The most trusted and popular consumer complaints website
Explore your opportunities! Create an account or Sign In

Chrysler Financial / illegal collection practices

1 United States Review updated:
Contact information:

I have been involved with Chrysler and their over the top collection practices. If 10 phone call a day from several different phone numbers is not enough, they have now somehow acquired by telephone bill because they are calling people that I did not list on my credit application as references. Four in one day. I wish I could shove the car up their ---! I would like to start a class action lawsuit against them I am sure others have felt their tactics.

April Wilson at [protected] is calling relatives of my friends. I know she has my phone records because my friend was visiting her daughter over an hour away and they skipped traced her yesterday. They knew her last name and phone # and I do not even have that information. I am going to get an attorney and a bunch of pissed of customers and own Chrysler financial.

Va
Sort by: UpDate | Rating

Comments

  • Ma
      29th of Jul, 2008
    0 Votes

    I just had that same thing happen to me called someone I have only met and talked to once then went down the line FInd the Lawyer and I am in MARC

  • Tw
      4th of Aug, 2008
    0 Votes

    Chrysler financial ruined my credit to also my co-signer's. They is Very rude, and calls all day 7 days a week. They harass you from the day your payment is due, they also ask for next payment and they know it's not due. I don't no how they get people number's, but they said they will harass them until they get payment. I couldn't make my payment this month because i was in accident my dis ability was exsaulted now i'm waiting for unemployment to kick in, now there threating me about taking my car that's not fair. Don't let them no if your trying to purchase something, because they will indeed mess up your credit on purpose i know it happened to me. I'm in tt2hitek. I would love to make them pay the balance of my car. please keep me informed at tt2hitek@comcast.net

  • Tw
      4th of Aug, 2008
    0 Votes

    I co-signed for my friend to purchase a vechile, we traded that vechile for another they was paid in full, why would they put that on our credit report. The car we got from that trade we realized they charged us to much for it and the intrest rate was sky high, no one would take this vechile as a trade because of this. They finance another vechile for us but won't take this vechile as a trade, they also stated that we was charged to much, and the interest rate was to high at that point we was told they would pick up the other vechile the next day. not... we called the next and was told we had to find someone to take over the payments. they came and got it about 4-5 months later. they tried to charge us with those payments and late charges. Now they have all three vechiles on our credit report. They had the nerve to call my job and tried to garnish my wages. i'm in because they need to be stoped.

  • Sh
      11th of Aug, 2008
    0 Votes

    so you are upset b/c you agreed to a contract and signed it, and your'e breaking the contract so they are calling you now? is that right? ofcourse any financial institution will call you when you arent doing what you signed to do, search complaints on every major financial institution on here. you people are the problem with this country, always expecting to blame someone else for your actions. quite pathetic.

  • Pe
      4th of Sep, 2008
    0 Votes

    In reference to the last comment, everyone has difficulty now and then, but I would think that a company like Chrysler would treat their customers with a little decency, or perhaps they don't think they need the average customer. Your comment is narrow minded at best. Just because a person has circumstances that arise in their lives that create financial difficulty or hardship does not make them a bad person, nor give any business the right to break collection practice laws that are put into place to protect the public from ridiculous practices such as this!

  • Ch
      14th of Oct, 2008
    0 Votes

    I have had similar experience and would be happy to be a part of a class-action. contact me if anything comes of it

  • Ra
      27th of Oct, 2008
    0 Votes

    How can I get in touch with you?
    I have been facing Chrysler Financial for several years and I am very familiar with their harassment over the phone. Even insults when I kept composted.

    Please let me know if you have contacted an attorney yet or if you are planning on doing so.

    Sincerely,

    R.M.

  • Re
      2nd of Nov, 2008
    0 Votes

    I am jumping on the band wagon with everyone wanting to file a class action lawsuit against chrysler! Like others I have been harrassed by chrysler reps even before my payment was due. I recently was told by Tara from chrysler that I should not feed my 3 children until I made my vehicle payment!!! Can you believe this? Sure times are hard and I explained that with gas prices and grocery prices even the cost of heating our homes sky rocketing, it gets very difficult at times. Yes I did sign an agreement that I would pay 466.00/month for 73 months for a piece of "junk" but my children come first. I was told that "we all are living in the same economy and none of the employees of chrysler were neglecting their vehicle payment". Oh please I am not this nieve. You know what...let them come get the piece of junk. In all honesty I could probably come up with the money to get caught up on my payments but harrassing me and calling people they have no business calling...that infuriates me and therefore they can come and get it. They just down right belittled me and told me I was irresponsible. That is totally "UNCALLED FOR"! If anyone does make some headway with a lawsuit please email me. And furthermore thats what they get for financing vehicles that have a retail price double what its worth.

  • Bb
      2nd of Dec, 2008
    0 Votes

    GET A GRIP. You all borrowed thousands of dollars and now can't pay it back on time. Chrysler should stop thinking of keeping the business afloat and let everyone just have their cars for free. Do you even have a clue, if you don't pay Chrysler can't loan out money to keep the business going. You all act like you answer all the calls that are made to you. If you do not answer it does not count as a contact. How about you all sit in the seat of the people who are calling you hoping people will pay so the company will stay in business and they have jobs. Typical, you can't pay your bills so lets sue chrysler for trying to collect the thousands of dollars they gave you. Dont forget to carry the contract with you to the attorney's office. I am in the same boat as everyone else financially but why in gods name would I put down the company who gave me a vehicle when I needed it. If I can't pay its my problem, I signed the contract. How about you all loan out your paychecks this week, how many calls will you make to try to get it back from people who do not pay it back. As far as feeding your children first, that is correct that is a priority, but you also need to sell or give up your vehicle if thats the issue, you should not have a car loan if you can not afford to take care of your family. As for the phone calls, if you do not answer the phone then deal with the consequences. Its a business, grow up.

  • Tr
      5th of Dec, 2008
    0 Votes

    I have been harassed by this company recently due to my sister being behind one payment. It is not even my debt not am I a cosigner. In fact, I have told them not to call me anymore! However, the week following that conversation, I received five phone calls from them that I didn't answer. They left some extremely nasty and threatening voicemails. I answered another phone call from them today where the guy refused to give me his name or employee number, which by the way he is legally required to do (not last, just first). The phone number was listed as "restricted" and he refused to give me his phone number so I could verify who he was. They want me to give them contact information about my sister, but they refuse to give me contact information about themselves?!?! I have no way of verifying they are who they say they are, and I'll be damned if I am going to give them the address of a single mom whose kids are home alone for about an hour a day when I can't verify their identity.

    To Bball1227 - How can you tell these people posting to get a grip? Yes, they owe a debt, but it is immoral and ILLEGAL for Chrysler to behave in the manner they have. The majority of people who are behind by only a payment or two will get back on track and complete their contract. If you are responsible and are experiencing financial difficulties beyond their control, you do not deserve to be treated the way Chrysler is treated them. You cannot be harrassed by anyone, even a company to whom you owe money. That is illegal. If you ask them to not call you any longer, regardless of what you owe or your relationship with the company, the company CANNOT call you for a year. If they have to contact you, they can do so through mail. You may owe a debt, but you are still a person, and deserve to be treated as such. They certainly don't have the right to call the debtor's relatives, especially those who have nothing to do with the debt, and harass them. If they were really concerned about getting their money instead of employees just concerned about their commission, they would work with you to help you make your payments. That is what many companies do because statistics show they are more likely to get their money (and won't have to pay commission to collectors) than those that harass and have customers default on loans.

    Oh, and by the way, Chrysler Financial is claiming they will work with people who are having problems paying their lease. Well, my sister called and work out an agreement with them. She held to their agreement. She is still one month behind, which is okay by their agreement, and started receiving the phone calls the month after she called them. In my mind, that is NOT working with the customer. It's just talk to look good to the public but is a bunch of bull***t.

  • Ko
      11th of Dec, 2008
    0 Votes

    Man... this is unbelievable I always thought it was harrassment if they call you so many times a day...man they leave nasty messages on my voicemail they call my pregnant sister and harrass her, My biggest problem is my intrest rate, it is 18% on a 35k loan.. $825.00 a month, the dealer gave me the truck and let me keep it for 8 days before my loan was approved. they told me it had to be this way for the first 3-6 months then they would refinance it to 7%, what a lie that turned out to be, here i found out that chrysler gave me the loan at 9%, and the dealer wrote it up at 18% so everymonth the dealer gets 9% of my payment... thats what is call gaudging, i brought that to ashley @ chrysler financial"s attention, her reply was "you signed the deal", but i was forced to sign the papers before the rate and payment were printed, because they said it was for insurance reasons, because the gave me the truck for 8 days before i got the loan, totally tricked me and screwed me...class action lawsuit! im in man, lets get it started!!! email me i will get this rolling this has to be done please help lets stick together.

  • Lh
      23rd of Apr, 2009
    0 Votes

    We just begged, borrowed and starved to pay off our C/F loan a couple months late. Then we get a phone call stating we owe them another 60.00 and admitted this was their error??? We were getting up to 20 phone calls a day on both phone lines.Talk harassment!!! Then told us we should be living in our van instead of paying rent. I wish we could get ahold of those "This call may be recoreded to protect your privacy" Who records things to protect privacy? These employees are about as useful as hemmroids. I will NEVER buy another Chrysler product as long as I live and I will never recommend them to anyone living or dead. They are the rudest people I've ever come across. They call and saw that their coming for my vehicle have it ready . THREATS HARASSMENT its done its paid for . NOW I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY'VE FILED FOR BANKRUPCY !!! POOR CUSTOMER EVERYTHING!!! You can't tell me that every Chrysler employee Is current on their vehicle loans :Give me a break!

  • Cj
      30th of Apr, 2009
    0 Votes

    Can anyone give any suggestions on what to about them calling and harrassment? My brother, not sure what his situation whith his car but these people call my elderly parents everyday. Atleast 10 times a day. Calls the neighbor atleast 4 times a day. My parents are in there 70's, their sick and dont deserve to be talked to the way they do. They threaten my parents and this is not right or legal. My parents have ask them over and over to not to call them. Or atleast not to call their neighbor, thats tacky and embarrassing. Thank God my parents and neighbors have been living next door to each other for over 30 years so they understand but still. Can someone please tell how do I get these rude people to stop calling my parents.
    Thanks

  • Ri
      26th of Jun, 2009
    0 Votes

    before you send anything like this find out what what is involved and what the consequences are, look at the following web site www.dairobusch.com and get all the correct information . legal information is not the same as legal advise . everyone is responsable for their own actions. if you want to be free of all fraudlent loans and collectors check this out. become a free man or woman.


    LAWFUL NOTICE AND OFFER TO CLAIMANT AND/OR ASSIGNS TO SEIZE ANY AND ALL FORECLOSURE AND/OR COLLECTION ACTIVITY (SWORN DENIAL/AFFIDAVIT)
    Dated this 1st day of june, 2009

    To: chrysler financial(Claimant)
    c/o president & vice president of finance
    p.o box 9223, farmington hills, MI

    From: your name (Affiant)
    De Jure Soli, Sanguinis, Coronea
    c/o 65 PINE AVE SUITE 138
    LONG BEACH, CALIFORNIA, by [90802] )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    ) RE: chrysler financial: (account #)

    OFFER TO FULLY PAY/DISCHARGE
    ACCOMPANYING / ATTACHED BILL/CLAIM
    ON CONDITION THAT CLAIMANT COMPLY
    WITHIN 5 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST COLLECTION ACTIVITIES PRIOR TO VALIDATION OF PURPORTED DEBT AND VALIDATION THAT PURPORTED DEBT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE FRAUD

    SWORN DENIAL
    1. I (your name) swear that I deny that CHRYSLER FINANCIAL auto loan # is my debt and if it is my debt I deny that it is still a valid debt and if it is a valid debt I deny the amount sued for or stated or attempted to be collected is the correct amount.
    OFFER AND DEMANDS
    1. Pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601, 1692 et seq, this constitutes timely written notice that I decline to pay the attached/above referenced erroneous purported debt which is unsigned and unattested, and which I discharge and cancel in its entirety, without dishonor, on the grounds of but not limited to:
    1) Breach
    2) False representation
    3) Fraud.
    2. If claimant will
    1) Mark the subject erroneous purported debt “Satisfied” and “Paid in Full” on the county Records Books; and
    2) Refund each and every monthly payment (principal and interest) which we may have inadvertently made toward said fraudulent purported debt; and
    3) Return my original blue ink signature affixed upon the original documents that may exist pertaining to the subject erroneous purported debt, I might consider NOT filing charges of Fraud with the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Court under violation of, but not limited to, the Truth in Lending Act and Bank Regulation “Z”, The Constitution, The UCC, and the law, which mandate that we must (by law) sue the claimant for Three Times the of damages (3 times the purported debt amount). Failure to comply leads to charges being filed.
    3. This constitutes a good faith offer to FULLY PAY/DISCHARGE PURPORTED DEBT ON CONDITION THAT CLAIMANT COMPLY WITHIN 5 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS OFFER AND DEMAND TO VERIFY PURPORORTED DEBT AND THAT PURPRTDED DEBT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE FRAUD.
    STATEMENT OF FACTS AND SWORN AFFIDAVIT OF TRUTH
    1. All statements and case law is based upon and in full accordance with According to the law, the U.S. Constitution, Federal Reserve publications, and Economics, common sense, Finance college texts, and to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and the Matching Principle.
    2. 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (e) states that a “false, deceptive, and misleading representation, in connection with the collection of any debt”, includes the false representation of the character or legal status of any debt and further makes a threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken a deceptive practice. Such notice omits information which should have been disclosed, such as but not limited to vital citations, disclosing the agency's jurisdictional and statutory authority. Said notice further contains, false deceptive and misleading representations, and allegations intended to intentionally pervert the truth for the purpose of inducing one, in reliance upon such, to part with property belonging to them and to surrender certain substantive legal and statutory rights. To act upon this Notice would divest one from his/her property and their prerogative rights, resulting in legal injury.
    3. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (g) (4) Validation of Debts, if you have evidence to validate your claims that the attached presentment / purported debt does not constitute fraud and/or fraudulent misrepresentation and that one owes this alleged debt, this is a demand that, within 30 days, you provide such validation and supporting legal evidence to substantiate your claims. Until all the requirements of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and of this Legal Document and demands have been met and your claims are validated in fact, case law, and evidence, you have no legal jurisdiction to continue any type of collection activities. You must obey the law. This is constructive notice that, absent the validation of Claimant's claims and response within 30 days, Claimant must cease and desist any and all collection activity and is prohibited from contacting Affiant, through the mail, by telephone, in person, at Affiant's home, in public, or at Affiant's work. You are further prohibited from contacting Affiant's employer, Affiant's bank, or any other third party. Each and every attempted contact, in violation of this Act, will constitute harassment and defamation of character and will subject your company/agency and/or board, and any and all agents in his/her/their individual capacities, who take part in such harassment, and defamation, for a liability for actual damages, as well as statutory damages of up to $100, 000 for each and every violation, and further liability for legal fees to be paid to any counsel Affiant may retain and/or hire. Further, absent such validation of Claimant's claim, Claimant is prohibited by law to from filing any notice of lien and/or levy and are also barred from reporting any derogatory credit information to any Credit Reporting Agency, and continuing with collections activities (and foreclosure), regarding this disputed purported debt.
    1. Further, pursuant to Fair Debt Collection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (g) (8), as you are merely an “agency”, or board, acting on someone else's behalf, this is a demand that you provide the name of the original “principal”, or “holder in due course”, for whom you attempting to collect this alleged debt. If the Claimant or anyone disagrees with anything in this OFFER TO FULLY PAY/DISCHARGE ACCOMPANYING/ATTACHED BILL/CLAIM ON CONDITION THAT CLAIMANT COMPLY WITHIN 5 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST COLLECTION ACTIVITIES PRIOR TO VALIDATION OF PURPORTED DEBT AND VALIDATION THAT PURPORTED DEBT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE FRAUD and contained herein, then consider this as lawful notification pursuant to the federal Constitution, specifically, the Bill of Rights, in particular, the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth and Tenth Amendments, and pursuant to your oath, and requires your written response to me specific to the subject matter. Your failure to respond, as stipulated, and rebut that with which you disagree, in writing, with particularity, to me, within 5 days of the date of this OFFER TO FULLY PAY/DISCHARGE ACCOMPANYING/ATTACHED BILL/CLAIM ON CONDITION THAT CLAIMANT COMPLY WITHIN 5 DAYS OF RECEIPT OF THIS DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST COLLECTION ACTIVITIES PRIOR TO VALIDATION OF PURPORTED DEBT AND VALIDATION THAT PURPORTED DEBT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE FRAUD, and support your disagreement with fact, evidence and Constitutionally based law and case law.
    2. Affiant has now twice made good faith Offer to Claimant to resolve the question of this alleged purported debt and now demands for Claimant to prove that Affiant is wrong by signing the enclosed Affidavit, rebutting Affiant's lawful statements and standing and returning said Affidavit to Affiant so that Claimant and Affiant can resolve this private matter privately. Claimant is to respond to all requests and questions and may place a red line across any incorrect statements.
    3. This is not a refusal to pay a lawful debt, but Affiant is disputing the validity of the alleged debt referenced by Claimant and DISPUTING THAT PURPORTED DEBT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE FRAUD.
    4. “money” is an asset and an asset is “money” or at least the equivalent of “money”, and that Federal Reserve Notes are assets, and “checkbook money” or “demand deposits” are liabilities of a financial institution and therefore the opposite of money.
    5. When a bank or a financial institution accepts cash, checks, negotiable instruments, promissory notes, etc… from a customer and deposits and records the instruments as an asset, there is an offsetting liability that matches the asset they accepted from the customer. The liability shows they, the bank or financial institution, owe the customer the money they accepted from the customer. From the Federal Reserve Banks own publications, it is concluded that two loans were exchanged according to the bookkeeping entries. 12 United States Code, Sec. 1831n (a) requires all Federally-insured (FDIC) banks to follow GAAP.
    6. “Neither as included in its powers nor incidental to them is it a part of a bank’s business to lend its credit.” Credit is the opposite of money and is a liability. “Indeed, lending credit is the exact opposite of lending money, which is the real business of a bank; for while the latter creates a liability in favor of the bank, the former gives rise to a liability of the bank to another.” 1 Morse, Banks & Banking (5th ed.) Sec. 65; Magee, Banks & Banking (3rd ed.) sec. 248; 1 Michie, Banks & Banking Sec. 99. American Express Company vs Citizens State Bank, 181 Wis. 172; 194 N.W. 427.
    7. “Promissory note” means an instrument that evidences a promise to pay a monetary obligation, does not evidence an order to pay, and does not contain an acknowledgment by a bank that the bank has received for deposit a sum of money or funds. FLORIDA STATUTES, CHAPTER 679, UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: SECURED TRANSACTIONS, ARTICLE 9. 679.1021 Definitions and index of definitions.
    8. Banks cannot lend depositors’ money to borrowers without the depositors’ written authorization. In reality, banks do not lend their depositors’ money. 12 USC Sec. 1828.
    9. “No bank ever lends its deposits” Money and Banking by Professor David R, Kamerschen, 9th Edition, page 164.
    10. “Transaction deposits are the modern counterpart of bank notes. It was a small step from printing notes to making book entries crediting deposits of borrowers, which the borrowers in turn could “spend” by writing checks, thereby “printing” their own money. Modern Money Mechanics – Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, page 3, “Who Creates Money”.
    11. Banks do not make loans but they make exchanges when they allegedly make loans. “In exchange for the note or security, the lending or investing institution credits the depositor’s account or gives a check that can be deposited at yet another depository institution.” Two Faces of Debt, published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, p19.
    12. a check is “A commercial device intended for use as a temporary expedient for actual Money”. Kennedy v. Jones 140 Ga. 302: 78 S.E. 1069, 1070.
    13. Affiant has not been able to discover, despite extensive research, that banks lend their assets. However, Affiant has discovered through research that Banks deposit the Borrower’s promissory note as an asset then writes a bank check against said deposited asset and gives it to the Borrower as a loan without disclosure to the Borrower that the Borrower is depositing the promissory note and the Bank returns the same as a loan and charging the alleged borrower interest to boot. Money and Banking by David H. Friedman, American Bankers Association, page 86.
    14. The bank used the promissory note to fund the account the check was drawn from and did not put up lawful consideration. Therefore, the contract is .Ultra Vires”.
    15. All money in use today is “an obligation to pay”, for example, Federal Reserve Notes, and Negotiable instruments including Checks, CDs, Drafts, and Notes (promissory notes). 18 USC Sec. 8.
    16. A borrower’s promissory note or “obligation to pay” is the cash value that funds the lender’s loan check to or on behalf of the borrower, without disclosure to the borrower. Money and Banking by David H. Friedman, American Bankers Association, page 86.
    17. As a matter of equity, both the borrower and the lender have equal protection under the Law with regard to a mortgage loan agreement as the one referenced herein.
    18. As a matter of equity, “the one who provides the money or cash value to fund the loan check, in a loan transaction, is the one who must be repaid the loan money.
    19. The financial institution that issues a loan check, or equivalent monetary instrument, must follow generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and Federal Reserve Bank rules, regulations, policies and procedures. 12 United States Code, Sec. 1831n (a) requires all Federally-insured (FDIC) banks to follow GAAP.
    20. No financial institution can demand payment in any particular kind of currency, and that a borrower has the right to repay a loan in the same specie of currency used as a deposit to fund a loan check from a financial institution/alleged lender. House Joint Resolution 192 of June 5th, 1933 A.D.
    21. The corporate charter of a financial institution does not permit such institution to create money or lend its credit.
    22. Affiant makes claim against Claimant that Claimant failed to disclose to Affiant the true nature of the purported debt and the fact that Affiant provided (Affiant's future labor) the cash value created by Affiant's signature in the form of a “ promissory note”, to fund any alleged loan check from said financial institution to or on behalf of Affiant. Said non-disclosure voided Affiant's signature on any mortgage loan agreement, ab initio.
    23. the word “Loan” means “advance of money with an absolute promise to repay”. Bankers Mortgage Company v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 142 F. 2d 130, 131.
    24. Affiant makes claim against Claimant that Claimant financial institution did not lend Affiant its money or its equivalent or other depositors’ money/funds as Affiant was induced to believe by the above named financial institution and provided Affiant no consideration by failure to perform on the value of the contract or agreement between Affiant and Claimant.
    25. Affiant makes claim against Claimant that Claimant violated the Truth in Lending Act by failing to disclose that Affiant provided the cash value to fund the financial institution’s alleged loan check to Affiant.
    26. Affiant makes claim against Claimant that Claimant breached any original purported mortgage loan agreement/contract through misrepresentation, lack of disclosure, and lack of consideration by failure to perform on the value of the purported mortgage loan agreement/contract.
    27. Affiant makes claim against Claimant that Claimant does not possess Affiant's original, unmarked, unaltered Promissory Note.
    28. Affiant makes claims against Claimant that for Claimant to collect on a Promissory Note, Claimant must possess the original, unmarked, unaltered Promissory Note. Matter of Staff Mortg. & Inv. Corp. 550 F. 2d 1228.
    29. Affiant states that the copy of a thing cannot be the thing, no matter how cleverly it is worded or stated.
    30. Affiant States that Money “In usual and ordinary acceptation it means gold, silver, or paper money used as circulating medium of exchange, and does not embrace notes, bonds, evidences of debt, or other personal or real estate. Lane v. Railey, 133 S.W. 2d, 74, 79, 81.
    31. “No State shall make any other thing than Gold or Silver coin a tender in payment of debt”, thus, establishing the true nature of lawful money.
    32. Affiant demands a T-accounting of all funds going in and out of the above numbered account starting with the original promissory note.
    33. Any response from an attorney in his public capacity will be a public Offer that will be accepted for value with a demand on said attorney for release of said value to Affiant.
    34. Any response from an attorney in his private capacity will be a trespass in a private matter and will be dealt with accordingly by the law.

    AFFIANT'S QUESTIONS FOR CLAIMANT TO RESPOND AS STIPULATED BY LAW
    Write the answers and return on a separate document together with Affidavit (below)
    1. Did the bank loan gold or silver to the alleged borrower?
    2. Did the bank loan credit to the alleged borrower?
    3. Did the borrower sign any agreement with the bank, which prevents the borrower from repaying the bank in credit?
    4. Is it true that your bank creates check book money when the bank grants loans, simply by adding deposit dollars to accounts on the bank’s books, in exchange, for the borrower’s mortgage note?
    5. Has your bank, at any time, used the borrower’s mortgage note, “promise to pay”, as a deposit on the bank’s books from which to issue bank checks to the borrower?
    6. At the time of the loan to the alleged borrower, was there one dollar of Federal Reserve Bank Notes in the bank’s possession for every dollar owed in Savings Accounts, Certificates of Deposits and check Accounts (Demand Deposit Accounts) for every dollar of the loan?
    7. According to the bank’s policy, is a promise to pay money the equivalent of money?
    8. Does the bank have a policy to prevent the borrower from discharging the mortgage note in “like kind funds” which the bank deposited from which to issue the check?
    9. Does the bank have a policy of violating the Deceptive Trade Practices Act?
    10. When the bank loan officer talks to the borrower, does the bank inform the borrower that the bank uses the borrowers mortgage note to create the very money the bank loans out to the borrower?
    11. Does the bank have a policy to show the same money in two separate places at the same time?
    12. Does the bank claim to loan out money or credit from savings and certificates of deposits while never reducing the amount of money or credit from savings accounts or certificates of deposits, which customers can withdraw from?
    13. Using the banking practice in place at the time the loan was made, is it theoretically possible for the bank to have loaned out a percentage of the Savings Accounts and Certificates of Deposits?
    14. If the answer is “no” to question #13, explain why the answer is no.
    15. In regards to question #13, at the time the loan was made, were there enough Federal Reserve Bank Notes on hand at the bank to match the figures represented by every Savings Account and Certificate of Deposit and checking Account (Demand Deposit Account)?
    16. Does the bank have to obey, the laws concerning, Commercial Paper; Commercial Transactions, Commercial Instruments, and Negotiable Instruments?
    17. Did the bank lend the borrower the bank’s assets, or the bank’s liabilities?
    18. What is the complete name of the banking entity, which employs you, and in what jurisdiction is the bank chartered?
    19. What is the bank’s definition of “Loan Credit”?
    20. Did the bank use the borrowers assumed mortgage note to create new bank money, which did not exist before the assumed mortgage note was signed?
    21. Did the bank take money from any Demand Deposit Account (DDA), Savings Account (SA), or a Certificate of Deposit (CD), or any combination of any DDA, SA or CD, and loan this money to the borrower?
    22. Did the bank replace the money or credit, which it loaned to the borrower with the borrower’s assumed mortgage note?
    23. Did the bank take a bank asset called money, or the credit used as collateral for customers’ bank deposits, to loan this money to the borrower, and/or did the bank use the borrower’s note to replace the asset it loaned to the borrower?
    24. Did the money or credit, which the bank claims to have loaned to the borrower, come from deposits of money or credit made by the bank’s customers, excluding the borrower’s assumed mortgage note?
    25. Considering the balance sheet entries of the bank’s loan of money or credit to the borrower, did the bank directly decrease the customer deposit accounts (i.e. DDA, SA, and CD) for the amount of the loan?
    26. Describe the bookkeeping entries referred to in question #13.
    27. Did the bank’s bookkeeping entries to record the loan and the borrower’s assumed mortgage note ever, at any time, directly decrease the amount of money or credit from any specific bank customer’s deposit account?
    28. Does the bank have a policy or practice to work in cooperation with other banks or financial institutions use borrower’s mortgage note as collateral to create an offsetting amount of new bank money or credit or check book money or DDA generally to equal the amount of the alleged loan?
    29. Regarding the borrowers assumed mortgage loan, give the name of the account which was debited to record the mortgage.
    30. Regarding the bookkeeping entry referred to in Interrogatory #17 state the name and purpose of the account, which was credited.
    31. When the borrower’s assumed mortgage note was debited as a bookkeeping entry, was the offsetting entry a credit account?
    32. Regarding the initial bookkeeping entry to record the borrower’s assumed mortgage note and the assumed loan to the borrower, was the bookkeeping entry credited for the money loaned to the borrower, and was this credit offset by a debit to record the borrower’s assumed mortgage note?
    33. Does the bank currently or has it ever at anytime used the borrower’s assumed mortgage note as money to cover the bank’s liabilities referred to above, i.e. DDA, SA and CD?
    34. When the assumed loan was made to the borrower, did the bank have every DDA, SA, and CD backed up by Federal Reserve Bank Notes on hand at the bank?
    35. Does the bank have an established policy and practice to emit bills of credit which it creates upon its books at the time of making a loan agreement and issuing money or so-called money of credit, to its borrowers?

    NOTICE TO RESPOND, TO REBUT, AND TO COPMPLY WITH AFFIANT'S DEMANDS
    1. Affiant is granting Claimant ten (10) days to dispute Affiant's claims made in this document by signing the enclosed Affidavit, rebutting Affiant's lawful statements and responding (in writing) to Affiant via certified mail, thereby showing that Affiant is in error with regard to Claimant's claims. Claimant's failure to timely dispute Affiant's claims by signing and returning the enclosed Affidavit and rebutting Affiant's statements WITHIN 30 DAYS will place Claimant in Fault, and such Fault will be Claimant's agreement to the claims made above by Affiant, and Claimant's absolute and unequivocal waiver of any and all claims against Affiant and to a full discharge of the purported debt referenced by Claimant and allegedly owed by Affiant. Claimant's Fault will be further agreement that Claimant will cease and desist from any attempt at collecting this alleged debt and Claimant's tacit agreement and stipulation that Claimant will not turn over this debt to a debt collector for collections or for foreclosure action.
    2. Should Claimant refuse to sign the enclosed Affidavit, rebut Affiant's statements, and proceeds to turn the subject account allegedly owed by Affiant to a debt collector for collections or foreclosure actions, Claimant agrees to compensate Affiant three times the amount of the original purported debt plus all interest paid to date as well as for damages and all expenses and fees for collection. Any attempt by Claimant in Fault to contact Affiant by phone, or by letter, should only be for the purpose of informing Affiant that the purported debt is fully discharged or that a private meeting to resolve this private matter is in order. Claimant knows or should know that sending unsubstantiated demands for payment thorough the United States mail system may be considered as mail fraud under federal and state laws. Respondent may wish to seek legal advice before contacting Affiant again. “Deceitful statements of half-truths or the concealment of material facts is actual fraud under the mail fraud statutes.” United States v. Beecroft, 608 F. 2d 753, 757. (9th Cir. 1979)
    3. If Claimant should fail to rebut Affiant's lawful statements and/or sign and return the enclosed Affidavit to Affiant, and Claimant makes any unverified adverse reporting to any Credit Bureau with regards to Affiant's Credit rating, Affiant will seek damages for the times the amount of the purported debt amount against Claimant in addition to reporting Claimant to the State Banking Commissioner, the FDIC, and the Federal Trade Commission for illegal trade practices. Again, Affiant demands a T-accounting of all funds going in and out of the above numbered account starting with the original promissory note. Affiant looks forward to hearing from Claimant in a timely manner and within the deadline given with the return of the signed enclosed Affidavit and rebuttal and Affiant thanks Claimant for Claimant's kind cooperation in promptly resolving this private matter.
    4. Claimant's failure to respond, as stipulated, is a violation of law and Claimant's full agreement with and admission to the fact that everything within and related to this document is true, correct, legal, and lawful.
    5. If Claimant fails to respond within the alloted time frame, it constitutes Claimant's full admission attesting to this document and is fully binding upon Claimant in any court in America, without Claimant's protest, objection, or that of those who represent Claimant.
    6. If Claimant's fails to respond within the alloted time frame, it constitutes Claimant's full agreement to within 10 days
    1) Mark the subject erroneous purported debt “Satisfied” and “Paid in Full” on the county Records Books; and
    2) refund each and every monthly payment (principal and interest) which we may have inadvertently made toward said fraudulent purported debt; and
    3) return original blue ink signature affixed upon the original documents that may exist pertaining to the subject erroneous purported debt.
    7. Your silence is your acquiescence. See: Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391. Notification of legal responsibility is “the first essential of due process of law”. See also: U.S. V. Tweel, 550 F.2d.297. “Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or when an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading”.
    I hereby attest that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the above information is true and correct.
    Dated this 1st day of june, 2009
    Affiant, by: __________________________________________
    your name, Signed reserving all my rights,
    De Jure Soli, Sanguinis, Coronea.
    c/o (65 pine ave suite 138) long beach, california, by (90802)

    NOTARY
    On this day came before me the Affiant a living flesh and blood human to oath and attest and affirm the signature is true, complete, and correct on the foregoing affidavit. Richard Thomas Bodeker Jr. the undersigned, who is personally known by me or upon proper oath and identification, personally came before me, the subscriber, a notary public in and for the County of los angelas and the State of california, and Duly Affirmed the truth of the foregoing Affidavit in my presence. The Affiant also acknowledged the signing thereof to be her own voluntary act and deed. Signing the within instrument in my presence and for the purpose therein stated.

    Signed this day________________, of____________________, ______________ at______________

    My commission expires on: ________________________

    By_________________________
    seal:_________________________


    PROOF OF SERVICE:
    I, Richard Thomas Bodeker Jr.' the sovereign spoken of in Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 US 356, 370, making a special limited appearance, certify that, I have served all parties a true and correct copy of this document on this 1st day of june 2009 by sending it certified mail and via fax and email to all parties involved.

    Affiant, by: _____________________________
    (signature)
    Affidavit for Bank / Financial Institution Official to sign:_______________________
    (Affiant and alleged lender) CHRYSLER FINANCIAL INSTITUTION
    paul knauss
    P.O BOX 9223, FARMINGTON HILLS MI. 48333


    (Claimant and alleged Borrower) Richard Thomas Bodeker Jr.
    65 pine ave suite 138
    long beach, california by [90802]

    Re: Account #
    AFFIDAVIT

    LOS ANGELS COUNTY )
    ) SS
    STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

    I, Richard Thomas Bodeker Jr., Affiant herein, a resident of the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, state under penalties of perjury under The Laws of the STATE OF CALIFORNIA, that Affiant is competent to be a witness, Affiant has personal knowledge of the following facts, and that the facts contained herein are true, correct, complete, and not misleading.
    1. Affiant states that the name of the Financial Institution is_CHRYSLER FINANCIAL.
    2. Affiant states that Affiant knows and understands the meaning of “penalties of perjury”.
    3. Affiant states that Affiant knows and understands that ignorance of the Law is not an excuse for violating the Law.
    4. Affiant states that Affiant knows and understands the laws that govern banking and financial transactions.
    5. Affiant states that Affiant has consulted a duly qualified Bar Card carrying attorney at law and showed said attorney the “Private Notice of Claim” before signing this Affidavit.
    6. Affiant states that Affiant has a thorough knowledge and understanding of the money and banking system of the United States.
    7. Affiant states that the above named lending institution loaned money to the alleged Borrower.
    8. Affiant states that both parties, borrower and lender, have equal protection under the law regarding the auto loan agreement referenced by the above numbered auto loan account.
    9. The above named lending institution provided the money or its equivalent from its own assets as consideration to purchase the borrower’s “promissory note” to establish the above numbered mortgage account.
    10. The above named lending institution provided the money or its equivalent from its depositors’ accounts as consideration to purchase the borrower’s “promissory note”, to establish the above numbered auto loan account.
    11. The above named lending institution did not deposit the borrower’s promissory note as an asset then wrote a check against said deposited asset to give to borrower as a loan with interest to establish the above numbered auto loan account.
    12. The alleged Borrower does not provide anything with a cash value that the above named lender uses to fund a loan check to complete the closing financial transaction in the above numbered auto loan account.
    13. The one who provided the money or its equivalent to fund the above numbered auto loan is the one to be repaid the money or its equivalent in this auto loan account.
    14. The charter of the above named financial institution grants it the authorit to lend its credit.
    15. The charter of the above named financial institution grants it the authority to create “checkbook money” and lend it as money or its equivalent.
    16. The above named financial institution that allegedly provided the loan followed generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and Federal Reserve Bank rules, regulations, policies, and procedures to establish the above numbered auto loan account.
    17. The above named financial institution that provided the alleged auto loan did not make an exchange, but truly loaned its money or its equivalent or other depositors’ money or its equivalent.
    18. The borrower has the right to repay the loan in the same specie of money or its equivalent the above named financial institution used as a deposit to fund the loan check used to establish the above numbered mortgage loan account.
    19. The above named financial institution has the lawful right to demand payment from the alleged borrower in a specific kind of money or its equivalent or currency in violation of HJR-192.
    20. The above named financial institution made full disclosure to the alleged borrower and did not violate the Truth in Lending Act.
    21. The above named financial institution fully performed on the value of the auto loan agreement to establish the above numbered auto loan account.
    22. The above named financial institution did not violate the State’s usury laws.
    23. The above named financial institution risked its own assets in the auto loan transaction to establish the above numbered auto loan account.
    24. The above named financial institution risked its depositors’ assets in the auto loan transaction to establish the above numbered auto loan account.
    25. The above named financial institution will provide a certified copy of the T-accounting that was set up to establish the above numbered auto loan account from the beginning, starting with the alleged Borrower’s Promissory Note and providing a full accounting of all funds going in and out of said account.
    26. This Financial Institution CHRYSLER FINANCIAL never used a borrower's mortgage note / auto note or a lien to create checkbook money it loans out to borrowers. This financial institution has never loaned credit or used credit money. This financial institution is not involved in check kiting ( checks written without one dollar on deposit at the bank for every dollar in checking, savings, and certificate of deposits). This financial institution does not violate our Founding Fathers Constitution for the United States or the court decision in Bank of Augusta V. Earle, 13 pet. (U.S.) 519 and Colmon V. Jackson, 988 F.2d 13145, relating to the Foreign Agent and Propaganda Act, Title 22 U.S.C.A. 611 through 621, the Truth in Lending Act, Title 15 U.S.C.A. 1691 through 1691f, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Title 15 U.S.C.A. 1692 through 1692o. If the officer for the financial institution signing this affidavit lies, the alleged loan agreement becomes null and void, the borrower keeps the funds issued, and all loans this financial institution issued become null and void.
    Further Affiant says naught.

    ___________________________
    Head of Collections, Affiant
    ___________________________
    Phone:
    ___________________________
    email:
    Enclosed find financial institution's answers to your 35 legal questions on a separate document.
    NOTARY / WITNESS
    On this day came before me the Affiant a living flesh and blood human to oath and attest and affirm the signature is true, complete, and correct on the foregoing affidavit. Richard Thomas Bodeker Jr. the undersigned, who is personally known by me or upon proper oath and identification, personally came before me, the subscriber, a notary public in and for the County of LOS ANGELES and the State of CALIFORNIA, and Duly Affirmed the truth of the foregoing Affidavit in my presence. The Affiant also acknowledged the signing thereof to be her own voluntary act and deed. Signing the within instrument in my presence and for the purpose therein stated.
    Signed this day________________, of____________________, ______________ at______________
    My commission expires on: ________________________
    By_________________________
    seal:_________________________

  • So
      9th of Jul, 2009
    0 Votes

    Wow...you put theat whole thing in there? man...

    "Fun Facts"
    Did you people know that a cosigner is on the loan and just as responsible??

    If you are one day late you are in collections

    If a delarship tells you you can re-fi in 6 months they are lying to get you in a car.

    Your interest rate is based off your credit and Chrysler or any other company has nothing to do with it.

    Collection reps can call up to 9 times a day if you do not answer. That's right 9...any more than that is violation of fdcpa

    It is perfectly legal to skip trace relatives and neighbors and call them BUT they are FORBIDDEN to talk about any nature of your delinquent account.

    Working with you is an option but not a garantee.

    If you request for assistance there is a chance of denial

    Voluntary surrenders are the same as repos. it hits your credit the same.

    If your car is charged off they may garnish your wages

    Sometimes "grace periods" dont exsist depending on whats on your contract.

    PLEASE don't take "grace periods the wrong way. It's where you are charged a late fee...not i can make my payment 10 days late and not get calls. late is late.

    FYI I am financed through Chrysler financial. Though I have never been late these are just some facts you should know. that's all. carryon with the complaining.

  • So
      9th of Jul, 2009
    0 Votes

    Oh yeah! and if you ask for a supervisor they HAVE to connect you...at least that's what I heard

  • My
      17th of Jul, 2009
    0 Votes

    I leased a car and returned it in April... not knowing and not being told by the car salesman, that there would be a return fee of $425!!! I received a bill from them with an additional 'Service Fee' of $35!

    I refuse to pay them and since then, they keep calling me. They even called my job once - and it better be the last time.

  • Ke
      2nd of Mar, 2011
    0 Votes

    Chrysler contacted me on 2-25-2011 by telephone inquiring about my neighbor who is late on his car payments due to a reduction in his pay from the recession we are in. They are attempting to repossess his vehicle. They called wanting to know if I knew him etc... This is a horrible invasion of his privacy; I don't have a debt with them and they should not call me unless I was a co-signer. They have also trespassed on my private property in attempt to conduct surveillance on my neighbor and left trash and debris in my yard.

    The unfortunate part of this is after this happened we spoke to the neighbor who has been attempting to secure a second mortgage and pay off the vehicle and he has told them as much.

    I wouldn't buy a Chrysler even if it meant I had to walk or ride a bike everywhere.

Post your comment