The Crawfords Keep Looking For A Unicorn

[noblepa]

I wonder what "paperwork" Amanda thinks she saw that prove Tom paid the mortgage. And, why they spent so much court time on warrants and wet ink seals and other rubbish, when they had documentation that would have easily settled the matter if true.

She may have seen a statement that showed the total interest paid over the life of the loan. IIRC, they claimed at one point to have paid the loan three times over. That is entirely possible with an interest-only loan. That doesn't mean that the loan was paid, however.

I don't know if she is really that stupid, that she doesn't understand what the term "interest-only" means. Maybe she is. From the descriptions I've seen here of the endowment mortgage, it seems like a poor loan product, from the start. Unless the endowment had a guaranteed interest rate that was sufficient to accrue enough capital to repay the loan, there was always a high risk of a significant shortfall when the note came due.

Here in Ohio, back in 1981, I took out a similarly bad loan. It was a negative-amortization loan. Interest rates were so high (up to 17 percent) that few people could afford a mortgage. These loans were written with a very high interest rate but with a payment that was less than the monthly interest. So, every month, you added a little bit more to your loan. The theory was that, over time, the borrower would receive salary increases and could begin paying the full payment. I think I was required to begin full payments within five years.

Fortunately, interest rates came down within a couple of years, and I was able to refinance at a more reasonable rate of (IIRC) 11 percent, fixed rate, conventional mortgage. I was able to afford the payment on that loan. After a few more years, I was able to refinance again, to an even lower rate.

Question: Was the endowment portion of those loans a life insurance policy? IOW, if the borrower died, say, five years into the loan, would the endowment have paid the entire principle balance?

Also, IIRC, Tom got his loan in 1988. Surely interest rates have come down since then. It would seem that he could have refinanced to a conventional repayment loan, at a lower interest rate. He might have been able to get a repayment loan with a monthly payment amount less than he was paying B & B for an interest-only loan.

[notorial dissent]

As to whether Amanda is really that stupid, I'd have to vote yes, I think the entire family is resoundingly brain dead or deficient. I also think that Amanda just out of habit comes up with a lie for whatever occasion she needs one. Since TC admitted to all this in open court the first time around and it was memorialized in the judgment, it isn't like they haven't heard it all before, she just refused to acknowledge reality. And yes, again, I think they are ALL that stupid, on top of being basically and intrinsically dishonest.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Also, IIRC, Tom got his loan in 1988. Surely interest rates have come down since then. It would seem that he could have refinanced to a conventional repayment loan, at a lower interest rate. He might have been able to get a repayment loan with a monthly payment amount less than he was paying B & B for an interest-only loan.

A lot of UK mortgages are variable rate, especially back in the 80s. He had no need to change mortgage, the rate would have moved with bank base rates.
As for Amanda, I too think it is quite likely she hasn't a clue about mortgages and at best is going on the paid three times the amount borrowed bullshit Tom came out with at one point.

[Normal Wisdom]

There was a time when an endowment mortgage seemed to be a very good product. The return on investments were such that practically speaking there was no question that the loan would not be covered and it was simply a matter of how much extra the investment would generate as a"bonus". Lenders were required to warn borrowers that there was a risk (however slight) that the investment return would not cover the loan amount but in truth many sailed pretty close to the wind and some were downright misleading about expectations. Unfortunately endowments taken out in the late 80's onwards were caught by the collapse in investment returns and borrowers were suddenly faced with a shortfall against their loan. Many lenders had to pay compensation for mis-selling their endowment products.

Tom Crawford may have been mis-sold his endowment mortgage in that he was not made aware of the risks that the return on the endowment policy would not cover his loan. He may have been entitled to compensation as a result. Unfortunately for him this never became an option because he simply chose to stop paying his endowment policy premium after only a few years so there was never a reliable projection of the return on his policy.

I have always believed that the genesis of this whole mess was that Tom and Sue were sold an endowment mortgage without having any idea what it was or how it worked. They stopped paying the endowment policy premium because they thought it was unimportant. It is very hard to believe that after all this time, they have not been made to understand the mistake they made. However it is either that or they belatedly know the truth and simply chose to lie about it in order to maintain the fiction of their story.

[Normal Wisdom]

...
Question: Was the endowment portion of those loans a life insurance policy? IOW, if the borrower died, say, five years into the loan, would the endowment have paid the entire principle balance?

Also, IIRC, Tom got his loan in 1988. Surely interest rates have come down since then. It would seem that he could have refinanced to a conventional repayment loan, at a lower interest rate. He might have been able to get a repayment loan with a monthly payment amount less than he was paying B & B for an interest-only loan.

The endowment policy was an investment vehicle backed by a life insurance policy so that, as you say, in the event of the death of the policy holder the entire loan would be repaid. Endowment policies were offered by life assurance companies. I believe that Tom and Sue thought that aside from the monthly interest payment made to their lender, the money they were paying to the life assurance company was simply life assurance, a "nice to have" added protection but not directly related to the repayment of their loan. When money got a bit tight a few years after taking out the mortgage, they decided to stop paying the endowment premium without realising what they had done. In one of his videos, Tom explains how the problem in paying off their mortgage came to light (albeit that he still didn't understand what the problem was) when Sue was talking to the lender about "life insurance".

Again you are correct that converting the loan to a repayment type would have been a viable solution. They still had about 15 years left on the loan period and with lower interest rates the full capital repayment could have been fairly easily amortised into the remaining mortgage period. However, this is where Tom became involved in what up to then had been Sue's responsibility. Their complete ignorance about the basis of their mortgage lead to him being so certain that B&B were trying to cheat him in some way that he refused to engage with them at all.

[aesmith]

As for Amanda, I too think it is quite likely she hasn't a clue about mortgages and at best is going on the paid three times the amount borrowed bullshit Tom came out with at one point.

I agree, I think it's a figure someone plucked out of the air that's now being parroted as gospel. To pay three times the capital in 25 years would mean an average interest rate of 12%.

[littleFred]

Stupidity, ignorance and dishonesty, yes. But I would add: delusion. The individual wants to believe in lies or mistakes, whether made by themselves or other people, so much that they do actually believe them.

A delusion becomes an internalised truth that can withstand any contradictory evidence, so there's no point in fighting a delusion with facts.

For example, Tom has long believed that any court that finds against him is corrupt.

Delusions are contagious, and possibly inheritable.

[hucknallred]

I agree, I think it's a figure someone plucked out of the air that's now being parroted as gospel. To pay three times the capital in 25 years would mean an average interest rate of 12%.

We explored this in the last thread, I got the list of historical BOE base rates & some number crunching was done, that took into account the abolition of MIRAS etc. All that was missing was the B&B's historical interest rates which would have followed the BOE rises/cuts.
AS UKAR are owned by the government could they be FOIed for the historical rates?

[Penny Wise]

As to whether Amanda is really that stupid, I'd have to vote yes, I think the entire family is resoundingly brain dead or deficient. I also think that Amanda just out of habit comes up with a lie for whatever occasion she needs one. Since TC admitted to all this in open court the first time around and it was memorialized in the judgment, it isn't like they haven't heard it all before, she just refused to acknowledge reality. And yes, again, I think they are ALL that stupid, on top of being basically and intrinsically dishonest.

Amanda is a liar and takes the Crawford followers for the idiots that they mostly are.

In Tom's first post on GOODF, before he deleted it, he admitted that he owed the Capital Balance.

In one of his youtube videos, he shows his annual mortgage statements, which show only interest being paid and more importantly shows year after year the amoung owed is not decreasing.

As for the missing endowment as confirmed both in Court and in one of Tom's video's the endowment was credited to his mortgage account just a few years into the mortgage.

Amanda is either a liar or completely delusional.

[Pottapaug1938]

As for Amanda, I too think it is quite likely she hasn't a clue about mortgages and at best is going on the paid three times the amount borrowed bullshit Tom came out with at one point.

I agree, I think it's a figure someone plucked out of the air that's now being parroted as gospel. To pay three times the capital in 25 years would mean an average interest rate of 12%.

I was practicing law, in the early 80s, when an interest rate of 12% would have seemed cheap. I remember going over settlement sheets for real estate closings with clients; and they would often ask why their interest payments, over the term of the mortgage, were many times the principal amount being borrowed. I would explain that those interest payments added up; and were they not paying almost all interest, in their earliest mortgage payments, that figure would be even higher.

[Gregg]

I think Tom does and has always understood the particulars of his mortgage, its just that when facing a shortfall caused by his and Sue's own decisions he decided that it wasn't fair that he had to pay interest, and then latched onto the "I've paid 3 times what I borrowed, I made every payment over the 25 years, and therefore I think I should owe nothing"

That's his story, and he's sticking to it.

[JimUk1]

Certainly is a merry-go-round with Tom and co.
He'll be appearing on ancient aliens next, claiming reptilian bankers have being planning to enslave the humans since year 33AD, when they killed Jesus, for casting them out the temple.

[Normal Wisdom]

I think Tom does and has always understood the particulars of his mortgage, its just that when facing a shortfall caused by his and Sue's own decisions he decided that it wasn't fair that he had to pay interest, and then latched onto the "I've paid 3 times what I borrowed, I made every payment over the 25 years, and therefore I think I should owe nothing"

That's his story, and he's sticking to it.

You may well be correct but I just can't think of a reason why they would simply stop paying the endowment policy premium only three years into the loan period but maintain (more or less) the interest payments for the next 22 years unless they were ignorant of the implications of doing so.

[rumpelstilzchen]

You may well be correct but I just can't think of a reason why they would simply stop paying the endowment policy premium only three years into the loan period but maintain (more or less) the interest payments for the next 22 years unless they were ignorant of the implications of doing so.

I can understand it completely. I would say the opposite: You do know the implications. If you are self-employed and go through a period of having little money coming in you know you have to maintain the interest payments otherwise you will lose the house. You think to yourself that the endowment isn't important because you have more than twenty years to find that money. Just a few good deals....the business becoming a rip roaring success over the next few years.....hell, in twenty years I will have accumulated that piddling amount in cash and I will be able to pay it off easily.....that big deal will come tomorrow.......
I speak from experience. Been there, done that. Although, in my case, it was a pension linked mortgage. I stopped paying in to the pension within five years of beginning the mortgage and pension. At the time I could not afford the payments. I never paid another penny in to that pension plan. I simply paid the interest. Fortunately for me my business did ok. Good job too because that twenty years went by at a faster rate than expected.

[ArthurWankspittle]

Further to rumpelstilzchen's post, 1991 was a pretty bad time to be self employed or looking for a job. It makes sense that they stopped the endowment payments to save a bit of cash.

[Chaos]

given the cfraud's demeanor, I'm sure he would have been a real peach to hire.

[getoutofdebtfools]

Been away from the forum for bit, I presume Tom has his house back now as it's nearly 2 years since he, sweaty Sue and onesie-Amanda categorically stated they would...????

[notorial dissent]

Yeah, and the RV came in even higher than the gurus predicted, Chrisy Morris won his seat in parliament, WeReNotaBank just bought the Bank of England out of bankruptcy, and Article 61 is in full force and effect. Oh and the moon is made of green cheese. Did we miss anything else?

[Footloose52]

A property developer with no interpersonal skills became President of the USA, can we add that?

[Dr. Caligari]

A property developerreality TV star with no interpersonal skills became President of the USA, can we add that?

FIFY.