It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russian man outwits bank with hand-written credit contract.

page: 2
42
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by tvtexan
In Russia... bank pays you!

I am so going to try this!

Excellent find!



great story...try it but be prepared for the consequences if you lose




posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Anybody can do this, the person who failed to scrutinize the contract that he modified surely no longer has a job.

Anyone who thinks banks or any institution demanding one agrees to terms and conditions for the good of the peon taking out a loan or buying anything on credit is just stupid.

I have lined out terms and conditions in contracts before submitting them, and got some crazy looks, and of course turned down because they don't want to do business with you unless they can "Capitalize" on your ignorance.

I would like to see more people in the U.S. come to the realization that they are being taken advantage of and refuse the terms and conditions presented, then maybe things would change for the better.

Nope, never gonna happen, we all be so free ya see, see?.

Free to remain ignorant, free to get sucked into unfair contracts.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 08:40 AM
link   
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum
 

There isn't anything shady about changing the conditions of a contract before it is mutually agreed upon by both parties, it is shady though, how banks and mortgage companies and insurance companies write in reasons to revoke the contract for things that are beyond one's control.

Of course ignorant people who can't read get taken advantage of, in this case it was the bank because an agent of the bank failed to spot the modifications to the contract.

Perfectly fair, not SHADY at all.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 09:24 AM
link   
reply to post by MyHappyDogShiner
 


I think what I am doing deserves a little explanation.

I own a freight company and haul for allot of large national companies. A couple of years ago I was screwed by a rather large brokering company. I was screwed because one of my drivers hauled a load to a location. He was 2 minutes late to a check-in which is a serious no-no. The broker was calling before the end of the day saying that I could send the check to so and so address care of claims so and so.

I said "What?". He explained that the 10% was acrued when the driver was late to the delivery. The 10% was of the value of the load, which was $67,000.00. When I had initially read the contract I thought it was 10% of the line haul pay which would have only been $115.00 because the line haul was $1150. Instead I had to pay the $6700.00. Needles to say I was pi$$ed. Though I eventually recouped the money from the driver, I made it a point to myself to never let that happen again.

So now, I receive contracts on a daily basis. They are typically in word document format. For those that are not, I convert them to a .PDF file and extract the text and paste it to a word document, make my changes and then sign it and send it back. Later I will receive usually a notarized copy via fax or email.

The first thing I always look for when I get it back is to make sure that the changes I made are still there and they always are. In almost 2 years there have been 3 companies that have caught the changes. Typically they say "We Can't Do That" and they send a new contract.

What is funny though is that those 3 companies eventually ended up with modified contracts and never caught it.

Some of the things I change .. . ..

I am always pretty subtle. I will move a decimal or change a % to a $. So for example if the contract says that hauler is liable of 100% of the load. I will remove the % and make it "$100 of the Load Value". Where it states that I have to carry $100,000.00 cargo liability insurance, I move the decimal and change that to $10.0000. I also add the word "Not" in allot of places. So, for example, where it would say, "The Carrier is Liable for" I change that to "The carrier is Not Liable for".

When you are dealing with long contracts that go on for between 4-15 pages no one wants to go back through and read it. The only thing they are looking for is that you initialed each page and signed and dated the last page.

I consulted a lawyer about this practice and he said that it was a fantastic idea. I don't do it because it is a fantastic idea, I do it to limit liability and because I can. These are Legal documents and will hold up in a court of law especially if ALL parties involved have signed them.


edit on 9-8-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 11:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadellacZumbrum
reply to post by MyHappyDogShiner
 


I consulted a lawyer about this practice and he said that it was a fantastic idea. I don't do it because it is a fantastic idea, I do it to limit liability and because I can. These are Legal documents and will hold up in a court of law especially if ALL parties involved have signed them.


edit on 9-8-2013 by ShadellacZumbrum because: (no reason given)


Exactly. This kind of practice is a great way to legally protect your interests when dealing with people looking to do the same and then a lot more.

I have a question though, does anyone enter into a written legal contract with the IRS? Or how does that work?
edit on 9-8-2013 by Philippines because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Philippines
 


I think that is an "Assumed" Legal responsibility.

Though I have heard that if you owe taxes that they will have you sign a document saying that you owe the money and that you "promise" to pay it back.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha
 


It is nice to know that even banks skim over the agreement and sign anything, like most internet users do...

I can foresee a day when any written agreement is voided because nobody reads them.

Then we'll return to the spit and handshake way of doing business... until we stop checking for the spit.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
Dang this guy just became a hero to me! Way to win one over for the little guy. I should try this with the next credit card application I get. Change a few things here and there so that bank ends up paying me for fees. Sounds fun. Too bad it may result in a long court battle.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha
 


This guy's A Freekin Hero. If you know anything about it, The First Rule of contract law is that everything is negotiable. He just slanted the field a little more in his own favor. Good on him! BTW, The first Rule of Hunting is, Make sure you are The Hunter and Not The Hunted! Kinda apt in this case.
Namaste Arjunanda



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 03:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
The only thing I would say here I find curious, is that I though contract had to be initialed on any lines that were changed from original copies. By both parties.

I think you're right about that. When I bought a house I had to initial each of the changes on the contract. I highly doubt this would work in the US.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
You just know im gonna try this.

S&f

edit on 9-8-2013 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 03:44 PM
link   
reply to post by winofiend
 


Originally posted by winofiend
...
I'd rather it didn't work in this way at all.. Where a written legally binding document is used to unwittingly trick a second party.
...


Its not legally binding until both parties agree to the terms, you are free to change the terms of a contract until both parties agree to the terms. He stated his terms then set it back to the bank, the bank then agreed to the terms set forth by signing and notarizing the contract, therefore making the contract with his terms legally binding.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha
 


Good one now we need someone like this for the annoying cold callers on the telephone, I very much feel like shaking that mans hand.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha
 


Yeah russians are like that... every once in a while my wife does or says things that would have never thought about doing simply because she is not conditioned like me to simply obey and go along with things.. she is teh type that makes her own road... adn the inlaws are the same.



for this guy



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by AntiNWO

Originally posted by boncho
The only thing I would say here I find curious, is that I though contract had to be initialed on any lines that were changed from original copies. By both parties.

I think you're right about that. When I bought a house I had to initial each of the changes on the contract. I highly doubt this would work in the US.


i would think that is because a "change" was made on the "original" something crossed out, something added in, as an addendum to it. you initial it so as you can't say later that that "change" took place AFTER it was signed by either party. what this guy did as well as the trucking example, was indeed changed but it was changed and a new "original" printed out. so it doesn't show a change that was made after it was printed up, in other words nothing was "changed" on the "original" before or after it was signed by either party.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   
hero



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by pikestaff
 


Remember this could be processed in India for all we know... I know that JP Morgan and Citi Bank use Indian companies to process their bank mortgage servicing issues



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Lady_Tuatha
 


Fight fire with fire. I am sure this would work on a lot of banks. Most banks don`t look at contracts after they are signed. They see your name on it and pass it on into the system for record keeping.



posted on Aug, 9 2013 @ 11:54 PM
link   
www.themoscowtimes.com... smartest thing the guy did was put in the fine print if the bank changed the contract or the terms or cancled it they would incure a heavy fine


Alexeyev, 42, altered the conditions in the fine print, a favorite tactic of banks themselves. In particular, he stipulated that there would be no bank fees for using the card, RIA Novosti Voronezh reported. The former law enforcement employee also prescribed that Tinkoff Credit Systems had no right to change the terms of the agreement and would be subject to a 3 million ruble fine if they did. He added that if the bank decided to break the contract unilaterally, he was entitled to a 6 million ruble compensation fee. The bank employees did not notice the changes and signed the contract, sending it back along with a credit card. Read more: www.themoscowtimes.com... The Moscow Times
so he did what the banks try to do to us get us for not reading the fine print and then get you in a horrible contract,ALWAYS read what you sign twice in most cases he MIGHT just win this one not sure how russias banking laws work but i guess we will find out



posted on Aug, 10 2013 @ 05:12 AM
link   
You can be forgiven, for you all peoples in Russia Russian . one hazar ashkenazi pressed another stolen from Russian goyim money which of them did not win , the Russian goyim lose



new topics

top topics



 
42
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join