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?
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?Originally Posted by Seosaidh
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. :-)
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.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote