NOTICE OF FAULT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CURE

JP MORGAN CHASE
560 Mission St.
San Francisco, California 94105
CERTIFIED MAIL: ------------------------

01-21-2011
To the entity and/or banking institution doing business as JP MORGAN CHASE: Notice to age
nt of principal is Notice to principal, and Notice to principal is Notice to agent of principal.
On 12-19-201 0, I sent you a letter asking that you supply me with information regarding how t
he JP MORGAN CHASE charge card operates and how charges made by me are handled
within your system. As of this date myquestions remain unanswered. I have several questions w
hich must be answered before I continue to make payments on the account number
of xxx Insert Your Account Number Here xx . The name on the account is YOURNAME.
Since my last letter, I have done an exhaustive amount of research regarding the subject matter o
f that letter, and this one. You have refused to answer my questions.
United States Code, Title 12, Section 24, confers upon a bank the power to lend
its money, not its credit.
Michie on Banks and Banking, Chapter XV, Section 154, states the following:
"Source and General Nature. --The federal statutes relative to national banks constitute the auth
ority of such banks, and they cannot rightfully exercise any powers except those expressly grant
ed or which are incidental to carryingon the business for which they are established.
n99-1 Statutes are strictly construed in determining the powers and duties of national banks
because of the public interest involved."

National banks possess only powers conferred by Congress. -- In re Armijo's Will , 57 N.M. 649,
261 P.2d 833 (1953); People v. Franklin Nat'! Bank , 281 App. Div. 757, 118 N.Y.S.2d 210 (
1953), rev'd on other grounds, 347 U.S. 373,74 S. Ct. 550, 98 L. Ed. 767 (1954).
Powers not conferred are denied. -- The measure of powers of national banks is the statutory
grant, and powers not confe1Ted by Congress are denied. Yonkers v. Downey, 309 U.S. 590, 60S. C
t. 796, 84 L. Ed. 964 (1940), affg 106 F.2d 69 (2d Cir. 1939), affg 23 F. Supp. 1018 (S.D.N.Y.

Generally, failure to expressly grant power to national banks negatives its existence. Berylwood
Inv. Co. v. Graham, 43 Cal. App. 2d 659, 111 P.2d 467 (1941).
A national bank can acquire no right, make no contract, bring no suit which is not authorized by
a law of the United States. It is not only itself the mere creature of a law, but all its actions and all
its rights are dependent on the samelaw. Pacific R.R. Removal Cases, 115 U.S. 1, 5 S. Ct.
1113,29 L. Ed. 319 (1885).
I must interpret your silence and refusal to answer my questions as your apparent ad
mission of your practice of creating credit on your books and then loaning it. Loaning me your cred
it, and using my alleged debt asan asset is not within your corporate charter powers to
do. This, in my opinion, may be bank fraud and possibly a R.I.C.O. violation of law. If you can pro
vide evidence to me that your bank actually gave me or the vendors involvedlawful money, or some
thing of substance other than an electronic entry using my charge as a deposit on your books, in ord
er to create an electronic deposit to the vendors' accounts (checkbook money), then I will be willing
to payany legitimate and lawful balance(s) due.
According to the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 USC, when dealing with an ag
ency or instrumentality of the government such as your banking entity, I am required to
exhaust administrative options. In additionto my original requests, I would also like you to
provide me with the following information.
1. Did JP MORGAN CHASE loan lawful money to me?
2. Did JP MORGAN CHASE loan gold or silver to me?
3. Did JP MORGAN CHASE loan its credit to me?
4. Did I sign an agreement with JP MORGAN CHASE which prevents me from repaying you in cr
edit?
5. Do you inform an alleged borrower that you use the alleged borrower's loan to create the very
money and/or credit your institution loans out to the borrower?
6. Does your institution have a policy to show the
same money in two separate places at the same time?
7.
Does your institution claim to loan out money or credit from savings and certificates of deposits wh
ile never reducing the amount of money or credit from savings accounts or

certificates of deposits, which customers can withdraw from?

8. Using the banking practice in place at the time the loan was made, is it theoretically possible
for your institution to have loaned out a percentage of the Savings Accounts and Certificates of
Deposits? If the answer is NO,explain why the answer is NO.
9. Is it true that your institution creates (checkbook) money when the bank grants loans, simply b
y adding deposit dollars to accounts on the bank's books, in exchange for the alleged borrower's n
ote?
10. According to your institution's policy, is a promise to pay money the equivalent of money?
11. Does your institution use a borrower's assumed note to create new bank money, which did not
exist before the assumed note was signed?
12.
Does your institution use any form of note to create new money when your institution loans cr
edit to someone?
13.
Did your institution take money from any Demand Deposit Account (DDA), Savings Account (SA),
or a Certificate of Deposit (CD), or any combination of any DDA, SA or CD, and loan this money t
o the alleged borrower?
14. Did JP MORGAN CHASE replace the money or credit, which it loans to an alleged borr
ower with the alleged borrower's assumed note?
15. Did JP MORGAN CHASE take an asset called money, or the credit used as collateral for cust
omers' account deposits, to loan this money to the alleged borrower, and/or did your institution use
the alleged borrower's note toreplace the asset it loaned to the alleged borrower?
16. Did the money or credit which JP MORGAN CHASE claims to have loaned to the alleged borr
ower, come from deposits of money or credit made by JP MORGAN CHASE's customers, excludi
ng the alleged borrower'sassumed note?
17. At the time of the alleged loan of your credit to me, was there one dollar of Federal Reserv
e
Notes in your possession for every dollar owed in Savings Accounts, Certificates of Deposits a
nd Checking Accounts DemandDeposit Accounts for every dollar of the alleged loan?
18.
Does your institution have a policy to prevent an alleged borrower from discharging the note in
"like kind funds" which you deposited, from which to issue a check or loan credit?

19. Is your institution required to

obey the UCC laws concerning, Commercial Paper, Commercial Transactions, Commercial
Instruments, and Negotiable Instruments?
20. Did your institution lend the
alleged borrower JP MORGAN CHASE's assets, or JP MORGAN CHASE's liabilities?
21. What is JP MORGAN CHASE's definition of "Credit"?
22. What is JP MORGAN CHASE 's definition of "Loan"?
23. Considering the balance sheet entries of JP MORGAN CHASE 's
loan of money or credit to the alleged borrower, did your institution directly decrease the customer
deposit accounts (i.e. DDA, SA, and CD) for the amount ofthe loan?
24. Describe the bookkeeping entries required to open this account.
25. Did JP MORGAN CHASE 's bookkeeping entries to record the loan and the alleged borrower's
assumed note ever, at any time, directly decrease the amount of money or credit from any specific c
ustomer's deposit account?
26.
Does JP MORGAN CHASE have a policy, or practice to work in cooperation with other banks,
banking institutions, or financial institutions use an alleged borrower's note as collateral to
create an offsetting amount of newmoney, bank
money, or credit, or checkbook money, or DDA generally to equal the amount of the alleged loan?
27. Regarding the alleged borrower's assumed loan, give the name of the account which was
debited to record the note.
28. Regarding the bookkeeping entry referred to in opening this account, state the name and
purpose of the account which was credited.
29.
When the alleged borrower's assumed note was debited as a bookkeeping entry, was the offsettin
g entry a credit Account?
30. Regarding the initial bookkeeping entry to record the alleged borrower's assumed note and
the assumed loan to the alleged borrower, was the bookkeeping entry credited for the money
loaned to the alleged borrower, and wasthis credit offset by a debit to record the alleged borrower's
assumed note?
31. Does JP MORGAN CHASE
currently or has it at anytime used the alleged borrower's assumed note as money to cover your i

nstitution's liabilities referred to above, i.e., DDA, SA,

and CD?
32. When the alleged loan was made to the alleged borrower, did JP MORGAN CHASE have ever
y DDA, SA, and CD backed up by Federal Reserve Notes on hand?
33.
Does your institution have an established policy and practice to emit bills of credit to its alleged bo
rrowers? If YES, are said bills of credit created upon its books at the time of making the loan agree
ment when issuing money or"so-called money" of credit?
These questions trouble me and require an answer by you, before I can continue to p
articipate in our business relationship. This type of non-disclosure as embodied in the above regardi
ng contracts apparently voids,for fraud, any alleged contract or agreement between us. In addition t
o answering the questions, please provide me with a copy of your institution's
corporate charter paperwork.

As I indicated in my first writing, multiple publications by Federal Reserve Banks d

escribe how banks create money when they loan money. The preponderance of case law on the subj
ect prohibits banks fromcreating money and credit upon their own books by
means of booking entries. Banking institutions can lend their money, not their credit. It also clearly
establishes that a banking institution cannot enter into or enforce contractsdeclared Ultra
Vires. It is now my belief that you are doing this, which is prohibited by Federal and State law,
and not authorized in your corporate charter powers. If I am correct, this practice appears to
constitute Bank fraud. I will not, in any way be a party to this fraud.
If you are in doubt, please consult with your accountants to ascertain whether the commercial pap
er (promissory note, mortgage, Cardholder Agreement(s), credit card vouchers/payment orders, et
c., as applicable) issued by, andinitially acquired by you from YOUR NAME was/is recorded as
an increase in the financial/money/property assets of JP MORGAN CHASE (or of the original all
eged lender where applicable).
All that is really being requested here is that you release me from what appears to be
an unethical, unlawful, and apparently illegal and inequitable bondage obtained by material nondisc
losure, which may constitutefraud. The remedy I seek is the complete elimination and/or discharge
of the entire balance of the account referenced above, and my complete
removal from your records. I also request, if possible, a balance statement showing that no further
monies are owed and no balance is due. My intention is not the exposure of your fraud
but simply my removal from it.
Please respond in writing within twenty (20) days with the information I have

requested. Unless I hear from you, I will consider my account with you closed and this matter se
ttled. Please be sure to have the person replying for JP MORGAN CHASE sign any further corr
espondence under penalty ofperjury and send it only to
address exactly as it appears below by certified mail. Thank you, in advance, for your cooperation
.
I do not authorize nor consent to the sale, or transfer, or assignment, or novation of this alleged debt t
o a third party and/or another party. Any referral of my account to a credit reporting agency indicating
negativeinformation will be considered slander and a damage of my
good name in commerce and I will file a federal court action.
Here is a list of case law citation that I have used to formulate my belief on the matter:

1. "In the federal courts, it is well settled that a national bank has not power to lend its credit to anoth
er by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him. Farmers and Miners Bank
v. Bluefield Nat'! Bank 11F 2d 83, 271 U.S.669 (1926)_
2. "checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money of the United
States". State v. Neilan, 43 Ore. 168, 73 P. 321 (1903)
3. "The powers of a national bank are limited. They are determined by statute, section
5136, Revised Statutes (Title 12, Sec 24, U.S.C. 12 USCA Sec 24). It is not within those statutory
powers for a national bank, even though solvent, to lend its credit to another in any of the various
ways in which that might be done.Magee, Banks and Banking (3rd ed), p. 366; Bank of Valdosta v.
Baird (C.C.A 8) 160 F. 642, 17 L.R.A., N. S. 526; Farmers Bank v. Bluefield Nat.
Bank, 11 F. 2d 83, certiorari denied 271 U.S. 669, 46 S. CT. 483, 70 L.Ed. 1142; People's Nat.
Bank v. So. States, etc., Co., 192 N.C. 69, 133 S.E. 415, 49 A.L.R. 519; Board of commissioners v.
Citizens' Tr & Sav. Bank, 73 Ind. App. 76, 123 N.E. 130; City Nat. Bank v. Morgan, 258
S.W. 572; Rice & Hutchins Atlanta Co. v. Commercial Nat Bank, 18 Ga. App. 151, 88 S.E.
999; Howard & Foster Co. v. Citizens Nat. Bank, 133 S.C. 202, 130 S.E. 758; Federal
Intermediate Credit Bank v. L'Herisson, 33 F.2de 841_
4. "A national bank, under federal law being limited in its powers and capacity, cannot lend its credit
by guaranteeing the debt of another, and all such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires...
" Howard & Foster Co.v. Citizens' Nat. Bank of Union., 133 S.C.
202,130 S.E.758 (1926)
5. "A bank may not lend its credit to another, even though such a transaction turns out to have been of
benefit to the bank, and in support of this a list of cases might be cited, which would look like a catal
og of ships". NortonGrocery Co. v. People's Nat. Bank of Abingdon, 144

S.E. 501, 151 Va 195 (1928)

6. "In order to constitute a loan there must be a
contract whereby in substance one party transfers to the other a sum of money which the other agrees
to repay absolutely together with such additional sums as may be
agreed uponfor its use". United States v. Neifert White Co, 247
F. Supp. 878 (1965)
7. "The word 'money' in its usual and ordinary acceptation means gold, silver, or paper
money used as a circulating medium of exchange, and does not embrace notes, bonds, evidences of de
bt, or other personal or real estate".Lane et al v. Railey et al, 280 Ky 319, 133 S.W. 2nd 74 (1939)
8.
"It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal law, being limited in its po
wers and capacity, cannot lend its credit to another by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him
, such an act being ultravires.." Merchants' Bank of Valdosta v. Baird 160 F.
642 (1908)
9. A bank is not a holder in due course upon merely crediting the depositors account".
Bankers Trust v. Nagler , 229 NYS 2nd 142_
10. "When a contract is once declared ultra vires, the fact that it is executed does not validate it, nor c
an it be ratified, so as to make it the basis of suit or action, nor does the doctrine of estoppel apply".
Richmond, F. &amp, P. R.Co. v. Richmond, F. & P. &amp, R. & P. R. C. Co.,
133 S.E. 888 (1926) as quoted in Norton Grocery Co. v. Peoples Nat. Bank , 144 S.E. 501, 151
Va 195 (1928)
11. "A national bank has no power to lend its credit.." Bowen v.
Needles Nat Bank, 94F. 925, (1899), certiorari denied 20 S. Ct. 1024, 176 U.S. 682, 44 Led 637
12. "The defendants do not seriously contend that it was within the powers of
the bank to make the contract described, which was, in effect, a guaranty of the bonds, and a loan of t
he bank's credit. Nor do the defendants nowcontend they can stand upon that contract and
recover damages for its breach. Such a
contract is void and on no basis can there be a recovery upon or under it. The law in these respects
is
definitely settled. Howard & Foster Co. v. Citizens' National Bank, 133 S.C. 202,130 S.E. 75
8, and cases and authorities there cited;
Green v. First National Bank, 172 Minn. 310, 215, N.W. 213,60 A.L.R. 814." Hackettv. Kripke et al.
Court of Appeals of Ohio, Lucas County (1939)
13. "The powers of corporations organized under legislative statutes are such, and such only, as those
statutes confer. Conceding the rule applicable to all statutes, that what is fairly implied is as much gra
nted as what is expressed,it remains, that the charter of a corporation is

the measure of its powers, and that the enumeration of these powers implies the exclusion of all
others. 101 U.S. 82" Central Transportation Company v. Pullman's Palace Car Company
139 U.S. 24 (1890)
14.
"yet in the same connection, and in the most emphatic words, [Mr. Justice Miller in Thomas v. Railro
ad Co. 101 U.S. 71 (1879)] said that in the case before the court, of a contract forbidden by public po
licy and beyond thepowers of the defendant corporation, it was its legal
duty, a duty both to its stockholders and to the public, to rescind and abandon the contract at the earlie
st moment, and the performance of that duty, though
delayed for severalyears, was a rightful act when done, and could give the other party no right of acti
on;" Central Transportation Company v. Pullman ' s Palace Car Company 139 U.S. 24 (1890)
Govern yourselves accordingly. Without Prejudice.

YOUR NAME YOUR ADDRESS

YOUR CITY. STATE ZIP

JP MORGAN CHAS B
560 Mission St.
San Francisco, California 94105
Notice to principal is Notice to agent, and Notice to agent is notice to principal, in their private
capacity, applicable to all successors and assigns.
02-22-2011
Certified Mail Number: -----------------------

To the banking institution, and/or corporate entity, and/or entity per se, doing business as JP M
ORGA CHASE, and to the legal department of JP MORGAN CHASB:
REFUSED FOR CAUSE WITHOUT DISHONOR UCC 3-501
Please take notice of my demand to cancel the alleged credit account issued by your institution, xxx I
nsert Your Account Number Here xxx, and I demand proof of its cancellation. The credit
card issued by your organization haspreviously been destroyed, so I am unable to return it.
In addition I demand that all related computer generated bookkeeping
entries concerning my account be destroyed. Failure on your part to comply with my demands may re
sultin court action to compel performance of said
demands. Further be advised that any action by you or your agents in any attempt to collect on this ac
count may result in immediate court action. Any referral of my account to a creditreporting agency in
dicating negative information will be
considered libel and a damage of my good name in commerce and I may file a federal court action.
My actions are taken in a timely manner with this refusal for cause, pursuant to UCC 3-501
Refusal for Cause Without Dishonor; UCC 3-501(b)(3) states:
"Without dishonoring the instrument, the party to whom presentment is made may (i) return the
instrument for lack of a necessary endorsement, or (ii) refuse payment or acceptance for failure
of the presentment tocomply with the terms of the instrument, an agreement of the parties, or
other applicable law or rule. "
The reasons for my refusal for cause are as follow:
CONSTRUCTIVE FRAUD
When applying for my credit card, I was under the mistaken belief that P MORGA CHASE
would be loaning me depositors money which it received from its depositors or investors. Your
institution is authorized by its CorporateCharter powers to loan me its money. It is not
authorized by its Corporate Charter powers, nor by any state or federal statute to lend me its credit.

Michie on Banks and Banking,

Chapter VII; 5 Charters and Banking Laws states the following:
"Charter Delineates n57 Powers. --The powers of a banking corporation are limited by its
charter or amended charter, n58 both
as to what it can do, and by whom and how it can act,
and one dealing with a bank is deemed tohave notice of the limits of its charter powers. n59
And banking powers cannot be exercised under charters granted for other purposes, whether
such powers are prohibited or merely not mentioned. n60 A charter provision conferring
on a state bank the rights, powers, privilegesand immunities of the state has been held applicable to
all evidences of debt owned by the bank. n61 And the charter of a bank will be construed
strictly against the stockholders and in favor of the state, and no privileges or powerswill be implied.
n62
Limitations Imposed by Statute. --Like other corporations, banks can only exercise the powers
and carry on the business which the statute under which they are created has expressly or
impliedly authorized them to exercise and carry on. n63"
Further, the courts have held:
A banking corporation can make no contracts, and do no acts, either within or without the state which
creates it, except such as are authorized by its charter; and those acts must
also be done, by such officers or agents, and in suchmanner, as the charter authorizes. Bank v. Earle,
38 U.S. (13 Pet.) 519, 10 L. Ed. 274. See Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas, 177 U.S. 28,20 S. Ct. 518,4
4
L. Ed. 657; Pacific R. Removal Cases, 115 U.S. 1, 5 S. Ct. 1113,29 L. Ed. 319; Bartholomew v.
Bentley, 1 Ohio St. 37.
Even in the absence of statutory restriction, a corporation has no right to exercise banking
functions unless such right be conferred by its charter, either directly or by necessary
implication. Morris v. Way, 16 Ohio 469; MiamiExporting Co. v. Clark, 13 Ohio 1; State v.
Washington, etc. , Library Co., 11 Ohio 96; State v. Granville Alexandrian Soc., 11 Ohio 1.
I have found by reading "Modem Money Mechanics," "Two Faces ofDebt", and "Points of Interest",
published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, that JP MORGA CHASB created
the credit it loaned to me, by using mypromise to pay it, generated computer entries to
my account, listing the loan as a credit. In effect, creating "money" out of thin air.
Modern Money Mechanics, page 3
Then, bankers discovered that they could make loans merely by giving their promises to pay, or
bank notes, to borrowers. In this way, banks began to create money. More notes could be issued
than the gold and coin on handbecause only a pmiion of the notes outstanding would be
presented for payment at any one time. Enough metallic money had to be kept on hand, of course,
to redeem whatever volume of notes was presented for payment.
Transaction deposits are the modem counterpart of bank notes. It was a small step from printing
notes to making book entries crediting deposits of borrowers, which the borrowers in tum could
"spend" by writing checks, thereby"printing" their own money.

Modern Money Mechanics, page 6

If business is active, the banks with excess reserves probably will have opportunities to loan the
$9,000. Of course, they do not really pay out loans from the money they receive as deposits. If
they did this, no additional money would be created. What they
do when they make loans is to accept
promissory notes in exchangefor credits to the borrowers' transaction accounts. Loans
(assets) and deposits (liabilities) both rise by $9,000. Reserves are unchanged by the loan
transactions. But the deposit credits constitute new additions to the total depositsof the banking
system.
Two Faces of Debt, page 19
But a depositor's balance also rises when the depository institution extends credit-either by
granting a loan to or buying securities from the depositor.
In exchange for the note or security, the lending or investing institution credits thedepositor's account
or gives a check that can be deposited at yet another depository institution.
In this case, no one else loses a deposit. The total currency and checkable deposits-the money supplyis increased. New money hasbeen brought into existence by expansion of depository institution
credit. Such newly created funds are in addition to funds that all
financial institutions provide in their operations as intermediaries between savers and users of savings.
Points of Interest, page 7
Depository institutions, which for simplicity we will call banks, are different from other
financial institutions because they offer transaction accounts and make loans by lending deposits.
This deposit creation activity, essentially creating money, affects interest rates because these
deposits are part of savings, the source ofthe supply of credit.
Bankers create deposits by making loans.
Rather than handing cash to borrowers, banks simply increase balances in borrowers' checking accoun
ts.
Borrowers can then draw checks to pay for goods and services. This creation ofchecking accounts thr
ough loans is just as much a deposit as one we might make by pushing a ten-dollar bill through the tel
lers' window.
With all of the nation's banks able to increase the supply of credit in this fashion, credit could
conceivably expand without limit.
In none of my transactions with JP MORGAN CHASE , did any officer or employee notify me
that your bank created money by a journal entry (out of thin air). After discovering this, I am
prepared to proceed against JPMORGAN CHASE for bank fraud. The Bank's transactions relating to
me lacked two necessary elements of a valid contract.
Perhaps you should be aware of the following:
United States Code, Title 12, Section 24, Paragraph 7 confers upon a bank the power to lend
its money, not its credit.

Michie on Banks and Banking, Chapter XV, Section 154, states the following:
"Source and General Nature. --The federal statutes relative to national banks constitute the authority o
f such banks, and they cannot rightfully exercise any powers except those expressly
granted or which are incidental to carryingon the business for which they are established.
n99-1 Statutes are strictly construed in determining the powers and duties of national banks
because of the public interest involved."
National banks possess only powers conferred by Congress.-- In re Armijo's Will, 57 N.M. 649,
261 P.2d 833 (1953); People v. Franklin Nat'l Bank, 281 App. Div. 757, 118 N.Y.S.2d 210
(1953), rev'd on other grounds, 347 U.S. 373, 74 S. Ct. 550, 98 L. Ed. 767 (1954).
National banks can exercise only the authority that has been expressly or impliedly granted to
them by Congress. American Trust Co. v. South Carolina State Bd. of Bank
Control, 381 F. Supp. 313 (D.S.C. 1974), citing Michieon Banks and Banking.
Powers not conferred are denied. -- The measure of powers of national banks is the statutory
grant, and powers not confe1Ted by Congress are denied. Yonkers v. Downey, 309 U.S. 590,60
S. Ct. 796, 84 L. Ed. 964 (1940), affg 106 F.2d 69 (2d Cir. 1939), affg 23 F. Supp. 1018 (S.D.N.Y.
1938), rehearing denied, 310 U.S. 656,60 S. Ct. 1071, 84 L. Ed. 1420 (1940). Generally, failure to
expressly grant power tonational banks negatives its existence. Berylwood Inv. Co. v. Graham,
43 Cal. App. 2d 659, 111 P.2d 467 (1941).
A national bank can acquire no right, make no contract, bring no suit which is not authorized by
a law of the United States. It is not only itself the mere creature of a law, but all its actions and
all its rights are dependent on the samelaw. Pacific R.R. Removal Cases, 115 U.S. 1, 5 S. Ct.
1113, 29 L. Ed. 319 (1885).
In First National Bank of Tallapoosa
v Momoe, 135 Ga.614; 69 S.E. 1123 (1911), the court, after citing the statute heretofore quoted, said;
"[T]he provisions referred to do not give power to a national bank to guarantee the Payment of
the obligations of others solely for their benefit, nor
is such power
incidental of the business of
banking. A bank can lend its money butnot its credit."
Again in Howard & Foster Co. v Citizens National Bank of Union, 133 S.C. 202; 130 SE 758,
(1927) it was said: "It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal
law, being limited in its power andcapacity, cannot lend its credit by guaranteeing the debt of
another. All such contracts being entered into by its officers are ultra vires and not binding upon
the corporation."
See also Merchants Bank of Valdosta v Baird, 160 F 642; 17 Lns 526 (1876).
JP MORGAN
CHASE did not notify me that it created
money
by journal entry (out of thin air), defined as "bank credit". To have done so would have disclosed that
there was no consideration from JP MORGAN CHASE to me.

"A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the note." See Anheuser Busch
Brewing Co. v Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318,46 NW 558 (1890).
If there is no full disclosure and no consideration, there is no contract.
PEONAGE
JP MORGA CHAS 's manner of transacting business has made me a debt slave, in violation
of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which expressly forbids
involuntary servitude. The United StatesSupreme Court in addressing involuntary servitude,
also called peonage, in Clyatt v. U.S., 197 U.S. 207, 215-216; 25 S.Ct. 429; 43 L. Ed. 726
(1905), when it said:
"Peonage is
sometimes classified as voluntary or involuntary, but this implies simply a difference in the mode of
Origin, but none of the character of the
servitude. The one exists where the debtor voluntarily contracts to enter theservice of his creditor. The
other is forced upon the debtor by some provision of law. "
In addition, JP MORGAN CHASE's method of creating money out of thin air and charging
interest upon the transaction is a violation of the Biblical law of "just weights and measures."
JP MORGAN CHASE created
money inmoments which takes me years of labor to pay off. JP MORGAN CHASE
has made me a debt slave by controlling my labor, when it loaned me "bank credit" in and not money.
BE NOTICED that I no longer consent to accepting JP MORGAN CHASE's demands upon
me for my money. Your manner in the conduct of your banking business is in direct violation of
the laws of contracts, the Constitution of the United States of America, God's law and my civil
rights.
REVOCATION OF SIGNATURE
By my refusal of JP MORGAN CHASE 's statement in a timely manner pursuant to UCC 3501. I hereby revoke, rescind, and repudiate my signature on the original application presented to JP
MORGAN CHASE . The originalapplication was fraudulent on its face,
as full disclosure was not provided. The application did not inform me that JP MORGAN CHASE
was loaning me "bank credit" created out of thin air, not money.
Had JP MORGAN CHASE so disclosed this fact to me, that I was in fact borrowing "bank
credit", not money, I would have known that the element of consideration was missing
from the contract and would have not entered into that agreement. A well-established principal
of law states that fraud has no statute of limitations and its presence vitiates any and every contract or
agreement. I make demand upon your Bank to cancel our agreement and return tome every dollar of
my labor, plus all interest I have ever paid to you for the duration of the agreement. I
will contact the vendors directly concerning payment to them any products or services I may
have purchased from them.

CONSPIRACY
You and your fellow bankers have been allowed to defraud the American public for many year
and can only be explained by the knowledge that the Federal Rcscrvt: Banks are privately owned
and are a operated for profitCorporation. Because of your interlocutory relationship and practices, all
banks in this country are in law, to be considered as one and the same, in that each bank in the Federa
l Reserve system is obligated to accept the checks ofother member banks, as
if they issued said check.
I find it unconscionable that JP MORGAN CHASE has been able to transfer my labor to its balan
ce sheet by mere bookkeeping entries into its computer.
This egregious violation of law and my civil rightsshocks the conscience of all law abiding citizen
s.

NOTICE
UCC 3-503 allows you thirty (30) days from receipt of this Refusal for Cause Without Dishonor
Notice, to state under oath your rebuttal to my causes, supra.
If you do not respond within thirty (30) days from the date of your receipt of this NOTICE, a default
will be created by your material misrepresentation, which vitiates any transaction occurring from the
beginning of our doingbusiness together until thirty (30) days from the date first above written.
UCC 1-103.
If, within thirty (30) days, you do not either answer the above under oath or provide me Proof of
the cancellation of this computer generated debt, the return or destruction of my application, and
the return of all Federal ReserveNotes that I have paid to you since the beginning of our business relat
ionship, I may seek damages against your Bank for fraud. The Uniform Commercial Code and comm
on law holdings allow me to seek the return of all FederalReserve Notes paid to JP MORGAN CHAS
E plus treble damages.
GOVERN YOURSELVES ACCORDINGLY

Sincerely, Without Prejudice,

IY OUR AME YOUR ADORES

YOUR CITY. STATE ZIP
Nunc Pro Tunc Affidavit of Revocation of Signature for Cause

Comes now Affiant having full, first-hand knowledge of the facts herein and
by
making this affidavit of
one's
first-hand knowledge, affirms that the facts stated herein are true
and correct to the best of his/herknowledge and belief.
1. That Affiant signed documents believed at the time of signing to be an authorized
agreement for credit, without knowledge that a fraud was being perpetrated upon Affiant.
2. That Affiant was induced into signing documents without any knowledge that a fraud
was being perpetrated upon Affiant.
3. That Affiant's revocation of signature nunc pro tunc
constitutes a recession of signature. Thus, the contract no longer exists.
natures for cause pursuant to UCC
3-501;
Affiant hereby revokes and makes void all sig

Now Affiant is formally

and timely removing the afore mentioned signature(s)

for all time and removing any nexus that JP MORGA CHAS may presume to have over
Affiant by virtue of
said signature(s). Further Affiant sayeth no
t.

YOUR NAME YOU

R ADDRESS
YOUR CITY, STATE ZIP
State of California
County of _
Subscribed and sworn to before me of this___ day of , 2011, by

proven to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me.

___

,Notary Public

My Commission Expires:

YOURNAMB YOUR AD
DRESS
YOUR CITY. STATE ZIP

JP MORGA CHASE
560 Mission St.
San Francisco, California 94105

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Notice to principal is Notice to agent, and Notice to agent is Notice to principal, in their private
capacity, applicable to all successors and assigns;

03-24-2011
Certified Mail Number:

-------------------------RE: Account xxx Insert Your Account Number Here xxx

NOTICE OF DEFAULT
To the banking institution, and/or corporate entity, and/or entity per
se, doing business as JP MORGAN CHASE :
To date you have not answered my questions in the Notice of Dispute of Account I sent on
12-19-2010, nor have you answered my questions in the Notice of Fault I sent on 01-21-2011.
You have also failed to answer the Notice of Refusal for Cause Without Dishonor, dated
02-22-2011. There has also been no request for further time to respond. Accordingly, this is
your NOTICE of DEFAULT in this matter.
Therefore, my former alleged account with you is
completely closed, eliminated and/or discharged of the entire balance of
the alleged account referenced above, and I am to be completely removed from your records.
I alsorequest, if possible, a balance statement showing that no further monies are owed and
no balance is due. My intention is not the exposure of your fraud but simply my removal from it.
I do not authorize nor consent to the sale, or transfer, or assignment, or novation of this alleged
debt to a third party and/or another party. Any referral of my account to a credit reporting
agency indicating negative information willbe considered slander and a damage of my good
name in commerce and I may file a federal court action.

Sincerely, Without prejudice,

YOU R AM

Affidavit of Default

Comes now Affiant having full, firsthand knowledge of the facts herein and by making this affidavit of one's firsthand knowledge, affirms that the facts stated herein are true and correct to
the best of his/her knowledge and belief.
1. That on, or about, 12-19-2010 Affiant sent to JP MORGAN CHASE Notice of Dispute of Account;
2. That Affiant has never received answers to questions asked in the Notice of Dispute of
Account;
3. That on, or about, 01-21-2011 Affiant sent to JP MORGAN CHAS B Notice of Fault;
4. That Affiant has never received answers to questions asked in the Notice of Fault;
5. That on, or about, 02-22-2011 Affiant sent JP MORGAN CHAS Notice of Refusal for Cause
Without Dishonor;
6. That Affiant has never received answers to questions asked in the Notice of Refusal for
Cause Without Dishonor;
7. That on, or about, 02-22-2011 Affiant sent JP MORGAN CHAS notice of Affiant's
Revocation of Affiant's Signature on all documents held by JP MORGAN CHASE and/or Affiant con
cerning this matter, thus, any contractor agreement no longer exists;
8. That Affiant has never received a request from ITP MORGAN CHASB for further time to respond.

Now Affiant is formally and timely declaring the dispute between Affiant and JP MORGA
CHASB in Default, removing the afore mentioned alleged debt(s) and obligation(s) to JP MORGA
CHASB for all time andremoving any nexus that JP MORGAN CHASE may
presume to have over Affiant.

Further Affiant sayeth not.

YOUR NAME YOUR ADDRESS

YOUR CITY, STATE ZIP

State of California
County of _

Subscribed and sworn to before me of this day of

,201l,by

proven to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the

person(s) who appeared before me.

,Notary Public

My Commission Expires: