ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 The Roman World
 Statute Law
 Interesting experience at the bank
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 7

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 04 Aug 2005 :  15:07:23  Show Profile
Dear David,

Please be more explicit in your terms, lest I mis-understand. Remember, I was down for 10 months and am still trying to purge the drugs "they" administered thru food and air.

Speaking of Grand Jury judgments, on saturday I spoke to a man who is personally acquainted with someone who sat on the Grand Jury for my case. According to him, the vote was 3 to 9 against indictment. Now, if this be true, and I can get a sworn notarized affidavit to that affect from that juror, man will I have some more fun with "them".

It appears that the Court has gone silent on me. They are not answering my Writ of Error, and they are not granting the hearing I petitioned for. So, I think we have a stand-off. Should get interesting soon.


Regards,

Lewis
An American National foreign to the United States
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 04 Aug 2005 :  17:47:38  Show Profile
I am keeping an eye on the process you describe. That a foreign judgment be enforceable through the attorney general's office. That foreign judgment being a Notary Protest and certificate upon the same.

Like you say:

quote:
An American National foreign to the United States


Your judgment(s) are foreign judgments, to the United States. So would a grand jury convened in common law. Call it an American National grand jury of peers just like you but I do not think that is necessary. This is why when we convene we seal our names with thumbprints. That is direct evidence that a man or woman is endorsing the bill or writ.

What I am after are clues about enforcement. That means to get the judgment or writ properly filed where it disturbs the perpertrator etc. into contesting it and hopefully trying to get the judgment overturned. Then state court is faced with docrine res judicata from the superior court and has to admit the judgment is untouchable.

That is what caught my eye about your posts Lewis. The potential for a certificate of Notary Protest moving properly through the attorney general for enforcement of a foreign judgment. I apologize for being a little difficult to understand.


Regards,

David Merrill.
Go to Top of Page

BatKol
Advanced Member

USA
735 Posts

Posted - 04 Aug 2005 :  22:38:25  Show Profile
quote:
quote:
brother Robert said: we must be paid in cash

If one of kosmokrator’s (G2888) JUDGES were to ever ask us the question: “Do you use FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES?”
Our answer might be: “Not without objecting to their divers weight and measures, we don’t. Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the Supreme Suveran of our nation.”



Greetings! I have a rare, spare moment so I want to comment on this. How to address this essential item without sounding like a smart a**? For the life of me I cannot understand this one issue (and I have been racking my brain on this for years now).

Would not the very acceptance of an FRN be 'wilful' if we ask for them? We accept DEBT NOTES only because that's what the CORPS we desire to do business with demand.

I accept my own guilt in FRN'ing and CHECK accepting so I am not pointing fingers. Just trying to sincerely understand this:

How can discharging DEBT for CONSUMER GOODS be "acceptable"? It is very hard to buy or sell without FRN's.... so we accept FRN's. Is it just the lesser of the evil CHECK?



Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 05 Aug 2005 :  00:34:25  Show Profile
It is the specific paper trail of endorsement that makes for colorability. At least so many pieces of the big mosaic and models fit together nicely for me that way. What I mean is that nakar/nokriy of the Holy Bible suggests this colorable entity "feign self to be another" (Deuteronomy 15:1-3 foreigner; 23:20 stranger. This action of endorsement is fairly dangerous if you do not express your resentment of the false balances in the endorsement itself.

The colorable name works in conjunction with the colorable money.

Every time you hand off the con, giving debt and obligations to another instead of money, you become part of the problem. Your only clear conscience is that he will be able to con the next guy and get some kind of substance for the notes. But some day that will all end. The con will come to an end.

I was half asleep for the BBC radio report. But they were talking about China has stopped buying into 30 year Treasury Bonds. Well with the oil administration (BUSH) balking at China outbidding Chevron for the Caspian Sea Pipeline/Unocal (to direct it East instead of south to the Arabian Sea), is it any wonder China is considering crashing the Dollar? Or at least making no further investment in it?

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_Caspian_Sea_Pipeline.wmv

So keep a heads up. Keep your eyes open. The rapid loss of faith in debt/fiat currency may be just around the corner.



Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. I remember once I paid the process server with a little gold coin worth about what he wanted in FRNs. He accepted it and sold it at a dealer. But his accountant or attorney or whatever told him not to do that ever again.

Edited by - David Merrill on 05 Aug 2005 00:36:15
Go to Top of Page

BatKol
Advanced Member

USA
735 Posts

Posted - 05 Aug 2005 :  08:01:56  Show Profile
quote:
David said: This action of endorsement is fairly dangerous if you do not express your resentment of the false balances in the endorsement itself.


As always you make excellent points. Here's that part I am having a hard time seeing. Is not liking and resenting the false balances enough to keep our hands clean before the Creator if we are still going to use the FRN regardless of all we know about it? It is often said in this forum that an act done againt our will is not an act done by us. This makes great sense however, the FED RES LAWYER I spoke to on the phone said, "nobody is obligated to use our $". Unfortunatly this is true and plain common sense. I guess the alternative to the FRN would be finding/creating a network of folks who refused to use such INSTRUMENTS or the CONSUMER GOODS that require the same. Is that where all of this is supposed to lead us?
I also agree with you that the current system is "unsustainable".

Thanks again, David, for your response.
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 05 Aug 2005 :  09:01:27  Show Profile
Greetings and salutations brother Steven:
Peace be unto you and yours, dear brother.
Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
First, if it is an unpardonable sin to use the “caesar’s money”, we point out that as Yahuwah’s Principal Officer, he just condemned his fellowcitizens by allowing them to take their purses, since as far as we are able to ascertain thus far, they were not coining their own money…thus they too were using the “caesar’s false weights and measures”.
And, if we understand correctly, some of “caesar’s money” was all but worthless, since much of it was being made of brass, an alloy of copper (A metal, of a pale red color, tinged with yellow…) and zink (A metal of a brilliant white color, with a shade of blue…), only made to look yellow like “gold”.
The Greek word chalkos, translated money in their purse at Mark 6:8 evidently indicates brass and was translated thusly at Mattith'yahu 10:9.
Brass, n. 1. An alloy of copper and zink, of a yellow color
The Greek word chalkos probably comes from chalao through the idea of hollowing out… This word, chalao, according to James Strong means, lower or void and it in turn comes from the Greek word chasma , From a form of an obsolete primary chao (to “gape” or “yawn”); a “chasm” or vacancy, which may, or may not, indicate its lack of worth, i.e. intrinsic value.
Yahushua [JESUS] also instructed them to sell their garments and buy (#G59) swords. Evidence (#G59) indicates that he was instructing them to go to market, and we can only presume that like Ingles Market, they only accepted the shaved “coins of the realm”, which included the caesar’s comparatively worthless chalkos.
We used the word shaved above to point out that inflation, in those days, was accomplished by the king’s “coin shavers”. They actually had AGENTS who sat in their vaults shaving coins (this is why the edges of ancient gold and silver coins are so out of round); thus even the gold and silver coins of latter days were unfair weights and measures. With the advent of paper money they merely perfected this ancient practice; now they are able to shave all the gold and silver out of their “money”. Nifty!
Hope this is in some small way, helpful, brother Steven.


fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act.

Edited by - Oneisraelite on 05 Aug 2005 09:10:12
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 05 Aug 2005 :  10:59:20  Show Profile
Your question asks what God thinks. Do I have that correctly?

My position being intelligence nexus between over 100 sensory nodes does not really require such reckoning. However a lot of these people are driven to be courts of competent jurisdiction in lieu of the bankruptcy conditions of the State and United States. However very few of them have the luxury of being able to avoid FRNs altogether.

I enjoy FRNs in my pocket about as much as anybody I suppose. I would have difficulty conning all those people every day (people whom I give the FRNs to) if I were to burden myself with God's disapproval about it.

One visiting suitor discharged debt at a coffee house with this stipulation on the $20 note:

http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_UsedOnlyByNecessity.jpg

Quite frankly I feel a bit lazy when I consider doing that to every FRN that passes by me. And something seems a little unfair to the recipient who may not feel the same way. Do they have to wash the note of my stipulation?

A while after that I encountered this:

quote:
DEPOSITED FOR CREDIT ON ACCOUNT OR EXCHANGED FOR NON-NEGOTIABLE FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES OF FACE VALUE


This endorsement is often by signature form "True Name dba Legal Name".

Only a rumor mind you but then I thought about it and determined it useful regardless of whether the IRS agents determined the guy's paychecks "non-taxable events". (I still have a difficult time swallowing the IRS agents would say that out loud.) But I was by the timing the private banker who triggered the Montana Freeman Standoff. I engineered the comptroller warrant to present a genuine substantial issue or controversy into a system that had been colorable since, well 1861. It even looks like Governor Pitkin here in Colorado beat Washington by drafting against the (national) treasury before they had even thought of legal tender and Greenbacks in Washington. [I hope someday that may indicate the Constitution used in the Territorial Sessions Laws was a forgery with that de jure Thirteenth Amendment. But I do not think so at this time.] Maybe that perspective is the reason I easily see FRNs are non-negotiable to men and women. They are negotiable to persons/daughter corporations.

However when I reach out my hand to accept cash, I admit it; I contemplate negotiating substance with the empty evidence of debt. The IMF agent who said nobody is forced to use Our $... Well that kind of cold cruelty just goes a long way toward me sleeping at night. Don't you think?

I imagine if me spending the notes upset God he would have the power to pester me with unpleasant dreams and sleepless nights.

Lewis of course derived a plain English version to say the same thing.

quote:
verbally:

I have a draft against your bank I am presenting for acceptance.

Then above endorsement:

No liability assumed.
No value assured.

(Legal name signature)


I think by my paying the process server in gold coin you all understand that if given a choice, I will prefer true money by definition.


But like you all I am faced daily with the ignorant notion that FRNs are money.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Edited by - David Merrill on 05 Aug 2005 16:12:13
Go to Top of Page

yardstick
Senior Member

USA
52 Posts

Posted - 05 Aug 2005 :  15:50:42  Show Profile
Greetings to the Ecclesia:

I post the following link to the site for input and edification of the Ecclesia, considering the reluctance of many members to using FRNs:

www.libertydollar.org

I invite your comments.
Go to Top of Page

HenryBowman
Regular Member

USA
33 Posts

Posted - 05 Aug 2005 :  16:12:51  Show Profile
I tried this approach today, and I can tell you it blew their minds.

But I walked out with no charge (which they usually charge for a non-account holder) and the FRN's.

Thanks Lewis.

Henry Franklin

ATFOTRAF
Go to Top of Page

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 05 Aug 2005 :  16:26:22  Show Profile
Greetings David Merrill, and all,
I am not surprised, nor amazed anymore about the ways those "legal scholars" and their cling-ons redefine their perception of what they are into, noting their irrational responses.

"Harvard Law School's Prof. Mary Ann Glendon notes that formal legal ethics standards have been 'dumbed down' over the years, eliminating words like 'right' and 'wrong' and making moral considerations optional."
- U S News and World Report (Jan 30, 1995)

..."If we are to keep our democracy, there must be one commandment: Thou shalt not ration justice."...
. Justice Learned Hand

...."(many lawyers today believe) all rules, including the rules of professional ethics, are infinitely manipulable." ...
- Harvard Law Prof. Mary Ann Glendon

US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE COMMITTEES
RANKED BY ATTRACTIVENESS & PRESTIGE (1989)
with Percentage of Lawyers Shown
(Note: Total House Membership in 1989 was only 42% lawyers)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee Rank Lawyer Members(%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rules 1 53
Ways & Means 2 44
Appropriations 3 49
Budget 4 47
Energy & Commerce 5 61
Armed Services 6 45
Gov't Operations 7 41
Foreign Affairs 8 48
Agriculture 9 34
Merchant Marine & Fisheries 10 41
Public Works & Transport 11 29
Sceince & Technology 12 55
Interior & Insular Affairs 13 33
Judiciary 14 97
House Administration 15 32
Banking and Urban Affairs 16 35
Veterans Affairs 17 36
Dist of Columbia 18 20
Post Office & Civil Service 19 39
Education and Labor 20 31
------------------------------------------------------------------

. Glenn R. Parker & Suzanne L. Parker
..also see Lawrence Dodd and Bruce I. Oppenheimer


..."The number of lawyers employeed by the Federal government has grown rapidly over the years and appears to be continuing to increase. Between 1954 and 1970, the number of self-employed lawyers in the U.S. increased by 19% while the number of lawyers in the Federal government increased by 108% and the number employed by state government increased by 167%."
- Richard L. Abel

..."I believe there are more instances of abridgment of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations."
- James Madison (1751 - 1836)

..."The penalty for laughing in a courtroom is six months in jail; if it were not for this penalty, the jury would never hear the evidence."...
- H[enry] L[ouis] Mencken (1880 - 1956)


"Legal ethics is a misnomer ... lawyers conducting themselves legally are not necessarily conducting themselves morally ."...and ..."The zero sum nature of the legal system, combined with the universal adoption of zealotry as the marching orders of practioners and prosecutors, transforms the moral mission of the legal system from one of truth-seeking, storytelling, and justice, to one of fabrication, distortion, and manipulation in pursuit of victory. These victories, however, make us all losers."

- Thane Rosenbaum


"If the bar is to state quite honestly the measure of its
participation in public life, it must admit that law-trained
persons maintain a complete monopoly
over one branch
of government, and considerable effective control over
the other two."
- Esther Lucile Brown.

" Every lawyer is sorely vexed at me because I preach so harshly
against the craft; but I say I, as a preacher, must reprove what is
wrong and evil. If I reproved them, as Martin Luther, they need not
regard me, but forasmuch as I do it as a servant of Christ, and
speak by God's command, they ought to hearken unto me; for
if they repent not, they shall everlastingly be damned; but I, when
I have declared their sins, shall be excused. If I were not constrained to give an account for their souls, I would leave them unreproved."

- Martin Luther on Lawyers

I am,
Manuel


Edited by - Manuel on 05 Aug 2005 16:31:19
Go to Top of Page

BatKol
Advanced Member

USA
735 Posts

Posted - 06 Aug 2005 :  09:24:10  Show Profile
quote:
David said: Your question asks what God thinks. Do I have that correctly?


Yes. That about sums it up.
Go to Top of Page

BatKol
Advanced Member

USA
735 Posts

Posted - 06 Aug 2005 :  10:16:20  Show Profile
Greetings brother Robert,

quote:
You said: Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
First, if it is an unpardonable sin to use the “caesar’s money”, we point out that as Yahuwah’s Principal Officer, he just condemned his fellowcitizens by allowing them to take their purses, since as far as we are able to ascertain thus far, they were not coining their own money…thus they too were using the “caesar’s false weights and measures”. And, if we understand correctly, some of “caesar’s money” was all but worthless, since much of it was being made of brass, an alloy of copper (A metal, of a pale red color, tinged with yellow…) and zink (A metal of a brilliant white color, with a shade of blue…), only made to look yellow like “gold”.
The Greek word chalkos, translated money in their purse at Mark 6:8 evidently indicates brass and was translated thusly at Mattith'yahu 10:9.
Brass, n. 1. An alloy of copper and zink, of a yellow color…
The Greek word chalkos probably comes from chalao through the idea of hollowing out… This word, chalao, according to James Strong means, lower or void and it in turn comes from the Greek word chasma , From a form of an obsolete primary chao (to “gape” or “yawn”); a “chasm” or vacancy, which may, or may not, indicate its lack of worth, i.e. intrinsic value. Yahushua [JESUS] also instructed them to sell their garments and buy (#G59) swords. Evidence (#G59) indicates that he was instructing them to go to market, and we can only presume that like Ingles Market, they only accepted the shaved “coins of the realm”, which included the caesar’s comparatively worthless chalkos.
We used the word shaved above to point out that inflation, in those days, was accomplished by the king’s “coin shavers”. They actually had AGENTS who sat in their vaults shaving coins (this is why the edges of ancient gold and silver coins are so out of round); thus even the gold and silver coins of latter days were unfair weights and measures. With the advent of paper money they merely perfected this ancient practice; now they are able to shave all the gold and silver out of their “money”. Nifty!
Hope this is in some small way, helpful, brother Steven.


Thanks for your detailed post. There is much to ponder. Let's say that you are correct concerning the false weights and measures of the brass coin of Caeser's realm. This would translate quite well with the FRN. So if there is no problem at all with using the fake coin of unequal weights and measures to go to the market, then there should also be no problem with paying the TAXES that the CORPS demand when engaging in commerce (buying goods is considered commerce and they tax us for using their "system"). I was under the impression that part of the "no marks" doctrine is refusal to pay taxes which would help the perpetuate the BEAST. Paying the many taxes levied on CONSUMER goods certainly does this (gas TAXES being my most hated of the bunch, second would be PHONE taxes!!!!). We can't go to the STORE and refuse to pay it based on "spiritual" reasons. Well I guess we could but the CORP would not do business with us. The point is that we can't spend FRN's with CORPS without taking on the status of CONSUMER in COMMERCE. This make me suspect because it is quite hard to buy or sell without FRN's today. Ingles, Verizon, Walmart or Exxon are perfect examples and if we want to do business with them we have to go by their rules.

Concering the brass coins. I'd like to explore that idea a bit more. I know that FRN's are backed up by CONTRACTS and usury. They are also valued and devalued according to commercial and political needs. You made an interesting observation about the agents shaving to get extra gold off of the coins. Well, how would they add value back on to the coins? The FED can raise the value of an FRN with the stroke of a pen. To make the connection between the coins and the FRN we would need to have the same agents who shaved off the gold also being able to add the gold back in when they want to raise the value. I think the FRN and the coin are two different instruments all together. The market today has been transformed from what it used to be and no doubt when one engages in commerce with the CORP the "BEAST" rightly has jurisdiction.

Here's where I cannot follow the logic. Why is it OK to enter into BEAST jurisdiction via consumerism and FRNs yet not OK for other things? Some say "because no signature is required to go spend FRN's". Well, one's actions are just as binding as one's signature in "THEIR" law.

This is where I rack my brain trying to connect the dots in reality.

I also want to add I am NOT pointing fingers on this issue because I go FRN'ing everyday!








Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1141 Posts

Posted - 06 Aug 2005 :  10:52:08  Show Profile
quote:
I also want to add I am NOT pointing fingers on this issue because I go FRN'ing everyday!
That is about the extent of my point. The command is not to have two balances. This is so that you cannot walk to a light balance to buy and a heavy balance to sell. Maybe that helps reconcile things in our minds.

Speaking for myself I read the Book of Revelation as an overview of Jewish concepts. Messiah ben Joseph is destoyed, or nearly destroyed and the Messianic Age is brought forth by Messiah ben David. Also, this is a kingdom of heaven on earth being talked about. So that means the conveyance will be a little rocky but overall the material wealth will be conveyed.

I see that the "trustees" are busier and busier making claim to the wealth in their own names instead of the beneficiaries'. That creates an alter ego. Trustees never own the wealth, they manage the wealth; government. That goes for international bankers as government too.

Thank you OneIsraelite for the thought-provoking post about currency.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Edited by - David Merrill on 06 Aug 2005 10:53:14
Go to Top of Page

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 06 Aug 2005 :  19:56:55  Show Profile
Hey... Just add your version of the music and just sing-along...
as long as it isn't wanna those jezebels this song is referring to :0)

-----------------------------------------------
50 ways to leave your lover

Words & music by paul simon

The problem is all inside your head, she said to me
The answer is easy if you take it logically
I’d like to help you in your struggle to be free
There must be fifty ways to leave your lover

She said it’s really not my habit to intrude
Furthermore, I hope my meaning won’t be lost or misconstrued
But I’ll repeat myself at the risk of being crude
There must be fifty ways to leave your lover
Fifty ways to leave your lover

Just slip out the back, jack
Make a new plan, stan
You don’t need to be coy, roy
Just get yourself free
Hop on the bus, gus
You don’t need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, lee
And get yourself free

Just slip out the back, jack
Make a new plan, stan
You don’t need to be coy, roy
Just listen to me <-----------
Hop on the bus, gus
You don’t need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, lee
And get yourself free

She said it grieves me so to see you in such pain
I wish there was something I could do to make you smile again
I said I appreciate that and would you please explain
About the fifty ways

She said why don’t we both just sleep on it tonight
And I believe in the morning you’ll begin to see the light
And then she kissed me and I realized she probably was right
There must be fifty ways to leave your lover
Fifty ways to leave your lover

Just slip out the back, jack
Make a new plan, stan
You don’t need to be coy, roy
Just get yourself free
Hop on the bus, gus
You don’t need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, lee
And get yourself free

You just slip out the back, jack
Make a new plan, stan
You don’t need to be coy, roy
Just listen to me <------------
Hop on the bus, gus
You don’t need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, lee
And get yourself free
--------------------------------------------

See that... get yourself free!
Brings back some memories huh?

Next... I just might tag along some funky version of the mothership connection... UHUM-THATSRIGHT!


Go to Top of Page

mikah2k
Regular Member

USA
34 Posts

Posted - 09 Aug 2005 :  17:09:12  Show Profile
I take a check, written from a corporation to a fictitious name that I hold creation papers for but which is not the same as my legal name, to the bank.

Teller: Sir we can help you now.

Me: I have a draft against your bank that I am presenting for acceptance.

I pull out the check and the attached stub.

Teller:May I see that Please.

Me:Sure.

She looks at the draft and stub.

Teller:Sir you will need an endorsement guarantee before we can give you a cashiers check. The fee is $3.00 for the cashiers check. We cannot give you cash.

Me: Why not?

Teller:Because the check is written to a business. So it must be deposited in the business' account. So that when they are audited, they can prove what happened with the money.

Me:What is an endorsement guarantee?

Teller:That is basically a stamp by your bank where the business has an account.

Me:What if the business does not have an account?

Teller: Then the business needs to open an account. The check will be income to the business for tax purposes.

Me:Why do I need an endorsement guarantee?

Teller:You need that so that we can negotiate the check.

Me:Do I endorse the check first or do I get the guarantee first?

Teller:You must take the check to your business' bank, and endorse it, and they will give you a signature guarantee.

Me:Can you please give me something in writing that says what you told me to do about the endorsement guarantee.

Teller:Just take it to your business' bank and they will know what to do.

Me:But what if they ask me what this guarantee thing is? Could you give me something in writing that explains what you told me?

Teller:All banks know about endorsement guarantees. They will know what to do.

Me:So do you have anything in writing saying that I need an endorsement guarantee?

Teller:No.

Me:Where does this endorsement guarantee stuff come from?

Teller:Well all the banks do it. It a common practice in banking. There may be some policy about it. But I do not know where that is.

Me:So it is not written anywhere?

Teller:No.

Me:How long does it take to open a business account here?

Teller:Maybe 15 to 20 minutes. You will need the business registration papers from the state.

Me:Ok. I have the papers. Let me see if I have enough time.

I look at watch.

Me: I will have to come back later. Do you have a business card?

Teller:Yes.(hands card to me)

Me:Thank you, have a good day.

--------------
Any comments are welcome. Also any thoughts on how to proceed are welcome.

Edited by - mikah2k on 09 Aug 2005 17:10:15
Go to Top of Page

mikah2k
Regular Member

USA
34 Posts

Posted - 15 Aug 2005 :  14:39:04  Show Profile
I took the check made out to a Fictitious Name (that is not my Legal Name) to a bank where my Legal Name has an account.

Me: May I have a deposit slip for an checking/savings account?
Teller: sure.

Hands me the deposit slip.

I fill in deposit slip.

Endorsement on check written to fictitious name:
"Pay to the order of Legal Name, Fictitious Name. Deposited for credit on account or exchanged for non-negotiable federal reserve notes of face value, Legal Name."

Teller asked no questions.
-----------------
I did not get the F.R.N.s in my hand, but I did not have to show any papers/id for the Fictitious Name, and the Fictitious Name is not authorized on my Legal Name's account.
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 01 Sep 2005 :  18:18:48  Show Profile
Greetings Brothers,

I just opened a business account in the name of a corporation. There were about a dozen places where I changed the wording on the bank forms to show that I am not a person or a U.S. person or in any way anything other than a MAN. Let's see how long it takes before they notify me to come get my money back. On the last line it says "signature of U.S. person". I marked thru "U.S. person" and wrote U.S.A. Citizen. After leaving the bank and thinking about it, I should have written "Citizen of Washington, foreign to the U.S." But, hey, hindsight is always 20-20.

Well, it will still be fun to see how long the leave it open.

More later,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

mikah2k
Regular Member

USA
34 Posts

Posted - 06 Sep 2005 :  16:12:22  Show Profile
I took a draft, whose maker is [Fictitious Name] by an officer of [Fictitious Name], whose payee is my LEGAL NAME, against B of A, to a branch at postal service address ##### Xxx Xxxxxx Xxxxx Xxxx, in City, State. [zip].

I enter a waiting line.
A teller calls out I can help you.

I walk up to the teller's window.

Me: I have a draft against your bank which I am presenting for acceptance.

I proceed to indorse the check "No liability Assumed, No Value Assured, Legal Name". I hand the check to the teller. Teller takes the check and looks at it.

Teller: Do you have an account with us?

Me: No.

Teller: Well, I will need two forms of ID.

I give the teller a DL and a local resident photo card.

Teller: I will also need your thumb print placed in the center of the check.

I ink my thumb print in the face of the check.

Teller: That did not come out clearly. Could you put a thumb print here? (pointing to bottom of the check on white background.)

Me: Sure. (I put another thumb print on check near bottom on white background)

Teller calls to someone: I need an override.

Another woman, later calling herself the Teller Manager and highest ranking officer in the building, came up to the teller window.

They both observe the IDs and the check, they go to a computer in the back counter. Teller Manager picks up a phone. The Teller manager speaks the name of the city and state of the American union (written on the draft) into a phone. Teller Manager is on that phone for at least five minutes.

The Teller Manager comes to the counter where I am.

Teller Manager: Our policy has changed, we no longer allow cashing checks unless the customer gets a Signature Guarantee on the check from their bank.

Me: May I please have that in writing?

Teller Manager: No.

Me: May I please see where that policy is written?

Teller Manager: No.

Me: Can you tell me where I can get your policy in writing or if I need to write you a letter in order to get that in writing?

Teller Manager: No. We will not give that to you in writing. It is our policy. We do not make our policy available to the public or to customers.

Me: I conditionally accept what you say if you make it available in writing.

Teller Manager: We will not give you anything in writing. (walking away to Teller apparently to prevent hearing a response from me).

I stand smiling observing the Teller Manager and Teller at the back counter.

Teller and Teller Manager return to front counter where I am.

Teller Manager: You will need to talk to [FICTITIOUS NAME, account holder] about their check. It is non-negotiable. They did not put funds into that account. There is no money in that account. (Returning the check to me)

Me: Are you kidding?

Teller Manager: No. There is no money in that account. You need to talk to [FICTITIOUS NAME] about their account. You will need to step aside so that the Teller can help other customers.

Me: Are you willing to sign an affidavit stating what you just told me?

Teller Manager: No.

Me: May I please have your business card. (I did not step aside.)

Teller Manager: I will get it for you in a minute.

Me: Thank you.

The Teller Manager walks through a doorway.

Me: Is there any higher bank officer than your manager that I may talk to?

Teller: Um, [some name], but it does not look like she's in. she's the branch manager...

Teller Manager returns with a business card, handing it to me. I take hold of the card.

Me: Thank you. Is there a higher ranking officer in this building that I may speak to about this?

Teller Manager: No.

Me: Are you the highest ranking officer in this building?

Teller Manager: Yes. I am going to have to ask you to leave now.

I walk toward the door in which I entered.

I stop and turn around, and walk back up to the counter where the teller manager and the teller are.

Me: You have dishonored my presentment.

I leave that scene.

I go down the road to a bank where my Legal Name has an open account.

I take the check, [which has been indorsed, inked with thumb-print, and written on by B of A Teller/Teller Manager] up to a teller.

Me: May I please have a deposit slip for an account.

Teller hands me the deposit slip.

I fill in the deposit slip. I hand the deposit slip and check to the Teller.

Teller never turns over the check (to see the back) in my sight, but proceeds with processing the deposit and hands me a receipt of deposit. Transaction completed.
------------------
Afterwards I talked with an accountant who says that the account number on the check is probably for a zero balance account, aka zba. Go and search the web for 'zero balance account'. Essentially, the account balance is always zero, and when a draft against that account is presented, then funds are pulled into the [zero balance sub-]account from another [main]account that can have a non-zero balance. Then the zba balance goes back to zero when the draft is paid. Any thoughts on how I may achieve remedy even though I have deposited that check? The Teller Manager 'promised' not to give anything in writing, which should assure a default against her.

Edited by - mikah2k on 06 Sep 2005 16:20:26
Go to Top of Page

Linc
Advanced Member

Canada
111 Posts

Posted - 25 Oct 2005 :  16:58:14  Show Profile
I walked into a bank today with a friend and tried Lewish' technique.

The friend was a black man, working day labor. He had a cheque from the day labor agency for a couple days worth of work. He quietly told the teller, a young white girl, "I have a draft against your bank which I am presenting for acceptance".

Immediately the girl said "that is NOT a draft, a draft comes from another bank and is stamped in a special way". Seeing that my friend was ready to back down, I jumped in and insisted "it IS a draft, and he is presenting it for your acceptance". Then I demanded she get her manager. She repeated herself a few times, I repeated myself a few times, then she tried to cut me out of the interaction.

She seemed a bit less sure of herself by now, so she brought up the two pieces of ID and $5 charge. My friend didn't have what they considered suitable ID, so the girl told him she couldn't cash the cheque. When I told her the $5 charge was against the banking regulations, she retreated for a while; she pulled up one of the bank's pamphlets, then went into the back and looked at it for a couple minutes. She came back and admitted that it wasn't in the bank pamphlet she had pulled out, but still refused to get a manager or supervisor.

We both walked out of the bank, draft unredeemed. If anyone on this board can advise on what went wrong, or what to do next, we are willing to give this another go next week.
Go to Top of Page

HenryBowman
Regular Member

USA
33 Posts

Posted - 28 Oct 2005 :  22:27:41  Show Profile
quote:
Originally posted by Linc

If anyone on this board can advise on what went wrong, or what to do next, we are willing to give this another go next week.



In my opinion, what you did wrong was leaving. What really makes them nervous is when you say: "I am here for [fill in the blank with your reason, in this case presenting a draft for acceptance] and I will wait here until this issue is resolved.

I have found that this really unnerves them. They suddenly (or soon) become willing to compromise their posture to resolve the situation, so you will leave. Either they will compromise, or your answer will appear. I have seen this many times.

If it were me, I'd take 2 witnesses next time, and stay until it's resolved or the police show up to do a report, at which time your proof of dishonor is written on paper by a third party (police officer).

Then, you have to decide on whether to pursue them, as you have evidence they dishonored your draft.

I cannot advise you on how to do this, just know it can be done.

Henry Franklin

ATFOTRAF

Edited by - HenryBowman on 28 Oct 2005 22:28:54
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 7 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY © MMXVII Ecclesiastic Commonwealth Community Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.09 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000