Cites - Promissory Note Fraud

Originally Posted by Boxter

I wonder if I could try that (sending in a promissory note to discharge the alleged debt) with a mortgage? I guess the first hurdle would be the lack of intelligence concerning such a matter , by the clerk who opens the mail at the payment processing center, even though I believe a lot of banks, even for automobile loans, usually have a different address for "payoffs" to be sent to.

Boxter,



I just did this. I got them to send me a payoff statement good through a week later, and I sent the CPN and a request to produce the note and provide certified verification of the debt.



I mailed it registered to their payoff department, and they ignored it. I am now sending a copy with an affidavit stating what was in the envelope that they received, then I am getting an acquaintance to mail the copies and get an affidavit of mailing notarized that says what was in their envelope that they mailed for me. Then I am going to file that with the Register of Deeds here. Let's see how long they can ignore that...



Not given as legal advice.

[sadie]

Can I use something like this to pay/discharge a summary judgment?



How would that work?



Wouldn't I just be creating a new contract?



Am I the one tendering the note or do I have to get copyright/trademark and then is the fictitious entity sending the note? Afterall that is who the judgement is against.



I am new to this forum and trying to get a handle on this remedy.



I appreciate all the wonderful sharing and help.

SJ, you said,

<blockquote>"Remember, the promissory note you signed created the checkbook money on their ledger, which they used to create a check for you to purchase your home..."</blockquote>

I have read this in the explanations of G. Edward Griffin's "The Creature from Jekyll Island", as well as numerous other sites (which appear to only be using the great research of Mr Griffin as their basis for making the statement). I believe the basis of this understanding comes from the FRS booklet, "Modern Money Mechanics", and its explanation of what constitutes deposits, assets, liabilities, reserves, etc, correct???



However, this is NOT the kind of "authority" that any court would recognize as a valid argument. What evidence is there, in any case law, or any other public documents, that can be (or has been) used to substantiate that this is indeed what banks do with a promissory note, whereby a judge would accept it as a valid argument?



You also said,

<blockquote>"And when they modify that promissory note (in order to deposit it), that is FORGERY." </blockquote>

I have seen this statement made many times as well, and believe it also comes from Griffin's research. But nowhere have I seen any evidence that this "alteration" or "modification" takes place. Has someone ever proven in court that the original promissory note has been altered? Somewhere I read that it is "stamped" with something before it is "deposited" for value.

[sadie]

I have read Modern Money Mechanics and the Credit River Decision. This really is what they do.



It's in my economics book under "Expansion of Money"



The problem is finding any other cases to back this up.



In court yesterday. The atty. was reading from something called Protest the Protestors while we were waiting.



She cited cases that were lost trying to prove this is what the banks really do.



Wells Fargo Bank v. David Funk 2003 WL 22255704 Cal. App. 3 Dist is one of them and it references other cases.

He had a CPA affidavit to explain how the system works(expert witness?)

Looks like they gave him the run around in court and he probably made some procedural errors. I scanned it but haven't read it in detail yet.



The courts claim this is" nothing but frivolous rhetoric and legalistic gibberish" his legal theories "contains little more than unintelligible gobbledygook"



Does this not sound like kindergarden? If you can't justify what your doing then make the other person look like an idiot so no one will listen to them.



Anyway, the banks and attys and debt collectors are getting slick. They are now responding to VOD by sending sworn affidavits from clerks and secys. giving them titles such as litigation assistant or file administrator or whatever from the bank. And they are using these when they file the complaints.



Then the attys come to court citing these cases as proof that the "bank fraud" doesn't exists. You had a credit card you owe the debt end discussion, affidavit proves it.



Some banks are even stamping on the front of the correspondence sent to them for verification

"MONETARY PROTEST" and then fowarding to their legal dept and to collection attys.



I guess what is needed is common law jury trial and subpoena Alan Greenspan.



If anyone knows of any other cases- like Credit River Decision- that prove the "creation of money" out of thin air please post

[Jerseee]

networth2 and sadie,



First welcome to the forum networth2.



Now, in commercial law alteration of a document after it has been signed is fraud and forgery. For example, you write a check for ten dollars. you give it to a friend and they write in another zero making the check 100.00 instead of ten. Then take it to the bank and cash it or deposit it. And your account is less 100.00 instead of 10.00. What would you call that?



Now for the other issue of proving that altering the document is what they do....you only want to put them on notice of the case as it backs your position. You are not investigating their business practices. You simply want certified verification of the alleged debt.



Uniform Commercial Code § 3-407. Alteration by a holder which is both fraudulent and material discharges any party to the instrument whose contract is thereby changed, except as against a subsequent holder in due course, unless a party consents to the alteration or is precluded from asserting the defense.



Now if they cannot produce the original note--then there is no obligation. If they somehow produce the original note--then you can discharge that obligation dollar for dollar according to public policy. And I recommend that this be done in court in the open so that the judge and his cronies are witness to the discharge.



Look more towards tendering your CPN in public and not how they conduct their business affairs and their documentation.



Now my question to you is---why create an argument where none existed? When you do this, you give another lawyer or attorney a job.

you dont worry about any of that stuff, thats THEIR PROBLEM. send in the presentment (bill) as normal, all you need is proof you sent payment if you take them to court. take them to court and ask for the title.

[logos]

Originally Posted by sadie

Anyway, the banks and attys and debt collectors are getting slick. They are now responding to VOD by sending sworn affidavits from clerks and secys. giving them titles such as litigation assistant or file administrator or whatever from the bank. And they are using these when they file the complaints.

I know for a fact they do that. The lawyer for the mortgage co. presented an "affidavit" from some flunkie claiming that my "debt" is due and owing. Upon looking at the "affidavit", something seemed not quite right, but I didn't realize what it was until I reviewed it the next day. Though it was witnessed by a notary, nowhere in the "affidavit" does the person swear to what she says! Not swearing to the truth of one's statements on an affidavit is like giving unsworn testimony on the witness stand. The court shouldn't assign validity to such testimony because the testifier risked nothing. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that make this woman's "affidavit" worthless? People should review any affidavit of debt they receive from a bank, etc., to see if they pull this trick.



BTW, the lawyer's name is "Crook". HA!

[sadie]

logos



The affidavit I have is signed by a notary and has the saying presonally appeared and sworn to before me etc.



I just noticed at the top it also has her name and says of lawful age and being duly sworn.



This lady doesn't even have a title she just claims she works there and has personal knowledge of all relevant financial account information blah blah



I know this place doesn't have an original contract as it was with another bank that they took over. They never even sent anything with a signature. But the judge gave them summary judgment.



I did get an affidavit a while back from an atty collector on another account like the one you mentioned. I think it was something the atty made up and back dated to a date prior to my first correspondence (duh).



I sent him back a letter claiming violation of 1692 e false and misleading representations and that this was a fraud

and probable perjury.

He went away.

[Ice]

See the Cornforth material in regards to vacating a Summary Judgment. Once void forever void.

[logos]

Ice:

Shouldn't I be able to have the woman's above-mentioned affidavit thrown out or declared invalid because she didn't risk anything by swearing under penalty of perjury?