UK - Tom Crawford - Eviction

[Bones]

I know Tom lost his house and he lost his dog, does anyone know if he also lost his hat ?

I only ask because I have seen this on the daily mail website

[Syf]

I joined again recently but my IP address was rumbled,

I had a few more names after I (Wanglepin) was banned but I would even bother now. They are doing enough damage on their own without me asking inconvenient probing questions.

Use Tor browser they can't get your IP then.

[JonnyL]

[Hercule Parrot]

I think the annotation of any legal document would be a good idea. Perhaps they could also add further annotations to say "this document does not need to be signed" and "this is a seal" (beneath the seal).

Serious comment, I do think something needs to be done about the form of court orders and warrants. It may be legal for a stranger to appear at my door waving a laser-printed sheet of A4 (which anyone could create for themselves on any computer), but it isn't morally right. If we want to dispense with the ancient trimmings of seals, ribbons, stamps and signatures then we should consider other methods of authentication.

For example, a unique reference number or QR code, which if entered on the HMCTS website would confirm the document is legitimate. We can do instant online verification with car insurance and other similar government processes, there's no technical challenge involved. The Police should also have the ability to access this system from their control room, so that if a constable attends a bailiff incident he can quickly verify legitimacy.

And/or we should use a distinctive watermarked paper or a metalised security strip woven down one side, which only authorised bodies are allowed to have blank stock (how we used to do the annual "MOT" roadworthiness tests). OPCA people might still cry forgery, but I'm thinking of the ordinary public who would reasonably expect a court order to have some appearance of authority.

Also, such orders should be printed to multi-sheet or 'carbonless copy paper', so that the subject of the order can be given "the pink copy" or whatever to read and keep (as happens with motoring penalties for example). They shouldn't have to relay on having something waved in their face, and the bailiff shouldn't have to risk handing over the sole copy.

(I am not suggesting that the current system is unlawful, it clearly is not. But it needs to be improved)

[letissier14]

I think the annotation of any legal document would be a good idea. Perhaps they could also add further annotations to say "this document does not need to be signed" and "this is a seal" (beneath the seal).

Serious comment, I do think something needs to be done about the form of court orders and warrants. It may be legal for a stranger to appear at my door waving a laser-printed sheet of A4 (which anyone could create for themselves on any computer), but it isn't morally right. If we want to dispense with the ancient trimmings of seals, ribbons, stamps and signatures then we should consider other methods of authentication.

For example, a unique reference number or QR code, which if entered on the HMCTS website would confirm the document is legitimate. We can do instant online verification with car insurance and other similar government processes, there's no technical challenge involved. The Police should also have the ability to access this system from their control room, so that if a constable attends a bailiff incident he can quickly verify legitimacy.

And/or we should use a distinctive watermarked paper or a metalised security strip woven down one side, which only authorised bodies are allowed to have blank stock (how we used to do the annual "MOT" roadworthiness tests). OPCA people might still cry forgery, but I'm thinking of the ordinary public who would reasonably expect a court order to have some appearance of authority.

Also, such orders should be printed to multi-sheet or 'carbonless copy paper', so that the subject of the order can be given "the pink copy" or whatever to read and keep (as happens with motoring penalties for example). They shouldn't have to relay on having something waved in their face, and the bailiff shouldn't have to risk handing over the sole copy.

(I am not suggesting that the current system is unlawful, it clearly is not. But it needs to be improved)

One of the best ideas I have heard in a long long time

[BillKintyre]

Yes, they are keeping an eye out. I've been banned loads of times, under loads of names. I still have one going that hasn't been rumbled (this post will have them searching high and low).

[hardcopy]

I think the annotation of any legal document would be a good idea. Perhaps they could also add further annotations to say "this document does not need to be signed" and "this is a seal" (beneath the seal).

Serious comment, I do think something needs to be done about the form of court orders and warrants. It may be legal for a stranger to appear at my door waving a laser-printed sheet of A4 (which anyone could create for themselves on any computer), but it isn't morally right. If we want to dispense with the ancient trimmings of seals, ribbons, stamps and signatures then we should consider other methods of authentication.

For example, a unique reference number or QR code, which if entered on the HMCTS website would confirm the document is legitimate. We can do instant online verification with car insurance and other similar government processes, there's no technical challenge involved. The Police should also have the ability to access this system from their control room, so that if a constable attends a bailiff incident he can quickly verify legitimacy.

And/or we should use a distinctive watermarked paper or a metalised security strip woven down one side, which only authorised bodies are allowed to have blank stock (how we used to do the annual "MOT" roadworthiness tests). OPCA people might still cry forgery, but I'm thinking of the ordinary public who would reasonably expect a court order to have some appearance of authority.

Also, such orders should be printed to multi-sheet or 'carbonless copy paper', so that the subject of the order can be given "the pink copy" or whatever to read and keep (as happens with motoring penalties for example). They shouldn't have to relay on having something waved in their face, and the bailiff shouldn't have to risk handing over the sole copy.

(I am not suggesting that the current system is unlawful, it clearly is not. But it needs to be improved)

One of the best ideas I have heard in a long long time

It's a fantastic idea but come on, how many fraudsters turn up at a house with a fake warrant and suddenly demand your goods or the keys to the house.
There is a long process before it comes to that , although I suppose an enterprising criminal could find out who is on the bailiff radar and nip in before them.

[wanglepin]

For example, a unique reference number or QR code, which if entered on the HMCTS website would confirm the document is legitimate.

Brings to mind what Godsmark said:

As computers should be our slaves and not our masters

I am positive that the Goofers over in Goofsville have already said words to the effect that anything from a computer is not valid. ( one of Clown goofer ceylon Hainings videos I believe) So that wouldn't keep them happy either. Unless of course it somehow worked in their favor.

[Losleones]

Looks to me like it's been derelict for some time. Looking at this image this could be considered a "win" based on the fact Peter has more luxury surroundings & home comforts in his 1991 Talbot cash machine.

[JonnyL]

Looks to me like it's been derelict for some time. Looking at this image this could be considered a "win" based on the fact Peter has more luxury surroundings & home comforts in his 1991 Talbot cash machine.

There is the potential for Tom and his crowd of merry men to try and retake this house 3-6 months after the new lawful occupier moves in. It'd be absolutely hilarious if a buy to let firm bought it and rented it out to a bailiff.

[Losleones]

Given the fact the property may be sold for a song, this might inspire Re members to infiltrate the auction waving their cheque books. Oh the heat & red wine.....bad combo!!!!1!!!!

[wanglepin]

http://youtu.be/w08x6fOQJf0
They are going to arrest every police officer that attended.. Unless they say sorry.

What I find most interesting about this particular U.K. Column video is that Brain Gerrish doesn’t introduce Taylor as is usually the case. Is he also distancing himself from the Crawford disaster now he has been made to look a complete berk after abetting Taylor in his lies in earlier interviews?
In fact, there is a video missing if we were to go by the usual sequence of Gerrish / Taylor interviews. It is the video of Guy Taylor “explaining” to Brain Gerrish and the U.K. Column Tom Crawford’s “Success” after the court decision; it never materialised.

[JonnyL]

Given the fact the property may be sold for a song, this might inspire Re members to infiltrate the auction waving their cheque books. Oh the heat & red wine.....bad combo!!!!1!!!!

Is there a reunion happening at Tom's local to celebrate the 1st anniversary of 'Response'? as that pub is just a stones throw from his former home it is highly possible that the soon to be fueled by booze brigade may try and retake it that night.

[wanglepin]

If we do in fact have some goofers on this forum, could anyone of them be kind enough to ask how the "special" Police Investigation into fraud and corruption in the courts is going, that Tom Crawford told us was "ongoing as we speak"?
It would be nice for an update. Thank you.

[Losleones]

If we do in fact have some goofers on this forum, could anyone of them be kind enough to ask how the "special" Police Investigation into fraud and corruption in the courts is going, that Tom Crawford told us was "ongoing as we speak"?
It would be nice for an update. Thank you.

To add, how is Tommy getting along with re entering B&B property as he mentioned in the video prior to assaulting a Police Officer? What a silly billy. The added debt for Tommy is going to be crippling & even reclaiming his possessions will be a handsome fee. Maybe a whip round in the local......if there's any Re cheques still circulating.

[vampireLOREN]

Yes, they are keeping an eye out. I've been banned loads of times, under loads of names. I still have one going that hasn't been rumbled (this post will have them searching high and low).

Me too

[hardcopy]

If we do in fact have some goofers on this forum, could anyone of them be kind enough to ask how the "special" Police Investigation into fraud and corruption in the courts is going, that Tom Crawford told us was "ongoing as we speak"?
It would be nice for an update. Thank you.

Tom also mentioned in his eviction interview that there were 5 flaws in his judgement that were the subject of his " revise and review " request. Any idea what they were ?

[Jeffrey]

Is there any legitimacy to the need for verifiable warrants?

Doesn't seem to apply in Tom's case since he knew for a fact it came from a real judge and a real court.

Is there really some epidemic of fake warrants I'm unaware of?

[daveBeeston]

If we do in fact have some goofers on this forum, could anyone of them be kind enough to ask how the "special" Police Investigation into fraud and corruption in the courts is going, that Tom Crawford told us was "ongoing as we speak"?
It would be nice for an update. Thank you.

Tom also mentioned in his eviction interview that there were 5 flaws in his judgement that were the subject of his " revise and review " request. Any idea what they were ?

There were 5 flaws that helped shape the outcome of Judgement and are pretty clear to all who have followed the case I shall list them below.

1.Tom Crawford
2.Sue Crawford
3.Mark "Ceylon" Haining
4.Michael O’Bernicia
5.Gedaljahu Ebert

That is all....

[Origen]

If we do in fact have some goofers on this forum, could anyone of them be kind enough to ask how the "special" Police Investigation into fraud and corruption in the courts is going, that Tom Crawford told us was "ongoing as we speak"?
It would be nice for an update. Thank you.

Tom also mentioned in his eviction interview that there were 5 flaws in his judgement that were the subject of his " revise and review " request. Any idea what they were ?

No though i think he pointed them out to his local MP.

@Jeffery - I thought it wasn't a real court because the judge was in civvies, left the room 3 times and judgement wasn't sealed up to the standards they require.