Affidavit to Bank - im taking them to court

[Free]

There's another doc you might like to look over Leeds, one which I've served as part of the continuing bombardment which to date has put the bank in an extremely vulnerable position.

The document is entitled 'Notice Requesting Adequate Assurance of Due Performance'

Firstly, a notice of formal request for clarification was served upon the bank in September

A response came back informing that a response would follow in due course...which of course never appeared.

Second, Notice of Lawful dishonour, as no response was forthcoming to the original request.

A response appeared via a 3rd party commercial solicitor indicating their instruction to act on behalf of the bank. It did not contain anything of substance so was immediately sent back to them along with a copy of all correspondence to date including the current notice.

Now, the bank will have received the 'Notice Requesting Adequate Assurance of Due Performance'

This is a document recognised in commerce.

Should a response not be forthcoming the bank will be served the Final Notice which demands back the original promissory note, deed, and three times the original value of the mortgage in damages. The Bank are bound, and must forward the note, and claim the damages by way of increasing the value of the original signed instrument. It costs them nothing other than a blow to their pride.

It's a win win win situation for all parties concerned.

If you'd like to see the documents please ask and I'll mail you them

Free

[Leeds]

i am very interested in those documents and how your case progresses. i would like to see them and have time to digest them and understand how it all works.

i have looked into the 'Notice Requesting Adequate Assurance of Due Performance' i am partly familiar with some UCC documents but am still in the early stages of learning.

i am between things on this case as i have a solicitor and a barrister and i dont think they support strawman and UCC unless i could present it confidently which i cant, yet. i feel i dont want to rock the boat too much at this stage with them but i do want to be aware of what is really going on.

i have two other bank accounts for a small amount which are now in question. i would like to consider using UCC documents with them. i am unsure of how to use the strawman and to exist in commerce at the same time. i have a lot to learn.

i dont think i am ready to be UCC literate and confident but i would welcome the chance to see and study the documents you mention. i want to be able to handle my own commercial affairs in the future.

trying to fight my case has brought me to here. i have been looking ino all this, the freeman route and commercial route for about a year or so. also law and maxims in law and stuff.

currently, my case is now being re-pleaded and permission has been granted from the bank to delay the case til 2010. we are waiting for confirmation from the judge to allow this.

my case might change depending on the barrister who may now be involved. he is very experienced with harassment.

i am getting more familiar with the strawman and UCC and have been thinking of how it might relate to my situation
especially in regard to being harassed and data kept.

as the bank have no record of the calls anymore, i now only have my own proof. most people have no proof at all.

(there are 1000s of people bieng wrongly harassed or pushed into debt by banks and call centres. look on the consumer forums anywhere or search for info)

does this mean that unless i go through data with the caller, the call isn't logged by the bank?

to not exist on record would cover a lot of tracks and get past a lot of regulations laws and statutes.

does going through data with them put us - the harrased - in a position of the straw man and give up our rights to human rights and respect as a human being?

are our phones our private property - don't we have a say in who calls us?

does going through data protection protect us or them?

does it put us into a commercial jurisdiction?

are we contracting with them as the strawman?

are we being tricked into giving up our common law rights by agreeing to go through data with them?

why is it so important to them and if it is so important why is it un-monitored and not recorded?

is this why they are not trained to respect the harassment act and are just trained to hound people for payment by ringing them continuously and sometimes for months on end?

is that how they get away in court with prolonged harassment - because we were acting in our strawman capacity without being told and so we have no rights?

if human rights and common law were adhered to how come the controlled and cleverly managed action of harassment (of debt) has become such a mainstream profitable and expanding commercial market and resulted in so many people losing everything without records of the pressure being used on customers being kept. in india where the commercial farming and waste management and call centre market is booming 10,000 farmers have commited suicide because of debt collection practices and the despair associated with debt in the last few years.

what chance does a customer have of proving this or of fighting them fairly in court or otherwise if they don't even know how to defend themselves or where they have been directed to stand in commerce?

where does data protection relate with regard to the strawman and the human?

no one has to answer any of this but it has been making me wonder.

Rob Menard says how important it is to know what you are giving up.

makes me wonder why is data protection questioning is so important to them and so is pushing us to use paperless contracts

clearly we are denied full disclosure and complete records even when we formally request data kept about us such as by DSAR

people are standing up in many ways as can be seen from the many cases that are now questioning disclosure with regard to contracts.

has anyone questioned the strawmans role in banking and the way that banking might abuse it?

i know i seem all over the place with this but these are my real thoughts happening now and this is where i can air them.

truth is the more i find out,

i find,

the more there is to find out

and im not confident with any of this

sometimes i feel im lost in a rabbit warren and i think

i took the red and the blue pill at the same time

but i like it so far

so thats ok

Leeds

[Free]

Lots of questions there Leeds. You'll see in time that most of them will answer themselves.

I've been working on the Notice Of Termination today which follows the Notice of Request for Adequate Assurance of Due Performance

UCC is not involved in any of these. They are straight to the point requests for proof of alleged 'loan' and subsiquent Demand for the original instrument and Deed.

I'll pop them up here shortly.

Using Barristers and Solicitors in my humble opinion is a waste of time. Their only mission is to get 'the best deal' they can between the two parties involved and of course..themselves. Their first duty is to themselves and that is that. No matter how nice they are they're very much on their own side.

Everything....and i mean everything must be done on paper. Their system works against you if you keep calling them on the phone.

We do not ask...we 'Serve Notice'...an notice un-rebutted in the time YOU give them becomes YOUR law over them.

Solicitors and Barristers work in the public, that which is 'legal' (fiction)

We work in the private, that which is real.

I accept that to get closure on current matters we must dip our toes into the waters..if only to get them to recognise our paperwork...as it is the paperwork which provides the key to the solution and subsiquent remedy till such time as there are enough of us pushing to shut down their paperwork systems.

Free

[phillwelsh]

Hi Leeds,
Very interesting thread. i am also in the process of creating an affidavit against a bank.
I have a question for you, I have no experience with solicitors or affidavits. Im just wondering if you had the affidavit sworn and witnessed by the solicitor and how you went about this. It probably really easy but I really have no idea!

Any help would be fantastic! I look forward to your updates on this thread!!

Phill

[Free]

Here's the template's I was referring to previously.

It must be noted that these documents are in current use in the public domain and are recognised by banks and lenders.

The first,being the Notice of Request for Adequate Assurance of Due Performance will be served after the time period allowed for response to the Notice of Discharge and Request for Clarification and subsiquent Notice of Dishonour/Oppertunity to Cure have been dishonoured.

Upon dishonour, a Commercial Affidavit of Truth will be served. (I'll post this up as soon as it is in template form)

The second, Notice of Termination will be held back and used as counter claim should the lender proceed with a claim through the courts. Should no proceedings be made by the lender, the notice will be served in due course.

Finally, A claim will be made as stated in the Notice of Request for Assurance of Due Performance for the deed, promissory note and damages representing 3 times the original loan.

Templates for the claim will follow shortly.

Hope this is of help to you.

It must be noted that the templates that follow are for advisory, entertainment purposes only and anyone choosing to apply their contents in a matter must do so having taken full knowledge of the reasons and circumstances for use and the possible penalties involved for getting it wrong or becoming involved in a commercial claim without a full understanding of it's workings and principles. The use of this method of redemption is NOT for the faint hearted and if not properly excercised could result in the claimant having a nice stay at her majesty's B&B.

Now follows the templates:

John: Doe
c/o Address line 1
Address line 2
Address line 3
Address line 4
Near [POST CODE]

Non-Domestic Without the United Kingdom

Lender’s name and address
Address line 2
Address line 3
Address line 4
POST CODE


Date here:
Your Ref:

Notice Requesting Adequate Assurance of Due Performance

Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal. Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent

Principal Creditor and Authorised Agent for MR JOHN DOE, hereafter ‘The Borrower’

Dear


Following your dishonour of my Notice of Discharge and Request for Clarification dated DATE HERE and my Notice of Dishonour and Opportunity to Cure dated DATE HERE I now serve you Notice Requesting Adequate Assurance of Due Performance.

It has come to my attention, following consultation with an executive level chartered accountant and extensive research on the statutes governing the banking industry, that there is every reason to believe that LENDERS NAME is not Holder-in-due-Course of MR JOHN DOE’s promissory note and/or may be in breach of the alleged loan agreement concerning the above-referenced account.

Therefore, I am hereby serving notice of my intention to discharge the alleged debt in full, using the same specie of money that LENDER used to fund the alleged loan, provided that I receive specific answers to the following questions:

1. According to the alleged loan agreement, did LENDER, lend its own money as adequate consideration to purchase the promissory note (loan agreement) from MR JOHN DOE? YES or NO.


2. According to the relevant bookkeeping entries, did LENDER, lend its own money as adequate consideration to purchase the promissory note (loan agreement) from MR JOHN DOE? YES or NO.

3. According to the alleged loan agreement, was MR JOHN DOE to provide valuable consideration to fund the alleged loan? YES or NO.

4. According to the relevant book keeping entries, did LENDER accept anything of value from MR JOHN DOE that was used to give value to a cheque or similar instrument of approximately the same value of the alleged loan? YES or NO.

5. Did LENDER follow UK GAAP (Generally Accepted Accounting Principles of the United Kingdom) in the execution of the alleged loan agreement? YES or NO.

6. Can LENDER provide evidence that its accountant and auditor at the time of the execution of the alleged loan confirmed that it followed GAAP in the execution of the alleged loan? YES or NO.

7. Was it the intent of the alleged loan agreement that the party who funded the loan is the party that is to be repaid the money? YES or NO.

8. Are all the material facts of the alleged loan disclosed in the original (alleged) agreement?
YES or NO.

9. According to the alleged loan agreement, was MR JOHN DOE obliged to lend the promissory note to LENDER, or another financial institution in order to fund the alleged loan? YES or NO.

10. Are the economics of the alleged loan similar to stealing, counterfeiting and swindling against MR JOHN DOE? YES or NO.

Failure to answer these reasonable questions with specific answers within seven (7) days of your receipt of this notice, will comprise the tacit procuration of LENDER’S agreement that it has concealed material facts from MR JOHN DOE, that the promissory note has been altered or stolen and that the alleged borrower provided the funds that the alleged lender claims were lent to MR JOHN DOE, in which case, MR JOHN DOE is legally entitled to file a commercial injury claim for at least three times the value of the alleged loan.

Sincerely, without ill will , vexation or frivolity

By:

John: Doe
Authorised Representative for MR JOHN DOE
All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted

And the Notice of Termination




Date:
Your Ref:

NOTICE OF TERMINATION

Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal. Notice to Principal is Notice to Agent

Principal Creditor and Authorised Agent for MR JOHN DOE, hereafter ‘The Borrower’

Dear

Following your dishonour of my Notice Requesting Adequate Assurance of Due Performance dated DATE HEREyou are now hereby served Notice of Termination.

This is timely notice that this contract and any obligation it created is hereby terminated for failure to provide Adequate Assurance of Due Performance as outlined in the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts 1994.

Article 7.3.4 - Adequate Assurance of Due Performance

A party who reasonably believes that there will be a fundamental non-performance by the other party may demand adequate assurance of due performance and may meanwhile withhold its own performance. Where this assurance is not provided within a reasonable time the party demanding it may terminate the contract.

All requests have been made in writing, and service has been recorded via registered post with delivery confirmation. Despite these requests for full disclosure I have not received information from the Bank to assure me of its performance, and that I received proper consideration to support the contract.

It must therefore be assumed that the Bank did not lend me it’s own pre-existing money or assets (including pre-existing money or assets it may have sourced from another institution), but merely monetised the loan instrument, my promissory note, creating a credit on account through book keeping entries that it used to fund the loan, as I have not received information to the contrary.

That would be an exchange, not a loan, and have not received full disclosure that I was to be the source of the funds. That is misrepresentation and fraud as I believed the Bank would be lending me it’s own pre-existing money.

You are requested to immediately release any deed, title or other document that you may be holding and return to me at the address above within seven (7) days of receipt of this notice.

Failure to do so will result in an action at law to recover it. Further, you are directed to correct any record of bad credit that you may have lodged with any credit reporting agency within seven (7) days.





Sincerely, without ill will , vexation or frivolity

By:

John: Doe
Authorised Representative for MR JOHN DOE
All Rights Reserved - Without Prejudice - Without Recourse - Non-Assumpsit
Errors & Omissions Excepted

[nameless]

"It has come to my attention, following consultation with an executive level chartered accountant and extensive research on the statutes governing the banking industry, that the -----"

Remember, when anyone is good enough to help others out with suggested templates, you should make sure that everything that is written is applicable to you, and that you agree with what is being written. I, for one, could not make the above statement, so I would have to water it down considerably in order to make it my truth, or miss it out.

[Free]

I agree with nameless

Tamplates can be useful for a base from which to start, however not only must they be finely tuned to our own specific requirements, we must also revue them constantly as those opposing us and our notices will most certainly be twisting and turning their own responses to keep us at bay.

Should one template be adopted by the masses, it follows that only one notice of rebuttal need be created by the opponent. The more differences we can create the more rebuttals they must create which costs them time and money and jams their systems.

Free

[Leeds]

jsut an update on stuff here its been a little hectic for me lately.

i didn't do an afidavit to be given to the bank in the end.

i wrote a statement for the barrister which touched on the signature creating the credit and non disclosure of the fact, being treated as a contract and not a human being, irresponsible lending, breaches of contracts by them, plenty of times including by selling my accounts and buying them back when i threatened to take them to court. i didnt elaborate on the strawman but i hinted at it and ucc etc and i wonder of that affected my legal aid being withdrawn... the reason was i didnt have enough evidence of harrassment based on the cases that have lost already.

i could appeal against the legal aid decision but am thinking of being a litigant in person and carrying on myself. i would definately need a mackenzie friend tho.

the bank now want me to sign a Tomlin order, which would effectively gag me and restrict me now and in the future from using or disclosing the documents i have in or out of court. the solicitor is acting on the dregs which are left of my legal aid and wants completion of her bit.

i am refusing the order and think i should ask for a copy of the accounting.

i may have 28 days to come up with an agreement, depending on what the court decides tomorrow.

i have to let my solicitor know tonight what i think about the banks kind offer!!! short notice indeed.

Leeds

[fmotl69]

I wouldn't take the bank to court, ever. Why try to get them into their 'house' to play in a battle of legalese (their own designed game/language) and fraudulent mind fornication?
It is my Understanding that, by taking them to court; you are defending something (in this case your person) and you automatically become the defendent and admitting guilt. Let them invite (summons) you and reject their proposal. By accepting their invitation, you are giving them jurisdiction (which you know is not anywhere close to common law jurisdiction).
Get lawful estoppel by acting honourably at all times. Don't sink to their level. Always stand taller than them (and of course never stand under them), and as little contracting between both parties as possible. They are not harassing 'you'; by phoning ('you' are not the person), they can't harass 'you'; by sending letters ('you' are not the person), its just fear and panic on their behalf (desperation). Don't get over protective of your person (unless you wish to continue to contract with companies/corporations in the future). You are a sovereign human being with a living soul, and should fear nothing (unless you drink lots of aspartame, which could cause phobias)!

Those ruthless bastards!

And of course never go to court quoting statutes and acts, they are for them, not you. They are legislated rules of society to be law on consent of governed and straying from common law (if statutes continue to be quoted), which you demanded pre-hearing. Then contract law is paramount and they know more about the acts and their crazy sub-sections than you ever will. Just absolute proof is required with a large dose of common law mixed in and its a perfect cocktail.