TORONTO LANDLORD, ANGELA STERLING'S "SON", GETS SPECIAL TREATMENT, FROM THE POLICE.

IT IS GETTING KIND OF TIRING AND REPETITIVE, REPORTING ON THIS LANDLORD'S UNUSUAL RELATIONSHIP, WITH THE POLICE. IN THIS CASE THE LENIENCY, OF THE POLICE TOWARDS HER SON, MAKES YOU SIT UP AND TAKE NOTICE. 

MICHAEL ERROL GREEN, AKA MICHAEL HAMILTON, AKA OTTIS WOODS, HAS CAUSED THE OTHER TENANTS OF THE BUILDING, TO FEAR FOR THEIR SAFETY.

AFTER BANGING ON HIS NEIGHBORS DOORS AND WINDOWS ALL NIGHT, AND EVEN PUNCHING A HOLE IN ONE OF HIS NEIGHBOR'S DOOR, IN A DRUNKEN RAGE AND STUPOR, ALL THAT HE MANAGED TO GET FROM THE POLICE, WAS A TICKET. NO CHARGES FOR HARASSMENT, OR FOR DISTURBING THE PEACE, OR FOR THE MISCHIEF, THAT HE HAS CAUSED, TO HIS NEIGHBOR'S DOOR. POLICE WERE CALLED AT LEAST THREE TIMES AND BY MORE THAN ONE NEIGHBOR OF THE MAN, WHO GOES BY DIFFERENT NAMES. HE IS KNOWN TO THE POLICE, AS MICHAEL ERROL GREEN, MICHAEL HAMILTON, OR HIS OTHER ALIAS, OTTIS WOOD. 

MR WOODS, OR MICHAEL GREEN, AS HE IS USUALLY KNOWN, DID NOT TAKE HEED TO THE POLICE WARNING THE FIRST TIME, OR THE SECOND TIME. IN FACT HE DID NOT TAKE HEED, TO THE WARNINGS AT ALL. RIGHT AFTER THE POLICE LEFT ON THEIR SECOND VISIT, ON THE NIGHT OF DECEMBER 30TH, THE MAN WENT UPSTAIRS TO HIS NEIGHBOR'S HOME AND BANGED REPEATEDLY ON HER WINDOW, DOOR AND WALLS, PROMPTING THE NEIGHBOR TO CALL THE POLICE, A SECOND TIME ON HIM FOR THE NIGHT. THE SAME NEIGHBOR CLAIMED, ALSO, THAT THE POLICE HAD TOLD HER, AFTER CALLING HER BACK THAT NIGHT, THAT THEY HAD TOLD MR GREEN, THAT THEY DID NOT WANT TO COME BACK THERE THAT NIGHT. WELL THEY DID AND HE WAS GIVEN A TICKET, OR A FINE. WHEN REALLY HIS BEHAVIOUR WARRANTED A CRIMINAL CHARGE, SINCE HE KEPT THE NEIGHBORS UP ALL NIGHT, WITH HIS HARASSMENT. HE HAS EVEN MADE THREATS THAT HE WOULD KILL SOMEONE, ALTHOUGH HE DID NOT SPECIFY WHO. THE POLICE CLAIMED IT WAS A "GENERAL THREAT". AND ALSO THAT BY GIVING HIM A TICKET, IT WAS LIKE TAKING BABY STEPS. REALLY?. WHY DID THEY NOT JUST ARREST HIM?. AS THEY WOULD HAVE DONE IN OTHER SITUATIONS?. THE POLICE ALSO SAID THAT BECAUSE HIS MOTHER OWNED THE HOUSE, THAT HE COULD NOT REALLY BE CHARGED FOR MISCHIEF, IN DAMAGING HIS NEIGHBOR'S DOOR. 

THE MAN ALSO CLAIMED, THAT SOMEONE BROKE INTO HIS HOME AND LEFT A GLOVE, O.J. SIMPSON STYLE, AND THAT HE ALSO WANTED THE POLICE, TO DO A DNA AND FINGERPRINT ON THE GLOVE, TO FIND OUT WHO BROKE INTO HIS HOME, WHILE HE WAS AWAY. HE CALLED THE ALLEGED PERPETRATOR, A "DUPPY". I.E A GHOST. 

THE TENANTS COMPLAINED, THAT HE ACTS LIKE THAT, WHENEVER HE DRINKS ALCOHOL. THAT HE USES THE OPPORTUNITY, TO TERRORIZE HIS NEIGHBORS AND TO EMPHASIZED TO THEM, THAT HIS MOTHER OWNS THE HOUSE, THAT THEY ARE LIVING IN, SO BASICALLY HE CAN DO WHATEVER HE WANTS. IT HAS ALSO NOW BECOME APPARENT, THAT HE HAS USED ALCOHOL AND ALLEGEDLY DRUGS, TO HARASS THE TENANTS OF THE BUILDING, AND GETS AWAY WITH HIS ACTIONS, EVERY TIME. HE ALSO LIKES TO REMIND THEM, THAT HE IS A "BAD MAN", OR GANGSTER AND HAS EVEN MENTIONED HIS ASSOCIATION, WITH THE "SHOWER POSSE", A TORONTO GANG. SO THE TENANTS ARE VERY MUCH WARRANTED, IN FEARING FOR THEIR SAFETY FROM HIM. 

BUT HOW OFTEN DOES THE POLICE ISSUE  A TICKET, FOR CAUSING A DISTURBANCE, OTHER THAN NOISE?. SHOULD THAT INCLUDE THE ACTIONS, OF BANGING ON PEOPLE'S DOORS AND WINDOWS ALL NIGHT? DOES THAT KIND OF ACTION NOT WARRANT A CRIMINAL CHARGE?. ESPECIALLY, IF IT COMES FROM MORE THAN ONE WITNESSES?. SO WHY DID THEY LET THIS LANDLORD'S SON GET OFF SO EASY?. ESPECIALLY, WHEN THE POLICE KEEP GETTING, REPEATED CALLS ABOUT HIS BEHAVIOUR?. WHEN WILL THEY STOP BEING CORRUPT AND SERVE AND PROTECT EVERYONE?. THIS SPECIAL FAVOR TO THIS LANDLORD, WHICH EXTENDS TO HER SON AND TO HER PROPERTY, BY THE POLICE AND OTHER CITY OFFICIALS, WHILST DOING THEIR LEGAL DUTY, AND FAILING TO CARRY THROUGH ON IT, IS CALLED BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION. IT IS THAT PLAIN AND SIMPLE. SOMETHING THAT I AM PERSONALLY GETTING TIRED, OF REPORTING ABOUT THE TORONTO POLICE.

SHELLYANN PEREIRA, PARALEGAL, UNETHICAL CONDUCT. LIES, HARASSMENT AND USING HERESAY, AS CREDIBLE EVIDENCE.

SHELLYANN PEREIRA, PARALEGAL

SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, LEGAL SERVICES, SPEREIRA LEGAL SERVICES   

THE UNETHICAL CONDUCT, THAT EXIST BETWEEN SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, AND L & T BOARD MEMBER, LORRAINE MATHERS. BOTH HAVE SUPPRESSED EVIDENCE, THAT WAS REQUIRED AT A HEARING, ON DECEMBER 18TH. THE EVIDENCE ITSELF, WAS A MEDICAL DOCUMENT, DETAILING THE TENANT'S ILLNESS AND THE REASON THAT SHE WAS UNABLE, TO ATTEND THE HEARING.  ACCORDING, TO THE MEMBER, HEARING THE MATTER, ON THAT DATE, THE MEDICAL DOCUMENT, WAS NOT PROVIDED, AT THE HEARING, BY EITHER THE BOARD, OR BY SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, THE LANDLORD'S COUNSEL. BOTH THE BOARD AND MEMBER LORRAINE MATHERS, AND ALSO SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, SUPPRESSED THAT EVIDENCE, FROM THE MEMBER, IN ORDER TO INFULENCE, THE OUTCOME OF T HE HEARING, IN FAVOR OF THE LANDLORD. 

SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, THE LANDLORD'S PARALEGAL, AT THE L&T BOARD AND THE BOARD MEMBER, LORRAINE MATTERS, ALSO A PARALEGAL, WHOSE RELATIONSHIP, WITH SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, IS TO BE INVESTIGATED FURTHER, IN REGARDS TO THEIR ATTEMPTS TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, IN THE MATTER. STILL UNCERTAIN, AND WHO HAD DECIDED, TO MOVE THE LANDLORD'S APPLICATION, AHEAD OF THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, DESPITE THE FACT, THAT BOTH APPLICATIONS, WERE ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED, TO BE HEARD TOGETHER. WAS SHE DOING A FAVOR, FOR ANOTHER PARALEGAL, AS A MEMBER OF THE L&T BOARD? AND EVEN MORE DISTURBING, WAS THERE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, IN HER DECISION, TO FAVOR THE LANDLORD, OVER THE TENANT, BY SEPARATING, THE APPLICATIONS AND MOVING THE LANDLORD'S APPLICATION FORWARD, TO BE HEARD SOONER AND ON ITS OWN, BECAUSE OF SHELLY ANN PEREIRA?

THIS PARALEGAL, IS UNETHICAL, IN HER CONDUCT, AND SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED, BY THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA, FOR SERIOUS VIOLATIONS, REGARDING HER PRACTICE. COMPLAINTS AGAINST HER.

THEY INCLUDED, WITHHOLDING INFORMATION, IN A LEGAL PROCEEDING, THAT MAY GO AGAINST HER CLIENT, HARASSMENT, SUCH AS UNSOLICITED EMAILS, WITH UNSUBSTANTIATED, INFORMATION, THAT SHE HAS CLAIMED TO BE FACTUAL, JUST BECAUSE SHE HAD, ALLEGEDLY, RECEIVED IT FROM HER CLIENT, AND ATTEMPTS, TO UNLAWFULLY INTERFERE, IN A LEGAL PROCEEDING. 

SHELLYANN PEREIRA, DOES LANDLORD AND TENANT MATTERS, AS A PARALEGAL. 

ShellyAnn Pereira, whose discreditable conduct, included, lies, harassment and withholding evidence, such as witnessing, the physical assault, by her client, upon the tenant, in front of witnesses, at the L&T Board, when her client, spat at the tenant, repeatedly. Receiving documents, from the L&T Board, directly, that were to to be sent to the Board, directly, from another L&T Board location. And then claiming, that she had forwarded, the documents, to the intended office, of the L&T Board. And providing no proof, of such an action.  This may not seem as much, but it it really mattered, since sending the documents, directly, to ShellyAnn Pereira, it caused a delay, in the Board having the information, than if it was transferred directly, to the L&T Board, from one location, to another. Corresponding, to  L&T Board staff, and others related to the L&T Board, by email,where she took the opportunity, to discuss the litigation, in length.  And they in turn responded, by making decisions, about the matter, outside of being a member of the Board.  Those persons, included, Jide Oladejo, Barrister & Solicitor, at 1111 Finch Avenue West, in Toronto, who is not on record, as the landlord's counsel.  But interfered in the matter, nonetheless. As shown in her correspondence (emails), with ShellyAnn Pereira, (tenant had to ask the Board, if this was allowed?. And was told by the Board, that it was not allowed), which ShellyAnn Pereira, sent a long diatride, about the tenant. Again, unsubstantiated, evidence, that she had claimed, to have received from the landlord, about the tenant. It would have been better, if the Board had gotten the opportunity, to sort out the evidence, itself and not those persons, who were not adjudicating the matter. Aside from those facts mentioned, there is also the additional questions, concerning Shelly Ann Pereira's relationship, with the Landlord &Tenant Board Member, Lorraine Mathers, who is also a paralegal, and whose bias decision, to favor the her client, the landlord, that not only shows procedural unfairness, but may also go deeper than that. 

There is more to report, regarding Shelly Ann Pereira and this case. And more reports to be made, regrading her other complaints, that are registered against her, with the Law Society of Upper Canada.

LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD MEMBER, LORRAINE MATHERS, A PARALEGAL, DENIED TENANT, ON MEDICAL LEAVE, AND UNDER A DOCTOR'S CARE, THE RIGHT TO RESCHEDULED A HEARING.

    CORRUPTION AT THE L&T BOARD

A PARALEGAL, WHO REPRESENTS LANDLORDS, IN HER PRACTICE AND IS NOW A MEMBER, OF THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, SHOWED, JUST HOW PREJUDICE, SHE IS TOWARDS TENANTS, AT THE L&T BOARD. 

 
LORRAINE MATHERS, THE CORRUPT MEMBER, OF THE ONTARIO LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, IGNORED THE MEDICAL REPORT, SENT TO THE BOARD, TO RESCHEDULED, A HEARING, DUE TO THE ILLNESS, OF THE TENANT. 

SHE DENIED THE TENANT THE RIGHT, TO RESCHEDULED, THE HEARING, EVEN THOUGH THE TENANT, IS PHYSICALLY NOT ABLE TO ATTEND, THE HEARING, FOR MEDICAL REASONS. IGNORING THE MEDICAL DOCUMENT,THAT WAS ALSO PROVIDED, TO THE L&T BOARD.

SHE ALSO SHOWED, SPECIAL FAVOR, TO THE LANDLORD, BY SEPARATING, HER APPLICATION, FROM THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, WHICH WERE SCHEDULED, TO BE HEARD TOGETHER, AND MOVED IT FORWARD, TO BE HEARD ON ITS OWN, THE NEXT DAY, WHILE THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, WAS LEFT IN LIMBO, AND IGNORED. 

BOTH APPLICATIONS, WERE ORIGINALLY LINKED TOGETHER, BY ANOTHER MEMBER, SHELBY WHITTICK, IN ORDER TO BALANCE, THE RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES, OF THE LANDLORD AND TO PROTECT THE TENANT'S RIGHTS.

EVIDENCE SHOWED, THAT THERE MAY BE, MORE CORRUPTION, INVOLVED, LINKING THIS L&T BOARD MEMEBR, TO THE LANDLORD'S OWN COUNSEL, ANOTHER PARALEGAL, SHELLYANN PEREIRA, WHO HAS ACTED, WITH A LACK OF INTEGRITY AND PROFESSIONALISM, REGARDING HER CLIENT.

THE TENANT, WHO IS ON MEDICAL LEAVE, UNTIL AFTER DECEMBER 31, 2020, HAD INFORMED THE BOARD, AND HAD ASKED FOR A RESCHEDULING OF THE MATTERS, TO BE HEARD, ON DECEMBER 18, 2020. THE MEMBER DECIDED, ON DECEMBER 17, TO DENY THE TENANT'S REQUEST AND TO PROCEED WITH A HEARING, THAT THE TENANT IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, FOR MEDICAL REASONS. 

IN THE MATTER BETWEEN: VALERIE HENRY GUILLAUME, TENANT AND ANGELA STERLING, LANDLORD. 

THIS LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, MEMBER, LORRAINE MATHERS, ALSO SEPARATED, THE THREE MATTERS, THAT WERE SCHEDULED, TO BE HEARD TOGETHER, FAILING TO COMMENT, ON TWO OF THOSE MATTERS, AS SHE PROCEEDED, WITH ONLY THE ONE MATTER, INVOLVING, THE LANDLORD'S APPLICATION.

NO CONCERN WAS SHOWN, BY THIS MEMBER, OR BY THE L&T BOARD, CONCERNING THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, THAT WAS IGNORED, IN THE PROCESS.

THE MEMBER, LORRAINE MATHERS, IN HER DECISION, ALSO DID NOT PROVIDE, IN WRITING, ANY REASONS, FOR HER DECISION. THERE WAS NO ORDER, OR ENDORSENMENT, OF HER DECISION, TO DENY THE TENANT'S REQUEST, TO RESCHEDULED THE MATTERS, AT THE BOARD. ONLY HER COMMENTS, WERE REGISTERD, ON FILE WITH THE BOARD AND WERE READ TO THE TENANT. 

THE MEMBER,  LORRAINE MATHERS, DID NOT PROVIDE, A WRITTEN REASON, FOR HER DECISION, IN NOT PROCEEDING, WITH THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, AS SHE IS REQUIRED TO DO, UNDER THE LAW. SUCH A REASON, IS USUALLY PROVIDED, IN THE FORM OF A WRITTEN AND SIGNED ENDORSEMENT, OR AN ORDER, BY THE MEMBER. BUT NOT IN THIS CASE.

LORRAINE MATHERS, AS A MEMBER OF THE L&T BOARD, HAS VIOLATED, THE TENANT'S RIGHTS, IN MORE THAN ONE WAYS. IGNORING HER MEDICAL CONDITION, AND REFUSING TO GIVE A WRITTEN REASON, FOR HER DECISION, TO DENY THE REQUEST, TO RESCHEDULED, THE HEARING, FOR MEDICAL REASONS. AS WELL AS TO, LEAVE THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, WITHOUT A NEW HEARING DATE, AS IT WAS TOTALLY IGNORED, BY THE MEMBER AND THE BOARD.

No where under the law, does it require someone, to physically attend a hearing, who is unable to do so, for medical reasons. If someone is physically, not able to attend a hearing, how is it that this Member, Lorraine Mathers, of the Landlord and Tenant Board, command her to do so otherwise?. 

If the L&T Board, Tribunal, proceeds with a hearing, on December 18, 2020, or makes a ruling, against the tenant, at the intended hearing, knowing that the tenant, is unable to attend the hearing, the matter will be appealed, to the court.  The Member, Lorraine Mathers, will also be investigated, by the Social Justice Tribunal.

A POSSIBLE UNETHICAL CONDUCT, MAY EXIST, BETWEEN SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, THE LANDLORD'S PARALEGAL, AT THE L&T BOARD AND THE BOARD MEMBER, LORRAINE MATTERS, ALSO A PARALEGAL, WHOSE RELATIONSHIP, WITH SHELLY ANN PEREIRA, IS STILL UNCERTAIN, AND WHO HAD DECIDED, TO MOVE THE LANDLORD'S APPLICATION, AHEAD OF THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, DESPITE THE FACT, THAT BOTH APPLICATIONS, WERE ORIGINALLY SCHEDULED, TO BE HEARD TOGETHER.

Why do the Landlord and Tenant Board, has such a member, who acts against the law?. A lack of procedural fairness, is cause for such a member, to get removed from the Board. Permanently. Why?. For many reasons, but also because it interferes, with the Constitutional rights, under the Charter, of the tenant, as well. Suing the L&T Board, and its Members, is also an option, presented to the tenant.

Overall, it is called corruption. Exposing the personal corruption, of the Member, Lorraine Mathers, at the Landlord and Tenant Board, East Office, at 2275 Midland Avenue, Scarborough, Ontario.