What does the community think about Ultra Vires as a defense?

“BORROWER’s PROMISE TO PAY” the promise to pay is stated in these words…..”In return for a LOAN, I promise to pay….to the LENDER…” Bank's cannot lend credit... It is our signature that funds the loan and the bank/mortgage company pretends to have loaned us the credit for the house... A worthy defense? To point out that banks can only lend money, and not credit. The United States Code, Title 12, Section 24, Paragraph 7 confers upon a bank the power to lend its money, not it’s credit. In First National Bank of Tallapoosa vs. Monroe, 135 Ga 614; 69 S.E. 1123 (1911), the court, after citing the statue heretofore said, “The provisions referred to do not give power to a national bank to guarantee the payment of the obligations of others solely for their benefit, nor is there any authority to issue them through such power incidental of the business of banking. A bank can lend its money, not its credit.” Meanwhile, they do it anyway from a profit motive, even though it flies in the face of their primary duty to protect people’s money. In Howard & Foster Co. vs. Citizens National Bank of Union, 133 S.C. 202; 130 SE 758, (1927), it was stated, “It has been settled beyond controversy that a national bank, under Federal law, being limited in it’s power and capacity, cannot lend it’s credit by guaranteeing the debt of another. All such contracts being entered into by its officers are ultra vires and not binding upon the corporation.” There is case law all day long for Ultra Vires...