In order for any contract to be valid, there must be 'full disclosure', 'good faith', 'valuable consideration', and 'clean hands'.

Here is what the banks advertise: "Come to our bank. We have money to loan you". Is this really what happens?

When you entered into a loan contract with a bank, you signed a note or contract promising to pay the bank back, and you agreed to provide collateral that the bank could seize if you did not repay the loan. This contract supposedly qualified you to receive the bank's money.

But did the bank provide 'full disclosure' of all of the terms of this agreement? Answer the following questions and decide for yourself if the bank was acting in 'good faith', that you received 'valuable consideration', and that your 'signature' on that agreement is valid.

1. Were you told that the Federal Reserve Policies and Procedures (see quotes on reverse side) and the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) requirements imposed upon all Federally-insured (FDIC) banks in Title 12 of the United States Code, section 1831n (a), prohibit them from lending their own money from their own assets, or from other depositors? Did the banks tell you where the money was coming from?
2. Were you told that the contract you signed (your promissory note) was going to be converted into a 'negotiable instrument' by the bank and become an asset on the bank's accounting books? Did the bank tell you that your signature on that note made it 'money', according to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), sections 1-201(24) and 3-104?
3. Were you told that your promissory note (money) would be taken, recorded as an asset of the bank, and be sold by the bank for cash - without 'valuable consideration' given to obtain your note? Did the bank give you a deposit slip as a receipt for the money you gave them, just as the bank would normally provide when you make a deposit to the bank?
4. Were you told that the bank would create an account at the bank that would contain this money that you gave them?
5. Were you told that a check from this account would be issued with your signature, and that this account would be the source of the funds behind the check that was given to you as a "loan"?

If you answered "No" to any of these questions, it is now up to you to challenge the validity of your "signature" on any alleged bank "loan" agreement or check, and, pursuant to UCC 3-308, the burden of proof of establishing its validity now lies on the bank. Look up "Verification" and "Unconscionable Bargain or Contract" in Black's Law Dictionary concerning the above items.

Now suppose you had a wealthy friend who wants to pay off that "alleged" loan balance in full, provided the bank could verify by affidavit that the "signatures" on the loan were valid by a "preponderance of the evidence" (UCC 3-308). Pursuant to the UCC, when a bank fails to accept a "good faith" offer for full payment of a loan (for fear of exposing the fraud), the loan is considered to be PAID IN FULL, and provided you supply evidence of following the Due Process of giving Notices to the bank, you can obtain a Summary Judgment to that effect from a district or circuit court.