Sep 05, 2013 11:35 PM

Why the Bank thinks they own your 'money' = TOTTEN TRUST

Controversy is not a solution, it's consent my friend by way of behaviour/conduct. Contracts are borh expressed AND IMPLIED.

Your choices are: 1.Acceptance = honor 2.Conditional acceptance (counter offer) = honor 3.Silence= acceptance/dishonor 4.Controversy/explaination/discussing/arguing= acceptance/disnonor

the bills of exchange is all about honor and dishonor

I've been told that I MUST deposit my cheques before I cash them. Can anyone point to information/acts/statutes that indicate otherwise? As above, the response as to why this is so,,,"it's policy". In fact, because my old credit union closed down I switched to another credit union. They are claiming they must hold all funds from cheques for 10 days.

Go to the bank it was issued from and cash it there.

That specific check was from a trust and drawn on the head office branch of the bank I was at. The union I work for holds our vacation pay in a trust. ADP the payroll corp that issues my weekly checks, does not make checks unless the employer forwards the payroll monies, the bank is well aware of this fact. What the bank wants is for me to have my money in their accounts in the unlikely event the shareholders need to very rapidly convert liabilities to operating capital. The bail in regime is coming.

Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma - I've had limited success with that approach. On a number of occasions I've been told that cheque cashing privileges are for members only. When I retorted with a member has an account here because they want me to get paid, to which I added, "should I inform your client that his bank won't honour his cheques and are rendering the cheque not worth the paper it is written on?", I've been told to "go ahead". They said they will inform the member that they were "protecting" them "because the couldn't validate "my" ID was authentic". Then they go on, "But, if you want to start an account and deposit the cheque, we could then give you the funds via a withdrawal". Of course, I asked them why my ID was considered possibly forged if I just want to cash a cheque, however, if I am willing to start an account, the very same ID will immediately and magically be accepted as valid. The response at getting caught in this lie usually results in something along the lines of "I've spent enough time on this. Do you want to start an account or not?"

Robert Cormier have you read the action plan for 2013

David Smile: Which Action Plan? There seems to be so many "action plans" out there.

Harpers Economic Action Plan

state clearly they will wipe out our bank accounts pg 155 in the pdf

Are you referring to the "BAIL IN"?

I've read a portion of it.

yep the regime as they call it

This is almost funny...."This will reduce risks for taxpayers" pg 155

when they say to better protect tax payers they mean the money they already have

Guys, consider getting off the legislation perception merry go round and move onto creative constructive solution...educate/lien/counter offer the bank CEO for fraud and damages for not cashing your cheque (only takes 3 letters) or help a brother out and simply take his offer of opening an account so he has more solvency to create credit on:-) Debtor whine and revile, creditors solve and create. Peace.

And remember it ain't charity without reward, after 90 days if done correctly you can sell that security for cents on the dollar:)

Blake, when you are referring to liening bank CEO's as opposed to the bank itself... would that be your suggestion as well in a case of a contract that has a summary judgement against a bank? I'm stumbling through trying to learn the ins and outs for my situation

Absolutely Gail :) I would always attach/address/involve the act / tort to an individual, and of the highest possible standing in said corp as well as the specific/initial person of interest and all third parties that dare to interlope in the matter. However one is enough to make your claims upon.

Also remember Gail the bank CEO is also under bank public hazard insurance...so it's all covered. I mention everything private and public as collateral for their debt plus I include a specific power of attorney.

Yep, you hold them PERSONALLY responsible... if you are addressing someone specifically and they refuse to acknowledge you...

Ok so my contract was accepted by their cashing my check, and the follow up through the administrative process was addressed to the CEO, so she is who I should lien...what about their lawyer who responded to me a few weeks after the summary judgement was rendered?

He's just trying to contract with you...

You can warn him he MAY be added as a respondent to a potential lien if he continues to meddle:) And if you feel so inclined you can add him and his assests as collateral for the debt.

Yah Blake... good one...

I was looking at ppsa.ca for doing the lien, and it asks what provinice, do i do it in Ontario because it is where I live? The bank is national but the head office is in Quebec

This is good info, thank you Blake Gardner and Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma

The lien is private and ppsa is for registering the lien interest publicly. It's usually in the jurisdiction of the collateral.

Blake Gardner when you say power of attorney, through the administrative process, a power of attorney was identified, would that be what you are referring to?

I'm referring to one of my terms and conditions is power of attorney so I/principal on behalf of the debtor can sign on Their behalf any document, transfer of title ect necessary in collecting and/or selling the collateral

For the debt:)

ok yes that was communicated already to them...

Do you send the individuals notice of the lien or is public notice all that is required?

If they recieved the notice of default then they have been noticed. The rest is a public notice in aid of moving toward filing for collection, other creditors and the debt market investors.

great thanks....the response after the summary judgement I received from their lawyer, do I need to respond to it...he basically said no we dont see it as you do and you owe us still?

Technically you do, you could just send it back - refused with cause referencing exibits 1-3. Also technically depending on your terms of a non response it can also be treated as a non response - for example one of my terms for non response are if their reply is NOT registered mail (as all mine are). Plus they can't prove receipt of anything sent standard post in court.

they sent one through regular mail. and they sent one to me and one to my hubby via courier, but we were on vacation and the 2 envelopes were left between my front doors. They courier could say they delivered it, but there is no proof that it was still between the doors when I returned from vacation?

True, but in that instance I would most certainly return his letters with the default notice and possibly a warning that he MAY be added as a liable party personally (he and all his assets) as collateral to the claim/debt for harassment, interloping and fraud if he responds again without providing proof of standing. Then specify what that entails. Counter offer:-)

ok thank you

he send one to my husband separately because the account is joint but my husband hasn't been involved in this, I would send back his copy of the letter as well?

Eg. Proof of agency to act as the bank with full authority and liability, his public hazard insurance provider and policy number ect...

Do I need that policy number for the CEO before I can proceed with the lien?

You need to search the county register for property in the debtors name, check what there is and if there are any other claims on them. Then you can list the assets, accounts ect specifically on the lien to the value of the debt ir thereto.

Gail Blackman: great thanks....the response after the summary judgement I received from their lawyer, do I need to respond to it...he basically said no we dont see it as you do and you owe us still?

You could write and say that the lawyer's response is of 'no consequence' because it has not factually addressed the questions/concerns/counterclaims you have outlined in your default and is therefore of 'no force or effect'...Does the lawyer have first hand knowledge of the facts? etc

I just send them back...

have you done a lien Beverly?

Nope. But once you have a lien right you can do it any time... I believe...

they are starting to play games with me, trying to steal money from my accounting by changing their name to by pass the stop payment I put on the account, so it's time for me to get moving on it

Did you send them an affidavit at all during your process?

yes and I have a summary judgement against them

Well... as they say in Mortal Kombat... FINISH HIM!! :D

haha

It's annoying for sure but they are definitely motivating me any false guilt I may have felt is vanishing

2. finish him A line from Mortal Kombat when you want to rub in your victory and make your friend whine about losing. Usually followed by a fatality, babality, friendship, animality, or if you have the x-rated version, the bestiality.

Blake Gardner and Stuart Stone and you Beverly Girl-Brain Braaksma have been extremely helpful in this thread thank you

it was only a small 2 cents worth, but always a pleasure :D

But... speaking of "finish him"... this is funnee http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzNNpUH2DqQ

every cent is valuable to me :)

Your 3 letters, notice, fault, default is your lien/claim in the private if done correctly. Case closed. You can sit on it defensively or offensively have it enforced in the public if it contains a counter claim, damages/fraud ect. If they take you to court you just sit on that claim and petition for dismissal. If your claim consists of a counter claim then you can file a case as plaintiff to collect or sell it to another interested party as a security and they can collect.

So Gail the only immediate problem you have right now is to stop access to your funds.

ok ty

Great stuff !!! :)

wow! :-D

Lawyers are third party interlopers without standing who are operating on hearsay. Lien them if they don't stay away.

If you see one in court you make them shut up by pointing out the above. :)