• Approved

David-Michael: Barker and Angela: Barker

Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending
Tony, Case Manager NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation
Melissa, NAB Resolve Team
Nathan, Case Manager NAB Resolve
Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited
Gary McNamara, Albany Commercial Debt Collectors

When negotiating a contract, full disclosure is the act of providing all material information, or telling the
“whole truth”, about any matter which may influence the decision-making of the other party or parties
before they decide to enter into a contract. If either party fails to make full disclosure, the contract is Null
and Void.

The “National Australia Bank Limited” Loan Agreement is not valid and enforceable as the following
Defendants refuse to provide full disclosure and therefore the agreement was void from the outset and is
the evidence of the fraud.

1. Full Disclosure Denied by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren:
A ‘Request for Further and Better Particulars’ (Court of Record No: CR-06-002, CR-06-012) was received
by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, containing 14 questions. Mr Mike Warren did not reply and therefore
failed as The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending National Australia Bank Limited to provide full
disclosure and verify a valid contract.

The ‘Notice of Default’ (Court of Record No: CR-06-010, CR-06-015) received by the Defendant, Mr Mike
Warren, stated the universal maxim of law, Notice to Agent is Notice to Principle and Notice to Principle is
Notice to Agent, meaning all addressed parties Jointly and Severally as well as their Successors,
Nominees, Agents and Assigns and therefore all Defendants have failed to provide full disclosure.

Full Disclosure denial confirmed by the Defendant, Tony (Case Manager).
We received an email from Tony (Court of Record No: CR-06-006): “Furthermore we understand you had
questioned the manner in which we fund lending, under the banking code of practise, “National Australia
Bank Limited” are not required to provide internal processing document on funding.”

Invalid Contract – Parties not Competent to Contract
The parties to a contract should be competent, being of the age of majority/consent, of sound mind, and not
disqualified from contracting by any law to which s/he is subject. A flaw in capacity may be due to minority,
lunacy, idiocy, drunkenness or status. The status of the parties should be of like kind, being artificial Legal
Person and artificial Legal Person, or living Man/Woman and living Man/Woman, allowing two or more
parties but never a mixture of these kinds.

At the time of the Loan Application/Agreement We, the living woman ‘Angela’ of the house of “Marijanich”
and the living man ‘David-Michael’ of the house of “Barker” were unaware of the Age of Majority and were
therefore Minors. We had been deceived throughout our entire lives into believing we were the artificial
Legal Person making us not competent parties to the contract. This deception/fraud made our Loan
Agreement an invalid contract, Ab Anitio (from the beginning).

2. Personage – Disregarding Age of Majority Declaration – Fraud
Personage: Misrepresenting a living man or woman as a fictional “person” causing unwitting “joinder”.
Unlawful breach of copyright: Unauthorised use of and/or publishing of the name “DAVID MICHAEL
BARKER” and “Mr David Barker” and “ANGELA BARKER” and “Mrs Angela Barker” (legal fictitious
names); and

Having entered into the Loan Agreement as minors, we have recently claimed our Estates and ceased
acting as a Minor, reaching the Age of Majority to become Sovereign Over Self and have claimed the Right
Occupancy of the Office of Steward/Executor/Executrix of our Estates; and
We have stopped Acting as a Fiction (de-facto, without fact) and began to Live as a Real Man/Woman (de￾jure, right); and

We sent a ‘Notice of Express Trust Contract’ (Court of Record No: CR-06-027) and a Notice of Unlawful
Action as No True Contract Exists (Court of Record No: CR-06-062) to the Defendants, Mellissa, (NAB
Resolve Team) and Mr Mike Warren, (The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending) which stated the
universal maxim of law, Notice to Agent is Notice to Principle and Notice to Principle is Notice to Agent,
meaning all addressed parties Jointly and Severally as well as their Successors, Nominees, Agents and
Assigns, claiming our proper title as the Executor/Executrix and Equitable Beneficial Named Estate Trust
Title Holders; and

Therefore, all the Defendants have Disregarded our ‘Notice of Express Trust Contract’ in which we
proclaimed that we had recently reached the Age of Majority (coming of age) in the legal sense and no
longer the “Legal Fiction” as per the Age of Majority Act and the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 CHAPTER 11 18
and 19 Cha 2; and

By declaring that this Trust exists and that it is a Named Estate Trust of which we are the
Executor/Executrix, Equitable Beneficial Named Estate Trust Title Holders in all matters relating to it, we
no longer require the Defendants and/or “National Australia Bank Limited” to act as beneficiary on
documents regarding the Trust’s contract administration matters. As we expressed that we have claimed
our proper title in this relationship on all administrative documents, and in correcting our positions regarding
this administrative matter, Mellissa and/or Mr Mike Warren and/or “National Australia Bank Limited” are
acting in the capacity as Trustee. In addressing us as the Legal Fiction Names, the Defendants are
continuing to participate in the deception/fraud of Personage.

3. Non Disclosure of Valuable Consideration
Consideration is something of value that is possessed by the parties that is brought to the contract table.
This something of value is bargained for and given in exchange for a promise or performance.
The “National Australia Bank Limited” Loan Agreement is not valid and enforceable as the Defendants have
failed to provide material evidence of Agreed Consideration (the record as to the source of the funds lent to
the Borrower) and as the “National Australia Bank Limited” has not given any consideration “National
Australia Bank Limited” cannot suffer any loss; and

“National Australia Bank Limited” Provided None of own Money or commercial instruments so “National
Australia Bank Limited” has No Consideration in the transaction and so no True Contract exists; and
Within the ‘Request for Further and Better Particulars’ (Court of Record No: CR-06-002, CR-06-012)
received my Mr Mike Warren, questions 2, 3 & 4 requested disclosure of Consideration. The Defendant, Mr
Mike Warren did not reply and therefore failed to respond to the questions; and

The ‘Notice of Default’ (Court of Record No: CR-06-010, CR-06-015) was received by the Defendant, Mr
Mike Warren, which stated the universal maxim of law, Notice to Agent is Notice to Principle and Notice to
Principle is Notice to Agent, meaning all addressed parties Jointly and Severally as well as their
Successors, Nominees, Agents and Assigns and therefore all Defendants have failed to provide full
disclosure of valuable consideration; and

We received email confirmation (Court of Record No: CR-06-006) that Full Disclosure of Valuable
Consideration will not be given from the Defendant, Tony (Case Manager): “Furthermore we understand
you had questioned the manner in which we fund lending, under the banking code of practise, “National
Australia Bank Limited” are not required to provide internal processing document on funding.”

4. Failure to Acknowledge Private Settlement Agreement
The Defendants failed to provide Full Disclosure, ignored Lawful Notices and failed/refused to
validate/verify any debt owing by “DAVID MICHAEL BARKER” and “Mr David Barker” (legal fictitious
names), and “ANGELA BARKER” and “Mrs Angela Barker” (legal fictitious names), to “National Australia
Bank Limited” within the time frame afforded them.

The Defendant, Mr Mike Warren received our ‘Notice of Default’ (Court of Record No: CR-06-010, CR-06-
015) which stated the universal maxim of law, Notice to Agent is Notice to Principle and Notice to Principle
is Notice to Agent, meaning all addressed parties Jointly and Severally as well as their Successors,
Nominees, Agents and Assigns. This constitutes all the Defendants acceptance of and agreement to the
Private Settlement Agreement (Court of Record No: CR-06-001, CR-06-011) between the parties. The
‘Notice of Default’ was signed under Court of Summary Jurisdiction.

Part 10 Instruments not covered by the Legislation Act 2003, and parliamentary resolutions Section 47
court of summary jurisdiction means any justice of the peace, or magistrate of a State or Territory, sitting
as a court of summary jurisdiction.

5. Disregarding Bill of Exchange
In receipt of the Notice of Express Trust Contract (Court of Record No: CR-06-027) and the Notice of
Unlawful Action as No True Contract Exists (Court of Record No: CR-06-062), both lawful Notices stating
the universal maxim of law, Notice to Agent is Notice to Principle and Notice to Principle is Notice to Agent,
meaning all addressed parties Jointly and Severally as well as their Successors, Nominees, Agents and
Assigns, all the Defendants were notified the following:

BILLS OF EXCHANGE ACT 1909
That “National Australia Bank Limited” does accept cheques, and a cheque is a Bill of Exchange Pursuant
to the Bills of Exchange Act 1909 Sect 45-46/61, and that “Delivery” means the bill has been delivered and
the debt is now paid in full, discharged and offset; and

Persuant to the Bills of Exchange Act 1909, (in force – Latest Version), PART III, – CHEQUES ON A
BANKER. DIVISION 1. – Cheques Generally, 78. – (1.) A cheque is a bill of exchange… ; and

In refusing to honour Our remittance as declared by Us the Equitable Beneficial Named Estate Trust Title
Holder, and increasing the amount each time the Defendants send another demand is a crime under the;
BILLS OF EXCHANGE ACT 1909 – SECT 22 Definition and requisites of acceptance (1), (2) (a) & (b); and
Part II Bills of exchange Division 1 Form and interpretation 25 Inchoate instruments (1), (2), (3) & (4); and
Part II Bills of exchange Division 3 The consideration for a bill 35 Presumption of value and good faith (1),
(2); and
Part II Bills of exchange Division 5 General duties of the holder 47 Non- acceptance; and
Part II Bills of exchange Division 5 General duties of the holder 48 Dishonour by non-acceptance and its
consequences (1) (a), (b) & (2); and
Part II Bills of exchange Division 7 Discharge of bill 68 Cancellation (1), (2), (3); and

BANKING ACT 1959
Therefore, as a cheque is a Bill of Exchange, the Defendants have agreed and confirm that “National
Australia Bank Limited” does accept Bills of Exchange as a legitimate payment method; and Bills of
Exchange cannot legally be refused as Legal Tender/Australian Currency according to the BANKING ACT
1959 – SECT 39 Power to make regulations (8) states that “Australian currency” includes bills of exchange,
and Bills of Exchange are included as “Money”; A NEW TAX SYSTEM (GOODS AND SERVICES TAX)
ACT 1999 – SECT 195.1 Dictionary “money” includes: (a) currency (whether of Australia or of any other
country); and (b) promissory notes and bills of exchange; and

CURRENCY ACT
CURRENCY ACT 1965 – SECT 9 Transactions to be in Australian currency (1); and
CURRENCY ACT 1965 – SECT 19 Payments during and after transition period (1) (a), (b) (i) & (ii); and
CURRENCY ACT 1965 – SECT 16 Legal tender (1); and
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
UCC3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, A cheque is a Negotiable Instrument, (a) (1) (2) (3) (i) (ii) (iii) (b)
(c) (d) (e)
UCC 3-105. ISSUE OF INSTRUMENT
(a) “Issue” means the first delivery of an instrument by the maker or drawer, whether to a holder or non
holder, for the purpose of giving rights on the instrument to any person.
UCC3-106. UNCONDITIONAL PROMISE OR ORDER.
(a) Except as provided in this section, for the purposes of Section 3-104(a), a promise or order is
unconditional unless it states [otherwise].

Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act 1901 – SECT 51, (xvi) – Bill of Exchange and Promissory
Note.

The Defendants were notified that “National Australia Bank Limited” does accept cheques, and as a
cheque is a Bill of Exchange “National Australia Bank Limited” therefore does accept Bills of Exchange;
and that in 1966 the lawful money of The Commonwealth was substituted (without referendum) with
fiat/military scrip (debt instruments), thereby making it impossible to expunge any debt, as a debt cannot be
paid with a debt. For this reason and as the Equitable Beneficial Title Holder/Secured party (not the
Trustee/Debtor), the only payment method available to us lawfully and legally to settle the account, is via
the Bills of Exchange Act; and

In refusing to accept a legitimate Bill of Exchange for such purposes is in direct violation of the legal status
and treatment mandated for Bills of Exchange as a form of Australian currency and money as defined
across multiple Commonwealth Statutes and Acts; and

There are no exemptions or provisions in Australian law that provide a statutory basis for companies,
businesses or individuals to refuse acceptance of a properly payable Bill of Exchange when tendered for a
consumer purchase or transaction involving money currency; and

“National Australia Bank Limited” and it’s employees have dishonoured their fiduciary duty to
settle/discharge the Bill of Exchange already endorsed, mailed, accepted, and still in their possession; and
The Defendants in denying our remittance (“payment”), as our final attempt to settle the bank’s claims,
have no further claim, therefore no lawful/legal right to demand further “payment”.

6. Unwelcome and Unlawful Trespass
Trespass and/or violation of Notice of Trespass of property and/or physical body.
The Defendant, Gary McNamara, (Albany Commercial Debt Collectors) as a third party interloper (sent by
“National Australia Bank Limited”) ignored our Trespass Notice and knocked on our door demanding
payment (Court of Record No: CR-06-035).
Number 8 of the 8 Essentials of a contract is: 8. Privity of contract:
1. A contract exists only between the parties.
2. No 3rd party can obtain rights within a contract
3. Or buy or sell a contract without express permission of the original parties.
Therefore, all the Defendants have broken the Privity of Contract and so no True Contract exists.

7. Extortion – Demanding Property with Intent to Steal – Mortgage
over Property – Threat of Enforcement Action/Theft
Extortion: The practice of obtaining something, especially money, through force or threats.
The Defendants continue to ignore the Private Settlement Agreement, the Bills of Exchange Act, continue
to demand payment and threaten debt recovery action (Theft/Sale of Property); and

“National Australia Bank Limited” Has No True Need for a Mortgage over the Borrower’s Property, since
the Bank has No Consideration, No Risk and No Need for Security; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Exploited (Account Holder) by demanding a Redundant and Unjust
Mortgage; and

“National Australia Bank Limited” Deceived (Account Holder) that the Mortgage is needed as Security.
Mortgage Contract is a second Financial Instrument Created by the (Account Holder). Deposit of the
Mortgage Contract was not credited to the (Account Holder). “National Australia Bank Limited” sold the
(Account Holder) Mortgage Contract for profit without disclosure or share of proceeds to (Account Holder).
Sale of the Mortgage Contract confirms it has intrinsic value as an Asset yet that value was not credited
to the (Account Holder) as Creator and Depositor of the Mortgage Contract; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Extorts Unjust Repayments from the (Account Holder) under Duress with
threat of Foreclosure; and

DENTONS “Notice of Default” is Notice given by the lender (the Defendants) which states they may
commence Enforcement Proceedings in relation to the default, and, if relevant, repossession of the
mortgaged property may begin. The lender proposes to exercise a power of sale in respect of the
mortgaged property. Harassment/verbal threats and/or physical force from/by any “officer” used against our
incarnate spirit, flesh-and-blood living-being self is a crime.

Pursuant to the Crimes Act 1900 SECT 99 Demanding property with intent to steal
(1) Whosoever, with menaces, or by force, demands any property from any person, with intent to steal the
same, shall be liable to imprisonment for ten years.
(2) A person is guilty of an offence under this subsection if the person commits an offence under
subsection (1) in the company of another person or persons. A person convicted of an offence under this
subsection is liable to imprisonment for 14 years.
(3) It is immaterial whether any such menace is of violence or injury by the offender or by any other person.

8. Extortion – Profiteering Through Deception – Banking Fraud
Deception – Off Balance-sheet Accounting – Calling Credit a Loan – Committing Banking Fraud.
Fraud Act 2006 – “Insisting or demanding payment without a preexisting commercial arrangement which is
based on presentable fact in the form of a commercial agreement is an act of deception. Payment is a
commercial activity. Profiteering through deception is an act of fraud.”

“National Australia Bank Limited” advanced none of own money to (Account Holder) but only monetized
(Account Holder) signature; and
The Financial Instrument remains property of (Account Holder) since the (Account Holder) created the
Financial Instrument with the signature; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Failed to Disclose to the (Account Holder) that the (Account Holder)
Signature Created New credit that is claimed by the Bank as a Loan to the Borrower; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Deceived Borrower by Calling Credit a “Loan” when it is a Deposited
Asset created by the (Account Holder); and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Deceives Public at large by calling this process Mortgage Lending, Loan
and similar; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Failed to Disclose to (Account Holder) that the (Account Holder) Created
an Asset (Financial Instrument) deposited with the Bank by the (Account Holder); and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Failed to Disclose the Bank’s Liability to the (Account Holder) for the
Value of the Asset of the commercial instrument; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Failed to Give (Account Holder) a Receipt for Deposit of the (Account
Holders) Asset or commercial instrument; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Deceived (Account Holder) that the (Account Holder’s) self-created Credit
is a “Loan” from the Bank, thus there is No Full Disclosure so no True Contract exists; and
(Account Holder) is the True Creditor in the Transaction; and
(Account Holder) Created the new credit as a commercial instrument; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Deceived (Account Holder) that (Account Holder) is Debtor not Creditor;
and
“National Australia Bank Limited” hides its Liability by off balance-sheet accounting and only shows its
Debtor ledger in order to Deceive the Borrower and the Court. “National Australia Bank Limited” is licensed
by the “Corporate Government” to commit actions that would otherwise be illegal (Banking Fraud). The
court is a sub office of the same “Corporate Government”. The Court has an obligation to support actions
licensed by the “Corporate Government”. There is a clear conflict of interests here; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Deceived Borrower by Charging Interest and Fees when there is no
consideration provided to the (Account Holder) by the Bank; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Demanded (Account Holder) Repayments without Just Cause, which is
Deception, Theft and Fraud; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Extorts Unjust Repayments from the (Account Holder) under Duress with
threat of Foreclosure; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Steals (Account Holder) wealth by intimidating (Account Holder) to make
Unjust and fraudulent Loan Repayments; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” makes Fraudulent Charges to (Account Holder) for Loan Repayments
which the Bank has no lawful right to since it is not the Holder in Due Course of the Loan Contract; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Interest is Usurious based on there being No Money Provided to the
(Account Holder) by the Bank so that any interest charged at all would be Usurious.

9. Deception – Securitization of Financial Instrument
The Defendants refuse to answer questions 6,7 and 8 in the ‘Request for Further and Better Particulars’
(Court of Record No: CR-06-002, CR-06-012) regarding the security given to National Australia Bank
Limited by us, whether this security been sold or given as security/surety to another party and whether
“National Australia Bank Limited” participate in a securitization scheme whereby debts/promissory notes
are bundled and then sold-on to a third party/parties via special purpose vehicles, entities or alike
processes; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Hid the truth from the (Account Holder), not admitting Theft, nor sharing
proceeds of the sale of the (Account Holder’s) Financial Instrument with the (Account Holder) and creator
of the financial instrument. The (Account Holder’s) Financial Instrument was converted into a Security
through a Trust or similar arrangement in order to defeat restrictions on transactions of Loan Contracts.
The Security including the Loan Contract was sold to investors, despite the fact that such Securitization is
illegal; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Deceived the (Account Holder) that the Bank is Holder in Due Course of
the Loan Contract, however, “National Australia Bank Limited” is not the Holder in Due Course of the Loan
Contract. Only the Holder in Due Course can claim on the Loan Contract; and
“National Australia Bank Limited” Sold (Account Holder) Financial Instrument to a third party for profit. Sale
of the Financial Instrument confirms it has intrinsic value as an Asset yet that value is not credited to the
(Account Holder) as Creator and Depositor of the Instrument; and

10. Bringing False Claims – Barratry
The crime of bringing false claims (Fraud, Identity Theft, Trespass).

11. Slavery
Forced Compliance to contract not held.

12. Conspiracy
The action of plotting or conspiring a secret plan by a group to something unlawful or harmful

Financial Remedy Sought
1. Full Disclosure Denied
Rate Amount $250,000.00
The sum-certain amount of Two-hundred and Fifty-thousand Australian Dollars $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation:$250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $250,000.00

2. Personage – Disregarding Age of Majority Declaration – Fraud.
Rate Amount $250,000.00
The sum-certain amount of Two-hundred and Fifty-thousand Australian Dollars $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $250,000.00

3. Non Disclosure of Valuable Consideration
Rate Amount $220,000.00
The sum-certain amount of Two-hundred and twenty-thousand Australian Dollars $220,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $220,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation: $220,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $220,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $220,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $220,000.00

4. Failure to Acknowledge Private Settlement Agreement
Rate Amount $250,000.00
The sum-certain amount of Two-hundred and Fifty-thousand Australian Dollars $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $250,000.00

5. Disregarding Bill of Exchange
Rate Amount $250,000.00
The sum-certain amount of Two-hundred and Fifty-thousand Australian Dollars $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $250,000.00

6. Unwelcome and Unlawful Trespass:
Rate Amount $1,000,000.00
The sum-certain amount of One-Million Australian Dollars $1,000,000.00
By the Defendant, Gary McNamara, (M.I.M.A): $1,000,000.00

7. Extortion – Demanding Property with Intent to Steal – Mortgage over Property – Threat of Enforcement Action/Theft
Rate Amount $1,000,000.00
The sum-certain amount of One-Million Australian Dollars $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $1,000,000.00

8. Extortion – Profiteering Through Deception – Banking Fraud
Rate Amount $1,000,000.00
The sum-certain amount of One-million Australian Dollars $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending:$1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation:$1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team:$1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited:$1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $1,000,000.00

9. Deception – Securitization of Financial Instrument
Rate Amount $1,000,000.00
The sum-certain amount of One-Million Australian Dollars $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and Remediation: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors:$1,000,000.00

10. Bringing False Claims – Barratry
Rate Amount $1,000,000.00
The sum-certain amount of One-Million Australian Dollars $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and
Remediation: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $1,000,000.00

11. Slavery
Rate Amount $1,000,000.00
The sum-certain amount of One-Million Australian Dollars $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and
Remediation: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $1,000,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $1,000,000.00

12. Conspiracy
Rate Amount $250,000.00
The sum-certain amount of Two-hundred and Fifty-thousand Australian Dollars $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mr Mike Warren, The Manager Housing Loan NAB Lending: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Tony, Case Manager, NAB Resolve Customer Resolution and
Remediation: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Mellissa, NAB Resolve Team: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Isabel, Dentons Australia Limited: $250,000.00
Participation by the Defendant, Gary McNamara, M.I.M.A Albany Commercial Debt Collectors: $250,000.00

All payments are to be made in the following methods, in the equivalent mid-market value of the Australian
Dollar or the Quantum Financial System as calculated on the day of payment:

.9999 Pure Gold (Troy weight)
.999 Pure Sterling Silver (Troy weight, to the Bourse value of Sterling Silver)

Any other payment method as agreed Cheques, credits and bank account deposits are acceptable Payable
to the “Legal Fiction” account: ANGELA BARKER DAVID MICHAEL BARKER Bankwest BSB 306025,
ACC 0116283

Non Financial Remedy Sought:
Privacy: To retain our Fee Simple Absolute Estate (allodial title) under Common Law without harassment,
threat or trespass and to retain our natural and Inalienable Rights as recognised by Common Law, the
historic traditions of the land known as “Terra Australis” and the “Commonwealth of Australia”.