pays it into that customer’s account, the bank receives an outright transfer of that money and so does not hold the deposited money on trust for the customer…. A banker therefore owes only personal obligations to its customers (that is, its depositors) when it receives their deposits. In that sense, money transferred to a bank is an outright transfer of money to the bank…. It would require an express agreement between the bank and the customer for the bank to be understood as acting as a trustee: banks often do act as trustees, but only through special subsidiaries and only in limited circumstances, but not in relation to ordinary bank accounts. Thus, the court will look at the circumstances and infer the existence or nonexistence of an express trust from those circumstances.”

R v Davenport 1954

In REGINA v. DAVENPORT [1954] 1 WLR 569, Lord Chief Justice Goddard stated that 

“If I pay money into my bank either by paying cash or a cheque, that money at once becomes the money of the banker. The relationship between banker and customer is that of debtor and creditor.… Directly the money is paid into the bank it becomes the banker’s money, and the contract between the banker and the customer is that the banker receives a loan of money from the customer against his promise to honour the customer’s cheques on demand”.

Steve Knight has got it wrong!

Steve Knight and his partner run a facebook page called Debtless. 

The page is run like a military-style prison with strict rules and abrasive communications. 


Before you book one of Steve Knight’s very expensive advice sessions – read this:

I paid many hundreds of £s for a session with Steve. I was in arrears with the Mortgage and needed urgent help because I was being threatened with repossession.  He started off by saying that I was about to be given information that only he could give.

He then started telling me the basics about the Strawman which I had already learnt online years earlier. I tried many times to re-focus his attention on my problem – the threat of repossession I had received – but Steve just continued to talk about the strawman and how everything is a trust.

My time with Steve produced nothing constructive and caused me to feel anxious and desperate. (I recorded the meeting which I will make public just as soon as my friend has edited it.)

I was so desperate that I foolishly paid Steve more money (around £800) to draft some paperwork for me. It achieved nothing except making my financial situation worse.

Now I am a little bit more knowledgeable I feel I have the ability to voice my opinion:


Steve focuses on Equity and Trusts. He claims everything is a trust and every problem can be resolved through equity.

He says contracts do no exist – they are trusts. I find that difficult to accept because some trusts are created by contract. 

He also says that all employees, no matter who they work for, are your agents.

The problem with his theory is that law books contradict what he is saying. I agree that trusts do exist and play a major part of this system. But trusts are not recognised by every jurisdiction around the world so how can that be the answer?

Secondly – law books make it clear that contracts, powers and agency agreements, can often be mistaken for trust relationships. There is a distinction.

It has since been revealed that Steve Knight failed to save multiple buy to let properties which were repossessed.

He charges extortionate prices to desperate people, for processes that don’t work. Then he blames his customers (every time) and says they haven’t followed his instructions.  He appears to have had no success at all – and I haven’t heard of any success stories. I have only heard of failures and huge Orders to Pay Costs. 

I accept that some people are unable to follow instructions or lack the skill to do so. This in itself raises a question over the strategy that Steve Knight is expecting his customers to employ if they are mentally unable to do so.  I also would have expected to see some results, but these are lacking. If you ask Steve Knight to prove he has had success he throws you off his group – has I have witnessed many times. 

He now operates through a company in the US because it gives him “protection” from potential law suits – something he is quite open about.