Fresh out of BofA - signature card woes

Hello all,

As I've been lurking in these forums for quite some time now and I've decided it's high time to begin to apply my remedy and process. The first step I've undertaken was to notify Bank of America that I will from now on out be conducting all transactions on my account in "Transactions demanded in lawful money pursuant to Title 12, U.S.C. subsection 411"

I attempted to put the aforementioned verbiage: specifically "All transactions demanded in lawful money per 12 U.S.C. ? 411" on a freshly acquired signature card before executing it with the personal banker. She asked me what the verbiage was for and I told her that is was a reservation of rights (kinda), and that it may be for tax purposes pertaining to my account.

After numerous calls to the help desk (where they looked up, and read the code when I gave them the URL), and eventually to the legal department (which is where I could see the gears turning in her head, and a flustered look) she informed me that "signature cards my not be modified for any customer". All while showing me a screen on her computer that had that clause as a bullet point under a larger "Risk Management" heading. I informed her that the specific verbiage said "for" and not "by" any customer, but in either case she was unpersuaded, so to avoid an escalation to a verbal argument about the importance of semantics I thanked her for her help and left the branch.

Now at this point I still have the signature card with the hand written verbiage on it so what, if any, methods or recourse do I have to either persuade them to take it, and provide me a notarized copy, or the laws, codes, statutes, ordinances, or case-law that I can cite to effectively shove it down their throats? Bear in mind that I currently have an account with them, and a copy of the signature card I executed back in 2007 without anything other than my naked signature.

Many thanks to the brain trust here, as i'm learning tons since I've come across this site.

-Gonzo

Tell them it is part of your Signature. If that doesn't fly make it your signature for banking purposes. Sign the new Signature Card "Lawful Money" or "Lawful Money Demanded". Then of course you will sign all your checks and withdrawal slips etc. that way. Also, to be fair change all your accounts to non-interest bearing accounts. If they cannot use your funds for fractional lending you should not be profiting by getting interest from them.

I will try that either today or tomorrow. I did do a deposit yesterday after returning to the branch - where they looked at me like i had two heads when I walked back in - as I had forgotten I to deposit a check.

They must have thought I was there to cause more strife, and in my heart I wanted "win", so on the back of the check in the endorsement section I signed my name (which is in congruence with the current signature card), under which I wrote in "redeemed lawful money pursuant to USC 12, SS 411, Deposit for credit on account". They took it, and its posted as of today, so despite the personal bankers insistence that changing my signature card "would change nothing", they as of yesterday would not allow me to put in that specific verbiage.

I will tell them that the verbiage is part of my signature, but this brings up another question inre: "True Name" vs. "LEGAL NAME", which is this. When I sign as "First Last, All transactions demanded in lawful money per Title 12, USC SS 411" is this how I will from then forward have to sign, as I did yesterday? The next, more for confirmation, would a stamp with that specific clause affixed with a transcription of my "First Last" signature fufill the requirement for endorsement of checks for deposit?

And finally, the best site to get such a stamp made? Preferably where I can upload my signature to include, and get my choice of colors (apparently BOA will not take Red Ink signatures "because they wont scan" - which after 14 years in the IT field I presume to be bullshit.

You may go back and speak to the manager.
If no satisfaction, you may tell them that you want to speak to the regional/district manager.
Usually one obtains satisfaction when they seek someone higher on the ladder rungs.

Record your NOTICE of the demand in a public venue (newspaper, National Republic Registry , etc.) and then issue certified copies to the bank.

More BofA problems. Last time I reported that my 'Personal Banker' refused to provide a signature card for me to modify, and pretended (perhaps?) ignorance of 12USC411. Since then I recorded my demand with the county Register of Deeds and sent BofA a certified copy. Today I received a letter from the Banking Center Manager II with the following amazing text:
Dear Mr Gerdes:
We are in receipt of the purported Notice and Demand for Lawful Money. Please be advised that this document has no legal relevance and, therefore, no action has been taken or is required by the bank. We are therefore returning this document to you and consider the matter closed.
Sincerely, Anthony Petrella

So BofA did not (could not) R4C my demand because of our ongoing contractual relationship, so they just said it is irrelevant and they are ignoring it.
From this I conclude that:
1. BofA has confirmed that they got my demand.
2. BofA has no intent to comply with the law.
3. What BofA thinks is of no great importance to me; I will proceed as if they agreed to my demand.
4. It appears that the 12USC411 crowd is beginning to put pressure on the IRS, and they are stalling harder to discourage any more slaves from escaping the plantation.

What does the brain trust think of BofA's response?

Freed Gerdes

post edit: Have not heard from E*Trade Financial, who got the same certified copy of my demand. Sprott Global Resource Investments, LLC took my demand cheerfully. Heh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EZrhythm

You may go back and speak to the manager.
If no satisfaction, you may tell them that you want to speak to the regional/district manager.
Usually one obtains satisfaction when they seek someone higher on the ladder rungs.

Record your NOTICE of the demand in a public venue (newspaper, National Republic Registry , etc.) and then issue certified copies to the bank.

---

That's hardcore :).
I like it.

Get a stamp and start signing with the stamp only. If your bank complains tell them to let you put that on your signature card so that the stamp alone is your Authorized Signature.

http://img60.imageshack.us/img60/9060/redeemedfrn1.jpg

i'm new here, so i may be missing something critical. The whole premise from my perspective is to make your demand known. If BoA has returned to you confirmation the institution has received your demand, what can the IRS say regarding the matter? Your demand was made manifest and law is final in the matter at that point? Is this what is key, the demand, or is the acceptance also requisite for the process?

For Shikamaru: the BofA response seems hardcore to me; which part do you like?
For David: I am retired, and the only 'checks' I get are Social Security checks, which are automatic deposits, ie, no check ever appears. So the account needs to have the demand established above the level of any single transaction. The security trading accounts likewise automatically transfer cash balances into a linked account whenever I sell a stock, which they then report on a 1099, and the IRS wants me to pay capital gains on the sale; again no 'check' involved. I have now noticed the three banking institutions that I deal with, including a certified copy of my demand, on file with the Register of Deeds. my plan was to next write a short note to the IRS to attach to my 2012 tax return, explaining that I am no longer in contract with the Federal Reserve, and thus have no income from taxable sources, so this will be the last tax return I will file. This letter, and its attendant documentation, will sustain the rebuttable presumption that my taxable income will be zero for all future years. Sincerely, FWG, ex-taxpayer. So the BofA response is a puzzlement. I am inclined to write to the president of BofA, with a copy to the Richmond Federal Reserve. Suggestions?

post edit: The BofA account agreement clearly states that the bank has a policy of ignoring anything you write on the back of the check!
I have to assume that their response is designed to encourage me to take my business elsewhere...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Freed Gerdes

For Shikamaru: the BofA response seems hardcore to me; which part do you like?

---

My response was to EZRhythm :).

We have Notice to the Federal Reserve documented by example on the site already. Springboard from my post above in its simplicity:


I like this notion. You wish to change/correct your Authorized Signature to include the Redeemed Lawful Money stamp. If the institution will not allow you to change or correct your Authorized Signature, which is something they do not have legal control over don't get upset, do it anyway. For example show them a blank check that has only the stamp on it and tell them that is your new Authorized Signature and you really think they should allow you to fill out a new Signature Card.

Freed;


It is difficult to believe that you did not sign something somewhere that authorized your payment transactions. However I know of somebody who simply got a Debit Card with the major retailer chain and as best he can recall, that is all. The funds from his Clocking In and Out appear on the Debit Card for his use...

So maybe so many decades ago when you signed the Application for a SSN that is the Authorized Signature Card they are using? So I would suggest that you utilize the Notice to the nearest Fed approach and serve that Notice once marked up on whatever institution.

Something disturbs me about notifying anybody that this will be your last Return. Is that necessary? I would rather you simply do not file a return if none is required at the future time. I do not like you announcing that you will never be filing again in advance.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gonzo

... The first step I've undertaken was to notify Bank of America that I will from now on out be conducting all transactions on my account in "Transactions demanded in lawful money pursuant to Title 12, U.S.C. subsection 411"

I attempted to put the aforementioned verbiage: specifically "All transactions demanded in lawful money per 12 U.S.C. ? 411" on a freshly acquired signature card before executing it with the personal banker. She asked me what the verbiage was for and I told her that is was a reservation of rights (kinda), and that it may be for tax purposes pertaining to my account.

After numerous calls to the help desk (where they looked up, and read the code when I gave them the URL), and eventually to the legal department (which is where I could see the gears turning in her head, and a flustered look) she informed me that "signature cards my not be modified for any customer". ...

Now at this point I still have the signature card with the hand written verbiage on it so what, if any, methods or recourse do I have to either persuade them to take it, and provide me a notarized copy, or the laws, codes, statutes, ordinances, or case-law that I can cite to effectively shove it down their throats?

---

If nothing else, protect your interests by signing the back of each check you deposit with the verbiage:

"Depostited for credit on account in, or exchanged for, lawful money per Title 12 U.S.C. Sec. 411"

sign with: True name: First Middle dba First Middle Initial Last [or however you set up the account in the first place, using whatever way you signed the document at the time for your dba, e.g. John T. Smith or John Smith, without the middle initial] Print your DBA name, do not autograph it. Sign or autograph (meaning in your natural handwriting, not printed) only your true name to the document.

Example of true name (meaning first and second names) and dba: John Thomas dba John T. Smith
John Thomas dba John Smith

If signed in this way, it is a non-endorsement of Federal Reserve notes, as David has previously explained.

It helps, if you have to go to court about this, to make the stipulation of "lawful money per Title 12 U.S.C. Sec. 411" as this precludes the "judge" from misconstruing the law that you are referring to. You are referencing a specific law passed at a specific time with a specific meaning behind it (no matter whether the law has later been amended, which this law has, most likely in an effort to get ignorant people to stop using the verbiage, thinking that it no longer applies; which, in law, IT still DOES apply) that still applies today, no matter how they've messed around with the law since.

Before submitting any check with this verbiage on its reverse side, first take a photocopy of the reverse side, providing evidence of your demand; take the resulting copy and place the front side of the check beneath the image of the signature on the reverse side and make an additional photocopy showing both the front and back sides of the check simultaneously. Keep this last photocopy as your proof of demand for that specific check. (You can keep the first photocopy for future photocopies of this verbiage as having been printed on whatever future checks you receive for deposit or cashing. This way you won't have to do two photocopies each time you make a demand since the verbiage on the reverse never changes.) This way you have direct evidence of your demand each time you deposit a check to the institution. This should be enough to protect you from the IRS.

Seems to me any law that will not be enforced is no law at all. There simply must be some means of forcing compliance. The law exists for protection the people.
What ever protection is provided by the law is made of none effect without enforcement of the law. Whose responsibility is it to enforce this law? Exactly what steps must be taken to bring compliance?

"Dear Mr Gerdes:
We are in receipt of the purported Notice and Demand for Lawful Money. Please be advised that this document has no legal relevance and, therefore, no action has been taken or is required by the bank. We are therefore returning this document to you and consider the matter closed.
Sincerely, Anthony Petrella"

Buddy, how are you at Poker? Sorry not be be offensive, I should not address you as a buddy, however my point is they repudiated your Notice [might they be bluffin??] How does one return such an offering? How bout a refusal? This is a game to them, you served, they returned, are you goin to let the ball drop on your side, or do you volley it back?

Look up the definition of Repudiate, oh heck here is one for you to start with, out of an old book....

6. Repudiate. ? The term repudiate " is
never applied to a refusal to perform a void
contract, but to the denial of the binding force
of a valid obligation." Wapello County 7/.
Burlington, etc., R. Co., 44 Iowa 610, per
Beck, J., dissenting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Inhisimage

The law exists for protection the people.

---

I see the law as a tool of conquest and dominion as well as the upholding of some person or parties self-interests.

The idea that laws exist to protect people is a false or quasi-false doctrine induced to ease peoples' subjugation by that government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by John Booth

"Dear Mr Gerdes:
We are in receipt of the purported Notice and Demand for Lawful Money. Please be advised that this document has no legal relevance and, therefore, no action has been taken or is required by the bank. We are therefore returning this document to you and consider the matter closed.
Sincerely, Anthony Petrella"

Buddy, how are you at Poker? Sorry not be be offensive, I should not address you as a buddy, however my point is they repudiated your Notice [might they be bluffin??] How does one return such an offering? How bout a refusal? This is a game to them, you served, they returned, are you goin to let the ball drop on your side, or do you volley it back?

Look up the definition of Repudiate, oh heck here is one for you to start with, out of an old book....

6. Repudiate. ? The term repudiate " is
never applied to a refusal to perform a void
contract, but to the denial of the binding force
of a valid obligation." Wapello County 7/.
Burlington, etc., R. Co., 44 Iowa 610, per
Beck, J., dissenting

---

You of course R4C the Notice but that Notice is also Proof of Service.

I live in California, and Google tells me there are 5 Federal Reserve Banks in California. Could BofA's repudiation of the demand for lawful money be irrelevant simply because they are not a Federal Reserve Bank?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seosaidh

I live in California, and Google tells me there are 5 Federal Reserve Banks in California. Could BofA's repudiation of the demand for lawful money be irrelevant simply because they are not a Federal Reserve Bank?

---

No. They are tied into the Federal Reserve system six ways to hell! All banks are tied into the Fed's system. How do you think they get away with having only a fractional reserve and writing credit (issuing loans etc.) on top of that reserve?

These banks aren't lending substance, they're lending credit in the form of unbacked Federal Reserve notes. [Note: Unbacked, that is, except by a "pledge" of the credit worthiness of the "U.S. Government, Inc."]

Their repudiation of his notice is just a legal ploy, and a quite ineffective one at that. See David's response if you want the truth about what happened: "...that Notice is also Proof of Service." And of course R4C the Notice as David suggests.

I realize they're all part of the Federal Reserve System. But the statute clearly says Fereal Reserve Bank, and Google gave me 5 FRB's in California. I dunno, just a thought. :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KnowLaw

No. They are tied into the Federal Reserve system six ways to hell! All banks are tied into the Fed's system. How do you think they get away with having only a fractional reserve and writing credit (issuing loans etc.) on top of that reserve?

These banks aren't lending substance, they're lending credit in the form of unbacked Federal Reserve notes. [Note: Unbacked, that is, except by a "pledge" of the credit worthiness of the "U.S. Government, Inc."]

Their repudiation of his notice is just a legal ploy, and a quite ineffective one at that. See David's response if you want the truth about what happened: "...that Notice is also Proof of Service." And of course R4C the Notice as David suggests.

---

Here are two possible alternatives that are recommended in addition to what David had recommended to you earlier to handle this BofA situation.

1. Serve a notary witnessed mailing via certified mail, return receipt requested, of your Notice/Demand for Lawful Money in all Transactions on the local Federal Reserve district branch office servicing your local B of A branch. After the receipt of the USPS GREEN PS form 3811 "domestic return receipt" which will show the name of the Federal Reserve Agent signing for your Notice/Demand. You can write that B of A representative who sent you that letter via certified mail and instruct them to check with their local Federal Reserve district branch office by communicating with Agent _______________ at that location to obtain a Federal Reserve District verified copy of your Notice/Demand from their records as they currently act as one of the current custodians/trustees of your Notice/Demand which is also memorialized in the local __________ County Public Records under public record # ____________________. Such a public filing constitutes proper lawful notice to all parties and constitutes court admissible evidence of your ongoing historical Notice/Demand. Furthermore, through the interlocutory operations of the Federal Reserve system, Notice to the Federal Reserve principal via their local area District office is also is Notice to the principal's agents & vice-versa . . . If BofA persists in ignoring your Notice/Demand, you then have the option of executing option #2 against their local branch operations as described in #2 below.

2. As a secondary alternative, you could respond to their subsequent correspondence indicating that you have received their refusal(s) to honor your Notice/Demand for lawful money in all transactions "correspondence" and will be forwarding their "position" taken in this regard as it is memorialized within their various pieces of correspondence dated __________ as attachments under your cover letter which will be sent to the Comptroller of the Currency, who absolutely has the lawful authority to "terminate" and wind-down their public banking operations.

A party can forward such a protest/admission to the Comptroller of the Currency, who with the concurrence of the Secretary of the Treasury, may then appoint a special agent, who upon such appointment - gives immediate NOTICE to BofA of their appointment, and who proceeds at once to ascertain and report whether the bank has refused to pay it's given (fractional reserve practices derived) notes in "lawful money" when demanded. If, from such protest/admission and the report of this agent, the Comptroller is satisfied that the bank has REFUSED to redeem it's issued (federal reserve) notes in "Lawful Money" and is in default, he declares, within 30 days, the bank's deposited (fractional reserve) bonds forfeited to the "United States". After Notice has been sent to the defaulting bank, it becomes UNLAWFUL for the bank to do any business except to receive and safely keep "money" belonging to it and to deliver special deposits only.

The Comptroller may then, at their discretion, either cancel an amount of bonds pledged by the bank equal at the current market rates, not exceeding par, to the notes paid, or may cause so much of them as may be necessary to redeem it's outstanding notes to be sold at public auction in New York City, after giving 30 days' notice of such sales to the bank. If the Comptroller of the Currency deems it to be in the best interests of the "United States", he may sell any of the bonds at private sale, but not for less than par value or the market value thereof at the time of the sale. If the proceeds of all the bonds of the bank when thus sold are insufficient to reimburse the Treasury for the amount expended in redeeming the notes of the bank, the "United States" has a paramount lien upon all the bank's assets for the deficiency.

The above extracts were taken from "Banking Principles And Practice", by Ray B. Westerfield.

From research conducted quite a while back, I believe that BofA is a federally chartered (National Association) bank.

We are still researching the regulatory "teeth" regarding the above actions that are to be taken by the Comptroller of the Currency to force the federal venue claiming "banks" to honor their regulatory mandated requirement to redeem Lawful Money on demand -vice- continuing their fractional reserve money-lending/FRN multiplication practices with such deposits.

Such regulatory cites that give the Comptroller of the Currency such authority could also be used as our "teeth" to remind such federal reserve connected financial institutions (banks/agents/instrumentalities/etc.) of the consequences associated with the "position" they have taken to conduct such "fractional reserve lending/multiplication practices" with inelastic lawful money that cannot, by federal venue regulation, be used as any kind of reserve by such financial institutions (see 31 USC ?5115).

Also, for what it's worth - when you go to the bank to withdraw any of your funds with a check, you can write the following restrictive verbiage on the back of the check. We have had consistent ongoing success with this regarding making our Demand for lawful money known in this manner.

On the back of each check taken to the bank, we print the following:

"EXCHANGED FOR UNITED STATES CURRENCY NOTES
AND/OR UNITED STATES MINTED COINS ONLY."

and then place your customary signature/autograph on the back of the check.

Lawful Money consists of "United States (currency) Notes (as of 1971) and United States Mint impressed coins ONLY, so your receipt of "Lawful Money" only base is covered by the demand printed on the back of your check in this regard.

If any teller questions the verbiage above, you simply tell them that their bank has the capacity to handle multiple forms of currency, and you wanted the correct form of United States government obligations annotated on the back of your check to avoid any confusion by any party in this regard. (see also 18 USC ?8, 18 USC ?333, 31 USC ?3124, and 26 CFR 1.312-6(b) for background info in this regard).

Their comment will be . . . . oh, OK . . . . been there - done that! ;-)

Evidence of Your Demand will be available online when you (or Comptroller of the Currency/IRS) view the imaged front/back of such checks.

[QUOTE=Freed Gerdes;7458 I am retired, and the only 'checks' I get are Social Security checks, which are automatic deposits, ie, no check ever appears....[/QUOTE]

dude ....

YOU are receiving a Benefit from the Federal Gov't

How do You intend to avoid the Benefit being subject to the Federal Gov't's attachments ...??

Ashwander ..??

Quote:

---

If the only income you received during the tax year was your social security or equivalent railroad retirement benefits, your benefits may not be taxable and you may not have to file a tax return.

---

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc423.html

So "Freed" is all set there.

Just like to say that it can be done: http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/9007/bofasc.jpg
I had no trouble doing this multiple times but if one bank gives you flack, just try another; there is no shortage of banks!

Remember this is a private agreement between you and the bank. You have a unlimited right to contract in America.

Also, see at the top it says Personal Signature Card with Substitute Form W-9. Form W9 is clearly an IRS tax form. Therefore we can say there is government reporting on the SSN/TIN going on - or perhaps, the potential of government reporting. And yet here we all are, all we suitors saying the amounts deposited here are not taxable income under statute, not paying taxes on the lawful money deposited, and the IRS agreeing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stoneFree

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc423.html

So "Freed" is all set there.

Just like to say that it can be done: http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/9007/bofasc.jpg
I had no trouble doing this multiple times but if one bank gives you flack, just try another; there is no shortage of banks!

Remember this is a private agreement between you and the bank. You have a unlimited right to contract in America.

Also, see at the top it says Personal Signature Card with Substitute Form W-9. Form W9 is clearly an IRS tax form. Therefore we can say there is government reporting on the SSN/TIN going on - or perhaps, the potential of government reporting. And yet here we all are, all we suitors saying the amounts deposited here are not taxable income under statute, not paying taxes on the lawful money deposited, and the IRS agreeing.

---

I killed a half hour in Compass Bank (no intention of actually opening an account) and it got a bit hinky. I was not allowed to leave with the Signature Card and I photographed it but had a smudge that kept the auto-focus from working - I was in a hurry though so maybe that was it. She got mad so I did not take a second photo:

http://img199.imageshack.us/img199/1...gnaturecar.jpg

I have the audio too. Silly me though; I was using the camera for the audio so you don't hear her when I was taking the photo. I had to shut down the audio to take pictures.

The way I picture it, the Bank cannot keep you from changing your Signature Card. They can Refuse for Cause your Innovation (novation). They are party to the contract. I think for some reason, maybe fiduciary responsibility to stockholders they have a big problem with shutting down an account. You have to do it. If they throw a fit for example and say that they are shutting down your account it will come down to them handing something for you to sign, presuming they have made you upset as well and glad to be rid of them.

But if you are cool-headed then you can just start all over again;

Just let me correct my Authorized Signature on the Signature Card and I don't need to shut this account down...

Cognovit Note: http://www.answers.com/topic/cognovit-note

A cognovit note is a confession of judgment given to a plaintiff, agreeing to pay a certain sum. The defendant acknowledges the claims asserted by a plaintiff against him in a complaint are valid and waives all defenses. http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/cognovit-note/

I have no evidence, but it?s conceivable that ?cognovits? might even be included in bank signature cards, and applications for drivers licenses, so-so security cards, etc. http://adask.files.wordpress.com/201...ovit-final.pdf