Bank of America DOES NOT accept U.S. DOLLARS as payment on mortgages

reply to post by MidnightTide


Thanks for the info. If this is the case that applies to them, then what you posted is 100% spot on.

According to their FB, they were told they could make payments at any BoA branch. So either they are lying for whatever reason, or they worked out a deal with BoA and the branch employees didn't have the updated information. I'm sure this disinformation, if any, will be resolved within the week.

Hello group. This is actually my first post (excepting my introduction), and this topic is actually what spurred me to finally become a member as I had some things to share which may help.

First, the assertion that banks do not want your property is simply not true. Now they may not be interested in trying to unload it into the open market at present, but that's an entirely different question (Do they want it vs Do they want to sell it now). In the US, we just witnessed one of the greatest heists of all time and it doesn't appear too many people have still caught on to what really happened.
Lest I wind up writing a novel here, I'll paraphrase and answer any questions it spurs as I can.
Notice: Nothing herein should be construed to render legal advice.
1st, Centralized Banks operating under a fiat currency DO NOT actually loan money. Every bank has a capitalization rate to maintain (usually 12-20% depending on their charter). Say it's 20%. That means for every
$20 worth of "assets" on it's books it can loan out $100. So where does the other $80 come from? The borrower's signature creates it, or borrows it into existence. There was never $100 in an account with the original lender backing the loan before hand.
2nd, so the bank has loaned you $100, and has $20 worth of their own assets on the line for it but also now has a security (lien) against the property you bought with it. Now the lending Institution turns around and sells this $100 security interest (your mortgage) into the open market, for say $70. The buyer who paid $70 is now the holder in due course with all the pertinent rights to foreclose the original "lender" had, and the original lender has divested themselves of the interest by operation of the sale and recouped their initial $20 outlay while adding another $50 to their balance sheet in the process.
3rd, By operation of the original bank having lent you $100, which should mean they have less money to lend out right? But what actually has happened is that now the original lender has $70 on their books instead of $20 (their original $20 investment in your loan + the $50 they made off the sale). But in reality what has happened under this operation in a perpetual debt system is that now that original lender has the ability to loan out another $350! ($350 X 20% capitalization rate = $70 on their books). and so it continues ad nauseum.

It was this process which froze up the foreclosure process' on BofA for over a year. Because they tried to foreclose on properties for which they had already divested themselves of the interest. Simply, they had no skin in the game.

Now to a refusal of payment. First, the tender, or offer, must be in accord with the terms of the original agreement (partial payments don't apply). But that if the account is current, and the payment is being tendered in form, and accord, with the terms of the original agreement then this applies;
U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS , PART 6. DISCHARGE AND PAYMENT

§ 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.
(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.

A very interesting side note: I used to have a copy of a court case but wasn't able to find it, he won but I would suspect they've since closed the loophole. The essence of what took place was that in a foreclosure process the borrower opened the record with "Your honor, I would like to settle this matter and the balance in full if the Plaintiff agrees. To which of course they did. He then asked, on record, if they would accept gold or silver as payment (they can't, try it sometime) they refused on record, he then offered a privately issued, non-redeemable note of debt, to discharge the obligation instead of satisfy it. They refused, he got that refusal on record, noticed the court of their refusals to accept the payments tendered, and then proceeded to prove that what he had described and offered is exactly what a Federal Reserve Note are, and showed the court he was without access to any remedy (law cannot compel one to do the impossible). The refusals by the bank and his lack of other options prescribed at law prohibited the bank from proceeding and the case was dismissed.
Check and M8
Apologies for the length, but I lacked the time to write fewer words.

bank of america accepts cash at some of its atms.
put 1000 into an atm in tempe az 5 days ago.
puts it into your checking account.
counts it.
gives a receipt.
you can then transfer cash to another account, that day.

Please go to
Analysis of the Occult Symbols Found on the Bank of America Murals
at vigilantcitizen dot com. read it.

then you can deposit cash too.

I apologize in advance for any discomfit this observation may cause.

"Legal Tender for all Debts Public and Private"

I guess banks are above monetary policy and federal law.

Where did they get those cops from the cast of Jackass...was waiting for Johnny Knoxville to roll-up.

It was bad acting all the way around. lmao

Without wading through all the replies, I don't think my local bank, even if it was the same company as my mortgage provider, would accept any form of payment. That doesn't even make sense. Why would you think they would? The mortgage end of BoA is most certainly connected with your local BoA branch in name only. Payments must go to the address on the envelope and that is usually not a local branch.

The title is misleading at best.

reply to post by usernameconspiracy


From their Facebook 4 hours ago...

Rob & Ana vs Bank of America NO we are NOT in foreclosure, our legal case filed LAST year stopped BofAs attempt to sell our home at trustee's on Jan 30, 2012.

DEAD IN IT'S TRACKS!

We're now hearing from some media contacts that have called BofA about our YouTube video (youtu.be... 254,970 views As seen on reddit: the front page of the internet and 239 others) that BofA is saying we are still in foreclosure... WRONG!

BANK OF AMERICA IS FLAT-OUT LYING! This really should come as NO surprise to anyone. So NO thanks to Bank of America we ARE keeping our home... as we've said all along, WE ARE NOT MOVING!

It's hard to find a borrower like this credible. When you raise your voice in a bank lobby, use profanity, create a rabble-rousing ruckus, then post your sad, sordid tale on YouTube, you make yourself look pathetic.

How about trying to make your mortgage payments in a timely manner? How about that idea? Then you won't have to make such a pathetic public nuisance of yourself.

But, yes, let's blame the Big Bad Bank. Yep, they are at fault here for you not making your mortgage payments. Yep, let's even blame the Banking Center Manager in the video for not accepting your partial payment -- Yep, he is definitely at fault.

Can anyone see what is going on here? The bank just wants timely payments of principal and interest. That's all. They don't want this guy's house, which would probably be trashed to smithereens anyways if the bank ever did take possession.

These borrowers are frauds, plain and simple, and an embarrassment to their friends and family. Get a job. Pay your bills. And, please, quit whining about your situation. Be a Man. Pay your bills, buddy, and you won't have to post these lamentable videos on YouTube.

The bank is a liar? You signed the mortgage. Why aren't you living up to your end of the bargain by making your payments on time? You're right. It's the bank's fault.

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by DJM8507

Credit card companies hate people like you...lol How are they going to make a profit on someone with fiscal discipline.

No, they love people like him. That's why they keep offering him free money, because the amount he brings in through merchant fees makes up for it, and they don't have to worry about him defaulting.

This is exactly true! I had said something similar many years ago and in response I have been told by one of my credit cards that I am a valuable, "Zero Risk" customer who brings in transaction fees paid by merchants. They bend over backwards to make me happy.

There was 1 occasion many years ago where I was traveling abroad and one of my scheduled payments did not go through, needless to say it incurred a hefty late fee. I made 1 call, explained the situation, and the fee was immediately removed and I was even given a $50 credit to apologize for the inconvenience.

Good credit has its perks, but it takes a lot of discipline to not max the cards out, for me, I just view it as a tool, as cash, and i know how much something costs when I buy it, as I break down my salary and realize that LCD TV is paid for with real blood, sweat, and tears through my employment and is not just paid for with magical money that grows off trees.

Seems banking has been a problem for thousands of years. Even in Athens B.C., the interest rates, taxations, debt and deficits of thousands of years ago seemed to devastate the agricultural economy back then.

look at this email from wellsfargo I just got.

Our "Transfer to Another Customer" service is changing
We're sending you this email because you've used Wells Fargo Online® or Mobile Banking to transfer money to another customer.
What's new
Starting in March, you'll be able to send and receive money using an email address, mobile number, or account number.
We're expanding our service to include both Wells Fargo and Bank of America customers.
What you need to know
Once you've signed on to online banking, you'll select the "Transfers" tab under "Transfers & Payments," then the "Send & Receive Money" tab (formerly "Transfer to Another Customer").
Your existing recipient information will remain available.
Some delivery times and transfer limits are changing. In most cases, you'll be able to send more money to your recipients.

Seems banking has been a problem for thousands of years. Even in Athens B.C., the interest rates, taxations, debt and deficits of thousands of years ago seemed to devastate the agricultural economy back then.

Bad banking has been a problem for thousands of years - Yes, agreed. But there are good banks, and good bankers that know how to lend money properly without all of the egregious and abusive practices we have witnessed this past decade.

A good banker can help an entrepreneur to grow a small company into a mammoth organization, employing thousands. With the proper guidance, counsel, and advice, a banker can be invaluable resource to an entrepreneur. Without access to capital, few entrepreneurs would have any success. And access to capital traditionally comes from a sound banking system, and, ultimately, a banker.

Originally posted by nongoogleable1


A very interesting side note: I used to have a copy of a court case but wasn't able to find it, he won but I would suspect they've since closed the loophole. The essence of what took place was that in a foreclosure process the borrower opened the record with "Your honor, I would like to settle this matter and the balance in full if the Plaintiff agrees. To which of course they did. He then asked, on record, if they would accept gold or silver as payment (they can't, try it sometime) they refused on record, he then offered a privately issued, non-redeemable note of debt, to discharge the obligation instead of satisfy it. They refused, he got that refusal on record, noticed the court of their refusals to accept the payments tendered, and then proceeded to prove that what he had described and offered is exactly what a Federal Reserve Note are, and showed the court he was without access to any remedy (law cannot compel one to do the impossible). The refusals by the bank and his lack of other options prescribed at law prohibited the bank from proceeding and the case was dismissed.
Check and M8
Apologies for the length, but I lacked the time to write fewer words.

I don't believe that, and if that did actually happen, you can sure as hell guarantee the bank appealed on the basis that the judge misdirected himself as to the law. You do not get to simply walk away from a mortgage - most states allow the 'equity of redemption' i.e. you are allowed to pay off the missed payments + interest + costs, OR, where there is an 'acceleration clause', the bank can demand the full balance once one payment has been missed, and if the mortgagor cannot stump up, he is screwed). Mortgage results in the bank recording a lien over the house, and a buyer does not get to escape his liability simply because he missed loads of payments and then decided he would try to pay in brass buttons. It just doesn't work like that. You also don't get to miss loads of payments and then come back with a few hundred dollars saying you want to pay some money.

If folks are going to be providing their legal opinion, you really need to be doing more research ... on several threads, we have seen people doling out absurd legal 'advice' which posters have actually gone on to use in court. This is dangerous, and irresponsible.

Originally posted by DaMod
"Legal Tender for all Debts Public and Private"

I guess banks are above monetary policy and federal law.

This does not mean that people are required to accept payment in this form - simply that it is American money which is to be used as the currency in this nation i.e. your local walmart cannot demand that you pay in Russian Roubles as opposed to US Dollars.

legallad.quickanddirtytips.com...

I think you might also find that 'monetary policy' does not mean what you refer to it as in this context. Monetary policy refers to the supply of money in the economy - it has nothing to do with how money is used, per se; those are questions of law and statutory/constitutional interpretation.

Originally posted by Silicis n Volvo
reply to post by JibbyJedi

 

im just wondering...but...

when you sign contracts with large companies such as banks, money lenders, phone companies etc etc...ive never read the fine print but do they say clearly how payments MUST be made...or what payment types are NOT accepted?

because if they dont...you have video footage of you trying to pay your bill and them not accepting it...i would go home...keep your money...and save that video for court.

if they have the right not to accept cash as payment then you surely have the right not to use wired transfer as payment method also?

they say "im sorry sir we dont accept cash as a payment method" and you say (if its not in the contract) "im sorry bank but i dont use wired transfer as a payment method" heres your money take it or leave it

You don't have any rights outside of what you agreed to with the bank. You don't get to change your mind later on. That is a breach.

Originally posted by nongoogleable1

Now to a refusal of payment. First, the tender, or offer, must be in accord with the terms of the original agreement (partial payments don't apply). But that if the account is current, and the payment is being tendered in form, and accord, with the terms of the original agreement then this applies;
U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS , PART 6. DISCHARGE AND PAYMENT

§ 3-603. TENDER OF PAYMENT.
(b) If tender of payment of an obligation to pay an instrument is made to a person entitled to enforce the instrument and the tender is refused, there is discharge, to the extent of the amount of the tender, of the obligation of an indorser or accommodation party having a right of recourse with respect to the obligation to which the tender relates.

en.wikipedia.org...

Article 3 UCC does not apply to mortgages. A mortgage is not a negotiable instrument. It can be used to secure a negotiable instrument (i.e. an iou) but the mortgage interest itself, and the mortgage agreement, are nothing more than collateralized loans with a recorded lien over the house as security in the event of default. If you tried to pay in accordance with the terms of the agreement, then this would surely be a breach, but where the creditor has laid out, with clarity, how payment is to be made and when payment is to be made, the mortgagor/homeowner is not allowed to do whatever he wants in the belief that he can satisfy his debt.

After he has defaulted, he has limited options to redeem, and bringing in a few hundred dollars in cash probably isn't going to cut it (doubtful whether or not the bank branch would be the correct authority to approach on this - BoA might have made the loan, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the local teller at your bank branch or even the manager is necessarily authorised to make any representations or to alter the terms of the mortgage agreement without approval from higher up.

And yes ... it is wikipedia. But it gets the job done.


Edit: after doing some investigation ... although the mortgage interest itself is not actually governed by UCC, the promissory note the mortgage secures might be governed by Article 9, if not Article 3... (I didn't train the US, so forgive me)

In any case. You don't get to default on payments and then have that debt forgiven because you tried (unlawfully) to redeem the mortgage.

reply to post by JibbyJedi


Wait a minute? if banks aren't obligated to accept cash then what are they there for?why do they print them? and lol i wish here in canada i could be paying 16 dollars for a month for a phone bill. still a dishonored agreement is still as it a dishonored agreement. here telecom giants offer you a base of 40 dollars a month but with all the added charges and what not it doubles when you open the bill

Originally posted by 1ncegreat
reply to post by JibbyJedi

 

Wait a minute? if banks aren't obligated to accept cash then what are they there for?why do they print them? and lol i wish here in canada i could be paying 16 dollars for a month for a phone bill. still a dishonored agreement is still as it a dishonored agreement. here telecom giants offer you a base of 40 dollars a month but with all the added charges and what not it doubles when you open the bill

Central banks print cash, private banks do not. A private bank is just like any other business - it can choose to do business with you, or it can choose not to. As in this case, satisfaction or payment of the debt was probably laid out in very clear terms with the mortgagee has not kept to.

Originally posted by JibbyJedi
Some aspects of this incident tell a story of them being in the foreclosure process.... they say differently.

Posted on their Facebook just over half hour ago...

Last Friday, after almost 2 year of this living hell, we were supposed to be able to walk into ANY BofA branch and make a payment. Just as we've done many times in the past, what we didn't know on that day is that, apparently BofA dose NOT take cash (U.S. Dollars) as payment on ANY mortgage, at any location, regardless of any given homeowners situation. Had never tried paying in cash before. Will post more after our day in court at 777 Sonoma Ave. Santa Rosa, Ca. Anyone wanting an interview or comment should be there on Monday Feb 6th, our appointment is at 2pm, so sometime after that. Thanks, Rob & Ana

Posted 9 hours ago...

Just a heads up to Bank of America. Our attorney, Catherine King is behind us 100%... thank you very much!

Catherine King:
I'm on it. Thanks.
9 hours ago

www.facebook.com...

Why would any reputable attorney support their actions?

And given the amount of apparent BS in this situation why would you take their word for it still?

Fake.

Biggest red flag? Their own Facebook page. Take a look at the front, where it clearly says (next to their location) "Community Page about Occupy Together." They're "Occupy" movement people. Other red flags in this amateur shoot include, but are not limited to, the following:

A) Tripod in the background in the "bank."

B) People don't usually go to a desk to pay a mortgage in person; the tellers can handle that.

C) Everything about that supposed law enforcement officer screams "fake," including how patient he was with the guy when he refused to produce identification.

D) If they really ONLY cared about keeping their home...they wouldn't be making a big deal out of a cash payment; they'd just pay the damn mortgage.

Not a BoA fan here, and definitely believe the government is pushing for a cashless society. Just don't buy into this story, that's all.