Substance of the R4C

[EZrhythm]

Well, I might have celebrated to early.... the bank called today to ask to come in and resign the signature card....UGH! I explained (calmly) to them that it was within my rights to sign it that way, if they can cite a law that says that I can't sign it that way..then I will sign a new card or cancel the account.

All comments Welcome

EXCELLENT! You may also ask them if they are attempting to give you legal advice or represent you. ;-) You may advise them about "practicing law without a license". LOL

[walter]

don't go,
what can they do?

[gdude]

Well today I logged on to my account..it was still open.

So I called my contact at the bank and she apologized and said she would close it today...I told her I changed my mind and leave it open. She asked if I was going to come in and resign the sig card, I said "no, your legal department could not cite any legal authority to prevent me from annotating the card.... because it is the law...I also pointed out that what we have is a valid contract.

She said they may have to close the account without a resigned card. I replied that they would have to be the ones to close the account and I am not going to resign a valid contract.

[David Merrill]

Well today I logged on to my account..it was still open.

So I called my contact at the bank and she apologized and said she would close it today...I told her I changed my mind and leave it open. She asked if I was going to come in and resign the sig card, I said "no, your legal department could not cite any legal authority to prevent me from annotating the card.... because it is the law...I also pointed out that what we have is a valid contract.

She said they may have to close the account without a resigned card. I replied that they would have to be the ones to close the account and I am not going to resign a valid contract.

Thanks! The only problem I see is that you called her. Technically I feel that you made an appearance. Now she has notified you that she might close the account without your consent and that notice is verbal so it is difficult for you to R4C. There are plenty of banks though and kind of a shame on that bank if you have to go through this again down the street.

Did you inquire of the papers about interest?

Also there is some freeware called ROP (for Record on Phone - obviously Chinese). If you use a landline it records well through the modem connector.

[gdude]

Well, I will see how it plays out, I informed her that I had informed my bosses CPA that I had changed banks and they direct deposit on the 15 and 30....the 15th falls on Tuesday...she said she would wait until the deposit comes through.

I could call the CPA Monday and revert back to my old account.

Do you think a general Demand, notarized and registered with the County Recorder, and send copies to the local FED branch and my old bank would suffice?

[David Merrill]

Well, I will see how it plays out, I informed her that I had informed my bosses CPA that I had changed banks and they direct deposit on the 15 and 30....the 15th falls on Tuesday...she said she would wait until the deposit comes through.

I could call the CPA Monday and revert back to my old account.

Do you think a general Demand, notarized and registered with the County Recorder, and send copies to the local FED branch and my old bank would suffice?

This is probably a case of "next time". You can likely wait until the deposit is rejected because it never will be rejected. Following the brain trust shows that one bank fired employees because they were making general deposits instead of special deposits in a similar situation. They closed down several accounts but they had lost a lot of money after ignoring the non-endorsements. This bank administrator has an obligation to stockholders not to be shutting down accounts when you are doing nothing wrong - for just demanding lawful money.

You might freshen up on a Notice and Demand of some sort. I think in the future we might have to settle for affidavits of due diligence. One suitor tried a Fed branch and then a Major 12 and they are rejecting process from the professional server. That may be a trend. But you see we have them concerned when they have shut down receiving process. The Fed is not a governmental agency. They are behaving like the UN Campus on Manhattan, like they are international soil too.

[gdude]

This is probably a case of "next time". You can likely wait until the deposit is rejected because it never will be rejected. Following the brain trust shows that one bank fired employees because they were making general deposits instead of special deposits in a similar situation. They closed down several accounts but they had lost a lot of money after ignoring the non-endorsements. This bank administrator has an obligation to stockholders not to be shutting down accounts when you are doing nothing wrong - for just demanding lawful money.

You might freshen up on a Notice and Demand of some sort. I think in the future we might have to settle for affidavits of due diligence. One suitor tried a Fed branch and then a Major 12 and they are rejecting process from the professional server. That may be a trend. But you see we have them concerned when they have shut down receiving process. The Fed is not a governmental agency. They are behaving like the UN Campus on Manhattan, like they are international soil too.

It is amazing to me that they can reject a demand that they are obligated to receive and process. What a lawless bunch to even to go as far as rejecting service!

[David Merrill]

It is amazing to me that they can reject a demand that they are obligated to receive and process. What a lawless bunch to even to go as far as rejecting service!

As best I can tell the only basis would be interest. If you change your standing Signature Card on an interest-bearing account be sure to specify that you want it adjusted to a non-interest bearing account.

[LearnTheLaw]

Too all Suitors,
I may be wrong with my thinking below, so please feel free to correct me if I am.
any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeitingrelating to extortionate credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents)

finish reading here:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1961

================================================== ================================================== ===============

:

202.2

[David Merrill]

Going out on a limb here with some Crosstalk:

Dear Suitors;







I have been considering the report of being vexed by suitors being charged frivolous penalties after redeeming lawful money. I have a fairly clear memory and also filter even suitor testimony through loose rules of evidence.



It seems to me that there are to date no instances of a suitor filing a redeemed lawful money Income Tax Return and actually being fined a frivolous filing penalty. We have one suitor who a couple years ago received inappropriate threats about frivolous correspondenceby phone. The most credible evidence that somebody has been charged a frivpen on a fully executed Lawful Money Return (2011) has only received the Notice that there will beprosecuting the IRS agent if you have an actual $5K bill of indictment.







Regards,


David Merrill.

[gdude]

Too all Suitors,
I may be wrong with my thinking below, so please feel free to correct me if I am.
any act or threat involving murder, kidnapping, gambling, arson, robbery, bribery, extortion, dealing in obscene matter, or dealing in a controlled substance or listed chemical (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act), which is chargeable under State law and punishable by imprisonment for more than one year; (B) any act which is indictable under any of the following provisions of title 18, United States Code: Section 201 (relating to bribery), section 224 (relating to sports bribery), sections 471, 472, and 473 (relating to counterfeitingrelating to extortionate credit transactions), section 1028 (relating to fraud and related activity in connection with identification documents)

finish reading here:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1961

================================================== ================================================== ===============

:

202.2

Good points LTL! I did not realize the depth of the deception until I started down this road looking at missaplication of the "income Tax" and now the unseen, obligations and presumptions placed on you when you open a bank account.

Could the fact that when you open a bank account and fill out these forms and contract with the private credit of the FED RESERVE (without legal counsel or full disclosure) that this is the linch pin that puts us in the cattle pen! Think about it. I am not a U.S. Person or U.S. citizen...also note that they never define which U.S. they are talking about, remember that SCOTUS stated that there are 3 definitions of U.S.
I am a citizen of one of the several states of the united states of America.

But as LTL pointed out the simple act of opening a bank account has big consequences....giving up your Constitutional and unalienable rights, presumption that you are a "taxpayer" and a U.S. person/citizen ( how much you want to bet that it is a federal critter?) Making you a slave to be sheared and bend to the will of the Machine.

[David Merrill]

I think that the person around the SSN is likely the nexus. Redeeming lawful money though, that would seem to override any US person because it is designed for state banks.

[gdude]

Has anyone successfully rescinded their SSN? I know SEDM has a lengthy ( AND I MEAN LENGTHY) article and Docs on it, but I do not know of anyone claiming success.

Disengaging from your SSN, IMHO, would be a great start to combat the FED WEB. It is sticky, and when you think you have it cleaned off , you find more of it.

[BAMAJiPS]

Has anyone successfully rescinded their SSN? I know SEDM has a lengthy ( AND I MEAN LENGTHY) article and Docs on it, but I do not know of anyone claiming success.

I cant find any successful examples either. I actually called the SSA and asked if I could surrender my number. The girl on the phone said no. I AM purposing on NOT giving it out anymore when entities ask for it. If anyone can tell me they have successfully done it I will follow right behind them in the exact same manner they did!

[Chex]

Get the popcorn ready http://famguardian.org/Disks/TaxDVD/...idence/861.htm