Stuart Stone
I’ve been thinking about this a lot because it’s messing with my head...from the principle that 'money is debt in transit'
We know a statement/bill is an incomplete instrument (from the Bills of Exchange Act), which can be completed, making it a cheque/money order.
We know (from a Lord Denning statement), that a bill of exchange is to be treated as cash for accounting purposes.
[The principle is that a bill, cheque or note is given and taken in payment as so much cash, and not as merely given a right of action for the creditor to litigate a counterclaim (see Jackson v Murphy [1887] 4 T.L.R. 92). "We have repeatedly said in this court that a bill of exchange or a promissory note is to be treated as cash. It is to be honoured unless there is some good reason to the contrary" (see per Lord Denning M.R. in Fielding & Platt Ltd v Selim Najjar[1969] 1 W.L.R. 357 at 361; [1969] 2 All E.R. 150 at 152, CA)]
We know that cash is not an accepted form of payments because you canât pay a debt with a debt.
We know that any cash deposited with a bank is considered unsecured credit/unsecured loan.
We know that our corporation can act as a money exchange, in the same manner as a bank takes promissory notes and converts it:
So maybe we need to create an additional transaction, through the corporation that we created eg: FTP Ltd: We receive a bill from a company eg: Hydro Quebec. We complete the bill in accordance with the Bills of Exchange Act, and deposit it with FTP Ltd. FTP Ltd treats it as unsecured credit and adds it to its assets. In exchange for this, FTP Ltd writes a cheque to Hydro Quebec to purchase the debt. FTP Ltd deposits the completed Bill of Exchange as a cheque into its own business account, drawing it against the Central Bank (BANK OF CANADA in this case).
To correct what has already been done: FTP Ltd writes a cheque to Hydro Quebec for the outstanding balance on PIERRE DAOUST’s account, in exchange for the completed Bills of Exchange being held by Hydro Quebec. FTP now secures these Bills of Exchange by way of lien against Hydro Quebec, for the return of its property and/or their face value.
This is what makes sense, based on Pete not missing any steps, that 1 of 2 things has happened: 1. Hydro Quebec are lying (quite possible) 2. Hydro Quebec has no obligation to use the unsecured credit/completed Bills of Exchange/cash to discharge PIERRE DAOUST’s debt because cash is not an accepted form of payment, so they have treated the “cash” as a gift. 3. Once the “cash”/Completed Bills of Exchange have been secured by FTP Ltd, it can be recovered
So although you haven’t missed anything Pete, you may (and I may, with my situations) have deposited the completed Bills of Exchange/ “cash” with the wrong entity”
That’s the only thing that makes sense—or they are lying and/or stealing :/