legal tender vs tender of payment

LEGAL TENDER and/or TENDER OF PAYMENT ? Which Works?

Did the fraudulent Car Dealership, Mortgage Company, or Utility Company tell you? You can tender payment via a bill of exchange, dollars/FRNs/portable bonds, checks and/or money orders (pubic and private), drafts, orders, and more!

Did the fraudulent Car Dealership, Mortgage Company, or Utility Company tell you?

The concept of “legal tender” in the United States is primarily defined by 31 U.S.C. § 5103, which states that United States coins and currency, including Federal Reserve notes, are “legal tender” for all debts, public charges, taxes, and dues. 

Complementary to this, 12 U.S.C. § 411 clarifies that Federal Reserve notes are obligations of the United States and are redeemable in “lawful money.” Further regulations are found in 12 U.S.C. § 418, which outlines the denominations and collateral requirements for Federal Reserve notes, and 31 U.S.C. § 5112, which specifies the minting and issuance of coins. The prohibition against the use of gold clauses in contracts is detailed in 31 U.S.C. § 5118, ensuring that only U.S. legal tender can be used to settle debts. Additionally, 31 U.S.C. § 5120 standardizes the melting and refining of bullion to maintain the quality of U.S. coinage. Article I, Section 10 of the U.S. Constitution restricts States from making anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts. House Joint Resolution 192 of 1933 (Public Law 73-10) suspended the gold standard, making U.S. currency no longer redeemable in gold. 

Under these”legal” frameworks, payments can be “tendered” in various forms, including banker’s acceptances, bills of exchange, checks (public or private), money orders (public or private), as well as through private bankers and “banks” as defined by 31 U.S.C. § 5312. This diverse set of instruments ensures flexibility and comprehensiveness in the U.S. monetary system.

While the United States Code does not explicitly state that bills of exchange are legal tender, these instruments are recognized as valid forms of payment under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The UCC governs “negotiable instruments,” including bills of exchange, and ensures their enforceability in commercial transactions, though they do not have the status of “legal tender.”  However, these instruments are valid “tender of payment.” The UCC provides a standardized framework for the use of these instruments, facilitating their use in various financial transactions “within” the United States.

 

31 U.S. Code § 5312 – Definitions and application

(2)financial institution” means—

(A) an insured bank (as defined in section 3(h) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(h)));

(B) a commercial bank or trust company;

(C) a private banker;

(H) a broker or dealer in securities or commodities;

(I) an investment banker or investment company;J)a currency exchange, or a business engaged in the exchange of currency, funds, or value that substitutes for currency or funds;

(K) an issuer, redeemer, or cashier of travelers’ checks, checks, money orders, or similar instruments;

(L) an operator of a credit card system;

(M) an insurance company;

(N) a dealer in precious metals, stones, or jewels;

(O) a pawnbroker;

(P) a loan or finance company;

(Q) a travel agency;

(T) a business engaged in vehicle sales, including automobile, airplane, and boat sales;

(U) persons involved in real estate closings and settlements;

(V) the United States Postal Service;

(W) an agency of the United States Government or of a State or local government carrying out a duty or power of a business described in this paragraph;

 

EVERY MAN OR WOMAN IS A PRIVATE BANKER, WITH A STRAW MAN/ENS LEGIS/TRUST.

 

LEGAL TENDER and:or TENDER OF PAYMENT ? Which Works?

Leave your vote

More

Don’t Stop Here

More To Explore

Judge Roy K Altman’s Blatant Bias and Undermining of the the U.S. Constitution, the UCC, and HJR 192

Judge Roy K Altman’s Blatant Bias and Undermining of the the U.S. Constitution, the UCC, and HJR 192

In recent legal proceedings, Judge Altman’s handling of critical commercial and financial laws has raised serious concerns. His dismissal of key sections of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and essential federal statutes, such as House Joint Resolution 192 and 18 U.S.C. § 8, undermines the integrity of the U.S. legal system. These laws are foundational to understanding the complex interplay of U.S. monetary policy, debt discharge, and commercial transactions. In this article, we will dissect the significant legal missteps in Judge Altman’s ruling, exploring the implications for commercial law, government debt obligations, and the broader judicial system.

Title 18 Crimes and Civil Remedies Avoiding Common Pitfalls That Cause Dismissals

Title 18 Crimes and Civil Remedies: Avoiding Common Pitfalls That Cause Dismissals

Bare criminal statutes define unlawful behaviors and prescribe penalties such as fines or imprisonment but do not grant individuals the right to file lawsuits. These statutes are enforced exclusively by government authorities. In contrast, a private right of action allows individuals to file lawsuits for civil remedies, either explicitly or implied by courts. While criminal statutes like mail fraud or conspiracy against rights may not provide private remedies, other laws such as RICO or § 1983 may allow victims to seek civil redress. The distinction between criminal enforcement and civil remedies underscores the importance of understanding statutory rights for successful legal claims.

Riverside County Sheriff Facing One Trillion Lawsuit Right to Travel Conspiracy Racketeering Lawsuit

The $1 Trillion Conspiracy Lawsuit: Rights to Travel, Clearfield Doctrine, and California Vehicle Code Exposed

Riverside County Sheriff deputies Gregory D. Eastwood and Robert C. V. Bowman stalked national and private attorney-in-fact Kevin L. Walker through his neighborhood around the corner from his home, then arrested him on a bogus warrant and towed his Lamborghini. There is now an administrative process taking place and a pending One Trillion Dollar ($1,000,000,000,000.00) Federal conspiracy, fraud, forced peonage, and racketeering lawsuit against the deputies and the Riverside County Sheriff Department.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

error: Content is protected !!

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.

error: Content is protected !!