Slartibartfast wrote:And now the borrower and his advisors have gone further, explaining that the judgement should not be read literally. It is, they say, written in a special coded language called "legalese" in which words do not have their ordinary meaning. The leading OPCA guru (a legendary bankrupt vexatious ligitant) has kindly 'translated' the judgement and advised that it actually means that the borrower can 'deny the debt and keep the house'. (http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/v ... 60&t=86092)
atticus wrote:Unfortunately slarti's link to the full judgment (which I read this morning) no longer works. The document appears to have been removed.
THE COMPELLING PUBLIC INTEREST FACTS BEHIND THE UNLAWFUL COURT SESSIONS ON TOM CRAWFORD'S CASE
PRESS RELEASE - in the Public Interest
Tom Crawford's case is a great teaching tool, because it is a Classic example of how mis-reporting is being relied upon by criminals operating in a gang to conspire to steal the Crawford's family home by abusing the Court process and pulling the wool over everyone's eyes - without a shred of evidence to rely upon! This reduces the entire debacle in HMCTS and beyond, to a brazen act of Public deception, specifically, "a fraud on the Court and on the Crawfords" who are NOT deceived. So what are some of the actual RELEVANT FACTS on the Crawford case which the Media haven't yet examined?
In the 4th paragraph below, are 10 critical facts which preclude the Crawford's from being divested of their home lawfully, and which demonstrate that "Judge" godsmark was, alas, sitting in fraud without lawful jurisdiction or right of audience, having evidently abandoned his Oath of Office, engaging instead in perjury and an unashamed Abuse of the Court Process - along with the solicitors on the case (Walker Morris) and, of course, the originators of the scam - being Bradford & Bingley a 100% Government owned firm, who nominated themselves a 2nd lifeline by the inappropriate creation of UKAR (United Kingdom Asset Recovery) when banks like Bradford & Bingley collapsed by their own dead weight, snatching people's financial holdings with them which forced those robbed of their money to 'write this theft off', and yet prolonging the false "debtors" by creating the UKAR money-laundering vehicle intended to try to legitimise the unprovable and non-existent "debts".
But first, here is my truth review of UKAR (UK Asset Recovery) which I will share with you:
United Kingdom Asset Recovery are a despicable organisation with no morals, set up as a HOLDING COMPANY by a bankrupt "government" (bankrupt morally, financially, intellectually, spiritually) to scoop up illegal revenue for themselves, by abuse of position: all UK banks, supposedly "too big to fail" have failed miserably leaving a nuclear trail in their wake, saddling the People of Britain with their toxic legacy of uncontrolled DEBT through a fatally flawed Monetary system controlled by Rothschild, the infamous satanist behind the global economic collapse - which is entirely orchestrated.
UKAR have forced all those who invested their liquid assets in Bradford & Bingley and other failed "banks" to abandon their holdings and FLEE, but have dishonestly co-opted with the Government to given themselves an illegal 2nd lifeline with a conspiracy to force the alleged "debtors" or alleged "Borrowers" to stay on their hook, under their death-grip (mort-gage) with this money laundering vehicle called UKAR to implement this! Disgusting Corporatization which violates our human rights - be gone with you, for you are nothing more than scoundrels and financial opportunists who are parasites on the People of England. Financial hyenas like UKAR are NOT welcome here.
From the information I have gleaned on this case, here are10 critical facts in the Crawfords favour (not yet truthfully reported by the mainstream Media, who've failed to investigate the material facts) - if anything needs correction then I invite Tom Crawford to intervene, so this email is being copied to him accordingly....
1. The Crawfords believed they had a "mortgage" some 25 years ago from Bradford & Bingley, of some £41,000 or so. They repaid this no less than THREE TIMES over the ensuing 25 years, without realising until 18 months ago that they had apparently been duped into an "unconscionable bargain" - because it turns out they have never been given any Terms & Conditions and do not have any enforceable Mortgage Contract!
2. This means that the 100% government-owned Bradford & Bingley was engaging in practices which are now condemned and prevented through the introduction of much later regulation like The Financial Services Markets Act 2000 and other rules which go beyond the (rather ambiguous and limp-wristed) mere 'Mortgage Code' which was in force in 1986. Due to the lack of checks & balances back then, the Crawfords fell prey to predatory lending practices, so common amongst the Banks, particularly those which were 100% Government owned.
3. With there being no valid paperwork in place for the alleged "loan" which resulted in an INVALID charge being placed on the Crawford's property, using illegal means, due to non-compliance with the Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 and the Power of Attorney Act 1971 and non-disclosure of the "lenders" Terms & Conditions, meant that the Crawfords never had any 'right of redemption' of the said "loan"! Yet a 'mortgage' is defined by its 'right of redemption' (as with the game 'Monopoly', remember?), and so with this 'right' being in absentia, the Crawfords legally never had any mortgage!
4. Despite this, due to the lack of protective legislation to the Public and those labelled "borrowers" at the time, the Crawford's acted IN GOOD FAITH and repaid 'loan interest' without realising they had no obligation to pay anything, in effect, because of the invalid and unconscionable way the whole transaction had been badly and dishonestly set up, creating a total liability for the Crawfords and an unconscionable bargain. This is how Bradford & Bingley amassed an unwarranted sum approaching £150,000 in "interest only payments" which were tantamount to financial fraudon an alleged "borrowing" which involved an invalid paper trail that was procured from the Crawfords' own asset in the first place..namely, the Bradford & Bingley did not 'lend' the Crawfords ANYTHING but instead, created a book entry and issued CREDIT, misnamed "money" on their signature being misused!
5. Unfortunately, when the unethical 'interest' had been paid to the value of some three times the original alleged "loan", Bradford & Bingley, amidst the new and tightening legislation with financial fraud becoming a huge Public issue, acted in dishonour, by fraudulently CONVERTING the alleged "loan" into an "overdraft" - namely, they took the CREDIT that had been issued on paper illegally some 25 years earlier, and dishonestly changed its status into a false financial instrument that could NEVER be repaid - because no contract has ever been in existence. So what ought to have occurred is the 'loan should have been expunged there and then, and all of the 'interest' ought to have been repaid.
But instead, the ailing Bradford & Bingley co-opted with the Government, to create a money-laundering vehicle of "UKAR" (UK Asset resolution) parading as a means of 'helping customers with their loan and mortgage issues" so as to keep the illegal asset-stripping alive: in other words, a complete scam!
In this way, UKAR became the new "owner" of the (valuable, in their eyes) 'debt', and without checking in to the background nor putting right any of the foregoing errors and fraudulent irregularities, they conspired to issue a Money Claim on line during 2014 or thereabouts!
This "MCOL" false claim resulted from the false 'overdraft' the 'lender' had created through the illegal conversion of a 'debt' which was never validated or compliant with Law in the first place. It was around this time that the guilty parties became very apologetic to the Crawfords and bought them champagne and flowers, instead of explaining that the remedy they were entitled to receive was a full refund of all interest wrongly paid, and eradication of the original alleged 'debt' due to non-compliant paperwork and no enforceable contract.
6. However, with there being no Consumer Credit Agreement validly procured nor in place for the "overdraft" which was foisted upon the Crawford's, the MCOL could never stand up in Court, as any Civil claim in HMCTS requires the Law of Contract to 'prove' the case and win it, but this is impossible with there being no contract in existence for either the original 'loan' nor, indeed, for the subsequent fraudulent loan conversion into an Overdraft! Therefore, the MCOL was invalidly brought by Walker Morris solicitors - who have never complied with Part 31 Rules of Disclosure of the Court, despite being asked to do so: they, too, are in dishonour and abusing the Court process.
7. A further hallmark of fraud exists in the INVALID ISSUANCE of the MCOL, brought against the Crawfords in 2014: that of no proof of debt - the Government, under the facade of 'Bradford & Bingley' trading name back in 1990 or thereabouts, had done a mere book entry of issuing 'credit' against the Crawford's name and secured it invalidly against their asset (family home) - which denotes that the Promissory Note was not valid nor could be validated - because a charge can not be put on a property without a valid DEED, and in addition:
* the Deed has to be accompanied by a valid bi-lateral CONTRACT which must contain the Terms & Conditions of the loan within its wording in one document and executed in front of them at the 'exchange of contracts stage'.
* the Deed must also bear two independent witness signatures, and the original of this along with the original Contract, forms the original Promissory Note. Without these things all in place, no valid transaction has taken place.
* The above is the Law and is mandatory under the Law of Property (Misc Provisions) 1989 Act, Sections 1 & 2.
8. Astonishingly, District Judge Godsmark failed to detect ANY of the foregoing. Instead, he focused on the repayment vehicle (an endowment) which in no way can exonerate the missing vital steps referred to above. It is also questionable whether there has been any compliance at all with the Bill of Exchange Act 1882, which requires that any charge placed on a property via a valid Deed, must have received 'consideration' and a fair exchange (something of value for something of value). This, too, is thrown into serious question. In this way, it can be reliably deduced that DJ Godsmark was sitting in fraud and dishonour in HMCTS, by turning a blind eye to the compound fraud and multiple irregularities which he made no apparent attempt to correct.
9. Tom Crawford rightly drew to the Judge's attention the fact that the "claim" had never been validly issued, because it had never been PAID for! this means there are NO PROCEEDINGS - because with no valid issuance, the claim can not proceed and so there are no proceedings.
Moreover, the false 'claim bore NO COURT SEAL (a mandatory requirement under the Ministry of Justice Civil Procedure Rule 2.6), and NO SIGNATURE ON THE 'STATEMENT OF TRUTH' - which the judge weakly tried to get around by asserting it was "a money claim on line" !
The dishonest solicitors, complicit in this abuse of the Court process, showed a barrister present in the Court room the White book that stated that a home could be repossessed via an MCOL without any pre-action protocol - but quickly departed when it was pointed out to them by the erudite barrister that it was "subject only to STRICT CONDITIONS, none of which had been met!" This sums up the mindless manner in which this INVALID claim has been peddled through HMCTS. The fact that the Judge then took the unprecedented RISK of compounding the hot water he is already clearly steeped in, by REFUSING the Crawford's RIGHT OF APPEAL against the fraudulent and invalidly brought, unsubstantiated "claim" speaks volumes about the state of play and sheer CORRUPTION which has infiltrated HM Courts and even the police forces and Professions. Integrity has been thrown out of the window.
10. To add insult to injury, DJ Godsmark abused his position, by violating Tom Crawford's Article 6 right to a "fair hearing". He did this by refusing Mr Crawford's perfectly reasonable request to be represented by the party of his choice and nomination, but the Judge (illegally) refused this - evidently because he was not acting in accord with his sworn Oath of Office and instead was there in a PRIVATE capacity (a rescue operation for the avalanche of financial deficit created by the profligacy and reckless lending of the 1990's and earlier). Mr Crawford has been suffering symptoms of inevitable stress with 'blanking out' and many of us even witnessed him explaining this, but DJ Godsmark coldly ignored his plight and refused his request: this created an inequality of arms.
The excuse for a 'judge' ran out of the Court room NO LESS THAN THREE TIMES, evidently his conscience was pricking him too hard, and events that occurred exacerbated the reminder to the judge's conscience that he was not acting lawfully in his manner of handling the case. Had he done a deal behind the scenes with UKAR - the 100% Government Owned HOLDING Company and therefore 100% CONFLICTED to have brought the false "claim" in the first place?
I herein rest my case.
Finally, I will just say this: is anyone else noticing that something is terribly wrong here, with literally hundreds of billions of pounds being wiped off Bank balance sheets, yet not a single criminal prosecution for theft or robbery in sight, all aided and abetted by the illegal protectionism of the UK 'Government' ?
This plays out in the financial and Economic Marketplace where by there were apparently over 48,000 illegal repossessions bought last year against victims of the Corporate takeover by the giant behemoth financial institutions of the likes of Bradford & Bingley, or a house taken every 20 minutes, through abuse of position leading to people's loss (a criminal offence under Section 4 of the Fraud Act 2006) and nothing practical yet being done about this sorry state of affairs?
I speak with a certain authority and from first-hand experience, because I, too, am a victim of Serious Organised Crime by the State, only through a different financial institution - Bank of Scotland (previously known as "HBOS") who also engaged in predatory lending without passing the money for the false charges they took on properties using void deeds and in violation of the Bill of Exchange Act 1882.
In my and my sister's case, I have been literally wrestling against the corruption in HMCTS for the past EIGHT AND A HALF YEARS, and have been denied a fair hearing and denied any disclosure of a debt, amongst other things. These happenings are plainly, an abomination!
The BBC timidly took the lid off my case on 3 March 2014 without explaining that none of us ever received a penny in 'loans' nor any access to the said 'loans', but were helpful at least in exposing how the HBOS Head Auditor, Fraser Mackay, was at the helm of the heist of $233 million of which more than $2million has been stolen from my family members and we've been robbed of our peace of mind for 14 years and stressed out for nearly 9 years with invalid proceedings involving EVERSHEDS solicitors as the s.p.v. to the bank (special purpose vehicle) - latterly, the dishonest rogue solicitor Tim Pyle has rapidly FLED, without a trace! The claim continues to languish in the courts as I continue to patiently await the removal of no less than THREE illegal and invalid 'charges' on our home, by the Property Chamber.
Nick Wallis: Bank of Scotland investigation
Posted by Nick Wallis at 15:09. ... I believe it was designed by HBOS and implemented by broker introducers but, ... Inside Out Bank of Scotland investigation transcript.
IMHO, Britain is no longer a safe place to purchase or own property, nor to have or bring up children, because the corruption issues of the Crown Corporation which governs all of the atrocities which include child-trafficking, land and property grabbing by the State and bogus "bankruptcies" as a means of illicit debt collection, all stem from the abuse of the registration process at HMLR, HMRC, HMCTS etc. I hope this provides some useful insight into the REAL goings-on. You can view my posting from a few days ago on 'Eviction the fraud of the Bank' Facebook Group site, which will doubtless give you even more understanding into the Government's 'war against its people' going on in Britain today.
founder - ONE VOICE ACTION GROUP
'One Voice' action group
'One Voice' action group
"let's become One Voice, and let's make that voice be heard" Founder of 'One Voice Action Group'
View on http://www.one-voice-action-group.com
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest