[Subscriber]

[Address]
[City state zip]
[Phone]
[Creditor or Collector]
ATTN: [Attorney]
[Address]
[City state zip]
[Phone]
[Date]
Re [Plaintiff v. Defendant]; Case No. _____
Hello [Attorney],
Please find the enclosed answer and counterclaim.
Best regards,

[Subscriber]
 COURT
STATE
[Bank]
PLAINTIFF / COUNTER DEFENDANT, Case No.: _____
v.
[Subscriber]
DEFENDANT / COUNTER PLAINTIFF.
______________________________________/
ANSWER
Now comes the defendant and hereby specifically answers the allegations
in plaintiff’s complaint, to wit:

1. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 1 and demands strict

proof thereof.

2. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 2 and demands strict

proof thereof.

3. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 3 and demands strict

proof thereof.

4. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 4 and demands strict

proof thereof.

5. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 5 and demands strict

proof thereof.

6. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 6 and demands strict

proof thereof.

7. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 6 and demands strict

proof thereof.

8. Defendant denies plaintiff’s allegation number 6 and demands strict

proof thereof.
 9. As to all allegations not specifically admitted herein, they are hereby
denied and defendant demands strict proof thereof each.

10. Defendant demands a jury trial.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
FRAUD

At no cost to the plaintiff, plaintiff obtained defendant’s money by fraud,

deceit or misrepresentation. Plaintiff advertised and represented to the
defendant that it lent money and would lend money to the defendant upon credit
approval. Defendant’s application for credit was used to originate the money for
the purported credit account and plaintiff lent none of this money to the
defendant. Defendant was not aware of the manner in which plaintiff originated
the money for the purported credit account and had been deceived into believing
that the plaintiff would lend the money in the origination of the account. Plaintiff
is not the creditor nor the lender. The manner in which plaintiff originated the
credit account requires that the defendant become the creditor. Please see
Exhibit A (Mandrake Mechanism).

It cannot be assumed that the plaintiff lent money for the use or benefit of
the defendant. Exhibits A (Mandrake Mechanism) and B (Two Faces of Debt)
illustrate that the plaintiff is able to create currency from nothing except
defendant’s credit application, and then make this currency available at the point
of sale. In this instance, the plaintiff loses nothing but is paid fees by the
merchants from which purchases are made and is paid fees and interest by the
unsuspecting customer, in this case, the defendant. These facts necessarily
require the defendant to be the creditor or depositor for the so-called credit
account, even though no other negotiable instrument was used to make the
deposit.

The word used by the plaintiff in its industry to describe the “Mandrake
Mechanism” or the manner in which is creates new currency is “originate” and it
simply means that the plaintiff created new currency from the defendant’s credit
application. A popular publication in the credit industry is “Origination News”,
published monthly by Thomson Media. Its website address is
http://originationnews.com. Among other business related topics, the periodical
discusses ways in which software and accounting methods are used to create
new currency from credit applications and promissory notes. Without license of
the Federal Reserve, the term “originate” would be known by the more commonly
accepted words, “counterfeit” or “fiat”. Without the defendant’s credit application,
the plaintiff would not have had the ability to create the purported credit account.
Again, please refer to Exhibits A and B and consider them carefully.

The same facts have been published by the Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago in its free publication, “Two Faces of Debt”. The publication of this
brochure was discontinued sometime in 2001 because it was being used as
evidence in many other states against organizations such as the plaintiff. The
underlined portions of the attached Exhibit B illustrate the important points. This
Federal Reserve Bank, when now answering requests for this publication, claims
that it no longer represents the policies and procedures of the Federal Reserve
System or commercial banks such as the plaintiff. The current banking system
has been in place since the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and it
is quite suspicious why the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago was publishing this
brochure until last year and now claims that the brochure is not accurate.
Another brochure of a similar nature includes Modern Money Mechanics which is
not exhibited here.

It was not until the popularity of G. Edward Griffin’s book, The Creature
from Jekyll Island; that these matters came to light in the eyes of the general
public or consumers. It is the reason why this matter presents a case of first
impression to the court. It is the reason why most attorneys will not make these
same arguments, they are new and attorneys fear sanctions or reprisal from the
court or the banking system. It is the reason why the defendant has appeared
without an attorney. Because of the enormous social, economic and political
consequences involved in this case, this court is inherently predisposed to limit or
eliminate the evidence in support of the defense. This court is predisposed to
render its decisions based on the fear of reprisal from the banking industry and
the possibility of certain adverse social, economic and political consequences.

I. FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION

The complaint fails to state a cause of action upon which relief can be
granted. Plaintiff fails to allege the existence of any loan or money lent. The
plaintiff is not the lender, but in fact, is the borrower and defendant is the lender,
depositor or creditor. The complaint fails to allege damages and fails to indicate
that any evidence of damages may be discovered. The complaint is suspiciously
void of any allegation that money was lent to the defendant or that losses were
incurred as a direct result of defendant’s actions or failure to act. Please review
Exhibits A (Mandrake Mechanism) and B (Two Faces of Debt). The United
States District Court has exclusive jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
complaint, answer and counterclaim.

II. FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION

The complaint fails to state a cause of action or a claim upon which relief
can be granted. The complaint fails to allege or prove that plaintiff is licensed
and has procured a bond as required by law. The complaint is not supported by
any certified facsimile of a collection agency license. The plaintiff is not a
collection agency licensed or authorized to conduct a collection agency business
in this state. The plaintiff is not authorized or licensed to collect claims for others
in this state, solicit the right to collect or receive payment of a claim of another.
Plaintiff is not authorized or licensed to advertise or solicit, either in print, by
letter, in person or otherwise, the right to collect or receive payment of a claim for
another, nor to seek to make collection or obtain payment of a claim on behalf of
another.

The complaint fails to allege any exception or exemption to these

requirements. The plaintiff is not any of the following: an attorney at law; a
person regularly employed on a regular wage or salary in the capacity of credit
men or a similar capacity, except as an independent contractor; a bank, including
a trust department of a bank, a fiduciary or a financing and lending institution; a
common carrier; a title insurer or abstract company while doing an escrow
business; a licensed real estate broker; an employee of a licensee; nor a
substation payment office employed by or serving as an independent contractor
for public utilities.

III. FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION

The complaint fails to allege necessary facts such as the terms of the
purported agreement, the date that purported account was opened, the form of
consideration given and the complaint is unsupported by any evidence, details or
other information.

ACCORD AND SATISFACTION

Plaintiff accepted payment on the date of [date NFP was mailed] as full
accord and satisfaction for the purported debt.

ARBITRATION AND AWARD

Defendant has obtained an arbitration award against the plaintiff prior to

the commencement of plaintiff’s complaint. The arbitration award is binding and
has settled forever all of the equitable and factual disputes raised in plaintiff’s
complaint.

STATUTE OF FRAUDS

There is no contract in writing between the plaintiff and the defendant.

The nature of plaintiff’s complaint alleges the existence of a contract in writing,
and such contract is within a class of contracts that cannot be enforced unless
they are made in writing.

INVALID OR FAILURE OF ASSIGNMENT

The plaintiff is not an assignee for the purported agreement and no

evidence appears on the record to support any related assumptions.

Plaintiff's complaint fails to allege a valid assignment and there are no

averments as to the nature of the purported assignment or evidence of valuable
consideration. Plaintiff's complaint fails to allege whether or not the purported
assignment was partial or complete and there is no evidence that the purported
assignment was bona fide. Plaintiff's complaint fails to allege that the assignor
even has knowledge of this action or that the assignor has conveyed all rights
and control to the plaintiff. The record does not disclose this information and it
cannot be assumed without creating an unfair prejudice against the defendant.

VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT

The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act requires all debt collectors to
validate the collection upon request of the purported debtor. The plaintiff, a debt
collector, has refused or failed to validate the purported account upon written
request by the defendant as required by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The defendant is entitled to fees, costs and penalties imposed by the Act, which
may include dismissal.

VIOLATIONS OF THE FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT

The Fair Credit Reporting Act requires debt collectors to verify an item
reported upon request of the individual for whom the report is published.
Sufficient verification not only includes evidence showing that the reporting debt
collector has the correct mailing address for the individual against whom the
report is maintained, but also requires the debt collector to provide evidence
establishing that its legal right to maintain any claims. The Act requires the debt
collector to provide proof of valuable consideration between the parties, or any
information indicating that the debt collector and the individual were involved in
any contractual arrangements. The plaintiff has published derogatory information
about the defendant to the defendant’s credit history but has failed to validate
any of its claims as required by law.

VERIFICATION

The foregoing statements are true and correct to the best of my

knowledge and belief.

DATED this ___ day of [month] [year].

__________________________________
[Subscriber]
[Address]
[City State ZIP]
[Phone number]
 [COURT TITLE]
[CAPTION]
_________________________________/
COUNTERCLAIM
COUNT I - FRAUD

Defendant _____ sues plaintiff, ________ and alleges fraud, to wit:

1. Jurisdiction and venue are proper

2. The complaint form authorized by the rules is not attached since it is

optional and because the allegations it would contain would be redundant to
those stated herein.

3. Counter plaintiff, hereafter “defendant” believes that counter defendant,

hereafter “plaintiff” is a national banking association authorized to do business in
the State of California.

4. Defendant is a resident of the State of ______, whose mailing address

is ___________.

5. On or about, or beginning from the date of ______, plaintiff’s

advertisements falsely represented that it lent money at various interest rates.
Plaintiff exploited the common understanding held by most people, including the
defendant that interest is charged against a principal amount of money that is
lent. Plaintiff knew or had a responsibility to know that it lends no money and
that its customer is the creditor. Plaintiff “originates” new currency that never
before existed for each new customer, either by accepting a credit application or
by first creating the credit account and sending its prospect a credit card or a
check to be deposited for the new account.

6. The plaintiff knew of the false representations since the term “originate”
or “origination” is another word for “counterfeit”. It is a phrase commonly used
within the “lending” or “banking” industry. The scheme operates like this, instead
of debiting an existing asset appearing on an existing general ledger, the plaintiff
created a new account general ledger for defendant. This new ledger shows that
the plaintiff has acquired a new asset. This is known as a “receivable” (another
word for asset) since the plaintiff expected that the defendant would continue
making payments on what he believed to be an outstanding balance owed on the
so-called principal. The plaintiff also expected that if the defendant did not
continue making payments, that it would be able to maintain a lawsuit and obtain
a judgment against the defendant for what it claims to be the unpaid balance.

7. Defendant was induced into applying for a new credit account with the
plaintiff on or about the date of ______. The inducement was made by mail or
email or television or radio, but plaintiff has taken great care to conceal the
identity of the person or persons involved in making the solicitation.

When plaintiff made these false representations, it knew them to be false,

and these representations were made by plaintiff with the intent to defraud and
deceive defendant and with the intent to induce defendant to act in the manner
herein alleged. These false representations do not appear to have been made
by any particular individual, but are made through plaintiff’s written
advertisements, promotions, written agreements and other correspondence,
including plaintiff’s complaint as falsely represented by plaintiff’s attorney.

Defendant was thereby induced to act.

8. Defendant relied upon plaintiff’s false and fraudulent

misrepresentations, believing that the plaintiff would be the creditor or lender in a
loan transaction for which defendant would be required to pay fees and interest
and to repay the principal lent.

Just like plaintiff’s advertisements and representations first made to the

defendant, any written agreement alleged by the plaintiff to exist between plaintiff
and defendant contains fraudulent and misleading statements making it appear
that the plaintiff is lending money to the defendant and that if it is not repaid by
defendant, that it will constitute a default. The plaintiff uses words such as
principal and interest to misrepresent to the plaintiff and this court that it lent
money that is the principal that must be repaid; however, no money was lent.
 Plaintiff uses phrases like “extend credit” or “advance” to falsely represent
that plaintiff is making a loan of assets already in its possession before
defendant’s account was originated.

The defendant was thereby induced to act.

9. Until recently, defendant suspected nothing fraudulent or deceitful

about the arrangement with the plaintiff. It was not until defendant reviewed a
copy of Two Faces of Debt published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago
and a Congressional Report along with G. Edward Griffin’s book about the
Federal Reserve, The Creature From Jekyl Island, that defendant became
suspicious of the plaintiff. These publications explain about the “origination”
process and how the commercial banks such as the plaintiff create new currency
from new credit accounts. Had defendant known the actual facts, defendant
would not have taken such action. Defendant reliance on plaintiff’s
representations was justified because every advertisement, communication or
other information made available at all times since the defendant was literate,
indicated that banks lend money and that the plaintiff was a bank that lends
money to consumers on their promise to repay such money as if it were a loan
given by a friend.

10. The complaint filed by the plaintiff fraudulently fails to allege any loss
or injury, or even that money was lent to the defendant. This is a deceitful means
of escaping the burden of proving that the plaintiff incurred any loss or injury.

11. The complaint is unsupported by any in-state or local witness who

offers testimony or direct evidence about the actual account general ledger for
the disputed account.

12. Defendant has suffered damages equal to or greater than the total
amount of money paid to the plaintiff for the disputed account, plus all fees
collected from the merchants from whom defendant made related purchases.
Furthermore, defendant’s credit history is damaged by the plaintiff’s fraudulent
claim that defendant owes $_____. This fraudulent claim precludes defendant
from the enjoyment of other products, services and benefits otherwise available
to those without such derogatory items appearing on their credit history.

Compensatory Damages

13. Defendant demands compensatory damages no less than $______

for interest, fees and other payments made to the plaintiff, plus $____, for fees
paid to the plaintiff by each merchant from whom defendant made purchases,
plus $____ for costs and attorney fees, plus $___ for interest beginning from
[date that the disputed account was opened].

Exemplary Damages

14. Defendant re-alleges and incorporates herein defendant’s foregoing

allegations numbered 1 through 13.

15. The aforementioned conduct of plaintiff was an intentional

misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the plaintiff
with the intention on the part of the plaintiff of thereby depriving defendant of
property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury, and was despicable conduct
that subjected defendant to a cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of
defendant’s rights, so as to justify an award of exemplary and punitive damages.

16. Defendant demands exemplary damages against the plaintiff,

together with costs, fees and other amounts deemed appropriate by this court.

17. Defendant demands a jury trial.

VERIFICATION

I ________ am the counter plaintiff in this action. I have read the

foregoing complaint and know the contents thereof. The same is true of my own
knowledge, except as to those matters which are therein stated on information
and belief, and as to those matters, I believe to be true.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of ______
that the foregoing is true and correct.
 WHEREFORE defendant demands judgment for damages against
plaintiff.

COUNT II – UNJUST ENRICHMENT

Defendant sues plaintiff for unjust enrichment and alleges the following:

18. The defendant conferred upon the plaintiff a monetary benefit, which
was in fact appreciated by the plaintiff.

19. The plaintiff accepted the benefits bestowed upon same by the
defendant which would lead a reasonable man to believe that the plaintiff not
only accepted the benefits conferred upon the same, but that under the
circumstances the plaintiff assented to re-pay the defendant. This fact is
evidenced by the attached Exhibits A and B. The plaintiff obtained money that it
did not possess prior to the creation of the defendant’s credit account, and
benefited thereafter, incurring no loss or cost of its own.

20. That by virtue of the circumstances surrounding the request for funds
made upon the defendant through its advertising and promotions, the plaintiff
knowingly requested the funds in issue from the defendant (credit application)
and/or knowingly and voluntarily accepted the benefits bestowed upon same by
the defendant.

21. It would be inequitable for the court to allow plaintiff to retain the
benefits of the funds bequeathed upon same or to be unjustly enriched at the
expense of the defendant or to allow plaintiff to retain the value of the funds in
issue without re-paying the defendant the value of same.

22. Defendant demands a jury trial.

WHEREFORE defendant demands judgment against the plaintiff in the

amount of [$ value of greatest credit limit] plus costs and interest.

COUNT III – APPLICATION TO CONFIRM OR ENFORCE ARBITRATION

AWARD
 Defendant, [name of defendant], sues Plaintiff, [name of plaintiff] to
confirm or enforce an arbitration award and alleges the following:

23. Jurisdiction and venue are proper under [state statute giving
jurisdiction to the court]

24. This is an action to confirm the arbitration award attached as Exhibit

C. The time for appeal has expired and no appeal has been taken. No stay of
this arbitration award is in effect at this time.

25. There was a written undertaking to arbitrate as evidenced by the

attached Exhibit D.

26. There was no fraud in the inducement of that undertaking.

27. The arbitral tribunal impaneled in accordance with the undertaking

had previously determined that the dispute was able to be arbitrated.

28. The undertaking was valid or enforceable.

29. Defendant participated on the merits in the arbitral proceedings

leading to the award and submitted no questions or objections to the arbitral
tribunal.

30. Defendant was given notice of the appointment of the arbitral tribunal
and of the arbitral proceedings.

31. Defendant waived any notice requirements to participate in the

arbitration proceedings on the merits of the dispute.

32. The arbitral tribunal conducted its proceedings fairly and impartially.

33. The award was obtained by just and fair means, consistent with public
policy of the United States and of this state.

34. The arbitrator or arbitrators had no material conflict of interest with the
defendant.

35. Defendant demands a jury trial.

 WHEREFORE defendant demands judgment confirming the arbitration
award.

DATED this ___ day of [month] [year]

 [COURT TITLE]
[CAPTION]
_________________________________/
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF _______________ )
) ss
COUNTY OF _____________ )
Comes now ____________, the Affiant, and does solemnly affirm that the
statements herein are true and correct in substance and in fact, to wit:

1. My credit application was used to originate the money for the disputed
credit account.

2. I paid the plaintiff fees and interest.

3. The merchants from whom I made purchases paid fees to the plaintiff
because of products and services I purchased from them.

4. The written account or credit services agreement does not contain all
of the terms nor disclose all of the obligations of the parties to the agreement.

5. Plaintiff never disclosed how the funds for the disputed account were
originated.

6. Plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege money was lent to the defendant.

7. Plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege an injury or prove damages.

8. I have personal knowledge of the facts stated in the attached Exhibits

A, B, C, D, E and F.

____________________
Signature of Affiant
STATE OF _______________ )
) ss
COUNTY OF _____________ )
Subscribed and sworn to before me a notary public this ___ day of _____,
____.
____________________ [ls]
Signature of Notary
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I [Subscriber] hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent to
Plaintiff, by first class mail addressed to: [attorney], at: [mailing address] on this
___ day of [month] [year].

BY: ________