Product: Debt collection

BANKS CAN NOT LEND THEIR CREDIT The following are cases by the federal court ruling In the federal courts, it is well established that a national bank has no power to lend its credit to another by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX. " A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation ... XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX, XXXX denied in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 

It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal Law being limited in its powers and capacity, can not lend its credit by guaranteeing the debts of another. All such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires ... '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ( XXXX ) .and checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) of the United States XXXX '' State v. XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX. 

The United States Code, Title 12, Section 24, Paragraph 7 confers upon a bank the power to lend its money, not its credit. In XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX vs. 
XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ), the court, after citing the statue heretofore said, The provisions referred to do not give power to a national bank to guarantee the payment of the obligations of others solely for their benefit, nor is there any authority to issue them through such power incidental of the business of banking. A bank can lend its money, not its credit. '' In XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX, ( XXXX ), it was stated, " It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under Federal law, being limited in its power and capacity, can not lend it's credit by guaranteeing the debt of another. All such contracts being entered into by its officers are ultra vires and not binding upon the corporation. '' An activity constitutes an incidental power if it is closely related to an express power and is useful in carrying out the business of banking. See First XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. But even with this latitude no hint of lending credit is provided in 12 U.S.C. 24 that would give rise to an incidental power to lend credit. 

The exercise of powers not expressly granted to national banks is prohibited : XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX Bank is breaking federal law! 
In the federal courts, it is well established that a national bank has no power to lend its credit to another by becoming surety, endorser, or guarantor for him. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. " A national bank has no power to lend its credit to any person or corporation ... XXXX v. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX  XXXX, XXXX denied in XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 

" It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under federal XXXX being limited in its powers and capacity, can not lend its credit by guaranteeing the debts of another. All such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires ... '' XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 
... checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money of the United States ... '' State v. XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX. 

" Banking Associations from the very nature of their business are prohibited from lending credit. '' ( XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX ) " Banking corporations can not lend credit. '' ( XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) " Nowhere is the express authority granted to the corporation to lend its credit. '' ( XXXX XXXX vs. XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX ; XXXX XXXX XXXX ) " A national bank has no authority to lend its credit. '' ( XXXX vs. XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX ) It is not within those statutory powers for a national bank, even though solvent, to lend its credit to another in any of the various ways in which that might be done. '' XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX, XXXX F XXXX XXXX, XXXX ( XXXX ). 

There is no doubt but what the law is that national bank can not lend its credit or become an accommodation endorser. '' XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX. 
All such contracts entered into by its officers are ultra vires ... '' XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) ... .checks, drafts, money orders, and bank notes are not lawful money of the United States XXXX '' State v. XXXX XXXX XXXX Pac XXXX, XXXX Ore XXXX. 
By doctrine of ultra vires, a contract made by a corporation beyond the scope of its corporate powers is unlawful. '' XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) '' A holder who does not give value can not XXXX as a holder in due course. '' ( XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX ) Capital One Bank is clearly breaking the laws under federal law, court cases which is stated in this complaint. 
Capital One Bank has breache its authority by entering into an agreement that it knows it is not allowed by law to execute, is it moral to allow that party to enforce the agreement? Is it moral to force a person to pay on a loan when that person did not know that the bank did not have the legal authority to issue credit or to become surety. 

Capital One bank has no right to place a negative mark on your credit report, when they did not have the authority to enter into the agreement in the first place, and that any deficit in payment or if your late and cant make a payment. 
I am stating federal court decision. 
Capital Once is in violations of the law. 
18 USC 1961 RACKETEERING ACTIVITIES.

18 USC 1344 BANK FRAUD 18 USC 1001 FRAUD 18 USC 1341,1342 MAIL FRUAD 18 USC 1951 INTERFERENCE WITH COMMERCE 18 USC 514 FICTITIOUS OBLIGATION PROHIBITED 18 USC 2113 BANK ROBBERY OF A COMMERCIAL OR PRIVATE PROPERTY Capital One to national banks going beyond their express powers in that they are exposing depositor 's money to loss in contradiction to the bank 's primary duty. Therefore, the issue that can be raised is the argument of ultra-virus and not only is the contract void, but even if the borrower did receive a benefit, the borrower was not unjustly enriched. If the contract is now void, then both parties walk away as if there never was a contract. The judge is then asked to declare a XXXX balance and deem it as paid as agreed. Since the borrower provided the value for the source of funds, the borrower is also entitled to a judgment in the amount of the highest credit limit issued or loan amount. Also, since the banks acts demonstrate that the bank took unfair advantage of the borrower, this results in the bank needing to be penalized. Typically, the borrower is entitled to ask for a financial award against the bank in the amount of the debt forgiven. Since fraud is committed, the borrower is entitled to all sums paid on the contract including interest, plus treble ( triple ) damages, attorney fees expended and court and other costs in addition. The borrower can also demand a XXXX balance on this debt, and a voidance of the loan agreement, and a financial judgment in favor of the borrower due to the bad judgement of the lender. Capital One Bank will deny or does not recognize the laws in this complaint and they will only address the complaint by company policy and company policy are not laws and they are going to protect them self by claiming they are not breaking the law. Capital One Banking is committing fraud. 
I am not trying to vex or harm any body but exercising ones right under the law. This according to the truth and lending Act and equally protection Act and Due Processing Act.