Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


Bailiff Advice

Tom Crawford eviction by bailiffs: Freeman on the Land (FMoTL) nonsense has no place in the courts.

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1730 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Every daily newspaper is today reporting the dreadful events of yesterday when Tom Crawford's long running battle with his mortgage provider (Bradford & Bingley) came to an end when bailiffs eventually entered Tom & Sue's bungalow and repossessed it in accordance with the court order. Given the high profile and public interest in this case, over 70 police officers were in attendance and the cul de sac where Tom and his wife lived was closed off. Police also hand delivered letters to all his neighbours to advice them of the reason for their presence.

 

 

http://www.scoop.it/t/lacef-news

 

Sadly every year thousands of homeowners suffer the same fate as Tom Crawford when their home is repossessed but none of them get the press publicity that this one has. There is because, unlike other home owners, Tom Crawford is a support of the Freeman on the Land movement.

 

A few months ago bailiffs attempted to repossess the bungalow and social media sites appealed for supporters to attend the address to halt the eviction. Over 500 protestors gathered at the property forcing the bailiffs and police to retreat.

 

Following that days events, Tom attempted to stop any further action by appealing the possession order to the court. In doing so, he did not seek assistance from a solicitor. Instead, he sought the services of various individuals who are well known on the Freeman on the Land (FMoTL) and Sovereign Citizen circuit.

 

Quite simply.....the court rejected their silly arguments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had he fought this case on other grounds he would possibly have ended up with a stay of proceedings - or at the very least he could have cited the Norgan case.

 

Choosing the FMoTL route was a very bad decision indeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Background to Tom Crawford's case.

 

The case is remarkably simple. Tom and his wife purchased a bungalow in 1988 with a mortgage of £41,000. The mortgage was a an Endowment mortgage which was very popular at that time and meant that monthly payments to the Bradford & Bingley would only cover the interest on the mortgage and the owners would be required to take out a separate endowment policy . Monthly payments would have to be made to cover the policy with the aim being that when the policy matures (normally at 25 years) that the value of the policy would be sufficient to repay the capital (£41,000) to Bradford & Bingley.

 

In 2012 Tom and his wife got into difficulty paying their mortgage and arrears of approx £2,000 led to Bradford & Bingley seeking possession of the property. The court granted a suspended possession order but Tom did not pay and then a dispute arose surrounding the endowment policy (or more to the point....the non existence of the policy !!!).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Had he fought this case on other grounds he would possibly have ended up with a stay of proceedings - or at the very least he could have cited the Norgan case.

 

Choosing the FMoTL route was a very bad decision indeed.

 

The Judgment for his appeal is so very clear. Naturally the judge threw out any suggestion about 'wet ink signatures' and Tom's 'team' then tried to argue that the eviction was unlawful given that Bradford & Bingley had supposedly not paid a court fee for their application.

 

There has been a lot of discussion on various 'Freeman' sites and others and the one overriding question was .......'What has happened to the endowment policy'? Tom has given many interviews on YouTube and other FMoTL sites and this simple question was always met with vague answers. There are suggestions that the public have been seriously hoodwinked.

 

The judgment deals very clearly with the matter of the 'endowment policy' and it was agreed at the appeal that a little over a year after the policy has been taken out that payments stopped being made towards the policy and in 1991 it was cashed in. !!

 

Evidence was also provided that made very clear indeed that Tom and his wife knew that they did not have a policy in place to pay the capital when the mortgage came to an end and that they had received a lot of correspondence from Bradford & Bingley on this subject.

 

Sadly, Tom was completely taken in by the FMoTL theories that mortgages are frauds, banks never lend real money, and we can pay off the mortgage with promissory notes.

 

PS: Unfortunately Tom was arrested yesterday evening along with one of his advisors (Ceylon aka Mark Hainig from the Get Out of Debt Free website) for breach of the peace.

 

PPS: This was the very same 'Ceylon' who publicly stated on the Get into More Debt for Free site just three days ago that Tom would not be paying the mortgage because he had WON his court case. Are these activists so blind that they cannot see the truth when it is facing them ???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have some sympathy because those interest only mortgages with endowment policies were a rip off. Many were miss sold as often it was not pointed out that the endowment may not pay off the mortgage. In this case, if they cashed in the endowment, then the capital was always going to be due at the end of the mortgage term.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Tom not seek any proper, qualified legal advice?

 

If not, from where was his advice sourced? It would not be the site many might think of immediately, I am sure, so from whom did he get advice and do we know anything about them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Did Tom not seek any proper, qualified legal advice?

 

If not, from where was his advice sourced? It would not be the site many might think of immediately, I am sure, so from whom did he get advice and do we know anything about them?

 

Good question CD. I am just going out so will post more later.

 

In the meantime, the appeal judgment records that his McKenzie Friend was Michael O'Bernicia. He also also known as 'Michael of the Bernicia Family' or Michael Waugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would i be right to assume the eviction has now been done by a high court company or was it still the county court?

 

Reading amongst the drivel on btb it seems tom has also been arrested for inciting public disorder.

 

Lets be honest if given warning exactly the same thing would of happened, an arseload of people stopping the eviction.

And even though its been done it won't stop everyone from calling it fraud and a travesty etc etc and you can guarantee they will find a way to claim victory from somewhere


None of the beliefs held by "Freemen on the land" have ever been supported by any judgments or verdicts in any criminal or civil court cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has proven pretty well that taking these daft notions to these extremes is very costly. I sympathsise (and can empathise) with anyone who loses their house, but there has been plenty of time to put things into place. The arguments were never going to win for the simple reason they were massively flawed.

 

Lots of people have faced issues over endowment policies and not lost their homes, it's not exactly anything new. The police presence on the day was justified, given the potential for civil unrest. Putting aside issues which cloud the facts, Tom was foolish and unfortunate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So not only has he lost his house for not paying his mortgage as per his agreement, he has cost the tax payer tens of thousands in road closures and police support costs, court costs and thousand to the mortgage company. It's people like this that are the reason that bailiffs etc have to exist. They live in their own little world where they can do no wrong and believe they are untouchable. They then twist the story to try and gain public support without releasing the entire saga as they know they would be laughed at.

I'm sorry, but he was given every opportunity to sort this and lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tagging for future reference as a friend of mine is starting to believe in fotl crap for his mortgage too.


Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tagging for future reference as a friend of mine is starting to believe in fotl crap for his mortgage too.

 

It is happening to a lot of people, they believe what they are told that the money came out of thin air and doesn't exist, what they don't get their heads round, if i sold my house now, i could draw the proceeds out of the bank and keep it under my bed, real money

 

Also, it is never fraud when they are taking the mortgage out, only when it comes to paying it back

 

The Tom Crawford story still has a long way to go yet, they are in the process of recruiting a huge mob to storm the house and take it back, and move them back in

 

I watch with interest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So who do they think should be paying for their mortgage ?


Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy -

HERE

2: Take back control of your finances -

Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors?

Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt

Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated -

Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So who do they think should be paying for their mortgage ?

 

The banks of course. Payback springs to mind. lol..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Freeman on the Land and Sovereign Citizens supporters genuinly thought that the case of the Crawfords would rise the awareness of FmoTL around the country. The truth of the matter, is that it has done no such thing. Instead it has proved a complete disaster.

 

Instead of looking at the rotten advise from their 'legal team' they are instead seeking to get the Crawford's house back by using their 'Plan B'. This involves hunting down and threatening the owner of the removal team who removed the entire household contents. The next stage is that of secretly recruiting as many people as possible to 'storm' the house and retake it from the 'fraudualent bankers'.

 

These people need to wake up quickly......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So who do they think should be paying for their mortgage ?

 

That is just it, the money doesn't have to be paid back, because it never existed in the first place, it was just invented out of thin air, and so "fraud"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I try this trick with my council tax ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is just it, the money doesn't have to be paid back, because it never existed in the first place, it was just invented out of thin air, and so "fraud"

 

 

So they got the property for nothing? That can't be right.


 

What's Best for You?

 

 

The Consumer Action Group is a free help site.

Should you be offered help that requires payment please report it to site team.

 

Alliance & Leicester Moneyclaim issued 20/1/07 £225.50 full settlement received 29 January 2007

Smile £1,075.50 + interest Email request for payment 24/5/06 received £1,000.50 14/7/06 + £20 30/7/06

Yorkshire Bank Moneyclaim issued 21/6/06 £4,489.39 full settlement received 26 January 2007

:p

 

Advice & opinions given by Caro are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So they got the property for nothing? That can't be right.

 

And you hit the whole FMOTL philosophy on the head, something for nothing, all loans credit ect are ok, when taken out, but become fraud right after and don't need paying back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good old fractional reserve banking strikes again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And you hit the whole FMOTL philosophy on the head, something for nothing, all loans credit ect are ok, when taken out, but become fraud right after and don't need paying back

 

Where does the fraud come in..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because money is not real lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because money is not real lol

 

When the Banks almost when bust, we came to the conclusion they did not think it was real either But it cost the UK a fortune bailing them out.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting video

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For anyone wondering how this money is not 'real money', Google 'Fractional Reserve Banking' and you'll see how they believe money is invented which doeswn't really exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1730 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...