The Second Battle of Crawford's Castle, a Nottingham Farce...

[Tml69]

A bit of snooping indicates to me that a company is buying the property. A company which owns or has owned at least 100 other properties. Seems likely a developers or investor is buying rather than an unlucky first time buyer looking for a bargain.

[Skeleton]

A bit of snooping indicates to me that a company is buying the property. A company which owns or has owned at least 100 other properties. Seems likely a developers or investor is buying rather than an unlucky first time buyer looking for a bargain.

A developer with a large portfolio of properties or investor is the sensible way to go. The Crawfords can still claim the house has been "stolen" but they cant blame Mr and Mrs Smith for buying it. They will be dealing with a developer who as others have mentioned will not be so cuddly as B&B.

[Bungle]

A bit of snooping indicates to me that a company is buying the property. A company which owns or has owned at least 100 other properties. Seems likely a developers or investor is buying rather than an unlucky first time buyer looking for a bargain.

I cannot find my post right now but a week ago I said that the property would be quietly sold within one week. I would assume that given the extensive damage to the property by the 'Rooftop Six' last weekend that there has been some last minute bargaining about the eventual price (rockbottom price).

What is CLEAR is that any low price is the FAULT of the Crawford family and their 'supporters'. Today they should all be hanging their heads in shame. Once again, another family have lost their home becasue they too believed this Freeman on the Land nonsense.

[NG3]

They will be dealing with a developer who as others have mentioned will not be so cuddly as B&B.

I'm not suggesting this will happen here but I recall a similar case from a number of years ago and when the former owner broke into the house he was absolutely battered by the developer (it resulted in a permanent disability) & because of the seriousness of the injury both parties ended up in court cases.

The developer was found not guilty because they ruled he'd been using reasonable force to defend the property, and the other guy got 4 years for aggravated burglary (& six months on top for other charges).

The Crawford's & co. have had their warning shot across the bow, the law will have no sympathy with them if they don't heed it.

[Bungle]

Sorry all for going off topic for a moment.

Going back to Tom Crawford's first post on GOODF (asking whether he could pay his debt to Bradford & Bingley with a Promissory Cheque), the following judgment that I posted on another thread this morning is interesting.

This concerns a well know nutcase Anthony Parker (or as he prefers to be called: The Man Known as Anthony : Parker).

He took his case to the Court of Appeal in Northern Ireland and they have ruled that his promise to pay his mortgage arrears with a Promissory Note was without foundation.

The Court of Appeal referred to the case of Wirth v Weigel Leygonie & Co Ltd (1939) and where Du Parcq LJ said:

"I doubt whether a promise to pay to a man or to somebody else, who may be his creditor or debtor is a promissory note" (See also Halsbury's Laws of England Volume 48 paragraph 1405.

https://www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-GB/Judic ... 3Final.htm

[AndyPandy]

Interesting to see who does what if security has gone, a new call to arms !!

will it be a return of the roofing 6 - doubt it, they haven't got the bottle.

New set of willing sacrificial sheep? because you can bet your last dollar it won't be ANY of the Crawford Clan up on that roof !

[Skeleton]

A bit of snooping indicates to me that a company is buying the property. A company which owns or has owned at least 100 other properties. Seems likely a developers or investor is buying rather than an unlucky first time buyer looking for a bargain.

I cannot find my post right now but a week ago I said that the property would be quietly sold within one week. I would assume that given the extensive damage to the property by the 'Rooftop Six' last weekend that there has been some last minute bargaining about the eventual price (rockbottom price).

What is CLEAR is that any low price is the FAULT of the Crawford family and their 'supporters'. Today they should all be hanging their heads in shame. Once again, another family have lost their home becasue they too believed this Freeman on the Land nonsense.

I agree totally but with the caveat that Crawford did not have to be sold the FMOTL woo, he already was a follower, this has in his eyes elevated him to a more lofty position, allowing him to rub shoulders with the likes of Ceylon and Guy, a limelight he obviously enjoyed to the point the loss of the house became secondary. How long Ceylon etc will allow him up on that pedestal will be interesting to see, but his transition from victim to salesman is apparent with each new video release. Trouble is he and his family are a loose cannon, they want "yes" men so he will IMHO be quietly dropped.

[Jeffrey]

The house being sold to a evil development corporation isn't too good for the situation, given how this crowd feels about corporations.

[NG3]

How long Ceylon etc will allow him up on that pedestal will be interesting to see, but his transition from victim to salesman is apparent with each new video release. Trouble is he and his family are a loose cannon, they want "yes" men so he will IMHO be quietly dropped.

Crawford's "out card" is to blame Ceylon.

Ceylon's "out card" is to blame Tom

One of them will pull the trigger, to save their own reputation, but I doubt it will go down quietly.

It always happens, these sorts always turn on each other in the end. I've seen it to many times.

[Skeleton]

How long Ceylon etc will allow him up on that pedestal will be interesting to see, but his transition from victim to salesman is apparent with each new video release. Trouble is he and his family are a loose cannon, they want "yes" men so he will IMHO be quietly dropped.

Crawford's "out card" is to blame Ceylon.

Ceylon's "out card" is to blame Tom

One of them will pull the trigger, to save their own reputation, but I doubt it will go down quietly.

It always happens, these sorts always turn on each other in the end. I've seen it to many times.

And your money would be on? We should start a book on this I am suggesting Tom loses purely based on the fact he has said and done things during this process that must have had even Ceylon and the like pulling him to one side and "having a word"

[NG3]

And your money would be on?

Depends on timing and opportunity, but I'd wager whoever shoots first will win.

It'll mean nothing to anyone here but during my American adventures I came into direct contact with people at the more extreme and dangerous end of the spectrum and saw first hand how easily they'll turn on each other to save their skins.

Some of the American types make the Crawford's look level headed, reasonable and benign.

[PeanutGallery]

And your money would be on?

Neither, they are both losers.

[Jeffrey]

The recent Ceylon video in which he discusses the endowment policy issue, indicates to me that he more than likely understands the real story of why Tom was evicted and is simply now lying.

The current setup is too mutually beneficial for both Tom and Ceylon. GOODF gets free publicity and more customers everytime Tom gets coverage, and Tom gets the attention he craves along with possibly new customers by continuing to cavort with Cak.

I don't see a schism happening, they all have a vested interest in keeping the lie going.

By the way, we're now on day 3 of the Crawfords hiding the warrant?

[Skeleton]

And your money would be on?

Depends on timing and opportunity, but I'd wager whoever shoots first will win.

It'll mean nothing to anyone here but during my American adventures I came into direct contact with people at the more extreme and dangerous end of the spectrum and saw first hand how easily they'll turn on each other to save their skins.

Some of the American types make the Crawford's look level headed, reasonable and benign.

Makes perfect sense and explains some of the things i see on LiveLeak, thanks for the reply.

[NG3]

I don't see a schism happening, they all have a vested interest in keeping the lie going.

Until the financial reality catches up with Tom, or the fear of losing his liberty catches up with Ceylon...

This stuff is like the mafia, in the sense that you're not allowed to stop and/or leave, so sooner or later they all turn...

[hardcopy]

Hang on, someone with a property portfolio might have bought it ?
Has anyone seen Ebert lately ?

[NG3]

Has anybody got the video of Tom running away from those trying to show him papers ?

They are trying to show him the paperwork here

https://vimeo.com/133352245

[slowsmile]

The current setup is too mutually beneficial for both Tom and Ceylon. GOODF gets free publicity and more customers everytime Tom gets coverage, and Tom gets the attention he craves along with possibly new customers by continuing to cavort with Cak.

How much publicity is GOODF getting since Jon Witterick closed the TC thread?

The only publicity for Tom Crawford appears to be on Facebook on locked down pages which is hardly a way to draw in new customers. On the evidemce of recent turn outs the support is dwindling to a hard core of a few dozen.

[guilty]

ETFOTB reporting that Blues and twos are heading towards Fearn Chase.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Given the issues with previous attempts to re-occupy the property, I would bet that the new owners would be able to apply to evict without notice and the Judge would grant this immediately.
It is now up to the new owners to install security (if they wish).

No need for the "evict without notice" anyone going on there who is not wanted on site by the builders is a criminal trespasser. Phone 999 - Big Mick will sit on him until the Police get there.

Or just a member of staff in a solicitors?

Who just happened to go online one Saturday evening or Sunday morning and spot something?