Wednesday, February 29, 2012

How bankers get you with a home loan.




Subject: FW: Your House Loan in a Nutshell.


At your convenience, please read the article for an accurate accounting of what a home loan is and how it may differ considerably from your presumptions of the way banking and lending are routinely conducted.  Your realtor and your banker may never be the same after digesting the process that is taken for granted because it's too complicated or too hard to understand.  Here, the attorney's court transcript clearly outlines the fraud, and there is no statute of limitations for fraud!


"Fraud vitiates the most solemn of contracts ab initio"


David
Readers,


It's all in National Bank of Montgomery vs. Jerome Daly case.  It's still on Internet.  Let me share with you a banking experience that stunned me about six years ago.  I went into Umpqua Bank in Medford, Oregon to cash my compensation check.  It was on a Saturday, very laid back day; and the male teller who usually waited on me recognized me and said that he would help me in a center-of-the-room station.  So, we met there.  I handed him my $1000.00 check to cash and he began writing his part of the transaction.  As he was writing, he was summoned to an emergency phone call.  I told him to take it, I wasn't in a hurry.  Just accommodating those who would serve me without question.  He was gone it seemed like forever.  Only one other busy woman in the bank.  I leaned over the counter just stretching in boredom and happened to see the banking deposit slip he was making out and it said, $60,000.00?  I was stunned in suspicion?  I thought he was going to give me 60K.  Feeling like a bank robber, I just kept my mouth shut when he returned and he finished writing and the slip was out far enough that I saw what he was writing: He then put down $1000.00 withdrawal from the 60K?  He signed it and handed me $1000.00?








So, what happened in essence is this: somewhere there's an account or many accounts up in my name, social security number, corporate USA account, or maybe all of the named and more set up in my name; and Umpqua Bank, for its services, withdrew/deposited 60K in their bank for the transaction and gave me $1000.00 of the transaction? 








Perhaps someone with 'banking' transaction knowledge can share with us and let us know just what took place!  I'm very interested in that!








Thank you,


~Eagleinflight             
Very interesting article.


YOUR HOUSE LOAN IN A NUT SHELL     !!!!!!!!


Banking FRAUD In America ADMITTED IN COURT Date: Tue, 24 Jan     2012 16:15:28 +0000


Banking in America


This is an       actual court transcript - an interview with a banker, who is under oath,       about a foreclosure. The banker was placed on the witness stand and sworn       in. The plaintiff's (borrower's) attorney asked the banker the routine       questions concerning the banker's education and background. Then this       conversation followed:


The attorney asked the banker,       "What is court exhibit A?"


The banker responded by saying,       "This is a promissory note."


The attorney then asked, "Is       there an agreement between Mr. Smith (borrower) and the       defendant?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Do you       believe the agreement includes a lender and a       borrower?"


The banker responded by saying,       "Yes, I am the lender and Mr. Smith is the borrower."


The attorney asked, "What do       you believe the agreement is?"


The banker quickly responded,       saying, " We have the borrower sign the note and we give the borrower a       check."


The attorney asked, "Does this       agreement show the words borrower, lender, loan, interest, credit, or       money within the agreement?"


The banker responded by saying,       "Sure it does."


The attorney asked, `"According       to your knowledge, who was to loan what to whom according to the written       agreement?"


The banker responded by saying,       "The lender loaned the borrower a $50,000 check. The borrower got the       money and the house and has not repaid the money."


The attorney       noted that the banker never said that the bank received the promissory       note as a loan from the borrower to the bank. He asked,       "Do you believe an ordinary person can use ordinary terms and understand       this written agreement?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Do you       believe you or your company legally own the promissory note and have the       right to enforce payment from the borrower?"


The banker said, "Absolutely we       own it and legally have the right to collect the       money."


The attorney asked, "Does the       $50,000 note have actual cash value of $50,000? Actual cash value means       the promissory note can be sold for $50,000 cash in the ordinary course of       business."


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "According       to your understanding of the alleged agreement, how much actual cash value       must the bank loan to the borrower in order for the bank to legally       fulfill the agreement and legally own the promissory       note?"


The banker said,       "$50,000."


The attorney asked, "According       to your belief, if the borrower signs the promissory note and the bank       refuses to loan the borrower $50,000 actual cash value, would the bank or       borrower own the promissory note?"


The banker said,       "The borrower would own it if the bank did not loan the       money. The bank gave the borrower a check and that is how       the borrower financed the purchase of the house."


The attorney asked, "Do you       believe that the borrower agreed to provide       the bank with $50,000 of actual cash value which was used to fund the       $50,000 bank loan check back to the same borrower, and then agreed to pay       the bank back $50,000 plus interest?"


The banker said,       "No. If the borrower provided the $50,000 to fund the check,       there was no money loaned by the bank so the bank could not charge       interest on money it never loaned."


The attorney asked, "If this       happened, in your opinion would the bank legally own the promissory note       and be able to force Mr. Smith to pay the bank interest and principal       payments?"


The banker said, "I am not a       lawyer so I cannot answer legal questions."


The attorney asked, "Is it bank policy that when a borrower       receives a $50,000 bank loan, the bank receives $50,000 actual cash value       from the borrower, that this gives value to a $50,000 bank loan check, and       this check is returned to the borrower as a bank loan which the borrower       must repay?"


The banker said, "I do not know       the bookkeeping entries." 


The attorney said, "I am asking       you if this is the policy."


The banker responded, "I do not       recall."


The attorneyagain asked, "Do you       believe the agreement between Mr. Smith and the bank is that Mr. Smith       provides the bank with actual cash value of $50,000 which is used to fund       a $50,000 bank loan check back to himself which he is then required to       repay plus interest back to the same       bank?"


The banker said, " I am not a       lawyer."


The attorney said, "Did you not       say earlier that an ordinary person can use ordinary terms and understand       this written agreement?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney handed the bank       loan agreement marked "Exhibit B" to the banker. He said, "Is there       anything in this agreement showing the borrower had knowledge or showing       where the borrower gave the bank authorization or permission for the bank       to receive $50,000 actual cash value from him and to use this to fund the       $50,000 bank loan check which obligates him to give the bank back $50,000       plus interest?"


The banker said,       "No."


The lawyer asked, "If the borrower provided the bank with actual       cash value of $50,000 which the bank used to fund the $50,000 check and       returned the check back to the alleged borrower as a bank loan check, in       your opinion, did the bank loan $50,000 to the       borrower?"


The banker said,       "No."


The attorney asked, "If a bank customer provides actual cash value       of $50,000 to the bank and the bank returns $50,000 actual cash value back       to the same customer, is this a swap or exchange of $50,000 for       $50,000."


The banker replied,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Did the       agreement call for an exchange of $50,000 swapped for $50,000, or did it       call for a $50,000 loan?"


The banker said, "A $50,000       loan."


The attorney asked, "Is the       bank to follow the Federal Reserve Bank policies and procedures when banks       grant loans."


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "What are       the standard bank bookkeeping entries for granting loans according to the       Federal Reserve Bank policies and procedures?" The attorney handed the       banker FED publicationModern Money Mechanics, marked "Exhibit       C".


The banker said, "The promissory note is       recorded as a bank asset and a new matching deposit (liability) is       created. Then we issue a check from the new deposit back to the       borrower."


The attorney asked, "Is this       not a swap or exchange of $50,000 for $50,000?"


The banker said, "This is the       standard way to do it."


The attorney said, "Answer the question. Is it a swap or exchange       of $50,000 actual cash value for $50,000 actual cash value? If the note       funded the check, must they not both have equal       value?"


The banker then pleaded the Fifth       Amendment.


The attorney asked, "If the       bank's deposits (liabilities) increase, do the bank's assets increase by       an asset that has actual cash value?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Is there       any exception?"


The banker said, "Not that I       know of."


The attorney asked, "If the       bank records a new deposit and records an asset on the bank's books having       actual cash value, would the actual cash value always come from a customer       of the bank or an investor or a lender to the bank?"


The banker thought for a moment       and said, "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Is it the       bank policy to record the promissory note as a bank asset offset by a new       liability?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney said, "Does the       promissory note have actual cash value equal to the amount of the bank       loan check?"


The banker said       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Does this bookkeeping       entry prove that the borrower provided actual cash value to fund the bank       loan check?"


The banker said, "Yes, the bank president told us to do       it this way." 


The attorney asked, "How much       actual cash value did the bank       loan to obtain the promissory       note?"


The banker said,       "Nothing."


The attorney asked, "How much actual cash value did the bank receive       from the borrower?"


The banker said,       "$50,000."


The attorney said, "Is it true       you received $50,000 actual cash value from the borrower, plus monthly       payments and then you foreclosed and never invested one cent of legal tender or       other depositors' money to obtain the promissory note in the first       place? Is it true that the borrower financed the       whole transaction?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Are you       telling me the borrower agreed to give the bank $50,000 actual cash value       for free and that the banker returned the actual cash value back to the       same person as a bank loan?"


The banker said, "I was not       there when the borrower agreed to the loan."


The attorney asked, "Do the standard FED publications show the       bank receives actual cash value from the borrower for free and that the       bank returns it back to the borrower as a bank       loan?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney said, "Do you       believe the bank does this without the borrower's knowledge or written       permission or authorization?" 


The banker said,       "No."


The attorney asked, "To the       best of your knowledge, is there written       permission or authorization for the bank to transfer $50,000 of actual       cash value from the borrower to the bank and for the bank to keep it for       free?


The banker said,       "No."


"Does the creation of the new       note payable (now a bank asset) allow the bank to use this $50,000 actual       cash value to fund the $50,000 bank loan check back to the same borrower,       forcing the borrower to pay the bank $50,000 plus interest?       "


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney said, "If the bank       transferred $50,000 actual cash value (i.e. Federal Reserve Notes Payable)       from the borrower to the bank, in this part of the transaction, did the       bank loan anything of value to the borrower?"


The banker said, "No." He knew       that one must first deposit something having actual cash value (cash,       check, or promissory note) to fund a check.


The attorney asked, "Is it the bank policy to first transfer the       actual cash value from the alleged borrower to the lender for the amount       of the alleged loan?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The       attorney asked, "Does the bank pay IRS tax on the actual cash value       transferred from the alleged borrower to the       bank?"


The banker answered, "No, because the       actual cash value transferred shows up like a loan from the borrower to       the bank, or a deposit which is the same thing, so it is not       taxable."


The attorney asked, "If a loan       is forgiven, is it taxable?"


The banker agreed by saying,       "Yes."


The       attorney asked, "Is it the bank policy to not return the actual cash value       that they received from the alleged borrower unless it is returned as a       loan from the bank to the alleged       borrower?"


"Yes", the banker replied.       


The attorney said, "You never       pay taxes on the actual cash value you receive from the alleged borrower       and keep as the bank's property?"


"No. No tax is paid." said the       crying banker.


The attorney asked, "When the       lender receives the actual cash value (the promissory note) from the       alleged borrower, does the bank claim that it then owns it and that it is       the property of the lender, without the bank loaning or risking one cent       of legal tender or other depositors' money?"


The banker said,       "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Are you       telling me the bank policy is that the bank owns the promissory note       (actual cash value) without loaning one cent of other depositors' money or       legal tender, that the alleged borrower is the one who provided the funds       deposited to fund the bank loan check, and that the bank gets funds from       the alleged borrower for free? Is the money then returned back to the same       person as a loan which the alleged borrower repays when the bank never gave up any money to       obtain the promissory note? Am I hearing this       right? I give you the equivalent of $50,000, you return the funds back to       me, and I have to repay you $50,000 plus       interest? Do you think I am       stupid?"


In a       shaking voice the banker cried, saying, "All the banks are doing this.       Congress allows this."


The attorney quickly responded,       "Does Congress allow the banks to breach written agreements, use false and       misleading advertising, act without written permission, authorization, and       without the alleged borrower's knowledge to transfer actual cash value       from the alleged borrower to the bank and then return it back as a       loan?"


The banker said, "But the       borrower got a check and the house."


The attorney said, "Is it true or false that the actual cash value       that was used to fund the bank loan check came directly from the borrower       and that the bank received the funds from the alleged borrower for       free?"


"It is true", said the       banker.


The attorney asked, "Is it the       bank's policy to transfer actual cash value from the alleged borrower to       the bank and then to keep the funds as the bank's property, which they       loan out as bank loans?"


The banker, showing tears of       regret that he had been caught, confessed, "Yes."


The attorney asked, "Was it the       bank's intent to receive actual cash value from the borrower and return       the value of the funds back to the borrower as a loan?"


The banker said, "Yes." He knew       he had to say yes because of the bank policy.


The attorney asked, "Do you       believe that it was the borrower's intent to fund his own bank loan       check?"


The banker answered, "I was not       there at the time and I cannot know what went through the borrower's       mind."


The attorney asked, "If a       lender loaned a borrower $10,000 and the borrower refused to repay the       money, do you believe the lender is damaged?"


The banker thought. If he said       no, it would imply that the borrower does not have to repay. If he said       yes, it would imply that the borrower is damaged for the loan to the bank       of which the bank never repaid. The banker answered, "If a loan is not       repaid, the lender is damaged."


The attorney asked, "Is it the       bank policy to take actual cash value from the borrower, use it to fund       the bank loan check, and never return the actual cash value to the       borrower?"


The banker said, "The bank       returns the funds."


The attorney asked, "Was the       actual cash value the bank received from the alleged borrower returned as       a return of the money the bank took or was it returned as a bank loan to       the borrower?"


The banker said, "As a       loan."


The attorney asked, "How did       the bank get the borrower's money for free?"


The banker said, "That is how       it works."Regards,


Bollingbrooke Institute


Website http://www.bollingbrookeinstitute.org
Email:       info@bollingbrookeinstitute.org

No comments:

Post a Comment