Docstoc

COUNTERCLAIM

Document Sample
COUNTERCLAIM Powered By Docstoc
					ELECTRONIC COPY



                                                                          No. L050637
                                                                        Vancouver Registry


         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA


BETWEEN:
                            PAVEL N. DARMANTCHEV
                              IAN DENIS GRAVLIN
                                 DENA ALDEN
                                                                           PLAINTIFFS

AND:
                               MBNA CANADA BANK
                                   And others
                                                                          DEFENDANT
                      Brought Under The Class Proceedings Act
                                R.S.B.C. 1996 c. 50


                           STATEMENT OF CLAIM

THE PARTIES

1.     The Plaintiffs Pavel N. Darmantchev resides at 2094 Sunview Drive, Kelowna,
       B.C.
2.     The Plaintiffs, Ian Dennis Gravlin, resides at 241 Patterson Blvd. SW, Calgary,
       Alberta.
3.     The Plaintiffs Dena Alden resides Ste #303 – 1149 West 11th Avenue, Vancouver,
       B.C.
4.     The Defendant, MBNA CANADA BANK (“MBNA”), is a chartered bank whose
       corporate headquarters is listed as: 1600 James Naismith Drive, Ottawa, Ontario,
       K1B 5N8
5.     The Defendant, “and others” are unnamed defendants which the Plaintiffs may add
       to the style of cause by way of amendments as may be required.


Essential Character of the Plaintiffs’ claims
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                        2


6.    The Plaintiffs and the Defendant (“the parties”) entered into an agreement whereby
      the Plaintiffs agreed to become credit card holders and the Defendant MBNA
      agreed to be the Plaintiffs’ payment agent.
7.    The agreement between the parties is that as card holders, the Plaintiffs agreed to
      pay the Defendant an annual fee for the privilege of using a “credit card” towards
      the purchase of goods and services from participating merchants and service
      providers who agreed to sell to the Plaintiffs.
8.    The agreement between the parties also provides that the Defendant, MBNA
      agreed to act as payment agent for the Plaintiffs, to make cash payments to all
      participating merchants and service providers on all the goods and services
      received by the Plaintiffs.
9.    The Plaintiffs also agreed as part of the agreement to reimburse the Defendant for
      all the cash payments made by the Defendant to all participating merchants and
      service providers on his behalf. The Plaintiffs also agreed to pay interest to the
      Defendant on all such cash advances if payment is not received by the Defendant
      after 30 days.
10.   At all material times, the Defendant MBNA has failed to fulfill its contractual
      obligation as payment agent by failing to make cash payments to all participating
      merchants and service providers while they continued to extract cash payments
      from the Plaintiffs in the form of principal and interest. The Defendant MBNA
      never paid a single cent to any and all affected merchants and service providers.
11.   The Plaintiffs also discovered that the Defendant has made undisclosed “side
      deals” with merchants and service providers that allows the Defendant to extract
      secret commissions from said merchants and service providers without fully
      informing the Plaintiffs.
12.   The Plaintiffs also discovered that the Defendant MBNA has been charging
      excessive and unexplained interests, sometimes in excess of the 60% ceiling which
      contravenes the Criminal Code of Canada.
13.   Upon the Plaintiffs’ discovery that the Defendant MBNA had been defrauding
      their customers, the merchants and service providers, the Plaintiffs stopped paying
      the Defendant MBNA and demanded proper explanation and or clarification from

Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                              L050637                     3


      the Defendant regarding the validity of the loan agreement where no valuable or
      legal consideration was received by the Plaintiffs.
14.   The Plaintiffs says that no cash, legal tender money or any tangible asset was
      advanced by the Defendant MBNA to anyone as contemplated by the card holder
      agreement signed in writing by the parties which made the agreement between the
      Plaintiffs and the Defendant MBNA null and void.
15.   At material times, the Defendant MBNA initiated “debt collection” proceedings
      against the Plaintiffs in spite of the fact that no “debt” or any validated or
      verifiable proof or particulars thereof was shown by this Defendant even after the
      Plaintiffs has made a written request for such validated or verifiable proofs.
16.   The Plaintiffs demanded proofs or particulars of such purported debts from the
      Defendant MBNA; this Defendant failed, neglected or refused to provide any
      particulars or proofs of indebtedness to the Plaintiffs.
17.   The Plaintiff Pavel N. Darmantchev resides in Kelowna, B.C. and Plaintiff Dena
      Alden resides in Vancouver, B.C. The Plaintiffs says that the Defendant’s modus
      operandi as demonstrated in other cases is calculated to inconvenience the sued
      parties and to prevent them from attending to their lawsuits by filing the actions at
      a jurisdiction that is far away from the defendants.
18.   The Defendant MBNA filed its claims against Plaintiffs Darmantchev and Alden
      in London, Ontario and Ottawa, Ontario respectively in a transparent attempt to
      deny justice and to obtain default judgments against the Plaintiffs.
19.   The Plaintiffs also discovered that the Defendant MBNA and various law firms
      from various provinces have formed unlawful and collusive agreements despite
      their knowledge that MBNA does not provide validated or verifiable proofs to
      these said law firms and therefore they have no legal standing to file the Writs of
      Summons and Statements of Claims against the Plaintiffs.
20.   Notwithstanding that MBNA and the law firms knew or ought to have known that
      the writs and claims they filed against the Plaintiffs were void and of no merit
      because MBNA did not have and never provided the law firms any validated or
      verifiable proofs of the Plaintiffs’ indebtedness, this Defendant and various law
      firms contracted by them filed for the purpose of obtaining default judgments by

Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                        4


      filing the claims ex juris or by way of improper service in order to prevent the
      Plaintiffs and the proposed class members from appearing in court to resist the
      bogus claims thereby deceiving and defrauding the courts and abusing the process.
21.   After the Defendant’s lawyers have surreptitiously obtained the default judgments
      against the Plaintiffs, the next step is for the Defendant’s lawyers to go to court
      again for the purpose of attaching and registering liens against the properties of the
      Plaintiffs in preparation for illegal seizure of Plaintiffs’ and proposed class
      member’s properties.
22.   The Plaintiffs says that but for the unlawful interference of the Defendant’s
      solicitors above, judgment could not or should not have been entered against them
      by any of the Defendants.
23.   Further, the unlawful interference by the said Defendant’s solicitors has prevented
      the Plaintiffs and MBNA in coming to terms with the contractual relationships
      with each other.
24.   At all material times, the Defendant, their collection agents and solicitors have
      acted together in a concentrated scheme to unlawfully defraud the Plaintiffs and
      other credit card holders.
25.   The Plaintiffs claim that the Defendant MBNA, as payment agent neglected or
      refused to provide full disclosure, which is a legal requirement in any lawful
      contract, that they never intended to advance lawful money or cash to pay for the
      Plaintiffs’ purchases as required by the contract.
26.   The Defendant MBNA failed neglected or refused to disclose to the Plaintiffs that
      this Defendant does not pay the merchants and service provider with cash or
      lawful Canadian currency while the Defendant MBNA continues to demand and
      receive the Plaintiffs’ monies at full face value but the Defendant MBNA never
      provided any value in exchange to the Plaintiffs. Essentially, the Defendant
      MBNA receives the Plaintiffs’ money, and converts the said money for their own
      use by not paying any money to the merchants and service providers, while the
      Defendant MBNA unlawfully charged interest on these purported “debts” when in
      reality there is no debt.



Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                      5


27.   At all material times, the Defendant’s obligations pursuant to its contract with the
      Plaintiffs to pay for their purchases are continually being breached by the
      Defendant’s indiscriminate use of “IOUs” or promises to pay to the merchants and
      service providers.
28.   The Defendant is guilty of creating and trafficking counterfeit money through its
      widespread use of IOUs and “credits” which can never pay for or discharge any
      debts, legal and commercial liabilities.
29.   The Defendant has breached its contractual obligation and fiduciary duties by not
      paying the merchants with the monies it receives from the Plaintiffs and the
      Defendant MBNA was unjustly enriched in the process at the expense of the
      Plaintiffs whose money and fruits of labour were stolen, converted or
      misappropriated by the Defendant.
30.   At the start of the card holder agreement, the Plaintiffs and the proposed class
      members were led to believe that the money to pay the merchants and service
      providers comes from the Defendant’s own assets. At all material times, the
      Plaintiffs and the proposed class members have been deprived of the fruits of their
      labour and have suffered considerable financial losses which led to other direct
      and/or consequential emotional, mental, physical and relationship sufferings.


NATURE OF THE CLASS ACTION
31.   The Plaintiffs file their claim as a proposed class action pursuant to the Class
      Proceedings Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c.50 on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all
      persons who have been victimized by the Defendant MBNA in similar situations
      involving unlawful creation of money, fraudulent transfer of funds, money
      laundering, conversion of monies, usury, breach of contract, fraudulent or
      negligent misrepresentation, breach of trust and breach of fiduciary duties.
32.   In none of these transactions did the Plaintiffs and the proposed class receive any
      real money that is legal tender in Canada from the Defendant MBNA as
      contemplated by the card holder agreement(s).
33.   Illegal creation of money by the Defendant MBNA, and other causes of action
      listed above are ultra vires transactions that were unlawfully executed beyond its

Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                        6


      charter or corporate powers which renders all contracts and loan and mortgage
      agreements void and of no force and effect;
34.   The Defendant MBNA, fraudulently, unlawfully and without colour of right
      created money out of thin air, and at no cost or risk to the Defendant MBNA who
      fraudulently and unlawfully “advanced” these unlawfully created monies to the
      merchants and service providers and then unlawfully charged the Plaintiffs and the
      proposed class members with interests;
35.   The said interest charged by the Defendant constitutes usury as they are based on
      nothing;
36.   The “money” (which are nothing but IOUs and promises to pay) that was
      unlawfully created out of nothing by the Defendant was used by them to cancel all
      the debts and liabilities arising from the use of the credit cards notwithstanding the
      fact that the Defendant MBNA is precluded by law from “creating” money;
37.   The created money was cleared by the SYSTEM notwithstanding the fact that the
      Defendant did not have any money of their own to lend, nor sufficient funds or
      assets to lend to the Plaintiffs and the proposed class pursuant to the underlying
      loan and financing agreements;
38.   The Defendant MBNA induced the SYSTEM to “clear” the said transactions
      knowing fully well that the transactions are fraudulent in nature and a deliberate
      commission of civil and criminal wrong;
39.   The Defendant MBNA was able to induce the SYSTEM to “clear” the said
      transactions even when the SYSTEM itself does not have any money of its own to
      lend, nor sufficient funds or assets to guarantee that the Plaintiffs and the proposed
      class members would receive the money from the Defendant MBNA pursuant to
      the underlying loan and financing agreements;
40.   The said transactions constitute money laundering in that the source of money, if
      money was indeed advanced by the Defendant and purportedly paid on behalf of
      Plaintiffs’ and the proposed class members’ accounts could not be traced, nor
      could be explained by the Defendant;
41.    At all material times, Defendant MBNA and others like them have no legal
      standing to lend or advance any money to the Plaintiffs and the proposed class

Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                       7


      members or to pay money to the merchants and service providers, because: 1)
      these banks and financial institutions did not have the money to lend or advance,
      and therefore they did not have any capacity to enter into a binding contract; 2)
      the Defendant MBNA did not have any cash reserve for the purpose of lending or
      advancing money, they are not legally permitted to lend or advance their
      depositor’s or member’s money without expressed written authorization form the
      depositors, and: 3) the Defendant MBNA had no tangible assets of their own to
      lend or advance and all their “assets” are “paper assets” which are mainly in the
      form of liabilities or “false receivables” created by them out of “thin air,” derived
      out of loans whereas the monies loaned or advanced out were also created out of
      thin air;
42.   Other than bookkeeping and computer entries, no money or substance of any value
      was loaned or advanced by the Defendant to the merchants and service providers
      or to the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members;
43.   At no time did the Defendant MBNA, or any of them as the intended holder in due
      course make any presentment to the Plaintiffs for payment of the amount of
      promissory note(s) pursuant to s.84.(1) of the Bills of Exchange Act;
44.   By electing to sue with the mind to attach liens and then foreclose on the
      properties of the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members rather than to present
      the promissory note(s) to the them for payment pursuant to s.84.(1) of the Bills of
      Exchange Act, the Defendant MBNA has forfeited every right it might have
      regarding the promissory note(s).
45.   By attempting to sue with the mind of foreclosing on the Plaintiffs’ and the
      proposed class members’ properties, the Defendant MBNA was unjustly enriched
      because the Defendant had already been pre-paid when it “cashed” the promissory
      note(s) of the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members.
46.   The Defendant MBNA failed, neglected or refused to return the promissory notes
      it received from the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members.
47.   The Defendant failed, neglected or refused to indemnify the Plaintiffs and the
      proposed class members for the promissory notes they received and converted for
      their own use;

Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                      8


48.   By virtue of the promissory notes received by the Defendant MBNA, which were
      deposited and converted for its own use, it was the Defendant as “lender” who
      owed the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members money, not the other way
      around;
49.   The Defendant anticipated the breach. Other than money or “currency” that was
      created out of nothing, at no time did the Defendant MBNA intend to loan or
      advance any substance to the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members;
50.   The illegal creation of money from nothing by the Defendant MBNA, constitutes
      illegal creation and passing of counterfeit money which contravenes the Criminal
      Code;
51.   And because no value was ever imparted by the Defendant MBNA to the Plaintiffs
      and the proposed class members, the Defendant MBNA did not risk anything, nor
      loose anything and never would have lost anything under any circumstances and
      therefore no lawful agreement or contract or liens had been perfected according to
      law and equity against the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members;
52.   The legal proceedings carried out in bad faith by the Defendant MBNA were in
      every respect an unlawful act of conversion, unlawful seizure of property without
      due process of law and breach of trust or breach of fiduciary duty which resulted in
      the unjust enrichment of Defendant;


NATURE OF THE CLASS ACTION
53.   This is a proposed class action brought pursuant to the Class Proceedings Act,
      R.S.B.C. 1996, c.50 on behalf of persons who entered into any type of card holder
      agreements or contracts whether secured or unsecured within or without British
      Columbia with the Defendant MBNA. The class is intended to include all persons
      who are “borrowers” within the meaning of the Criminal Code, the Bank Act, the
      Bank of Canada Act, Interest Act, the Currency Act, the Canadian Payments Act
      and the Bills of Exchange Act. Excluded from the proposed class are directors,
      officers and senior employees of the Defendant MBNA.
54.   Although the main emphasis of the class action is to seek damages for the wrongs
      done unto a particular class whose monies and properties have been unlawfully

Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                              L050637                     9


      seized through legal actions, attachment of liens, foreclosure or “repossession”, the
      class is also intended to include all persons who are now facing legal actions,
      foreclosure or “repossession” of their properties, as well as those persons who
      could possibly face similar proceedings in the future.
55.   The proposed class shall not be limited to the above criteria but shall include all
      other loan transactions, card holder agreements, be it secured or unsecured such as
      credit card agreements and entered into by the Defendant MBNA and the Plaintiffs
      where the use of “created” or “private” money was used as consideration;
56.   As an alternative, the proposed class can be divided into two sub-classes: the first
      class being, those who suffered loss by way of legal action, foreclosure of
      properties; and the second class are those who are exposed to or are facing
      possible legal action and foreclosure of property in the future;
57.   The Plaintiffs and the proposed class members sues on their own behalf and on
      behalf of others similarly affected, as members of the proposed Class, namely, all
      persons within or without British Columbia and Canada who have suffered loss of
      money, foreclosure and seizure of real and personal property, are suffering the
      same and who will suffer as a result of having entered into a loan agreement
      between themselves and the Defendant MBNA.
58.   The members of the proposed Class number in at least thousands if not millions.
      As a result, the Class is so numerous that joinder in a single action is
      impracticable. However, each Class member should be readily identifiable from
      information and records available to the Plaintiffs.
59.   Individual members of the proposed Class do not have a significant interest in
      individually controlling the prosecution of separate actions, and individualized
      litigation would also present the potential for varying, inconsistent, or contrary
      judgments and would magnify the delay and expense to all parties to the court
      system resulting from multiple trials of the same factual issues. The cost to pursue
      individual action would effectively deny individuals access to the court.
60.   There is a well-defined list of common questions of fact and law. These common
      factual and legal questions do not vary from one Class member to another, and



Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                       10


      may be determined without reference to the individual circumstances of Class
      members. These include, but are not limited to, the issues listed below:
61.   The contracts entered into between the Defendant MBNA and the Plaintiffs were
      void or voidable and have no force and effect due to anticipated breach and for
      non-disclosure of material facts;
62.   Creation of money out of nothing is illegal and ultra vires the Plaintiffs’ charter or
      granted corporate power and therefore void ab-initio;
63.   The Defendant MBNA as lenders failed to disclose the material fact that they are
      not actually lending money or any substance to the borrower;
64.   The Defendant MBNA as lenders failed to disclose the material fact to the
      borrower that they are actually lending or advancing “IOUs” and not money;
65.   The Defendant MBNA as lender and fiduciary failed to disclose the material fact
      to the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members that they are going to be charged
      interest (usury) based on nothing;
66.   The Defendant MBNA as lender failed to disclose the material fact to the Plaintiffs
      and the proposed class members that it intended to receive the monies paid by the
      card holders and convert the said monies and unjustly enrich itself with it by not
      paying the merchants and service providers out of the proceeds received from the
      card holders.
67.   At all legal proceedings where the Defendant MBNA seized the Plaintiffs’ and the
      proposed class members’ properties, the Defendant MBNA may have committed
      fraud upon the court at these legal proceedings by failing to disclose the truth, that
      no monies were advanced to the merchants and service providers or to the
      Plaintiffs which made the underlying credit card transaction and other similar
      agreements void from the start;
68.   The contracts were void for lack or failure of legal consideration;
69.   The contracts were unconscionable;
70.   Fraudulent misrepresentation;
71.   The Defendant never risked anything, nor lost anything and therefore has not been
      exposed to any risk to warrant the usurious interests they charged and extorted
      from the Plaintiffs and the proposed class.

Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                        11


72.   The Defendant MBNA never risked anything, nor lost anything and therefore has
      not been exposed to any risk to warrant the attachment of liens and the subsequent
      foreclosure of the underlying properties;
73.   The legal proceedings and foreclosure(s) carried out by the Defendant MBNA
      were an abuse of process, illegal and constitutes conversion and unlawful seizure
      of property;
74.   The Defendant MBNA was unjustly enriched as result of the conversion, unlawful
      seizures of properties, foreclosure(s) and subsequent sale of the Plaintiffs’ and the
      proposed class members’ properties.


RELIEF SOUGHT
75.   The Plaintiffs claims on their behalf, and on behalf of the proposed Class:
76.   An order certifying this action as a class proceeding and appointing them
      representative Plaintiffs under the Class Proceedings Act, R.S.B.C. 1996, c. 50;
77.   A declaration that the card holder agreements made between the Defendant
      MBNA, and the Plaintiffs and the proposed class members are illegal,
      unconscionable and therefore void for lack of consideration or for unlawful
      consideration and of no force and effect as against the proposed Class;
78.   A declaration that the Defendant MBNA has not been exposed to any risk and
      therefore has no rights, titles or interests in the said properties or liens thereon as
      are above described;
79.   A declaration that the legal proceedings and foreclosure proceedings filed by all
      the Defendant MBNA and all subsequent court-ordered sales and vesting orders be
      and are declared null and void as against the Plaintiffs and the proposed class
      members;
80.   A declaration that the legal proceedings and foreclosure proceedings filed by all
      the Defendant MBNA and all subsequent court-ordered sales and vesting orders
      constitutes unlawful seizure contrary to the Charter and Bill of Rights;
81.   A declaration that any debts incurred against the Plaintiffs and the proposed class
      members by the Defendant MBNA be and are discharged;



Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                      12


82.   A declaration that the Defendant MBNA, and other financial institutions, for all
      practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices is in law to
      be treated as one and the same association with the defendant banks being
      members of the association, did create the entire amounts of “money” and credit
      upon its own book or computer database by bookkeeping entry;
83.   A declaration that all financial institutions, are equally liable, both jointly and
      severally, along with the Defendant MBNA with regards to the illegal creation of
      money and the passing and circulation of such monies unlawfully created by them;
84.   A declaration that the money or credit created by the Defendant MBNA out of
      nothing was the consideration used to finance the loans and mortgages relevant to
      this action;
85.   A declaration that the acts of the Defendant MBNA constitutes unlawful creation
      of money and such acts are ultra vires and not within this corporation’s charter,
      nor is this corporation licensed by any competent authority to create money and
      therefore all monies created by the Defendant be rendered void and of no value;
86.   A declaration that the Defendant MBNA and the other defendants named in this
      action were unjustly enriched by and through their actions;
87.   A declaration that the Defendant MBNA and the other defendants named in this
      action have breached their fiduciary duties;
88.   An Order that the defendant MBNA return to the Plaintiffs and all the proposed
      Class, the original promissory note(s), received and accepted by these defendants,
      in the amount of the loan value, plus interest by way of cash, draft, certified check
      or money order or other negotiable instrument commercially acceptable in Canada;
89.   An Order that the Defendant MBNA, indemnify the Plaintiffs and the proposed
      class members, the equivalent or in lieu of the original promissory note(s),
      received and accepted by the Defendant MBNA, in the amount of the loan value
      plus interest by way of cash, draft, certified check or money order or other
      negotiable instrument commercially acceptable in Canada;
90.   An Order that the Defendant MBNA, return to the Plaintiffs and the proposed class
      members, all monies received by them as payment for “interest” and or other



Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended
ELECTRONIC COPY                                            L050637                      13


      similar charges derived from the aforementioned loans where bank-created monies
      were advanced by the Defendant MBNA as consideration;
91.   In the alternative, an Order that the Defendant MBNA, pay to the Plaintiffs and the
      proposed class members, the present value of the properties wrongfully foreclosed
      upon by them including all monies received by the defendant(s) as interest be
      returned to the Plaintiffs and the proposed Class forthwith;
92.   An Order that the Defendants, law firms either jointly or severally, pay damages to
      the Plaintiffs for wrongful interference with the Plaintiffs contractual relationship
      and obligations;
93.   An Order that all judgments, garnishment orders and all liens that were
      surreptitiously obtained by the above Defendants against the Plaintiffs and the
      proposed class be set aside and rendered null and void;
94.   General damages;
95.   Punitive damages;
96.   Exemplary damages;
97.   Special damages;
98.   Costs pursuant to Section 37 of the Class Proceedings Act R.S.B.C.1996 c. 50;
99.   Interests pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act, R.S.B.C. 1996 c 59;
100. Such further and other relief as this Honorable Court may deem just.




DATED: March, 7, 2005                                __”Pavel N. Darmantchev”___
                                                          Plaintiff or agent




Note: Red hi-lites and red letters denotes previous errors which will be officially
amended

				
DOCUMENT INFO