"Gently Mavis"PeanutGallery wrote:What would Sgt Wilson say...vampireLOREN wrote: Mrs Pike is very unpleasant .
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Moderator: ArthurWankspittle
"Gently Mavis"PeanutGallery wrote:What would Sgt Wilson say...vampireLOREN wrote: Mrs Pike is very unpleasant .
biglee wrote:Hi
this is my first post.
I would assume any loss/damage to Crawfords belongings,would be countered by the bill they will be getting for the cost of the eviction, storage, security.
and of course the storming and recapture of Crawford towers.
(Should reduce the bill by a tenner then!)
It was a "goodwill" delivery. The deadline had passed, the goods could have been destroyed, so anything is better than nothing, and the court would dismiss.NYGman wrote:So I really doubt they will have any claim against the movers or banks, or would have a difficult time proving their case.
During my brief stint as a removals driver back in the 80s our contacts had a lot of get-clauses which essentially came down to the customer agreeing to the fact that things will inevitably get broken in a move and we weren't liable for breakages unless we had been grossly negligent. We had no way of knowing what was in the boxes we shifted and whether or not it was broken before we even walked through the door.NYGman wrote:So I really doubt they will have any claim against the movers or banks, or would have a difficult time proving their case.
THE CHICKEN IS IN THE GUARD DOGbiglee wrote:Thanx for the welcome
Just because they won't have a claim, or the ability to prove liability it won't stop their cracking legal team from coming up with some argument
don't forget there is a chicken still missing!!
But, but, but, they will have told their insurers what was happening and where the goods were being stored, surely.NYGman wrote:So I really doubt they will have any claim against the movers or banks, or would have a difficult time proving their case.
I hope the guard dog is under protective custody. awaiting an appearance in front of a common law grand jury in a back room of a seedy pubbagman wrote:THE CHICKEN IS IN THE GUARD DOGbiglee wrote:Thanx for the welcome
Just because they won't have a claim, or the ability to prove liability it won't stop their cracking legal team from coming up with some argument
don't forget there is a chicken still missing!!![]()
Which is, of course, exactly what he said to the police during the eviction. He also threatened to put the carrier out of business by organising a boycott of the company.PeanutGallery wrote:I think the problem is going to be twofold, for one the Crawfords expect to be able to generate an army of supporters angry mob at the drop of a Panama although the supporters angry mob doesn't get anything for it's help.arayder wrote: One has to wonder if the goodfer world is going to eventually suffer "Crawford fatigue".
This is going to raise a sense of entitlement in the Crawfords, making them feel and behave like gang bosses. One could easily imagine Tom standing up to the deliverymen telling them that they had better do as he says or he'll have thousands here to make them...
I wonder if there is a mathematical formula that can express how the larger his threats become the less power he has to deliver on them?Normal Wisdom wrote: Which is, of course, exactly what he said to the police during the eviction. He also threatened to put the carrier out of business by organising a boycott of the company.
Tom increasingly appears to revel in his notoriety within the FoTLer community.
PeanutGallery wrote:arayder wrote: One has to wonder if the goodfer world is going to eventually suffer "Crawford fatigue".That's sort of what Tommy did at the eviction. When the moving van showed up he walked up to the cab and shouted that his minions were going to boycott their business. What a blow to business, eh? In reality Tom's making business for them by going around telling folks they can stop paying their mortgages.PeanutGallery wrote:. . .the Crawfords expect to be able to generate an army of supporters angry mob at the drop of a Panama although the supporters angry mob doesn't get anything for it's help.
This is going to raise a sense of entitlement in the Crawfords, making them feel and behave like gang bosses. One could easily imagine Tom standing up to the deliverymen telling them that they had better do as he says or he'll have thousands here to make them. . . .
There are rumors of former Tom-hangers-on who are already falling out with the family. It doesn't sound like Amanda is one to mend fences.PeanutGallery wrote:. . .the mob are likely to tire of constantly being asked to make time to help the Crawfords,. . .This is likely going to lead to accusations and infighting, with the Crawfords removing supporters from their own ranks or other members of the mob chasing them out.
At this point everything the Crawfords touch turns to shinola. I understand they are living in the deceased mother-in-law's house. My money is on them finding a way to lose that too.PeanutGallery wrote:If they keep this up I would wager that they stand a very good chance of managing to lose their home and also piss off everyone who would be their friend through behaviour that is petulant, arrogant and childish.
The biggest mistake freemen gurus (Tom is now playing that roll) make is dissing one of their followers who, upon following their instructions to the letter, ends up in trouble. Tom's going around telling folks to follow his example. He can get away with them failing as long as he blames it on the powers that be and the "corrupt courts".PeanutGallery wrote:However in the meantime we have to remember that some people have shown themselves willing (or have been idiotic enough to fail to consider the consequences) to risk serious jail time for the Crawfords. That is evidence of a degree of power over the mob. People are harming themselves for the Crawfords and the Crawfords are enjoying their time in the limelight.
But as soon as he starts blaming the "client" he'll go the way of Eldon Warman, Robert Menard and Peter of England who all made the mistake of exclaiming that the failures of their methods where due to their ignorant clients.
Tom's just dumb enough to do so.
Whilst Ceylon has claimed his phone and laptop are bugged, and the police are so out to get him that they actually tried to murder him when he was causing his affray, the truth is they are low level wasters that the police have little interest in.ArthurWankspittle wrote:I can't see all the people currently involved being able to keep their mouths shut and for those concerned, to stick to bail conditions, current or future.
I stand corrected. But this might explain why the goodfers didn't show up to lift Tommy's furniture. . . too busy doing 20 oz. curls?Burnaby49 wrote:You're just showing your ignorance of local custom and falsely disparaging the GOODF crowd with that comment Arayder. Beer in British pubs is sold in 20 ounce pints and they have frequently demonstrated that they can lift those with no difficulty whatever.Never having seen a goodfer lift anything over 12 ounces I fear the latter was expected.
Yes we have already seen signs of that Peanut. When the removal men turned up at the eviction Crawford warned them;PeanutGallery wrote:
This is going to raise a sense of entitlement in the Crawfords, making them feel and behave like gang bosses.
"touch one stick of furniture and I will have 600 people here in minutes".
As far as I can tell there is only one police helicopter covering both Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire constabularies.letissier14 wrote:Amanda Pike They've had 3 helicopters over head so far lol
7 mins · Like · 1
Really ????
Normal Wisdom wrote:As far as I can tell there is only one police helicopter covering both Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire constabularies.letissier14 wrote:Amanda Pike They've had 3 helicopters over head so far lol
7 mins · Like · 1
Really ????