Fraudulent banks, utility companies and corrupt courts

[Stilton Cheesewright]

I meant to add that the rumour is that B&B want to come to an arrangement so that Mr Crawford can stay in his house. I assume that might be some kind of equity release scheme. If that's true then let's hope that he is sensible enough to take the offer.

[Amanda Martin]

Just caught up with this.   I think something similar (bank fraud) happened to Zane, the former owner of the Bastion Mews on the corner of Bath Street and Union Street.   Can't remember the details now but I think it involved unilaterally increasing repayments, not telling him, waiting for enormous arrears to accrue and then repossessing.  

[megilleland]

Interview here on Bastion Radio with Guy Taylor who mentions Amanda and Hereford Voice.

 

I have also been following Guy Taylor and he mentioned Amanda in the course of an interview (2:18:00) on Bastion Radio in Bristol. The radio would like to contact her for further information. Would you be interested Amanda? Listen to the radio programme here. 

 

Even I got a mention twice together with Hereford Voice, although he didn't get the facts completely right - I don't own Hereford Voice!

[megilleland]

NCA slammed as 'ignorant' and 'ill-informed' by High Court judge after agency used unlawful search warrants

 

The National Crime Agency has been condemned as “incompetent†and “systematically flawed†by a High Court judge - after officers unlawfully used search warrants to plant a surveillance device without warning magistrates.

 

Mr Justice Hickinbottom ordered the NCA, known as ‘Britain’s FBI’, to seek legal advice when obtaining warrants in the future. He described the agency as “remarkably ill-informed†and “ignorant†about search warrant procedures.

 

The judge said the NCA “acted with patent and egregious disregard for, or indifference to, the constitutional safeguards†and that a systematic lack of understanding process meant the failings were highly likely to occur.

 

The five men failed in their attempts to have their arrests declared unlawful and remain on police bail. However, Mr Justice Hickinbottom found the search warrants were unlawful on several grounds including leaving out information such as the individuals and companies suspected.

 

The NCA also omitted to tell magistrates that its officers would use the search as a chance to plant surveillance devices to try and gather evidence from the suspects following their release from custody. One basic piece of information – grounds of suspicion – was also missing from the warrant.

 

Mr Justice Hickinbottom added: “This case smacks of incompetence, not bad faith.†The judge also said Birmingham Magistrates failed in their duty but that they were entitled to rely on the information provided to them at the hearing.

 

At least some judges are picking up the finer points of justice. 

[Stilton Cheesewright]

As I wrote about 10 days ago. Tom Crawford (supported by Guy Taylor) has appeared in court in Nottingham for a hearing of their application to appeal against the Order of Possession on Tom's house which was issued last year. There were precious few facts that emerged from the hearing. Tom continued to allege various types of fraud and malpractice by Bradford & Bingley. On the other hand B&B simply alleged that Tom has ceased to pay the premiums on the Life Assurance policy that supported his endowment mortgage. Judgement on the case was reserved primarily because the judge feared an outbreak of disorder in and outside the court.

 

The final judgement was delivered in court today.  There were two issues to be heard. Could Tom Crawford submit an appeal "out of time"? The judge granted that application. Could Tom submit an appeal based on the information he submitted to the court? The judge refused that application which means that he rejected all Tom's allegations about fraud etc. The judge ruled that the Order of Possession still stands and the Warrant for Possession (which allows Tom to be evicted) and which had been suspended pending the hearing could go ahead.

 

In a masterclass of self deception and misunderstanding bordering on stupidity that characterises the "freeman / common law" followers.  Guy and Tom have spun this result as a great victory.

 

I give you two polar opposite versions of the result:

 

 

http://www.nottinghampost.com/Judge-refuses-Tom-Crawford-s-battle-bailiffs/story-26501928-detail/story.html

 

I have to say, if this is an example of Guy's understanding of the law then it may be some time before he sees the inside of Bodenham Manor  again.

[Stilton Cheesewright]

The full judgement of Tom Crawford's hearing is now available on line. Remember this is the case where Guy Taylor was quite happy to support Tom in saying that the case had clearly been won.  See if you agree with him.

 

https://infotomb.com/cixyk

[megilleland]

In the planning notices today. Appears to have been sold on again.

 

151607 – AC P

Demolition of Bodenham Manor. Bodenham Manor, Bodenham.

[dippyhippy]

It would seem from the planning application, that Bodenham Manor is being sold to the chap who wants to knock it down??

 

He says on the application that informal consultation has already taken place with the parish council, but doesn't mention what their views are.

 

This seems rather drastic, demolishing it??

 

The applicant intends to build a new dwelling, however this is a conservation area, although I don't believe Bodenham Manor is listed.

[Stilton Cheesewright]

 

In the planning notices today. Appears to have been sold on again.

 

151607 – AC P

Demolition of Bodenham Manor. Bodenham Manor, Bodenham.

 

Any news on Guy's court action?

[megilleland]

None at the moment.

[Cambo]

Tom Crawford is being evicted

 

http://lm.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Ft.co%2FIn6xKpREEQ&h=JAQEMJehu&enc=AZNCMacQu5QPFXkFFErzNSUZa-buhcY_6aFCAFWiTGZb5vkq2jz7AFbzyjHk--TvQEsVOAp01501e477w8_zEIULGR1KmWYYxWJslR4Thlgh2Uy_FyXXu1E4Ngg5GVIXr_C_0HjTV37yq2mcgs-jlvN0hJoDqq1L0q295P-KQZ8HwJBao7t1nUx5tps1o_p0KR8&s=1

[Roger]

Tom Crawford is being evicted

 

Sadly your link has become broken. So here is the story ....

 

 

Nottingham's Tom Crawford evicted from home after long-running legal battle

•  
• 

 

A man whose long-running battle to keep his home won thousands of supporters has been evicted.

 

Tom Crawford, 64, of Carlton, Nottingham, disputed claims he owed Bradford & Bingley £43,000 in mortgage payments.

 

Mr Crawford claimed he had paid off the endowment mortgage he took out in 1988, adding that the terms were changed without his knowledge.

 

BBC News

 

These Mortgages are quite simple to understand. You pay off the interest on the loan for 25 years. Then pay off the Capital when the associated endowment matures. 

 

Of course the endowments (a fair few) will fall well short of predicted returns and you have got to make up the shortfall yourself. Unless you have somehow proved you were mis -sold the stuff in the first place. 

 

I have no idea where the wheel came off here but the Court have made their decision. 

[megilleland]

From This is Money:

 

Bank of Scotland damned by judge as 'unconscionable' after it 'double billed' mortgage borrowers who fell into arrears

 

Borrowers were paying arrears through higher monthly payments - but still faced possession proceedings

 

A piece posted this week concerning Bank of Scotland and Santander involved in ongoing court appearances in Northern Ireland for fraudalent practices involving mortgages. Do people really understand what they are signing up for when they purchase a house and do the banks want you to know? Someone tries to explain it.

 

Capitalisation, Securitisation And Fraud By Mortgage Lenders

[Roger]

Thanks for that. I get the general drift I think. So did Tom Crawford have some arrears rolled up into a similar situation where he would argue that he was paying a disproportionately higher amount? If he never missed a payment then surely a situation wouldn't have developed? 

[greenknight]

Back in the 80,s Roger the endowment mortgage was the way to go. It was only two thirds in when you were made aware that a lump sum shortfall at the end meant you might have to cough up for the rest. To be honest at the time I moved house I changed mortgage type thank god and went for straightforward repayment option. It could have been interest only which is the new nasty on the block. I feel many people forget what type of mortgage they are on until it gets close to the maturity of it.

[megilleland]

Following on from the above another scam

 

The “Section 151 Officer†Council Tax and Fraudulent Accounting

By John Hurst. May 2015.

This brings us to the little known “151 Officer†who appears to be at the heart of a scheme to establish a secretive fascist regime where money raised from local taxation is diverted into private investments without the knowledge of tax payers. (read on)

 

Elsewhere in the report several other types of “Reserve†are explained. The term “Unusable reserve†is not. No clue is given as to who decided anything about it. I think we have found what were looking for.

 

Am I right that the Unusable Reserve in Herefordshire Council's Statement of Accounts 2014/15 on page 16 is £110 million - where is this going?

[Roger]

Back in the 80,s Roger the endowment mortgage was the way to go. It was only two thirds in when you were made aware that a lump sum shortfall at the end meant you might have to cough up for the rest. To be honest at the time I moved house I changed mortgage type thank god and went for straightforward repayment option. It could have been interest only which is the new nasty on the block. I feel many people forget what type of mortgage they are on until it gets close to the maturity of it.

 

I'll fall short of my final payment. I got it covered. People forget that what they lost in the endowment being **** they gained in a next to nothing interest rate for donkey's years ~ on the interest monthly payment. I'm not remotely arsed! 

[Cambo]

Following on from the above another scam

 

The “Section 151 Officer†Council Tax and Fraudulent Accounting

By John Hurst. May 2015.

 

 

 

Am I right that the Unusable Reserve in Herefordshire Council's Statement of Accounts 2014/15 on page 16 is £110 million - where is this going?

Interesting question megilleland where indeed will that money be going?…maybe it will be used to pay off some of that £200 million plus they are in debt for???…but more than likely wasted instead of being put to good use shoring up frontline services??!!

[greenknight]

Gotta say I would like an answer to this one!

Personally I'm hoping some of it goes to subsidize the kiddie ride next to HSBC. It brings so much pleasure to the little ones....and so much pain to certain members of the public....I've suggested a permanent red bouncy castle...surely Roger getting the colour right counts for something😉

[Denise Lloyd]

Movement in reserves statement Reserves represent the authority’s net worth and show its spending power. Reserves are analysed into two categories: usable and unusable. Usable reserves • Result from the authority’s activities • Can be spent in the future • Include: – general fund – earmarked reserves – capital receipts reserve The level of usable reserves, the spending plans of the authority and other sources of funding will determine how much council tax needs to be raised. The movement in reserves statement (MIRS) analyses the changes in each of the authority’s reserves from year to year. It should be clear to see what has caused the movement in each reserve. The statement shows: • opening balances – these should be the same as the previous year’s closing balances • total income or expenditure for the year – this should agree with the comprehensive income and expenditure account • statutory transfers between reserves – these are made as the result of regulation • voluntary transfers between reserves – these are made as the result of the authority’s decisions • closing balances – these should agree to those on the balance sheet. Transfers between reserves should not result in a change in the overall level of reserves. 4 A guide to local authority accounts A guide to local authority accounts 5 Statutory transfers are adjustments that are made to usable reserves to: • remove transactions that are required by accounting standards • add transactions required by statute. For example, accounting standards require depreciation to be charged to the general fund to represent the cost of assets used in the delivery of services. Statute requires that all capital transactions are removed from the general fund. Depreciation is therefore taken out of the general fund and replaced with the minimum revenue provision (MRP). The MRP represents the authority’s estimate of how much it should contribute to capital expenditure each year and is approved by members at the start of every year. Voluntary transfers include the earmarking of reserves. Members may choose to earmark reserves, putting aside cash to deliver specific longer-term objectives, such as the replacement of vehicles, plant and equipment. The purpose and usage of each earmarked reserve should be clearly set out. Challenge questions 1 Are the movements in the two types of reserves shown in separate tables? 2 Do the opening balances agree with last year? Have any restatements been clearly explained? 3 Do the figures in the MIRS agree to the comprehensive income and expenditure statement? 4 Can you trace the figures in the MIRS to the relevant notes? Do the notes adequately explain the major movements? 5 Are the purposes of the material earmarked reserves consistent with the authority’s objectives and the authority’s decisions? Unusable reserves • Derive from accounting adjustments • Cannot be spent • Include: – pensions reserve – revaluation reserve – capital adjustment accoun

 

Statutory transfers are adjustments that are made to usable reserves to: • remove transactions that are required by accounting standards • add transactions required by statute. For example, accounting standards require depreciation to be charged to the general fund to represent the cost of assets used in the delivery of services. Statute requires that all capital transactions are removed from the general fund. Depreciation is therefore taken out of the general fund and replaced with the minimum revenue provision (MRP). The MRP represents the authority’s estimate of how much it should contribute to capital expenditure each year and is approved by members at the start of every year. Voluntary transfers include the earmarking of reserves. Members may choose to earmark reserves, putting aside cash to deliver specific longer-term objectives, such as the replacement of vehicles, plant and equipment. The purpose and usage of each earmarked reserve should be clearly set out.

 

Taken from 

A guide to local authority accounts - Grant Thornton

www.grant-thornton.co.uk/Documents/PS-Guide-to-local-authority.pdf

•  
•  

Unusable reserves. • Derive from accounting adjustments. • Cannot be spent. • Include: – pensions reserve. – revaluation reserve. – capital adjustment account.

[greenknight]

So no bouncy castle money Denise!

[Stilton Cheesewright]

Thanks for that. I get the general drift I think. So did Tom Crawford have some arrears rolled up into a similar situation where he would argue that he was paying a disproportionately higher amount? If he never missed a payment then surely a situation wouldn't have developed? 

 

The truth of Tom's case was revealed at the recent hearing of his request to appeal against the Order of Possession in which the judge denied him permission to appeal.

 

Tom took out an endowment mortgage is 1988. In 1991 he (or rather his wife) ceased paying the monthly premium for the endowment policy that was intended to repay the original capital sum. After about 12 months, the policy provider (Royal London) cancelled the policy and paid the proceeds accrued to date (about £178) into Tom's mortgage account with the Bradford & Bingley Building Society. It has never been satisfactorily explained why the premiums were stopped. The vast bulk of what Tom owes is the original capital sum.

 

Everything subsequent to this is a web of misunderstandings, misdirection and downright lies by Tom and the team of "experts" (including Guy Taylor) that gathered around him. They even tried to pretend that the result of the hearing (see link below) was a resounding win and that those of us that thought otherwise were either unable to understand the special legal language in which it was written or were "trolls and shills" shamelessly defending the corrupt banking system in the face of overwhelming evidence.

 

The only overwhelming evidence that I have seen is that Tom's team of experts; Guy Taylor, Gedalhaju Ebert, Michael Waugh etc have all been evicted from their properties and that anyone who has listened to their bullshit (Cleveland Rhoden, Michael Grant-Sinclair, Paula Jayne Campbell, Glynis Craggs and now Tom Crawford to name only some) have suffered the same fate.

 

One might think that this would give them pause for thought but no, in between his futile attempts to recover Bodenham Manor, Guy Taylor makes a habit (and a nice living?) speaking to groups of gullible people and enticing them down the path that has already caused so many people so much misery. Tom is just one more victim of this pernicious nonsense. Part of me thinks that they deserve all they get but a larger part of me thinks that that it is Guy Taylor and co who really deserve to be sorted out for playing silly games with other people's lives.

 

https://infotomb.com/dn1qw.pdf

[megilleland]

Channel 4 Dispatches tonight  6th July at 8pm and repeated on 10th July 2015

 

Reporter Antony Barnett travels from the southern tip of England to Edinburgh to uncover financial deals between cash-strapped councils and banks that are now costing taxpayers millions of pounds a year. He tracks down the banks that made enormous profits from offering complex loans to local authorities and speaks to insiders who reveal how these deals have left some councils with mammoth interest bills to pay at a time of huge pressure on public services.

[megilleland]

The LOBO loans referred to in the programme are used by Herefordshire Council in two instances:

 

Monday 23 February 2015 reported in the South Wales Argus by Bill Tanner

 

The council has two LOBO (Lender’s Option Borrower’s Option) loans of £6 million each on which the council pays interest at 4.5%.

 

Every six months, when interest charges are due, the lenders have the option to increase the interest rate being charged.

 

At which point the council can accept the revised terms or reject them and repay the loan.

 

LOBO loans are acknowledged by the council as a potential refinancing risk since the decision to amend the terms is entirely at the lender’s discretion.

 

It would be interesting to know what these loans are covering.

 

Most councils appear to use this form of creative accounting. Even the Tewkesbury Admag has picked up the situation in Worcestershire.

 

COUNCIL chiefs in Worcestershire have signed off £70 million in controversial loans linked to a national TV investigation into a potential banking scandal, it has emerged.

 

Your Worcester News can reveal how Worcestershire County Council has taken out £70 million in LOBO loans, a high interest bank lending tactic which has sparked calls for a parliamentary investigation.

 

Tonight’s Channel 4 Dispatches programme will reveal how around 240 councils in the UK have gone to banks to secure lending deals over 40, 50 or even 60 years under the LOBO deals.

 

[megilleland]

Freedom of Information request for details of Herefordshire Council LOBO loan borrowing and brokerage arrangements 

Dear Herefordshire Council,

 

For each of the Lender Option, Borrower option (LOBO) loans Herefordshire Council currently has on its books, and for any historical LOBO loans, please provide:

 

1) Loan principal?

2) Maturity date?

3) Trade date when the loan was signed?

4) Initial interest rate?

5) Current stepped-up interest rate and step-up date where

applicable?

6) Any formula or structure determining the interest rate where

applicable?

7) The first LOBO option call date?

8) The LOBO option call frequency?

9) Day count convention used for calculation of interest payments?

10) The original broker of the loan and fee paid?

11) Broker and fee paid for any subsequent restructuring?

12) The relevant bank or financial institution(s) which issued each

LOBO loan?

13) The name of the Treasury Management Advisor who advised on each

LOBO loan?

14) Where available, the original unredacted LOBO loan contracts.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

J M Benjamin

 

Currently waiting for a response from Herefordshire Council, they must respond promptly and normally no later than 10 July 2015. Mr Benjamin is writing to quite a few authorities - 2 interesting replies so far. Mr Joel Benjamin was involved with making the Channel 4 programme.

[megilleland]

What Debt Resistance UK have found is a cabal of private financial firms, banks (RBS, Barclays), brokers (ICAP, RP Martin and Tullet Prebon) and advisors (ICAP and CAPITA) acting in unison to plunder the public purse, costing taxpayers millions.

[Roger]

The truth of Tom's case was revealed at the recent hearing of his request to appeal against the Order of Possession in which the judge denied him permission to appeal.

 

Tom took out an endowment mortgage is 1988. In 1991 he (or rather his wife) ceased paying the monthly premium for the endowment policy that was intended to repay the original capital sum. After about 12 months, the policy provider (Royal London) cancelled the policy and paid the proceeds accrued to date (about £178) into Tom's mortgage account with the Bradford & Bingley Building Society. It has never been satisfactorily explained why the premiums were stopped. The vast bulk of what Tom owes is the original capital sum.

 

Everything subsequent to this is a web of misunderstandings, misdirection and downright lies by Tom and the team of "experts" (including Guy Taylor) that gathered around him. They even tried to pretend that the result of the hearing (see link below) was a resounding win and that those of us that thought otherwise were either unable to understand the special legal language in which it was written or were "trolls and shills" shamelessly defending the corrupt banking system in the face of overwhelming evidence.

 

The only overwhelming evidence that I have seen is that Tom's team of experts; Guy Taylor, Gedalhaju Ebert, Michael Waugh etc have all been evicted from their properties and that anyone who has listened to their bullshit (Cleveland Rhoden, Michael Grant-Sinclair, Paula Jayne Campbell, Glynis Craggs and now Tom Crawford to name only some) have suffered the same fate.

 

One might think that this would give them pause for thought but no, in between his futile attempts to recover Bodenham Manor, Guy Taylor makes a habit (and a nice living?) speaking to groups of gullible people and enticing them down the path that has already caused so many people so much misery. Tom is just one more victim of this pernicious nonsense. Part of me thinks that they deserve all they get but a larger part of me thinks that that it is Guy Taylor and co who really deserve to be sorted out for playing silly games with other people's lives.

 

https://infotomb.com/dn1qw.pdf

 

Thanks for that input .... Very informative SC ...... I was erring in that direction. I will admit that endowment policy Mortgages were not brilliant in hindsight. But life is too short to go on a crusade about making a point. I think Guy Taylor is a total *** for the stuff he does. Just my view! 

[Stilton Cheesewright]

Thanks for that input .... Very informative SC ...... I was erring in that direction. I will admit that endowment policy Mortgages were not brilliant in hindsight. But life is too short to go on a crusade about making a point. I think Guy Taylor is a total *** for the stuff he does. Just my view! 

You're welcome. For what it's worth, I agree about the endowment mortgages. I too was caught by the problem of the endowment policy not generating enough funds to pay off the loan but was fortunate that I could afford to make up the difference.

 

In time, Tom may have suffered the shortfall problem too but of course it never got to this point because he simply stopped paying the endowment policy premiums anyway so rather than the policy under performing there simply was no policy.

 

It seems likely that Tom will continue to take advice from Guy and co. and as Guy has done, try to launch various court actions to prosecute police, bailiffs, recover the property etc. I also would not put it past them to try to reoccupy the house as Guy did with Bodenham Manor. No doubt that will all be just as successful as Guy has been. What Tom seems to fails to realise is that his actions have and will continue to incur significant costs for the lender which will be recovered from the proceeds of the sale of the house along with the loan capital that he still owes. There is a real possibility that there will be insufficient equity in the house to actually cover the total meaning that even after the house is sold, Tom will still owe money without any means to pay it. 

[Stilton Cheesewright]

I understand that after a two day trial, Guy Taylor has been found guilty of trespass at Bodenham Manor. No word on sentence yet but according to some of his supporters on the "Get Out of Debt Free" website the conviction is a good thing because he now has them right where he wants them and they will have to produce the evidence.

 

It's not entirely clear why evidence would need to be produced after the conviction but I'm sure Guy has a trick up his sleeve. After all he was one of the legal experts that told Tom Crawford that despite the actual words in the judgement saying the opposite, he had actually won his court hearing. That was a few weeks before Tom was evicted. 

[megilleland]

 

What Debt Resistance UK have found is a cabal of private financial firms, banks (RBS, Barclays), brokers (ICAP, RP Martin and Tullet Prebon) and advisors (ICAP and CAPITA) acting in unison to plunder the public purse, costing taxpayers millions.

 

 

OMG!!!!! Massive fraud LOBO loans Banks/Govt/Councils

 

Artist Taxi driver eloquent as ever.