Here’s a revised demand letter incorporating **charitable law protections** to amplify your claim and emphasize the misused charitable purpose: --- **[WITHOUT PREJUDICE]** **Rowan Brad Quni** QNFO Email: [email protected] Website: http://qnfo.org LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/rowan-quni-868006341 ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0002-4317-5604 **Date**: March 10, 2025 **BMO Financial Group** Attn: Legal Department 111 W Monroe St, Chicago, IL 60603 Via Certified Mail & Email: [BMO Legal Email Address] **Re: Demand for Immediate Return of $8,000 in Charitable Funds** Dear BMO Legal Team, This letter demands the immediate return of **$8,000** wrongfully withheld by BMO Harris Bank (“BMO”) after I deposited a personal check to fund a **charitable account** for **Empowering Change**, a nonprofit organization dedicated to poverty relief. This demand is supported by statutory and regulatory authorities, including **charitable trust laws** requiring funds to be used as intended. --- # **I. Factual Background** 1. On [Date], I deposited a **$10,000 personal check** into an account at BMO’s San Francisco branch under the name **Empowering Change**, based on BMO’s representation that the account would be operational for charitable withdrawals. 2. BMO employees assured me the account was active, provided a debit card, and accepted the check as a **charitable contribution** to fund anti-poverty programs. 3. Despite these assurances, BMO later refused withdrawals and closed the account. Upon closure, BMO returned **$2,000 in cash** but issued an **$8,000 cashier’s check** payable to **Empowering Change**—an entity with **no valid bank account** to negotiate the check. --- # **II. Legal Basis for Demand** ## **A. Charitable Trust Protections** - **California Charitable Trusts Act**: - Funds donated for charitable purposes are held in trust and **must be returned to the donor** if the designated purpose fails (Cal. Prob. Code § 15100). - BMO’s retention of $8,000 violates this law, as Empowering Change cannot access the funds for their intended charitable use. - **IRS Guidelines for Charitable Contributions**: - Donations to non-501(c)(3) organizations are still protected under state law if the donor’s intent is clear (IRS Publication 526). BMO’s actions obstructed this intent. ## **B. Breach of Contract** - BMO failed to honor the **implied contract** to provide a functional account for charitable withdrawals (Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 2). ## **C. Unjust Enrichment** - BMO retained $8,000 without legal justification, as Empowering Change lacks capacity to receive the funds (Cal. Civ. Code § 1606). ## **D. UCC Violation** - The $8,000 cashier’s check is unenforceable due to **failure of consideration** (UCC § 3-412), as Empowering Change has no account to negotiate it. ## **E. Federal and State Regulatory Violations** - **UDAAP**: BMO’s misrepresentation about account accessibility violates the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. § 45) and California’s Unfair Competition Law (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200). --- # **III. Demand** BMO is hereby required to: 1. **Return $8,000 in cash** to **me personally** within **10 business days** as the donor and rightful steward of these charitable funds. 2. Provide a written explanation for violating California’s charitable trust laws. --- # **IV. Enclosures** - Copy of the invalid $8,000 cashier’s check. - Documentation of the $2,000 cash refund. **Respond in writing by [Date: 10 business days from now]**. Silence will be deemed an admission of liability. Sincerely, **Rowan Brad Quni** **Cc**: - California Attorney General’s Charitable Trust Section - Internal Revenue Service (IRS) - Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) --- # **Key Enhancements** 1. **Charitable Trust Law**: - Explicitly ties the $8,000 to **charitable intent** and cites California’s duty to protect donated funds (Cal. Prob. Code § 15100). - Threatens escalation to the **California Attorney General** and **IRS**, which oversee charitable compliance. 2. **Donor Intent**: - Emphasizes that BMO’s actions frustrated the **public purpose** of the funds, exposing BMO to reputational and legal risk. 3. **Regulatory Pressure**: - Adds the IRS to the complaint list, leveraging federal oversight of charitable contributions. This version positions the dispute as a **public interest issue**, maximizing pressure on BMO to refund the funds promptly. Let me know if you need further adjustments!