This is a letter that was sent to Ed. Anderson. We request an attorney to contact us to help in a single or class action lawsuit against this phoney company who are in the pockets of the bankers.
In response to this letter we received a check for $110.00, but still have yet to have an explaination as to why the check, with the exception of the "case" number, name of "case" and the date of this letter. The forum refuses to answer our questions, answer our requests or act impartially... But was willing to take our money.
If you have a contact that has a "MANDITORY BINDING ARBITRATION" clause in your banking contract immediately write them and opt out. ARBITRATION, at least with National Arbitration Forum, is onesided and a farce at best... Fraud more than likely.
Ed C. Anderson
P.O. Box 50191
Minneapolis, Minnesota USA 55405-0191
Dear Ed C. Anderson,
This is official notice that NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM, INC. Is in breach of contract on National Arbitration Forum file number FA0403000245508 and I, Gloria J. Lindsay, demand that you cease and desist immediately from doing so. I am sending this demand in an effort to avoid any form of litigation against all parties concerned and resolve this in a prompt and satisfactory manner.
Per Rule 47 it states The Arbitrator, the Director, the Forum, and any individual or entity associated with the Forum shall not be liable to any Party for any act or omission in connection with any arbitration conducted under this Code. However, you are currently in breach of contract as you have accepted payment for a service not rendered (request for Amended Code of Procedures) and forcing me, under duress, into an arbitration on a fraudulent contract, under a code I do not accept, without ever establishing the alleged agreement (contract) to be valid or even legal. You have further accepted payment under false pretense of impartiality when you are clearly not acting impartial.
This is formal notice that is currently in breach of it's contract with me. This is the final contact I intend to have with NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM, INC. Or you before I file a lawsuit against you in a court suit. I urge you to act.
AGAIN I deny any contract or agreement to be arbitrated by NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM, INC. And intend to sue, should you try to force me further into arbitration without my consent. I fully remove myself and my permission from any agreement to arbitrate as Shane N. Segarra, a case coordinator, has repeatedly acted in a purely bias manner toward the alleged claimant. Here are the following facts:
CHARGE 1. National arbitration forum due to actions by of shane n. SEGGARA are in violations of the Code of Procedures and the Amended Code of Procedures (Provided by myself to all parties concerned) by violations to RULE 1.
RULE 1. Arbitration Agreement.
A. Parties who contract for or agree to arbitration provided by the Forum or this Code of Procedure agree that this Code governs their arbitration proceedings, unless the Parties agree to other procedures.
I, Gloria J. Lindsay, did not agree to arbitration unless arbitration was governed under the Amended Code of Procedures, Provided by myself to all parties concerned. (SEE EXHIBIT A presented with both Response form and Counter Claim dated May 25 and EXHIBIT B attached to Check #2725)
C. Arbitrations will be conducted in accord with the Code of Procedure in effect at the time the Claim is filed, unless the law or the agreement of the Parties provides otherwise. A Claim that has been Stayed for more than one hundred-eighty (180) days will be subject to the Code of Procedure in effect at the time the Stay is lifted.
I, Gloria J. Lindsay, did not agree to arbitration unless arbitration was governed under the Amended Code of Procedures, Provided by myself to all parties concerned. Furthermore, when the Counter Claim was filed the Amended Code of Procedures was presented. (SEE EXHIBIT A presented with both Response form and Counter Claim dated May 25 and EXHIBIT B attached to Check #2725). It was the responsibility of NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM to confirm the acceptance of the Amended Code of Procedures prior to August 25, (SEE EXHIBIT D) BEFORE they cashed check number 2725.
D. Parties may modify or supplement these rules as permitted by law. Provisions of this Code govern arbitrations involving an appeal or a review de novo of an arbitration by other Arbitrators.
I, Gloria J. Lindsay, did not agree to arbitration unless arbitration was governed under the Amended Code of Procedures, Provided by myself to all parties concerned. (SEE EXHIBIT A presented with both Response form and Counter Claim dated May 25 and EXHIBIT B attached to Check #2725)
CHARGE 2. National arbitration forum due to actions by of shane n. SEGGARA are in violations of the Code of Procedures and the Amended Code of Procedures (Provided by myself to all parties concerned) by violations to RULE 5.
RULE 5. Summary of Procedures.
M. Access to Justice. This Code shall be interpreted to provide all parties with a fair and independent arbitration and with reasonable access to civil justice. Arbitrations under the Code are governed by the Federal Arbitration Act in accord with Rule 48B
SEE EXHIBIT C Request by a Party for an Order of Dismissal page 2 paragraph: FACT: DENIAL OF IN-PERSON PARTICIPATORY HEARING BY SHANE N. SEGGARA which lays charges of not being impartial.
SEE EXHIBIT D Please note both the date of the envelope and the letter dated August 24 by National Arbitration Forum per Shane N. Segarra. Please notice that this letter was not sent certified as requested in the letter sent on August 16 (See EXHIBIT E by Gloria J. Lindsay requesting that it be so that the alleged Respondent could be assured to get it in time to make payments necessary to her defense.) Please see Exhibit C again, please note on page 2 paragraph FACT: DENIAL OF IN-PERSON PARTICIPATORY HEARING BY NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM (filed with the forum before August 24 the date of the letter by Shane N. Segarra Exhibit D) stating how my mail is sometimes delayed or hindered and refer back to Exhibit E requesting notices that request for payments be sent certified. This is prove that National Arbitration Forum is not interested in allowing me to be able to defend myself form the fraudulent claim made by MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A.
It is reasonable to believe that National Arbitration Forum is not being impartial, as per the alleged agreement provided by MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A. Has a mandatory provision of arbitration under NAF, and that MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A. Is a regular customer of National Arbitration Forum bringing a lot of money and business to NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM in so much as to lead one to believe that National Arbitration Forum is slanted to protect, defend and promote the interests of MBNA AMERICA BANK, N.A. Rather than to remain neutral.
This can be further evidenced when Wolpoff and Abramson, L.L.P. Presented to National Arbitration Forum, by mistake, a Request to Vacate Award as the Respondent satisfied the outstanding obligation prior to the entry of Award why did National Arbitration Forum ignore this paper. If the Respondent satisfied the outstanding obligation prior to the entry of Award as the paper stated by what legal right did National Arbitration Forum deny this item signed with a jurat. If I had filed or failed to file a paper in time or correctly NAF would have sided against me (as with the payment issue above) but in this case NAF favored in the side of the mistake, made by the council for the bank, thus proving failure of NAF to not be impartial.
CHARGE 3. National arbitration forum due to actions by of shane n. SEGGARA you are in violations of the Code of Procedures and the Amended Code of Procedures (Provided by myself to all parties concerned) by violations to RULE 13:
RULE 13. Response.
A1. A written document stating in plain language a response to the Claim or stating the Respondent has insufficient information to affirm or deny a statement. A Response shall also include any defenses to each Claim made, the facts and the law (if known) supporting the defenses, including affirmative defenses and set offs;
I, Gloria J. Lindsay, deny I have information to affirm a statement. I attend to that in the Request for Discovery which shows a series of information I need to be assured that any agreement is valid and lawful. It is up to NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM to provide me the information requested or by default must accept that no lawful or accurate claim exists (as I have contended) and must dismiss any claims levied against me prior to forcing me into arbitration under a fraudulent agreement.
Furthermore, the I did deny and dispute the claim, under the Fair Credit Billing Act. The claimant ignored this as can be evidenced in all the correspondence with the Claimant prior to and at this time. Thus Claimant is in violation of the Agreement they presented to the forum, however you are forcing the injured party against her will, under duress, into arbitration rather than offering her immediate relief which she requested.
A2. An objection to the arbitration of the Claim, if the Respondent so objects. A Response that does not assert this objection is an agreement to the arbitration of the Claim and a waiver of this objection;
SEE EXHIBIT A B and other items presented to National Arbitration Forum as evidenced by my refusal to be forced into arbitration unless it is under the Amended Code of Procedures.
SEE EXHIBIT F (Response form) page one, response one. The Respondent had and does object to being under any Arbitration as Claimant knowingly committed an act of fraud. NATIONAL ARBITRATION SHOULD BE WELL AWARE OF THIS OBJECTION! She has stated it often! In Exhibit F I state, Respondent is not bound by alleged contract as contract was based upon fraud from its inception From that point on it is up to the Claimant to provide prove that they were acting in accordance to all governing laws and within the provisions of State and Federal guidelines and within compliance of the United States Constitution. Whereas, the Claimant refuses or Objects to provide any evidence of consideration, specific statutory authority for it's actions or that it is not usurping any state banking charters and/or the legal limitations of the Constitution. You are now assuming liability should the Claimants or council for the Claimants refuse to provide National Arbitration Forum the information requested. It is now up to you to prove that the contract is valid before it can force any Respondent to suffer unjust or non-impartial arbitration or to dismiss any action against her.
CHARGE 4. National arbitration forum due to actions by of shane n. SEGGARA are in violations of the Code of Procedures and the Amended Code of Procedures (Provided by myself to all parties concerned) by violations to RULE 40:
RULE 40. Voluntary Dismissal.
C. After a Claimant is served with a Response, a Claim may be dismissed at the Request of the Claimant. Before the selection of an Arbitrator, the Director may dismiss the Claim. After the selection of an Arbitrator, the Arbitrator may dismiss the Claim.
National Arbitration Forum is in violation of this as evidenced in charge two above, involving the fact that Wolpoff and Abramson, L.L.P. Did in fact file a Request to Vacate Award as the Respondent satisfied the outstanding obligation prior to the entry of Award and National Arbitration Forum did not honor this request. Even if it was issued by mistake, this is evidence that Wolpoff and Abramson, L.L.P. Does not have a clear and personal knowledge of the case before the forum, and that it may or rather is in error to the facts involved and should have been accepted as submitted, with prejudice. National Arbitration Forum's failing to cause councils to be responsible for false documents promotes frivolous cases (such as this one), and allows councils and parties to act in a reckless manner.
CHARGE 5. National arbitration forum due to actions by of shane n. SEGGARA you are in violations of the Code of Procedures and the Amended Code of Procedures (Provided by myself to all parties concerned) by violations to RULE 48:
RULE 48.interpretation and Application of Code.
A. This Code shall be interpreted in conformity with 9 U.S.C. 1-16 and 9 U.S.C. 201 - 208 in the United States or the applicable law of other countries in order to provide all participants in the arbitration with a fair and impartial proceeding and an enforceable Award or Order.
National Arbitration Forum you are in violation of Rule 48 as you are not acting in a fair and impartial manner, as you have received payment for services not rendered (ignored the mandate of arbitration only under an amended procedures), ignored an objection to the arbitration of the Claim, when the Respondent objected to the lawfulness of claim, hampered my right to defense due to lack of sending requests (which were to be made on a timely basis) not certified as requested, and arbitration coordinator, Shane N. Segarra has both in actions and over the phone, with my son, shown himself to be far from impartial.
RULE 48.interpretation and Application of Code.
D. The Director or Arbitrator may decline the use of arbitration for any dispute, controversy, Claim, Response or Request that is not a proper or legal subject matter for arbitration or where the agreement of the Parties has substantially modified a material portion of the Code. If Parties are denied the opportunity to arbitrate a dispute, controversy or Claim before the Forum, the Parties may seek legal and other remedies in accord with applicable law.
National Arbitration Forum is forcing a hearing on a case that is not proper or legal subject matter, as it is case that is compelling a fraudulent contract, in which the claimant is acting outside of the boundaries of both the state and federal banking charters allow, as well as, the United States Constitution. National Arbitration Forum is being used as an actor, in a conspiracy to commit fraud and to legalize theft against myself. It is with this that I ask that you cease and desist or provide the specific information provided in the Request for Discovery which the claimant refuses to provide or dismiss the case against myself. I am giving you ten (10) days for you to either provide the statutes requested in my Request of Discovery, compel the Claimant to provide specific answers (statutory authority) demanded in my Request of Discovery (copy enclosed), dismiss the initial claim levied against myself per rule 41 (1) or you accept by default that you are not acting impartial and are acting to commit fraud against myself and are acting outside of the codes of procedures and will be liable for damages against me.
According to Rule 41 (1) it is the responsibility of the Director to dismiss any claim that is not supported by evidence. While I gave ample amount of cases all the way up to the Supreme Court backing my response, the claimant and council for the claimant has repeatedly failed to provide even one State or Federal statute that allows them to lend out there own money or that of their customers. Failure to provide evidence that they have the legal authority allowed within their bank charters to loan out the banks money, their customer's money or credit, is ample evidence that no consideration was offered in exchanged for the loan. If no consideration was ever offered for the loan from the claimant than they have breached and fraudulently entered into a contract that they knew they could not legally enter into.
RULE 41.involuntary Dismissal.
RULE 41 (A.)
A Claim or Response may be dismissed by an Arbitrator at the Request of the Director or a Party or on the initiative of the Arbitrator for one or more of the following reasons:
1. It is not supported by evidence.
2. It is not supported by existing law
I received a letter dated September 16 from Mr. Shane Segarra which stated The National Arbitration Forum has received a Request for a for a Participatory Hearing from the Respondent. As the Claimant has agreed to cover the costs of the Participatory Hearing, that Request has been granted by the Forum... The Parties will be notified of the date of the hearing and the appointment of the Arbitrator.
It appears again that I am being denied the In-Person Participatory Hearing under the AMENDED CODE OF PROCEDURES as requested, as only one Arbitrator is being assigned, but the AMENDED CODE OF PROCEDURES requires three Arbitrators.
From amended code of procedures:
RULE 22. Number of Arbitrators.
Due to public interest there shall be three arbitrators for all In-person Participatory Hearings and Document Hearings. For all In-person Participatory Hearings, an arbitration panel consisting of three (3) Arbitrators shall conduct the hearing and issue an Award, unless the Parties agree otherwise. The Director shall designate the chair of the panel, unless the Parties agree otherwise.
Whereas, National Arbitration Forum has repeatedly cashed checks stating See attached letter or To be used ONLY for arbitration under the AMENDED CODE OF PROCEDURES in an In-Person Participatory Hearing (as evidenced by a copy of both sides of the check enclosed) I demand a hearing under the AMENDED CODE OF PROCEDURES as requested or I DENY ANY RIGHT TO BE ARBITRATED BY NATIONAL ARBITRATION FORUM. If national arbitration forum can not perform under the of the agreement they entered (by providing me the arbitration i have agreed and paid for, and upon which you took and accepted payment for) i demand you immediately dismiss any case involving me, purge any information you have on me from your systems and return all the monies unlawfully taken from me under false pretense (and given to you under duress).
i, gloria j. Lindsay, have made a formal request for the name of each and every Directors of National Arbitration Forum, contact addresses and phone numbers, but have failed to receive any information or a reason of denial. Again, this is reason to believe that I am being denied my rights to any impartiality and I have no right to check the backgrounds of the directors to be assured that they have no conflicts of interest. (See attached copy of such request.)
I, Gloria J. Lindsay, have made several formal requests for Orders of Dismissals. I have not heard any reason that these should not be granted by National Arbitration Forum, nor have I been given any evidence that these Orders have been or are being considered. (See attached copy of one such request.)
I, Gloria J. Lindsay, again state that I demand specific evidence of the lawfulness of the debt to be provided from you (or the claimant or claimant's council) or a dismissal of any claim against me under rule 41 (1). I am giving you ten (10) days to provide me with the specific evidence required in my Request For Discovery (enclosed) or a granted Order of Dismissal (with prejudice) against the initial Claimant or I rescind any implied consent to arbitration and demand payment in full for all of the monies paid to National Arbitration, under false pretense, concerning this case before the forum. Should you fail to provide me the things requested above, within the next ten (10) days, this is my notice of intent to litigate against National Arbitration Forum and all parties responsible or concerned and you, National Arbitration Forum (and/or it's representatives) agree by default to be responsible for any and all court costs.
Again, I can not make it any clearer, please provide the services I paid for or I rescind any previous consent to arbitration and demand immediate re-imbursement of monies taken under such false pretenses. Please, provide me the specific answers needed in my Request for an Order of Discovery with in ten (10) days or dismiss the claim under Rule 41 (1). You have ten (10) days to respond, act and conclude this matter or you agree by default that you have not acted impartial, will not act impartial and you are acting as a co-conspirator to steal under fraud monies from me in violation of Federal Rico and Racketeering laws. The time will begin from the receipt of this letter. Please act quickly.
Sincerely,
Gloria J. Lindsay
Closing Facts:
1. My mother did not get her amended code of procedures, but no less than 2 checks were cashed by NAF which stated directly on checks or accompaning letter "To be used with Amended Code of Procedures".
2."Case Co-ordinator" Shane N. Segarra, told me over the phone "Only the claimant may modify the code of procedures" although Rule 1: D states "Parties may modify". Why was this one sided only despite what the Code of Procedures specifically states? Why did Shane N. Segarra repeatedly refuse to answer this question?
3. My mother paid for a order of discovery... Which she has not received, but was forced to defend herself without any needed information in her request for discovery. Why was she charged for items not received and why did NAF refuse to issue the Order for Discovery as it claims it will in the Code of Procedures.
4. MBNA America Bank, through it's council Wolpoff and Abramson, were given 10 days to object to any requests for discovery. It took them 14 days to respond... And this was overlooked by Shane N. Segarra of National Arbitration. Why were deadlines used only against my mother?
5. My mother did filed no less than 3 requests for dismissal due to bias... All were ignored? Why were there never any investigations or answers provided to her?
6. MBNA America Bank refused to provided evidence that they ever loaned any money. (ignored request for discover) but "impartial arbitrator" sided with the bank.
7."impartial arbitrator" saw no conflicts of interest... Although all these and more items of conflict were pointed out to him. (Hope the banks are paying him enough to remain "impartial" for them.)
We are willing to provide evidence and affidavits of the fraud of the "impartial" arbitration through National Arbitration Forum to anyone in a class action lawsuit against NAF. Contact us.
Peter John
Waukesha, Wisconsin
U.S.A.
0 comments