Fresh out of BofA - signature card woes

[David Merrill]

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.

[KnowLaw]

... 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.

[Inhisimage]

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?

[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

[shikamaru]

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.

[David Merrill]

"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.

[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?

[KnowLaw]

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.

[Seosaidh]

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. :-)

[American_National]

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.