Personally I find these 'arguments' for not paying a debt a little odd to say the least.

Point 1.In the simplest terms the money loaned has come from the banks 'funds' and has been made available for your use.

Proof of where the funds came from? Really is not relevant, you asked/applied for a loan from xxxxxxxxxx, it made the funds available to you.

Point 2.No I don't believe it does.

Point 3. The signatory for the bank will be an authorised officer of the company who signs on behalf of the company/organisation, what point is there in questioning this?

Point 4. No relevance as far as I can see, seems logical that you have signed the agreement then the company officer has signed on the lenders behalf.

No doubt this credit facility has been utilised it seems so if you fail to keep to the agreed terms e.g. repayment date/ amount then the lender can take action to recover the debt.

Some good answers

Thank you for the answers. i need people to find any faults and give good advise as were to look or who to ask i am maybe clutching at straws but on a lot of the advice on this site seems to say, get them to prove the debt, get them to show by the away of counting to show the loss. its not my choice but i am been taken to court just waiting for the date. so when i get up in front of a judge, there is no point ask for them to show the loss they just point to the account.

1 so how do i prove that the loan agreement was commercial instrument a promissory note and was monetised and excepted as cash and they lent me back my own money

Definition of 'Monetise'

To monetise is to convert an asset into or establish something as money or legal tender. The term monetize has different meanings depending on the context. It can refer to methods utilized to generate profit, while it also can literally mean the conversion of an asset into money. For example, the U.S. Federal Reserve can monetize the nation's debt; this involves the process of purchasing debt (treasuries) which in turn increases the money supply. This essentially turns the debt into money (monetization).

All this sounds rather like the 'theories' put forward by the rather delusional Freemen on/of The Land., which has been thoroughly debunked nationally and internationally.

In this case.

1.You applied for a loan.

2.The loan was granted.

3. The money was used.#

Likely questions from a judge.

Did you apply for the loan?

Did you have the funds credited to your account?

Did you use those funds?

Why don't you want to pay the money back as agreed.

I am not a freeman of the land as such but I have read a lot of there stuff. If was not for the fact that I lost my job and struggling to make ends meet keep my family in a home and put food on the table I would not be clutching at straws. But since I have read about fractional banking, modern money mechanics, the goldsmith tale etc. I feel they have taken advantage of so I would like to stand my ground if in entered in to this contract with all the information upfront and on the table then I would not be kicking up a fuss, but they didn't,

It is my considered opinion that if you were to submit this 'theory' in court you are in grave danger of making a fool of your self.

These theorise have been around some considerable time., there has been a court case in Canada which has international repercussions regarding FOTL and related 'ideas', it has blown the whole concept completely out of the water.

Y what happend put up a like please .

Court Appeal

The story so far

Unknown to me back In 2009 Alliance and Leicester through there solicitors took me to court

and got a default judgement against me,

they asked for the stay of judgement as I was still paying the agreed amount.

I started the 3 letter process in November 2012 asking for A&L solicitors to validate evidence of the debt.

Over the next few months I get a few letters saying that they are waiting to get the agreement off A&L

and will forward them to me ASAP

I receive another letter from the solicitors around the end of June2013

they said they had sent the copies and I notified them that I had not received them .

At the beginning of July 2013 I received from the solicitors a copy of the agreement along with the court papers from NCCBC

and an unsigned statement of accounts, this is when I found out that A&L back in 2009 had gained default judgement against me.

A week or so later I receive a court date for the claimant hearing for the 1st August 2013

giving me 7 days to submit a defence which I did.

On the 31st July 2013 I received another court document stating that the defendants hearing

was to be held on the 13th September 2013 on receipt of this letter

I believed the court date had been re-scheduled for the 13th September 2013

In the Second week of August I received another letter from the court

containing a judgment order in favour for the claimant, and I had 14 days to appeal.

I contacted the court by telephone they informed me that the claimant hearing had actually been held on the 1st August 2013

and I should have attended and that the 13th September 2013 hearing, was my (the Defendant) hearing

but since I had not attended on the 1st

they gave judgement to the claimant

so therefore they had cancelled the hearing of the 13th Spetember.

The first court document carried the CCBC stamp (the claimants hearing)

the second document carried the Stockport CC stamp (the defendants hearing)

everything was exactly the same except I had not noticed that it said defendant on the paperwork

These mistakes on my part lead me to believe as I have stated above that the hearing had in fact been changed to the 13th.

On finally recognising this error I filed a defence explaining that the new document being exactly the same

led me to understand that the date had been changed and asked for a 60 day set aside,

to get all the information from the claimant to allow me to mount a defence which would facilitate me in my defence in court.

Shortly after I received a confirmation of a new hearing date of the 1st November 2103

for a defendants hearing which I was prepared for .

However on the 4th October 2013

I receive another judgement order from the court,

saying that judge after reading a letter for the claimant’s solicitors had awarded the judgment to the claimant,

thus not allowing me to mount a defence.

Having been away for recently this has left me only having a few days to respond and lodge an appeal.

Can you advise me what would be good and reasonable grounds for that appeal?

Would I go for a set side again?

If that is possible?

Should I go for an appeal against the decision or both?

Any statues and acts you know of that may help my defence / appeal would be much appreciated

along with any European laws you could quote.

I hope this makes sense and that you could offer advise on my next course of action.

Hello there.

The forum guys should be along later, in the meantime I'll put some paragraphs into your post to make it easier to read for them.

My best, HB