Tom Crawford is on the roof of Fearn Close !!!

[rumpelstilzchen]

If a feature film was ever made of the whole Crawford saga, who would you have play the main man?

Roy Kinnear's character Mr Screwsby along with Dick Emery playing his son Gaylord Screwsby would have been the ideal combination for Tom and Craig.
"Got it wrong again, Dad!"

[midjit-gems]

So it seems there's has been a huge divide between RUK (response) and the crawfrauds. Interesting that David Haynes mentions rachael considering she is in a relationship with Russell Burton a huge supporter of the crawfrauds.

[Hercule Parrot]

I found this:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ ... iff_manual

Dear Mr. Gove,

Urgent Notice: Serious abuse of process at HMCTS by dishonest solicitors, trying to illegally acquire our home

I am writing to you with a degree of urgency in the Public Interest to draw to your valued attention some extremely serious mis-uses of Her Majesty's Court Services for what appears to be unashamed White Collar criminal activity being deployed for private pecuniary gain. I believe the problem may be widespread across the whole of UK, and ours is one of thousands of similar cases involving identical issues of fraud and falsified invalid documents being relied upon...........

What a load of hot air that was. Just puffed-up blather, carefully avoiding the facts. Allow me to paraphrase, clarify and summarise Mr Jackson's grievance :

# I owned a company which entered into a franchise arrangement with Pirtek.

# My company cheated the franchise contract to screw extra profit for me, and we got caught.

# Pirtek terminated our franchise and demanded repayments of sums due under contract.

# We tried to avoid paying, but they sued us and won. The court ordered us to pay.

# Because I signed as a guarantor or whatever, Pirtek came after me personally for the debt.

# We didn't pay, and we didn't appeal. We just refused to accept the result.

# We tried various evasion tactics, eg hiding our cash in my wife's bank account.

# This didn't work, Pirtek's lawyers are well-practiced in managing dishonest ex-franchisees*

# And eventually we faced bankruptcy and loss of our home if we still refused to pay.

# Obviously we still refused to pay, hiding behind nonsense about the debt not being proven.

# After 4 yrs of this, the original £35k debt is vastly increased by legal costs & interest.

# But we still refused to comply with the judgement of the court (or to appeal it).

# We thought we could play this game forever, but now they've bankrupted us and taken our house!

# This is obviously a total miscarriage of justice. Mr Gove must overrule the judge immediately.

(* http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2010/1641.html)

[wanglepin]

No absolutely. Their story is fanciful enough. Which begs another question. If a feature film was ever made of the whole Crawford saga, who would you have play the main man?

How about Bean playing defence attorney Taylor?

[rumpelstilzchen]

Allow me to paraphrase, clarify and summarise Mr Jackson's grievance

You should know better than allowing the truth to get in the way of a good story. Anyway, even if Amanda is interested in the truth, in this particular instance the truth is too complicated for Amanda to understand. It is much easier to ignore the facts and shout "FRAUD!"

[mac]

In Hereford this morning near to Barclays Bank, and Hereford Court (share the same front entrance) could it be Guy arresting the Judge and Bank Manager ??

http://www.herefordtimes.com/news/14406 ... re_street/

[SoLongCeylon]

No absolutely. Their story is fanciful enough. Which begs another question. If a feature film was ever made of the whole Crawford saga, who would you have play the main man?

How about Bean playing defence attorney Taylor?

Ha ha ha Love the match between Colon and the Horses' Arse - Perfect - right down to the crap coming out

[midjit-gems]

Well thats put us all in our place

(Apologies this is from eviction fraud of the bank, still unable to use correct functions on here please admin delete if feel necessary )

Hi all,

Having spoken to Bob of the Jackson family they are all in good spirits and what they have achieved so far by recapturing their lawful home is extrodinary and which is their lawful right contrary to legal advice being given.

They knew in their hearts that this was the correct thing to do to standing up against a criminal conspiracy against their family by those who are supposed to protect us.

What they have done is covered by this law which is mentioned below this post; they had no previous knowledge of this law, it has been used in 2 recent criminal court cases that we have been involved with and been acknowledged in those cases.

Those that wish to walk on the legal side in court do so at their own peril there is no remedy in their courts those that do are only hoodwincking those they adivse by to follow the civil law!!!!! because they are only assisting the slavery system.

Here is a quick update on our position regarding the recaption of the Crawford's family castle, it has put the judiciary and the police into a serious and a most uncomfortable position today.

I will clarify the situation at a later date as we wish to hold our cards very close to our chest just now, but we will update you when we can.

Please save this, there are other references to this law but here is one that you can read.

Tom

BLACKSTONE'S COMMENTARIES: PRIVATE WRONGS.
BOOK II and III
II. Recaption or reprisal, is another species of remedy by the mere act of the party injured. This happens, when any one hath deprived another of his property in goods or chattels personal, or wrongfully detains one's wife, child, or servant: in which case the owner of the goods, and the husband, parent, or master, may lawfully claim and retake them, wherever he happens to find them ; so it be not in a riotous manner, or attended with a breach of the peace e. The reason for this is obvious; since it may frequently happen that the owner may have this only opportunity of doing himself justice: his goods may be afterwards conveyed away or destroyed; and his wife, children, or servants, concealed or carried out of his reach ; if he had no speedier remedy than the ordinary process of law. If, therefore, he can so contrive it as to gain possession of his property again, without force or terror, the law favours and will justify his proceeding. But, as the public peace is a superior consideration to any one man's private property: and as, if individuals were once allowed to use private force as a remedy for private injuries, all social justice must cease, the strong would give law to the weak, and every man would revert to a state of nature; for these reasons it is provided, that this natural right of recaption shall never be exerted, where such exertion must occasion strife and bodily contention, or endanger the peace of society. If, for instance, my horse is taken away, and I find him in a common, a fair, or a public inn, I may lawfully seise him to my own use: but I cannot justify breaking open a private stable, or entering on the grounds of a third person, to take him, except he be feloniously stolen f; but must have recourse to an action at law.
III. As recaption is a remedy given to the party himself, for an injury to his personal property, so, thirdly, a remedy of
e 3 Inst. 134. Hal, Anal. Sect. 46. f 2 Roll. Rep. 55, 56, 208. 2 Roll. Abr. 565, 566.
1. V. L. 1794. c. 43, Accordant.
the same kind for injuries to real property, is by entry on lands and tenements, when another person without any right, has taken possession, thereof. This depends, in some measure, on like reasons with the former; and, like that too, must be peaceable and without force. There is some nicety required to define and distinguish the cases, in which such entry is lawful or otherwise: it will, therefore, be more fully considered in a subsequent chapter; being only mentioned in this place for the sake of regularity and order.

Tom

[Dr. Caligari]

if individuals were once allowed to use private force as a remedy for private injuries, all social justice must cease, the strong would give law to the weak, and every man would revert to a state of nature

Just what the Freemen seem to want.

[Burnaby49]

and his wife, children, or servants, concealed or carried out of his reach

Is this a big problem over in England?

[midjit-gems]

and his wife, children, or servants, concealed or carried out of his reach

Is this a big problem over in England?

According to some yes

It also appears there's been a spat between pikey and Danny Bamping on btbab both have been given temporary bans.

[littleFred]

This happens, when any one hath deprived another of his property in goods or chattels personal, ...

Well, yes. If someone steals my stuff and I find it lying about, I can take it back without fearing I might be accused of theft. That seems reasonable enough.

But this hasn't happened to Tom. Courts have ruled that 3 Fearn Chase isn't his property.

the same kind for injuries to real property, is by entry on lands and tenements, when another person without any right, has taken possession, thereof.

My emphasis. Yes, is someone illegally enters my house without my permission, I have certain rights to eject him. But if the house no longer belongs to me, I don't have those rights.

[grixit]

The most demented is the hundredweight. Logically you'd think it was a hundred of something. Not in Britain! In countries with any sense on how to measure things like Canada and the United States it's a hundred pounds. In Britain? Equal to eight stones. So a hundredweight is 112 pounds. Why call it a hundredweight? No wonder America revolted.

Way back, possibly back when the angles and saxons could still tell themselves apart, the word "hundred" meant a large number, close to 100 but not necessarily. It may be that "hundredweight" descended directly from that, so when standardization came it was already an independent concept.

[littleFred]

The OED tells us that "Hundred" came from an Old Norse word that originally meant 120, and later meant either 120 or 100.

Karl Lentz tells us we should ignore new-fangled corruptions of the language, and go back to their original meanings. So, it means 120. But that number is spoken as "one hundred", of course.

[rumpelstilzchen]

Tom Crawford wrote:

What they have done is covered by this law which is mentioned below this post; they had no previous knowledge of this law, it has been used in 2 recent criminal court cases that we have been involved with and been acknowledged in those cases.

Hmm. Acknowledged maybe. A court acknowledging a law exists is no big deal. The important question is did the court agree that particular law applied in both cases and was it used successfully on both occasions? The answer has the "No" otherwise the Crawfords would have been shouting from the rooftops, oops no pun intended, about it.

[AndyPandy]

The Commentaries on the Laws of England[1] are an influential 18th-century treatise on the common law of England by Sir William Blackstone, originally published by the Clarendon Press at Oxford, 1765–1769.

Book II Of Private Wrongs Edit
Of Private Wrongs dealt with torts as they existed in Blackstone's time. The various methods of trial that existed at civil law were also dealt with in this volume, as were the jurisdictions of the several courts, from the lowest to the highest. Almost as an afterthought, Blackstone also adds a brief chapter on equity, the parallel legal system that existed in English law at the time, seeking to address wrongs that the common law did not handle.

Wake up you idiots, this as a treatise on the law as it stood in the mid 18th Century, which was ermmmm 250 years ago, let's face it the Crawfords weren't 'wronged' but the Bradford and Bingley were when they attempted to keep a house they hadn't paid for!

[letissier14]

BLACKSTONE'S COMMENTARIES: PRIVATE WRONGS.
BOOK II and III
II. Recaption or reprisal, is another species of remedy by the mere act of the party injured. This happens, when any one hath deprived another of his property in goods or chattels personal, or wrongfully detains one's wife, child, or servant:

They are getting really desperate now.

Any sane person would have accepted their fate by now and moved on. The Crawfords are unable not willing to accept any answer which goes against them and using Recaption or reprisal is just another attempt down a dead end to justify their actions.

They are like some z-list celebrity media whore, who can't live without being the centre of attention.

I really don't know what is worse, the Crawfords and their blatant lies or their supporters acting like puppy dogs jumping up and down on whatever they say

[rumpelstilzchen]

and his wife, children, or servants, concealed or carried out of his reach

Is this a big problem over in England?

It is a huge problem. Every time I come home I find that someone has carried my servants out of my reach.

[notorial dissent]

if individuals were once allowed to use private force as a remedy for private injuries, all social justice must cease, the strong would give law to the weak, and every man would revert to a state of nature

Just what the Freemen seem to want.

Until it happens to them you mean. And considering some of these people it would happen a lot. Some of these people should be VERY thankful for the legal protections they enjoy, otherwise they would be in a world of real hurt.

[Burnaby49]

and his wife, children, or servants, concealed or carried out of his reach

Is this a big problem over in England?

It is a huge problem. Every time I come home I find that someone has carried my servants out of my reach.

Nobody's bothered to steal my wife yet.