Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Moderator: ArthurWankspittle

doublelong
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2015 2:46 pm

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby doublelong » Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:10 pm

In fact I distinctly remember Sue shouting at the bailiffs what a state it is in and they are “bloody welcome to it” :snicker:

TheNewSaint
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:35 am

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby TheNewSaint » Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:53 pm

some idiot wrote:doesn't look like a family home.


Only one person lives in it. So... yeah.

AndyPandy
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1150
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 6:29 pm

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby AndyPandy » Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:15 pm

Well if it's such an eye sore Amanda your numpty (we cancelled the endowment policy because we didn't have a clue what it was) parents won't want it back will they, not that there's a cat in hell's chance of that happening despite all the bleating about warrants and idiocy about 'we paid the mortgage' when clearly they didn't! :beatinghorse:

longdog
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1794
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2015 9:53 am

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby longdog » Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:36 pm

I'm thinking we should have a whip-round to pay for some face-to-face professional legal advice for the Crawfords.

How long do you think it would take to explain that as far as the criminal case is concerned it wasn't legally his property and in the civil case he'd not paid off the capital.

It took me under a minute to type it so I reckon five minutes should do the job. :mrgreen:
JULIAN: I recommend we try Per verulium ad camphorum actus injuria linctus est.
SANDY: That's your actual Latin.
HORNE: What does it mean?
JULIAN: I dunno - I got it off a bottle of horse rub, but it sounds good, doesn't it?

letissier14
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 895
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 4:02 pm

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby letissier14 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:40 pm

longdog wrote:I'm thinking we should have a whip-round to pay for some face-to-face professional legal advice for the Crawfords.

How long do you think it would take to explain that as far as the criminal case is concerned it wasn't legally his property and in the civil case he'd not paid off the capital.

It took me under a minute to type it so I reckon five minutes should do the job. :mrgreen:


But surely those damn solicitors are in cahoots with the banks :snicker: :snicker: :snicker:
I don't take sides, I read all the facts and then come to my own conclusions

daveBeeston
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 276
Joined: Sun May 17, 2015 8:57 am

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby daveBeeston » Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:54 pm

I know they keep on about the warrant and how it doesn't exist/they never received it and even if they managed to get a judge to agree with them it wouldn't change the situation, they would still owe over £40,000 which they don't have in order to settle the outstanding mortgage balance(as per Tom's original post on GOODF), so they would still be without the bungalow.

The continued delusion is just sad and is consuming the life's of Tom, Sue and Amanda when they should be focusing on relaxing in retirement and their family respectively.

Tom you've admitted in court the mortgage was not changed and that is a matter of public record so please stop yourself and Amanda from spouting the opposite it makes you look foolish and a liar.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never argue with an idiot,they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

TheNewSaint
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:35 am

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby TheNewSaint » Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:57 pm

Like they'd listen. They're completely invested in the fantasy that their home has been stolen. There are transcripts in this thread where judges told them exactly why all their beliefs are wrong. They don't listen, or even seem to acknowledge the relevance of what was said.

Tom Crawford will continue with this until he dies. Which, at his current rate of deterioration, I estimate in the next year or two. Only then will the Battle for Crawford Castle truly end. I don't think either of his children will take up the crusade, as they've done little this whole time other than post on Facebook.

Chaos
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 570
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2015 9:53 pm

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby Chaos » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:28 pm

rumpelstilzchen wrote:
Hercule Parrot wrote:
rumpelstilzchen wrote:The Crawfrauds will never acknowledge the fact that they stopped making the endowment payments.

Exactly. They maintained the due interest payments (mostly) for 25yrs, but did nothing about repaying the underlying capital. The lender offered to change them to a normal repayment mortgage decades ago, and they refused. This dismal catastrophe of retirement is entirely their own doing, but TC isn't man enough to deal with that.

The Crawfords appear to believe that paying the interest payments for twenty-five years is good enough but anyone who has a basic understanding of endowment mortgages would instantly see they are wrong on that point.

We know the Crawfords read this forum so I am going to issue a challenge to them.

Tom, Amanda, Sue and Craig. You repeatedly state that innocent people are having their homes stolen by corrupt banks working with corrupt barristers and a corrupt judiciary. My challenge is this: Show us one example where someone who had an interest only mortgage, had paid every monthly payment over the entire term and then had repaid the original sum borrowed upon completion of the mortgage term, subsequently had their house "stolen" by the original lender.


makes one wonder if they only pay the interest on their credit cards. and if not, why not. same thing.

Chaos
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 570
Joined: Sat Jul 25, 2015 9:53 pm

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby Chaos » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:30 pm

JimUk1 wrote::shrug: Eyesore? It's a vast improvement. I'm interested in it now :wink:


when you're a troll and live in hovels, I imagine it is an eyesore.

User avatar
NYGman
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1608
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2012 7:01 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby NYGman » Tue Mar 21, 2017 4:44 pm

I often wonder if a qualified lawyer would give up an hour of his time to sit down, listen to everything TC has to say, and then slowly explain why he is completely wrong, and why he needs to move on, would TC actually listen? These people are quite cultish, in many ways, so perhaps a "deprogrammer" can mediate the meeting, and at least provide some support and guidance, on how to move on from this.

His house is no longer recognizable, his credit is undoubtedly shot, he has blotted his copybook in the eyes of the law, has been declared vexatious, and lost a ton of equity, likely owing more than there was. Despite what his crack legal team say, he is now further away from his house than he has ever been, and has no chance in hell to get it back. At this point, even if he were right, which he isn't, I don't think he would get his house, just compensation of value. He needs to face reality and realize the house is never ever going to be his, unless he buys it of the current owner, which I think is highly unlikely. I also wonder, if his advisors took any money, if he has any legal grounds to sue them. While I doubt they have a pot to piss in between them, and I am sure they will practice their own legal theories while representing themselves, so it could be an easy win here, although prepare for many dead trees, emails, and liens.

TC needs to keep speaking to the masses though, but he should show how listening to idiots spouting legal advice on the internet will not lead to success. Can he be turned, possibly. It really is in his bests interests to understand the truth, accept it, and move on, while attempting to make something positive from this. If he accepts it, I am sure his family will too, and Amanda can turn her spew the other way, and direct it to the people who really screwed her dad, her advisors.

Well, back to wishful wandering about what could be... I am sure that will never happen.
The Hardest Thing in the World to Understand is Income Taxes -Albert Einstein

Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose - As sung by Janis Joplin (and others) Written by Kris Kristofferson and Fred Foster.

TheNewSaint
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:35 am

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby TheNewSaint » Tue Mar 21, 2017 5:20 pm

I would hire the cult deprogrammer, and not bother with the lawyer. There's no point in trying to explain the law until they can consider the possibility that they're wrong. They're a long way from being ready for that.

They also have such a siege mentality about quatloos.com they would reject the suggestion only because it came from one of us. Which is sad, because the members of this site have offered much better advice than the people they've chosen to align with. I even think we've been more compassionate. But it never occurs to them they were let down not by us, but by the people whose advice they relied on.

Normal Wisdom
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 777
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:28 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby Normal Wisdom » Tue Mar 21, 2017 5:41 pm

One other key issue that the Crawfrauds don't seem to grasp is that in the general scheme of things, the existence of a warrant of possession is not that critical to him losing his home. The warrant is simply an authorisation from the Court to execute the Order of Possession which is the product of the Possession Hearing in Court. It is the Order which records the Judge's decision to award possession to the claimant, not the Warrant. A Warrant is only required when the householder refuses to heed the Order. In most cases, the householder does not see the Warrant but is served with a Notice of Eviction.

While Tom is banging on about the existence or validity of the Warrant he is carefully avoiding the fact that he knows that an Order of Possession was made and indeed he tried more than once to appeal it - with a spectacular and embarrassing lack of success. He has also publicly acknowledged that he was served with a Notice of Eviction.

Of course we know and have seen that there was a valid Warrant of Possession but even if he could prove that there was some technical fault with it or even that it didn't exist, I strongly suspect that at this stage in proceedings it would not result in him getting his house back. He has repeatedly tried and failed to challenge the fundamental decision that at the end of his mortgage term, he still owed the capital sum, has never repaid it and consequently possession was awarded to the bank. He can bleat about warrants and fees all he likes but it doesn't change the basic reason why he is not still living in Fearne Chase.
Mark Ceylon / Seylon / SriLankerC Haining - "... a dangerous and unpleasant boil on the arse of humanity".

littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 8:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby littleFred » Tue Mar 21, 2017 5:50 pm

TheNewSaint wrote:Like they'd listen. ... Tom Crawford will continue with this until he dies.

Yes.

Tom initially agreed with most of the reasoning in the Godspeed judgement, but has since disputed it entirely. Amanda has followed his lead.

Tom has now invested too much in his delusions for a withdrawal to be easy. A psychological rather than legal approach might work, but he wouldn't cooperate with that.

TheNewSaint
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 1079
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2016 10:35 am

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby TheNewSaint » Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:23 pm

littleFred wrote:Tom initially agreed with most of the reasoning in the Godspeed judgement, but has since disputed it entirely. Amanda has followed his lead.


Let's not forget Ebert's very large role in this. Ebert convinced Tom that he "won" the Godsmark ruling. letissier14 posted the documents earlier this thread. In them, you can that Ebert gave Tom many of the stupid ideas he now drones on about: missing warrants and unpaid fees and whatnot. He even coaches Tom to thank the judge, because Ebert's asinine legal analysis says that the judge gave Tom everything he needs to win his house back. By the time the case got to appeal, Tom was so convinced of all this malarkey he said:

Mr Crawford : No, no. The judgment was fine. It was excellent. But in fact the order that was passed down it didn’t reflect the actual judgment.


Go to hell, Mr. Ebert. Go. To. Hell.

ArthurWankspittle
Slavering Minister of Auto-erotic Insinuation
Posts: 2751
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:35 am
Location: Quatloos Immigration Control

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby ArthurWankspittle » Tue Mar 21, 2017 6:49 pm

Hercule Parrot wrote:
rumpelstilzchen wrote:The Crawfrauds will never acknowledge the fact that they stopped making the endowment payments.

Exactly. They maintained the due interest payments (mostly) for 25yrs, but did nothing about repaying the underlying capital. The lender offered to change them to a normal repayment mortgage decades ago, and they refused. This dismal catastrophe of retirement is entirely their own doing, but TC isn't man enough to deal with that.
Also, don't forget, one of Tom's early posts on GOODF was asking how to get out of repaying the capital which was coming due in a few months.
Normal Wisdom wrote:Of course we know and have seen that there was a valid Warrant of Possession but even if he could prove that there was some technical fault with it or even that it didn't exist, I strongly suspect that at this stage in proceedings it would not result in him getting his house back.
IANAL but my understanding of English Law is that it would NEVER happen. The current owner made a legal purchase, you can't undo it now.
Going to Tibet now and deleting Facebook you have my email address

littleFred
Stern Faced Schoolmaster of Serious Discussion
Posts: 1363
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 8:12 am
Location: England, UK

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby littleFred » Tue Mar 21, 2017 7:20 pm

Yes, Mr Ebert (and others such as Guy Taylor and Ceylon) played major parts in fostering Tom's delusions.

If the warrant wasn't valid, it wouldn't make any difference because it merely enforced a court possession order. This warrant nonsense is a double delusion because even if Tom was correct, it wouldn't help him. It's just garbage that has got stuck in his head.

If that possession order were somehow overturned, declared void, Tom would be entitled to be returned to the position he was in, as if the possession hadn't occurred. But I think the new owners have solid title, so Tom would instead get the money from Bradford and Bingley or whatever they are called today.

But that won't happen either.

User avatar
Penny Wise
First Mate
First Mate
Posts: 135
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 8:54 pm
Location: Deadlights

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby Penny Wise » Tue Mar 21, 2017 8:41 pm

With reference to the video about an alleged poster on Quatloo's being the person given a suspended sentence, would I be correct to say at least two of the three people in that video also have criminal records ?
Wanna balloon?

mufc1959
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 788
Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2015 3:47 pm
Location: Manchester by day, Slaithwaite by night

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby mufc1959 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:00 pm

I was just watching Judge Judy (I'm easily entertained) where the case bore a strong resemblance to the Crawfraud scenario. A builder who'd bought a foreclosed property was suing the previous owner - a batty old lady - for harassment. She'd put posters up all round the neighbourhood with his picture on them claiming he'd 'stolen' the house using fake deeds. He'd had to take out restraining orders against her.

She wasn't a FOTL and wasn't wearing a panama, but apart from that, it could have been TC standing there. She'd brought four separate court cases trying to prove the house had been stolen from her, that she'd paid off the mortgage years before, that she had no mortgage, and that the paperwork had been forged, etc, etc,. She'd lost every case in no uncertain terms, yet she - and her daughter (who wasn't wearing a onesie) - were persistent in their belief that they still owned the house.

Needless to say Judge Judy wasn't having any of it and she awarded the new owner $5,000 (the maximum JJ award).

getoutofdebtfools
Pirate
Pirate
Posts: 194
Joined: Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:27 pm
Location: Wanstead

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby getoutofdebtfools » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:20 pm

I do hope some short tempered scaffolder buys Tom's house.... :lol:
Oh the irony of the Get Out Of Debt Free website :lol: :lol: :lol:
Now owned by a debt management company :brickwall: Bye bye Ceylon :haha:

ArthurWankspittle
Slavering Minister of Auto-erotic Insinuation
Posts: 2751
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:35 am
Location: Quatloos Immigration Control

Re: Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

Postby ArthurWankspittle » Wed Mar 22, 2017 10:59 am

getoutofdebtfools wrote:I do hope some short tempered scaffolder buys Tom's house.... :lol:
I think we are past the short-tempered-builder stage by now, but the sale to a Doberman breeder would be welcome.
Going to Tibet now and deleting Facebook you have my email address


Return to “United Kingdom”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DotBot [Bot], Linkdex [Bot] and 1 guest