Complaint Review: Chase Manhattan Bank - New York New York

September 26, 2007

Only 1,944 People Said Something?

August 27, 2007

"Last year 1,944 New Yorkers saw something and said something."

[Assistant manager of branch 120 testify yes it can be done, that he does not need the customer signature in order to add a name to the Account]

What You Call A Dog Case.

The coming attack on our will & codicil by

Chase Manhattan Banks and

New York civil court of Brooklyn NY

Chase Manhattan Bank is above the law.

Miss Agnes Dixon 82 Years Young, born in Brooklyn, New York.

Denied Her Own Money, For Her Funeral.

Account #120465873701Single Ownership Accounts

Official Check # 0888100104 $9.524.98

December 18, 2000 Uncontested registered will & codicil.

Miss Agnes Dixon gave no one authorization to create a ledge Totten trust account.

Miss Agnes Dixon did not authorize anyone to make withdraws from her savings account.

Let the deceased speak for herself, voice can be verified, in the DVD made for TV.

Comptroller of the Currency

Administrator of National Banks.

Customer Assistance Group.

C.C.A.N.B. Complaint # 632695

State of New York office of the Attorney General

Thomas G. Conway

Complaint number # 2006-562384

The coming attack on our will & codicil by banks and New York civil court of Brooklyn.

Banking Association should be outrage from the decision, of December 20, 2001

Because the decision will put every savings account in jeopardy the elderly and senior citizens, will be at greater risk.

[Assistant manager of branch 120 testify yes it can be done, that he does not need the customer signature in order to add a name to the Account]

I have been writing to government institution, and politicians for five years and has not received any help, as of yet,

this issue is not a Republican or a Democratic problem. This problem is all of our problem.

I Bob Meadows cannot find an attorney to represent me. You know, and I know this is what you call a dog case, "whereas adequate protection of the human rights and fundamental freedoms to which all persons are entitled be they economic, social and cultural, or civil and political, requires that all persons have effective access to legal services provided by an independent legal profession".

Nobody want to go up against Chase Manhattan Bank.

NOTICE OF BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY: UCC, Section 3-307

Finally after five years of writing the Bar Association. I received an e-mail.

As you can see what was written in the e-mail from "Clara G, Schwab, Esq.

I believe you have contacted the legal Referral Services several times in the past and we have advised you that we cannot be of assistance. If you would like speech with me regarding this.

You can reach me at telephone number 212- 382-6715"

Clara G, Schwabe, Esq.

Managing Attorney, Legal Referral Service.

New York City bar Association

42 West 44th Street, NY 10036

Telephone 212-382-6715

Here I am asking New York City bar Association for a civil rights lawyer, and they turned right around and violate my civil rights by refusing to give the access to an attorney. You cannot make this stuff up, and I have it in writing. I will be bringing a lawsuit against Clara G, Schwabe, Esq.

Managing Attorney, Legal Referral Service.

Chase can choose who is allowed to cash they cashier's check!

Just putting some e-mail and letters that I have received in the past six years. By now, you know my name is Bob Meadows, I was chosen by Miss Agnes G. Dixon to be her executive, recognized by the Surrogate Courts of Brooklyn New York, County of King. Therefore, you can see what the Hell that I have been going through, the last six years this is more than a complaint, their should be criminal charges, placed upon this bank. Chase Manhattan Bank J.P. Morgan is liable for Chase Manhattan Bank, January 26, 2001 stopping payment on cashier's check, $9,524.98, Chase Manhattan Bank, had no court order, no letter of dishonor that was ever sent to me, and in addition,

"Chase Manhattan Bank J.P. Morgan stole my money".

First time:

Surrogate Courts of Brooklyn New York, County of King.

December 18, 2000 Agnes Dixon Account #120465873701,Single Ownership Accounts

Surrogate Courts found only one name on the account Agnes Dixon.

#2000-05205 131647

Second time: reinstated

Surrogate Courts of Brooklyn New York, County of King.

April 16, 2001 Agnes Dixon Account #120465873701,Single Ownership Accounts

Surrogate Courts found only one name on the account Agnes Dixon.

#2000-05205 131648

I have made over 25 visits to Surrogate Courts because I was bamboos about the title of Agnes Dixon, account by a paralegal department Chase Manhattan Bank.

Surrogate Courts informed me Bob Meadows that the court only issues a court order,

And that they do not enforce It, and if someone get they name on the account. They do not care the money belongs to the beneficiary although it did not show up on the account.

Obstruction of justice letters.

NOTICE OF BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY: UCC, Section 3-307

First letter dated February 16, 2001 from Mary Lee Hubschmitt , chase paralegal, a conspiracy, premeditated, she never give a name of the beneficiary.

Mary Lee Radovich

Paralegal

Chase

The Chase Manhattan Bank

Legal Department

One Chase Manhattan Plaza, 25th Floor

New York, NY 10081

Tel 212-552-7821

Fax 212-383-8065

February 16, 2001

Bob Meadows P.O. Box 180035 Brooklyn, NY 11218

Re: Agnes Dixon Account #120465873701

Dear Mr. Meadows:

I am in receipt of your letter dated February 1, 2001 which has been forwarded to my attention for response.

Chase has placed a hold on the above-referenced account because there appears to be a dispute as to who is the owner of the funds, (yourself or the beneficiary) As such, Chase will not pay out the funds until Chase receives either an agreement signed by all the interested parties or a court order directing payment.

I trust this is responsive to your request.

Yours truly,

cc: Sharon Jordan, Branch 120 Diane Coleman, Branch 120 Tereen Clarke , Branch 888

260495:v01

Second letter from Mary Lee Hubschmitt , paralegal legal department, March 12, 2001. She is deceitful her a*s off, obstruction of justice perjury intent to defraud. She never gives a name of the beneficiary. This is where she becomes a judge; she is gone to override a judge.

CHASE

The Chase Manhattan Bank Mary Lee Radovich

Legal Department Paralegal

One Chase Manhattan Plaza, 25th Floor

New York, NY 10081

Tel 212-552-7821

Fax 212-383-8065

March 12, 2001

Bob Meadows

P.O. Box 180035

Brooklyn, N.Y. 11218

Re: Agnes Dixon Account #120465873701

Dear Mr. Meadows:

I am in receipt of your letter dated February 28, 2001 and the Voluntary Administrator Certificate.

As stated previously in my February 16, 2001 letter, Chase has placed a hold on the above-referenced account because there appears to be a dispute as to who is the owner of the funds, (yourself or the beneficiary) As such, Chase will not pay out the funds until Chase receives either an agreement signed by all the interested parties or a court order directing payment. The hold will remain on the account until I receive the appropriate documentation. The Voluntary Administrator Certificate is not sufficient for this specific account since it appears that this is not an individual account.

I trust this is responsive to your request. cc: Sharon Jordan, Branch 120 Diane Coleman, Branch 120 Tereen Clarke , Branch 888 261123:v01

Third letter from Mary Lee Hubschmitt , paralegal legal department J.P. Morgan chase this is when J.P. Morgan brought into chase family or vice versa. April 13, 2001. She has a set of balls, Obstruction of justice and mail fraud. In this letter, I do not know what the hell. She was smoking. When she sent this letter out through the mail. With all the made-up statement that appears on this letter, I myself. Mr. Meadows, in possession of signs receipts from the post office, the mail room Chase Manhattan Bank. Which I have sent her one of the original Article 13 with the State of New York, seal on it because it was one of the original not a copy. Now she is asking for it and telling me that I have not submit my request to court, she is nothing but a liar, In addition, she put it in writing. Check it out her letter from March12, 2001. She clearly stated that she has receipt the voluntary administrator certificate from me.

She never gives a name of the beneficiary.

jPMorganChase

Mary Lee Hubschmitt

Paralegal

Legal Department

April 13, 2001

Bob Meadows P.O. Box 180035 Brooklyn, N.Y. 11218

Re: Account #120465873701-Agnes Dixon

Dear Mr. Meadows:

I am in receipt of your letter dated April 5,2001 regarding the above-referenced account.

I do not appreciate the derogatory language about the unresponsiveness of Chase regarding this matter,

when I have written to you on several prior occasions with our position.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the documentation you submitted pertaining to your petition to the

court regarding the appointment of a voluntary administrator is insufficient.

Pursuant to Article 13 of The Surrogate's Court Procedure Act, you must have a certified copy of an affidavit or of a short certificate of a judge or clerk of the Surrogate's Court officially appointing your as the Voluntary Administrator. You have only submitted your request to the Court.

Lastly, the account in question is not an individual account and therefore not an asset of the Agnes Dixon estate. If the appointed fiduciary for the estate believes that this account is an estate asset, rather than a totten trust, then, as previously stated on numerous occasions, you must obtain a court order or an agreement between the fiduciary for the estate and the beneficiary of the account agreeing that this will be considered an estate asset.

I trust-that this is responsive to your request.

Yours truly,

262256:v01

If.Morgan Chase & Co. One Chase Manhattan Plaza, Floor 25, New York, NY 10081 Telephone: 212 552 7821 Facsimile: 212 383 8065

Filed a lawsuit May 10, 2001

Discovery:

In discovery, requested all documentation of Agnes Dixon savings

Account #120-465873701,Single Ownership Accounts from Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith, Chase Manhattan Bank, paralegal department and copies of all withdrawal receipts,

Only thing that was sent to me. Mr. Meadows was bank statements, nothing else

There were no document sent to me about a joint account, nor there no documentation of a Totten trust account at all in addition , there was no date for the allege Totten trust.

Agnes Dixon Account #120-465873701, Single Ownership Accounts.

Chase Manhattan Bank is in violation UCC, Section 3-307

Chase Manhattan Bank is in violation of two Article 13.

Chase Manhattan Bank. Stop payment on cashier's check for no legitimate reason.

Chase Manhattan Bank has no document of a joint account for this account.

Chase Manhattan Bank has no document of a Totten trust for this account.

Chase Manhattan Bank has sent no letter of dishonor, to me Mr. Meadows.

Chase Manhattan Bank, as no court order, in order to stop payment of cashier's check.

Since the bank money order is a cashier's check equivalent, it is NOT possible to place a stop payment on it.

Chase Manhattan Bank, as no witness to allege transaction of October 4, 1999.

Chase Manhattan Bank has no Powell attorney for this account.

Chase Manhattan Bank has no sign complaint from anyone.

Chase Manhattan Bank created a bogus beneficiary in the courtroom of the trial

December 20, 2001.

Federal computer crime.

December 20th, 2001 civil court, City of New York, County of Kings.

Judge: Geoffrey D. Wright, No. 45108 KCV 2001 Holder-in due- Course,

Assistant manager Mr. Williams of branch 120 was late, 45 minutes late.

Chase lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith, and I, Mr. Meadows, was asked to come into the judge's chambers, that is where the lawyer Chase lawyer told the judge's secretary that they did not have a signature for the Totten trust account,

That the account holder intended to create a Totten trust account.

However, she never did sign, the signature card.

A few minutes later in the courtroom. The trial was on,

Judge Wright never really dress the issue of the cashier's check, is anyone would read the transcript from the trial you will see Judge Wright had a probate hearing in a civil court.

Chase lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith misled the court with bogus document that was not sent to me in discovery.

Chase Manhattan Bank did not subpoena so call beneficiary, you wonder why.

The bogus document indicated, Chases lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith can read very well, on the bogus document. It clearly states the relationship is the son.

Judge Wright accepted to two documents, as evidence.

Judge Wright examined the documents, and he read them. In addition, you can clearly see on the document. Its state relationship son.

Miss Agnes Dixon gave no one authorization to create a ledge Totten trust account.

How and hell is Miss Agnes Dixon is gone to revoke something that she has no knowledge of.

Chases lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith he stated that Miss Agnes Dixon will did not revoked the alleged Totten trust nor did her codicil.

Chases lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith he stated that Miss Agnes Dixon to infirm to travel back to the bank.

Someone remove money from this account evidenced from the bank statements ,10 times. Chase has no Powell attorney for this account?.

I myself Mr. Meadows testified that I driven Mrs. Agnes Dixon to the bank several times in the year of Jim Crow banking 2000.

Chase Manhattan Bank overruled, Agnes Dixon will & codicil.

When chases lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith, said to the court that the nephew was the beneficiary Miss Agnes Dixon nephew.

Chase Manhattan Bank could not get the son to sign a complaint.

So they came up with bait and switch.

I Bob Meadows asked Judge Wright is Shawn Dixon is the nephew, the judge refused to answer the question. Nor did Chase's lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith.

This is the very first time. Chase Manhattan Bank, or Chase lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith, ever indication the benefactors name, and I know for a fact,

Miss Dixon has no nephew (By such name).

Judge Wright did question assistant manager about the customer do not have to sign anything in order to change the name.

Assistant manager testify yes it can be done, that he does not need the customer signature in order to add a name to the account, or to remove a name. And it can be done over the telephone to.

Assistant manager testified that he made the changes on the computer.

Which is a federal computer crime, Miss Agnes Dixon did not authorize him to do a d**n thing, he has no signature?.

Assistant manager also testify that he always took care of transactions for

Miss Agnes Dixon. (" I guess assistant manager was in the out house, when someone came in to branch 120 made withdraws from Miss Agnes Dixon account in the year of Jim Crow 2000").

Assistant manager also testify that Miss Agnes Dixon returned to the Bank. Just one

Time after October 4, 1999. (October 18, 1999).

Assistant manager testified that the bank had heard that she had died.

Chase Manhattan Bank allowed pilfering from this account.

This is after October 18, 1999. Someone remove money from this account more than eight times.

Assistant manager also testify that he did not know that guy that came into the Bank with Miss Agnes Dixon, known as that guy also known as Shawn Dixon.

Assistant manager, testified that he did not get a Social Security number for

Shawn Dixon, No he is jest, a beneficiary.

Although there is a Social Security number on the bogus Powell of attorney document.

Assistant manager testified October 4, 1999. Miss Agnes Dixon came into the bank with that guy.

These are some of the names that Chase is describing the person that came into the bank, with Miss Agnes Dixon October 4, 1999.

1. Somebody.

2. That guy.

3. S. Dixon.

4. Shawn Dixon the nephew.

5. The beneficiary.

You would think if a perpetrator comes into Chase Manhattan Bank and stated that he was the benefactor of Miss Agnes Dixon savings account. The first thing they will do. To have an investigation. After finding no paperwork to back up his claim.

Assistant manager never clarified, who came in to the bank, with Miss Agnes Dixon on October 4, 1999, where is his witness, they cannot subpoena, someone that does not exist.

Assistant manager testified, she Miss Agnes Dixon stated to him the, assistant manager that she wanted to put somebody on her account, and that she was not feeling well, then she went to the cashier, to get some money and then she left the bank. Without signing.

Miss Agnes Dixon, 80 years old, leaving the bank with unknown perpetrated and $3000 in cash. Well you put it this way; some body had $2500 in their pocket.

Miss Agnes Dixon monthly maintenance cost is $500. She had cancer, and arthritis.

I Bob Meadows forewarn the court that Miss. Agnes Dixon was being ripped off their wares four Withdraws on the very same day, of allege Totten trust account creation.

I guess Chase Manhattan Bank ran out of ink on October 4, 1999, after all their where four different withdraws.

Judge Wright stated there was no evidence of it.

Judge Wright overruled, Agnes Dixon will & codicil.

Even with the two bogus documents that Chase presented as evident,

Judge Wright stated there is no support of a Totten trust account.

Now you would think after ruling no verification of Totten trust,

The judge would rule for plaintiff.

Judge Wright took 105 days. For a decision.

April 5, 2002

Judge Wright found Chase Manhattan Bank to be harmless, declared a mistrial.

Never gave a second thought about the two bogus documents that was presented as evident, failed to inform the D.A. about the bogus document. Far as I know.

I Bob Meadows, has written, Brooklyn DA twice, no respond.

Ruling:

I Bob Meadows, should bring the nonexistent nephew, known as Shawn Dixon

The nephew of Miss Agnes G. Dixon to a new trial, remember this person does not exist.

Chase Manhattan Bank created the allege nephew, right there in the courtroom and this was no accident.

I appealed the case:

I received a stay order

Chase Manhattan Bank is in violation of UCC, Section 3-307.

Chase Manhattan Bank is in violation of stay order.

Chase Manhattan Bank is in violation of two Article 13.

Chase Manhattan Bank has no sign complaint from anyone.

Chase lawyer Mr. Robert M. Rosenblith, made a dishonest statement, in his brief to the Supreme Court, that I, Mr. Bob Meadows as returned the cashier's check to Chase Manhattan Bank that is untrue. I am still in possession of cashier's check.

Appellate Term of the Supreme Court of the State of New York , for the second and 11th judicial Districts, in Kings County April 1, 2003 decision override the low court.

Charges can be reinstated against the defendant, Chase Manhattan Bank without. Course.

Two days later, April 3, 2003 received threatening phone call from a person said he was

Nassau Police Department, " I Meadows should not make contact with Mary Lee Hubschmitt of J.P. Morgan you will be arrested."

This from a New Yorkers saw something and said something, but no one is listening.

Denied

Brooklyn, New York

U.S.A.