Share post
Debt Consolidation Forums Getting a loan or mortgage and avoid foreclosure forums

Has ANYONE ever pondered or asked whether a promissory note is legal?

member profile picture
Posts: 5
Credits: 0

Has one person on this forum ever ponder the question of whether
a promissory note is legal or not?

Stop for just a moment and think about that?

Why wouldnt they be legal? Other than the interest rate....

Sub: #1 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 12:35

Moderators Cum Industry Expert
(Posts: 17319 | Credits: )


Im freshly new here to debtconsolidationcare.

what IF I told you banks loan people their own money.
Proven, researched, investigated into this very matter

Are you aware that all bank loans have hidden equity/value in them?
Knowning precisely how to tap into this equity is serious business.

Assuming you know much about the bankruptcy of 1933 and the confiscation of
america gold. Legally there isnt any lawful money in circulation.

All money in circulation is borrowed money. If all the money was tooken to
pay off all detbs all money would cease... how? Money is created out of debt.
bank didnt have that money until you signed for it.

what happens to the promissory note after you signed it?

what exactly does the bank do with the promissory note?

What I present here today is verifable and truthful as in I'll show you where to look
for it. If you are of truth and integrity.

Sub: #2 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 13:12

quantumwealth quantumwealth

(Posts: 5 | Credits: )

you sound like either kevin trudeau,or the guy who ran federal debt relief.try your thought process in a court of won't get far.btw if you think your "all debt is illegal"is gonna fly or stick here...FORGET IT!!!!!!!!

Sub: #3 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 13:19

paulmergel paulmergel
Moderators Cum Industry Expert
(Posts: 15514 | Credits: )

Thank you paulmergel... Your presence is welcome

Actually Im neither of those fine gentlemen.

You have me mistaken my friend.

People lose in court because the Judge rules from the bench (in latin its "bank")
look it up. NOW you see this is all about the money game. Judges don't favor the people.

Acutally courts are dead until they can get jurisdiction over you. That can't do anything to you until you give them jurisdiction over you. Most people unaware of the game of the legal system.

Courts operate under 4 basic premises
*Arguement -dishonor :never arguement with the judge/policeman
*Silence- dishonor : silence can get you thrown in jail
*acceptance -honor : taking responsiblity also can get you thrown in jail
*conditional acceptance- honor : accept want the judge says of value
inconsideration upon perfect claim

Sub: #4 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 13:56

quantumwealth quantumwealth

(Posts: 5 | Credits: )

i'm ecstatic you accept my presence(yawn).in fact your calling those two gelatinous cubes fine gentleman?are you kidding me?your four points are valid yet flawed at the same time.if any of what you said was true.none of it would stand up in court.if you use the law and know your will win,if not you will's just that easy.

Sub: #5 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 14:06

paulmergel paulmergel
Moderators Cum Industry Expert
(Posts: 15514 | Credits: )

With much respect and integrity I don't belittle another man. Im of a different breed.

As most people have been mislead to believe that we operate in a common law
system and we do. I've heard people who have had a difficult time trying to bring common law into court. Judges have threaten people with contempt of court if they speak another word about their constitutional rights.


We are under a different set of rules/laws. PEOPLE WAKE UP!

ITs called.. Uniform Commercial Code
World of Commerce/UCC) - Admirlty Law
"Global manual for operating in commerce"
-* Laws are based on it
-* Lawyers are trained in it
-* Court cases are based on this

Sub: #6 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 14:29

quantumwealth quantumwealth

(Posts: 5 | Credits: )

People lose in court because their challenging the system which is built
and design to protect itself. NEVER go aganist the system or challenge it. BiG NO-NO

When people come to the senses about trying to cheat or beat the system
which in itself creates a countertack. YOu dont wont it to come back to bit you.

You are guaranteed to lose everytime with the above.

On the other hand when people start to expand their awareness
you create win-win situations.
ex. no confrontational approaches, beating or cheating the system (old paradigm)
it no longer works that way.

Accept what takes place in your life than allow time to grow, reflect and learn.

Sub: #7 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 14:41

quantumwealth quantumwealth

(Posts: 5 | Credits: )

Your concept is not new. That's why banks give out free checking and savings accounts; because they turn around and loan out that money. This is also why there is the whole federal reserve system and FDIC.

Promissory notes are a type of negotiable instrument, which generally falls under the Uniform Commercial Code. However a "contract" is also formed, which courts generally follow the [URL=" ct.htm"]Restatement of the Law Second, Contracts[/URL], published by the American Law Institute.

There are 4 essential pre-requisites to a "contract", which are the 1) manifestation of mutual assent, 2) consideration, 3) legality of the subject matter, and 4) capacity to contract. If those 4 items are present, then a contract exists for which the court must provide remedy to an injured party under breech of such contract.

"Consideration" will be your main premise for fighting whether or not a contract exists. The consideration in a loan contract is bi-lateral. The lender incurred a detriment which is was not previously obligated to give (the "loan"), and the debtor incurred a benefit that s/he was not previously entitled to (receipt of the loan proceeds).

I agree with you that the "concept" of money tends to be somewhat imaginary. But I don't agree that that is justification to rule all contracts/promissory notes as unenforceable. I guarantee you that if I ever sued one of my customers, and some judge tossed my case over an argument similar to yours, I would take it up on appeal even if I had to pay my attorney more than the customer owed; and then I'd file complaints against that judge with the judicial review board.

Sub: #8 posted on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 16:52

DebtCruncher DebtCruncher
(Posts: 2293 | Credits: )

I have a related situation.

Promissory note for 150K showing 2 parties (Party 1 and Party 2). No money was transacted. Did not make any pmts on it. I don't even remember signing it. Signature looks like mine but not sure it actually is. Looks very close. The bank which owned the note(B1) was taken over by another bank (B2). B1 did not make any effort to collect and wrote if off in 2006 in its books as shown on the doc which came with the summons served. B2 buys over B1 in 2010. B2 serves a summons with the copy of the note in Dec 2010. Collateral is listed on the note, but I do not own the collateral. It is owned by Party1. Signatures shown are not notarized or witnessed. No signature from the bank on the note has been provided on the copy sent with the summons. Party1 has not been served.

How should I answer the summons?
Any suggestions on how to defend this bcos I can't afford an attorney?
Is this legal?

Please help. Thanks.

Sub: #9 posted on Mon, 01/10/2011 - 12:39

Ernie08 Ernie08

(Posts: 1 | Credits: )

The whole thing seems quite shady to me. You've stated that you do not own the collateral and the signatures are not notarized or witnessed. Moreover, you are not sure that whether or not it is your signature. In such a situation, you should somehow try and contact an attorney and take his help in replying to the summons. The attorney will guide you to deal with them in a better manner.

Sub: #10 posted on Tue, 01/11/2011 - 03:06

Anna Sweeting Anna Sweeting

(Posts: 1827 | Credits: )

Page loaded in 0.863 seconds.