Windward Islands Bank sued for “invalid contract”

POSTED: 09/25/13 5:52 PM

Plaintiff demands stop to auction and return of all payments

St. Maarten – The Court in First Instance is the stage on Friday afternoon for a lawsuit against the Windward Islands Bank, initiated by Elaine Christopher. In summary proceedings, the plaintiff seeks to stop the auction of a piece of property in Statia.

Notary Office SPS has scheduled the auction of the property for October 9. Christopher asks the court to put an immediate stop to the foreclosure proceedings and to the auction. She also demands the immediate release of the mortgage on the property, plus a full refund “of all money paid by me to the Windward Islands Bank in loan repayments, interest and fees.”

“It is my claim that the contracts that the Windward Islands Bank is now seeking to enforce by foreclosing on my property were never valid contracts,” Christopher’s wrote in her petition to the court.

This newspaper asked the Windward Islands Bank for a comment on the lawsuit but up to press time we had not received a reaction.

Christopher presents several arguments for her position to the court: “The contracts are void because the WIB did not own prior title to the money they claim to have loaned me, because WIB withheld information relating to the manner in which they managed my accounts.” The third reason according to Christopher is the foreclosure of the WIB on December 25 of last year. More about that further down.

Christopher says that for contracts to be valid, “there must be an offer, acceptance and consideration, which must pass both ways between the parties to the contract.”

When she applied for the mortgage, the bank required security, and to prove prior title to the property she put up as such. “This formed the consideration on my part.  The money that the WIB claim to have loaned to me formed the consideration on their part but only if the WIB were also able to prove prior title to that money.  No title = no consideration.”

Christopher says she discovered in February that banks do not lend out money they hold in customer deposits, but that “many banks create money out of thin air when they create loans.” The plaintiff refers to fractional reserve banking – a system whereby banks only have part of all deposits readily available.

“It occurred to me that the Windward Islands Bank did not provide me with proof of title to the money that they claim to have loaned to me under the aforementioned contracts and that what they had done was to monetize the secured IOU that I provided to them in the form of an agreement to pay them a certain amount each month for the duration of the loan,” Christopher says. “They created a debit account in US$ and balanced it with a credit account in US$.  The money did not exist until I signed the secured IOU.”

The plaintiff furthermore argues that the only bank empowered to create US dollars is the federal Reserve Bank of America. “If the WIB are unable to prove title then they must have created the money out of thin air. Any loan made by the WIB in this way would be fraudulent and an illegal act. No consideration could have passed from the WIB to me if this was the case.”

Christopher asked the bank for proof that it had prior title to the money it loaned to her, but she received no response.

Christopher furthermore claims that her contracts do not state that the WIB applies the guidelines of the Central Bank to the management of customer accounts. “All terms and conditions relating to the contracts must be known by both parties in advance.  The failure of the WIB to provide these details to me invalidates the contracts.”

Lastly, Christopher claims that, due to changes to international law using the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) all government and banking corporations worldwide, including the WIB, were foreclosed.  “As a foreclosed entity, the WIB has no authority to continue to demand payments on any contracts. All contracts are void and all debt is cancelled.”

Did you like this? Share it:
Windward Islands Bank sued for “invalid contract” by

Comments (7)

 

  1. Jacinto Mock says:

    Large institutions such as banks donot abide by the same procedures and protocols. See it as bulk service without individuality nor individual attention towards the particular loan or mortgage. How the money and the form or liquidity or the existence of the money or tender-quality of the money,- while in the possession of the bank does not affect the ability to repay. Most important is that there was no complaint after the transaction took place. How the bank manages the money is an internal operational matter which does not have to be revealed and should not be part of the contract, nor affect the contract. Default on loans which leads to foreclosures and auctions many times is a lose-lose situation for both the bank and the client. Price sold minus loans and interests owe to the bank. She gets whats left back in simple terms.

    • J.A. Rules says:

      Yes, banks follow the Uniform Commercial Code, which governs international commerce. Under the UCC, the foreclosures became effective Dec. 25, 2012.

      As a side note, no, they are not “internal” transactions. The bank has not actually lent any money and, if they don’t have the original signed note, they have no proof of anything at all. No transparency equals fraud.

  2. Elaine Christopher says:

    The hearing is at 2pm, Friday the 27th in the Philipsburg courthouse. Come early and come dressed for the court as we’ll be going inside and we don’t want to give them reason to keep us out.

    The banks are running a debt slavery system and it’s time to stop them.

    Hope to see you tomorrow.

    It’s happening all over the world, in Holland too: http://www.earth-matters.nl/11/8390/verborgen-nieuws/vrij-te-gebruiken-brieven-voor-je-bankdirecteur-om-te-stoppen-met-rente-betalen-door-ad-broere-en-geert-kimpen

  3. Myriam says:

    I’ll be there. Should be interesting. Those who wish to attend please wear decent clothing (no short pants or uncovered shoulders, and propper shoes). It is also quite cold inside.

  4. Elaine Christopher says:

    Postponed until next Friday, same time. It’s a shame the court didn’t tell me in advance of the postponement like they told the WIB’s lawyer. So much for the impartiality of the courts!

  5. jacinto mock says:

    If regulations governing our banking and credit institutions allows for extension of credits in services as well, the the client may have a chance. But such regulations has to be motivated with economic principles supporting how extension of credits makes the situation more competitive and favorable for our economy. I don’t mean to trample upon the banks and i consider this case unique in the sense that my opinions is not towards the whole banking sector. But as minister of Finance i would know that if many banks are experiencing default on payments, the Central Bank and all local banks will require adjustments whereby the customer could get some relief.