 |
| Little do we realize that... We Are The Banks! |
The Fraud occurs when a bank advertises that they make "loans".
What they call "loans" should more properly be called "exchanges".
Why?
Because actually TWO LOANS occurred in that transaction at the bank.
THEY loaned you some money (LOAN #1) that paid for a house, for example, in return for your Promissory Note to repay that amount.
However, YOU also loaned them some money (LOAN #2) when they DEPOSITED the amount of your Promissory Note into their General Ledger by:
1) debiting that amount as an ASSET into an "Accounts Receivable" account, and then;
2) crediting that same amount as a LIABILITY into an Accounts Payable account, described as "the borrower's deposit account".
They are required to ledger both of these two offsetting entries in order to comply with the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and also relevant banking regulations that require them to reveal the source of the funds for the Promissory Note, and also to keep the general ledger in balance in a double-entry bookkeeping system.
The fraudulent concealment, fraudulent conversion and "fraud in the factum" (fraud in the execution) occurred when they did not disclose that:
1) they opened a "borrower's deposit account" in your name
2) they signed your name on that account
3) they should give you a DEPOSIT SLIP for that DEPOSIT
4) they removed funds from that account without your consent
5) they bundled and monetized your Promissory Note and separated it from the mortgage loan, and how that affected this transaction.
This DEPOSIT is clearly illustrated and explained in the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago publication (no longer printed) entitled "Modern Money Mechanics", on page 7 as illustration #3. Below is a snapshot of that illustration with underlining and arrows added by me.
 |
| CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE |
This publication is non-hearsay EVIDENCE that this "borrower's deposit account" and DEPOSIT are banking policy of the Federal Reserve Banks and its member banks.
As a policy, does it not show a deliberate INTENT to defraud those who are likely ignorant of this policy and its associated benefits and risks when responding to the advertising that the banks make "loans"?
Does not a policy indicate that this is NOT an INADVERTENT MISTAKE committed by those who are processing said loans?
Does not this policy reveal a deliberate and sophisticated but yet FRAUDULENT CONCEALMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS IN A TYPICAL "LOAN" TRANSACTION?
But perhaps this publication's authors were mistaken, and it did not really mean what it plainly stated.
Nope, it appears that it was not a mistake, because another Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago publication confirms this policy in its booklet entitled "Two Faces of Debt", on page 19, as shown here.
 |
| CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE |
Do not the underlined statements above from page 19 give you probable cause to believe that the bank owes you for the DEPOSIT that was made when you got a loan?
Now, to confirm the above for yourself, as your DUE DILIGENCE, politely ask your banker some questions about the information alleged here.
QUESTION #1:
How would you respond to a request for a full accounting, per UCC 9-210, concerning the loan transacted with you on _____________ ?
If you are asked WHY you want this, explain that you have become aware of some "irregularities" that may have occurred during this loan transaction.
If you are then asked WHAT you mean by "irregularities", then direct them to Google "TOP SECRET BANKER'S MANUAL", and let them know that you will be happy to answer further questions after receiving and reviewing their accounting report.
QUESTION #2:
Would the FDIC-required Call Reports, especially Schedule RC, disclose a net increase in the bank's assets in the approximate amount of the loans made in the period when my alleged loan was made?
QUESTION #3:
If said Call Reports supply enough evidence providing probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed due to a material omission in the alleged loan agreement concerning the deposit and disposition of the borrower's promissory note during the execution of the alleged loan transaction, would you report it to the authorities as required by 18 USC 4, Misprision of Felony?
QUESTION #4:
If the deposit of the borrower's promissory note increased the bank's Owner's Equity, instead of the bank's Liabilities, would this not constitute said material omission, fraudulent conversion and fraud in the factum if the borrower did not intend to gift said deposit to the bank?
QUESTION #5:
Would not the taking of the funds for said deposit from the borrower's transaction account, without the borrower's consent, in effect constitute the converting of said funds into a gift?
QUESTION #6:
If the bank, upon checking its records concerning the alleged loan, discovered a mis-take in this transaction, ledgered a correction of said mis-take by settling said alleged loan by recording it as "Paid As Agreed", render a forensic accounting investigation into the alleged loan mute and groundless?
QUESTION #7:
Would not a signed letter from an officer of the bank asking for forgiveness of said mis-take be an appropriate gesture of good faith and conclude this matter of an alleged loan?
REQUEST FOR ACCOUNTING
Another strategy to induce them to "cooperate" with you is to send a certified letter to the Lender's CFO to "Request for Accounting" per UCC 9-210 (cite its equivalent as enacted in your State's General Statutes (Ex: NC GS 25-9-210). IMO, the risk of exposing the true accounting would be too great.
NOTE: Banks don't make Loans - They purchase Securities through Deposits by Richard Werner (Search for same) (Richard Werner blog)