rimarily,
Mr. Wayne states that when we take an action to a Court, if we have no
"Administrative Record" of attempt at a "Private Administrative Remedy" we
are asking the Court to sit in an Administrative capacity, rather than
Judicial. We can't invoke a Judicial Court unless we have failed at the
Administrative level to remedy the situation, and there is a genuine matter
in dispute. Unless the Administrative Process has been exhausted there is
no dispute of which the Judicial Court can take jurisdiction.
So, If we have
an Administrative Record, that shows we have attempted a Private Remedy, but
the other side has failed to honor their obligation to Administratively
Remedy the Dispute, (the Administrative Procedures Act), we should present
that record, so the Judge can now take jurisdiction of the dispute, and
Judicially render a judgement.
By the same
token, if the other side has brought an action, without first seeking an
Administrative Remedy, we should ask the Court if the plaintiff has
submitted an Administrative Record? If they have not, this will force the
matter back into the Administrative Private Remedy arena, where the issues
may be resolved, or in case the parties cannot reach a resolution, then the
issues in dispute are ripe for a Judicial Court.
The
Administrative Procedures Act is the application of our common law private
remedies to any dispute that arises between parties. Your (20) Day Private
Claims and Notices of Dispute, and your Verification Requests for validation
of the Debt. Your (10) Day Notices of Fault and Opportunity to Cure. Your
(10) Day Notices of Default and opportunity to Cure. Your Final (5) Day
Notice of Default and Final Notice to Cure. All these efforts to reach a
Private Remedy, under the Administrative Procedures, that have gone
unanswered by the other party. Now you have an Administrative Record to
present to the Judge, and now he can take jurisdiction Judicially, and grant
you the remedy that justice demands.
I have also
reviewed the material of a World Economist, Tim Madden, from Canada. His
information was centered on the banking and monetary system, and how that
relates to the economy. In regards to mortgages, he had some very
interesting insight. First he explained the "CREDIT" system and how it
works. If you view the credit system as a huge bubble and inside that
bubble there is a game of "musical chairs" being played. The "debt"
(representing the players) is being expanded far beyond the amount of
"money" (representing the chairs), or what is being used as money today.
This means that there is more debt, than there is money in circulation to
pay that debt. He also points out that his studies show there is a direct
[1 to 1] correlation of defaults to the interest rate that banks charge.
For example, if at the end of the year the interest rate that banks charged
for that year was 6%, there will be a 6% rate of defaults.
The reason for
this of course, is that there is not enough money to pay the debt that is
being created by the expansion of credit. So when the person running the
musical chair game inside the credit bubble gives the command to sit, there
are more players than there are chairs, so somebody has to leave the game.
The problem with this of course is that in real life this is not a game.
Those who are forced to leave the game because there is not enough money in
the economy to pay back all the debt the banks have created and profited
from creating it, will lose everything they have worked to accrue. Who gets
it? That's right, the banks. The banks receive a hard asset, representing
the fruits of your labor and you have to start all over with nothing.
The whole game
is rigged from the beginning and the number of casualties are calculated by
the rate of interest these banks are charging for expanding the "credit"
beyond the means of the economy to produce the funds to pay the debt. It is
predetermined and premeditated slaughter. And Allan Greenspan and his "out
of sight" fellow Board Members of the private Federal Reserve (that has no
reserves) Bank, knows this. Now you know why he is always trying to "slow
down" the economic growth. A strong economy does not serve his fellow
fleecers.
One thing Mr.
Madden points out is the importance of using the Equity Courts. He says
that we must argue Equity from the outset. NOT THE LAW!
He says the
Courts of Equity must give you equity, if you argue Equity!
Regarding the
Mortgage Foreclosures:
Mr. Madden
suggests that you Demand from the Court FROM THE OUTSET, [AN EQUITABLE
ACCOUNTING OF THE TRANSACTION]
Tell the
Court: "I want to know who brought the money to the table in this deal, and
who left the table with that money."
I WANT AN: "AUDIT
OF THE EQUITIES."
What you are
saying to the Court is:
I WANT: "THIS
COURT TO LOOK WITHIN THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENT AND HELP ME
FIND THE CONSIDERATION TENDERED BY THE PLAINTIFF IN THIS TRANSACTION."
If you get your
"AUDIT OF THE EQUITES" of the contract, and it reveals that there is NO
EQUITY in the transaction, the Court, BY EQUITY, must find for you in the
matter and rule the contract void, ab initio (Latin for “from the
beginning”).
Mr. Madden
further points out why the Mortgage Contracts are written the way they are
written. It is because there is no equity (no consideration). But the
contract must APPEAR as if the bank loaned you the money BEFORE they
received your Note and Mortgage Contract, in order for them to use the
Mortgage Contract as the RECEIPT to do what they do with the Note and
Contract. [To treat it as if they now own it, so they can sell it.]
The entire
transaction is a "scheme or artifice to defraud" based in deception and
deceit. And the "artifice to defraud" is constructed right into the
contract. It is "deceit", "deception", "concealment", "suppression", and
"non-disclosure" of material facts, that causes you to take an action to
your own detriment. The contract is a nullity. The transaction never took
place, because it is a CONSTRUCTIVE FORGERY, a fraudulent representation
that exists, right on the face of the document itself. It is phony! I
WANT AN AUDIT OF THE EQUITIES!
Regarding
foreclosure sales. A complaint for fraud will not stop the sale order by
the Court, if there was a foreclosure of a Mortgage. But, the fraud means
there never was a mortgage. So we must seek injunctive relief when we file
the Complaints for Fraud.
What the banks
and other lending institutions will do against these fraud complaints is
chip away through the Judge BY MOTION PRACTICE, and attempt to chip away at
your evidence, by denying you discovery through legal avoidance tactics.
The judge will uphold their objections to your Interrogatories and
Depositions and do everything he can to prevent your evidence from getting
into his evidence file. Then when the record is set the bank will move for
Summary Judgement by Default, because you have not stated a claim upon which
relief can be granted, (no evidence to support your claim) and the Judge
will grant their motion. They can't defend against the issues, they can't
win on the merits, so with the help of the judge, they will win by your
default, created by them and the judge.
According to
Mr. Wayne, what you have to do is hold the judge to his oath of office (And
this is a key element to your success.) because he is a key element to the
crime. One way to do that is demand the AUDIT OF THE EQUITIES. Another
thing you should know is that the judge is required to take his oath BEFORE
he enters in upon the official duties of his office. (Article 1, Section 6,
Clause 2 of the Constitution.) That means that he took the oath as a
private Citizen, and he cannot use "Judicial Immunity" as a defense when he
violates his oath by violating your rights.
Mr. Wayne
further points out that you should also understand that if a judge violates
the Constitution, and violates any of your Unalienable Rights protected
under that Constitution, he is not acting in an official capacity and you
can arrest him and bring charges against him. You can declare a Citizen's
Arrest and demand that the Bailiff take him into custody. Of course, he
probably won't do it, because he works for the judge (although he’s in the
executive branch not Judicial and does not have to follow the Judges
order). So, you may have to call the Sheriff.
I have known
people who recommended that you visit your nearest military base and speak
with the Provost Marshall, before you embark on arresting a judge. Let him
know what you are going to do, get his phone number, and have someone with
you who can call him to arrest the judge and the Bailiff. The Provost
Marshall has the authority to arrest anyone who is in rebellion to the
Republic. And, if treason is proven, he has the authority to HANG THEM. If
found guilty of a lesser crime than treason, the judge will face a, ten (10)
year prison sentence. Do they know this? You bet they do! They're just
hoping that you don't know it, and that you won't have the guts to enforce
it.
You need to
understand that you can petition the Appellate Court for Declaratory and
Injunctive Relief of a judge's actions in a proceeding. This is not a
punitive action but one for a Declaration by a higher authority on the
correctness of the lower Court or to enjoin the lower Court from doing
something that is incorrect. Once you get the Declaration or Injunction,
you can then go back to the judge and say, "Well, they said you were wrong,
so now I'm going to sue you personally."
You don't go in
making unfounded accusations against judges. That will get you in trouble.
You wouldn't want someone making unfounded accusations against you. But,
when the judge (or the lawyer for that matter; he took an oath and is an
agent of the State), takes an action that violates your rights and they will
not correct that action, you must bring charges against them. Otherwise,
they have gotten away with it, and they will do it to someone else. Maybe
even someone you know, like your children, or your Mom or Dad.
Another thing
that Mr. Madden points out is that every time your credit card is swiped,
and you sign the credit card slip (Bill of Exchange), at minimum, 30 crimes
are committed. Every time you sign a Promissory Note (Bill of Exchange), a
huge number of crimes are being committed. You are a party to these crimes,
whether you realize it or not. Are you culpable? Not by knowledge. So,
intent is not there. But, once you become knowledgeable (after reading
this), you could be found liable, if you do not take steps within your power
to correct the problem.
What do you
do? You send your 'CREDITOR' a "NOTICE OF SUSPENSION OF THE ACCOUNT" and
let them know that this account is now in dispute. NOTICE OF DISPUTE. Let
them know that you have become aware of the Duties, Obligations and Rights,
at Equity, regarding this transaction. Let them know that you are
requesting all the documents pertaining to this transaction and account.
Place a request to the creditor, affording them an opportunity to state what
they have as proof of the validity of this debt. When they don't answer,
then go to the Court and ask the Court to enforce the LACK OF AN OBLIGATION.
DUTIES OF A
LENDER: To loan you money. [They didn't loan you any money or the
equivalent thereof. But, they show on their books that they received from
you, money, or the equivalent thereof.]
OBLIGATIONS OF
THE BORROWER: You pay back the money. [And, you have paid.]
RIGHTS: Mutual
Obligation, Consideration, and an Equitable Contract. [I paid you that
which you did not loan me. I am entitled to the full face value of my Note,
which you stated on your books that you received from me. Take the house
and give me my money. Or, keep my money and give me the house. That's
Equity.]
You are bringing this
complaint because you now have knowledge of the crime. The crime of the
premeditated over-expansion of the debt beyond the amount of money in
circulation, which will create a predetermined number of innocent victims
commensurate to the percentage of interest that the banks charge each year.
You realize now that the banks cannot commit this crime without you signing
and GIVING to them your Note, so that you can hypothecate a certain number
of years of your future labor, and use the bank's "equivalent" of money,
NOW, in the present.
You realize now
that you were deceived by the banks and did not understand that the Notes
and Mortgage you have signed, documents given to you by the banks, but they
bear only your handwritten name and are unilateral contracts. You
now realize that, on its face, according to the unilateral contracts
given to you by the bank and that you signed, the banks have absolutely no
culpability regarding the making, execution and delivering of those
contracts to the bank… except for the "inducement by fraud" on the part of
the bank, by their "scheme or artifice to defraud" by deceit.
You asked for
information regarding the transaction; they refused to provide it. You
asked for Validation of the Debt; they refused to provide it. You asked the
creditor to please convince you that the creditor had not involved you in a
crime; they refused to answer. You stopped making payments because you did
not want to participate in a crime. Without meeting their obligations under
the Administrative Procedures for a Private Remedy, the creditor
foreclosed. You are Counter Claiming and seeking damages for the tort the
bank committed against you because you are a victim.
You want to
separate yourself from these heinous and diabolical criminals. You now
realize that by not making, executing and delivering your Notes to them, for
free, you will be doing that which is within your power, to stop the
insidious and deceitful fraud being perpetrated against the American people;
