LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD MEMBER, NANCY MORRIS, DENIED TENANT THE RIGHT, TO HAVE HER EVIDENCE HEARD, VIA AUDIO RECORDINGS, THAT CONTRADICTED, THE LANDLORD'S EVIDENCE. WHILE ALLOWING THE LANDLORD'S EVIDENCE TO BE HEARD.

LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD MEMBER,  NANCY MORRIS, HAS DENIED A TENANT THE RIGHT, TO PRESENT HER AUDIO EVIDENCE TO THE BOARD, OF THE CONFLICTING STATEMENTS, OF THE WITNESSES.  AND AT THE SAME TIME, HAVE ALLOWED THE LANDLORD'S EVIDENCE, CONSISTING OF A LETTER TO THE BOARD, THAT THE FORMER TENANT, BARBARA O'CONNOR, ALLEGEDLY, WROTE TO BE HEARD.

D&D ASSOCIATES, PARALEGALS AND THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD.

THEY LATER COUNSELED HER, TO STATE THAT SHE HAD MOVED OUT, AT THE END OF AUGUST. WHICH THE MEMBER ALSO ACCEPTED. THIS WAS DONE BY THE LANDLORD'S COUNSEL. AND ALSO BY BARNEY RIVERS EMPLOYEES, SAMANTHA GIBSON AND JENNIFER NICKELS. THEY HAD EVEN PROMISED THE FORMER TENANT, TO CANCEL THE $7,000.00 IN RENT ARREARS, THAT SHE HAD OWED TO BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENTS LTD. BEFORE SHE HAD MOVED OUT OF THE BUILDING. 

ANOTHER INCONSISTENCY, WITH THE MEMBER NANCY MORRIS'S ACTIONS, WAS TO ALLOW THE LANDLORD'S EVIDENCE, CONSISTING OF THE SOLE LETTER, THAT IS NOW A MATTER OF CONJECTURE, THAT WAS NOT SERVED ON THE VERY WITNESS, WHO WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE WRITTEN IT. AGAIN, THIS WAS REVEALED BY THE WITNESS, IN THE AUDIO RECORDING, AND TO ALLOW THE LANDLORD'S COUNSEL, TO USE THAT SAME EVIDENCE, AT THE HEARING ON NOVEMBER 10TH. 

DAVID RUBIN AND HIS ASSOCIATES, INCLUDING MERLE STEIN, ARE ALSO COUNTING ON THE MEMBER, NANCY MORRIS, TO OVERLOOK WHAT THEY HAVE TRIED TO DO, TO SUBVERT THE LAW, AND TO ALLOW THEM AND THEIR CLIENT, TO SUCCEED.  

THE TENANT, IS ALREADY PREPARED, TO APPEAL ANY DECISION, FROM THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, THAT DOES NOT ALLOW HER TO PRESENT HER EVIDENCE, AT A HEARING. OR THAT CHALLENGES HER TENANCY, BASED ON THE RTA, REGARDING, THE ASSIGNMENT OF THE LEASE, AND THE ILLEGAL LOCKOUT. OR THAT ALLOWS THE LANDLORD TO PROCEED, BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED, AT THE HEARING, WHEN IT IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR, THAT THE LANDLORD'S DEFENSE WAS SHATTERED, BY THE AUDIO RECORDINGS, AND ALSO THE TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES. WHEN IT HAS BEEN PROVEN, THAT ONE OR MORE OF THEM, HAS LIED UNDER OATH. FOR EXAMPLE, THE WITNESS SAMANTHA GIBSON, TESTIFYING, THAT SHE WAS GIVEN THE KEYS, FROM THE OTHER WITNESS BARBARA O'CONNOR, ON JULY 28. WHEN THIS WAS NOT THE CASE, BASED ON THE SAME WITNESS TESTIMONY, OF WHAT HAS TRANSPIRED. THAT SHE HAD NOT GIVEN HER THE KEYS AT ALL. WHICH CONTRADICTED, THE EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED BY THE LANDLORD, AT THE HEARING. 

Letter, produced by Barney Rivers Investments Ltd. of the witness, Mrs Barbara O'conner, which was refuted, in the tenant's audio recording, of the witness. In which she has denied both the letter and also giving the landlord the keys for the building after she had moved out. She had in fact given her keys to me, as she has stated in the audio recording. The L&T Board on the other hand, did not allow the tenant to play the audio recordings, of the witness at the hearing, marked as Exhibits, "A" and Exhibit "B". The Board did allowed the landlord, to use the letter (posted above) as evidence, when they tried to extend the 60 days allowed under the RTA sec. 104(4). Which was a desperate move on the part of the landlord. 

THE MEMBER, NANCY MORRIS, CAN CHOSE TO IGNORE THE TENANT'S EVIDENCE, WHICH HAS SHOWN THE INCONSISTENCY, IN THE LANDLORD'S EVIDENCE AND TO DO WHAT THE LAW H AS GIVEN HER THE AUTHORITY TO DO, WHEN THERE IS A CONFLICT REGARDING, THE TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES, AT A HEARING AT THE BOARD. SUCH AS THE INCONSISTENCY, REGARDING THE EVIDENCE, COMING FROM THE SAME WITNESS.  

*THE WITNESS STATED AT THE HEARING WHEN ASKED BY THE MEMBER, THAT SHE KNEW THAT SHE WAS BEING RECORDED. BOTH RECORDINGS WERE SENT TO THE BOARD, AS EXHIBITS, "A" AND EXHIBIT, "B".  THE BOARD MEMBER, NANCY MORRIS,  DID NOT ALLOW THE TENANT, TO PLAY THE AUDIO RECORDINGS, OF HER EVIDENCE, WHEN SHE WAS ASKED BY THE TENANT. BUT SHE HAS ALLOWED THE LETTER, THAT WAS PRODUCED BY THE LANDLORD, OF THE SAME WITNESS, TO BE HEARD AS EVIDENCE, AT THE HEARING.

THE WITNESS AND FORMER TENANT, ALSO STATED, IN THE AUDIO RECORDING,THAT SHE DID NOT GIVE HER KEYS, AFTER MOVING OUT, TO THE LANDLORD.  SHE STATED THAT SHE GAVE HER KEYS TO ME, AFTER MOVING OUT AT THE END OF JUNE. WHICH WAS A FACT.

*SAMANTHA GIBSON, PROPERTY MANAGER AT BARNEY RIVERS, THEN TESTIFIED AT THE HEARING ON NOVEMBER 10TH, THAT THE FORMER TENANT, BARBARA O'CONNOR, GAVE THE KEYS TO HER ON JULY 29TH. AGAIN THIS WAS A LIE, AS YOU CAN TELL FROM LISTENING, TO THE AUDIO RECORDING, OF THE FORMER TENANT BARBARA O'CONNOR, WHO HAS STATED ON THE AUDIO TAPE, THAT SHE HAD GIVEN TO ME HER KEYS. NO WHERE DID SHE MENTIONED ON THE AUDIO RECORDING, ABOUT GIVING UP HER KEYS, TO THE LANDLORD'S AGENT, SAMANTHA GIBSON. SO SAMANTHA GIBSON LIED AT THE HEARING. SHE HAS LIED UNDER OATH. SHE ALSO TESTIFIED THAT I DID NOT EVEN HAVE CLOTHES IN THE APARTMENT AND THAT I HAD ABANDONED MY ANIMALS. SO FROM THAT STATEMENT, I NOW KNOW THAT SHE HAS STOLEN AND ALSO DESTROYED MY PROPERTY, CONTRARY TO THE ORDER OF THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, DATED SEPTEMBER 23RD, THAT THE LANDLORD, WAS TO SAFEGUARD MY PROPERTY AND ALSO NOT TO RENT OF THE APARTMENT, DURING THE ILLEGAL LOCKOUT. 

THE MOTIVE FOR THE LETTER. 

* TO ADD ON THE 60 DAYS FROM THE TIME, THAT THE FORMER TENANT, HAD MOVED OUT IN JUNE, IN ORDER TO JUSTIFY THE ILLEGAL LOCKOUT, OF THE TENANT, ON AUGUST 4TH. 

* TO INCREASE THE RENT, ON THE SAME APARTMENT. WHICH THEY HAD ALSO ADVERTISED ONLINE AND ELSEWHERE, FOR ALMOST TWICE WHAT THE PRESENT TENANT WAS PAYING, BEFORE THEY HAD CHANGED THE LOCK ON THE DOOR, ILLEGALLY.

* TO WORK WITH AND OR ASSIST, THE CANADIAN AUTHORITIES, TO CONTINUE TO CARRY OUT, ITS HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE, AGAINST THE TENANT.

                                                                   Merle Stein

                                                                D&D Associates  

                                     A paralegal, she had provided the letter, to the L&T Board,

                                    allegedly, signed by the former tenant. The tenant then denied

                                    that she gave her such a letter. She was also acting for Barney Rivers

                                   Investments Ltd. Along with paralegal David Rubin.

                                 

                             

                                     

Paralegal David Rubin

                                         Founder of D&D Associates and an associate of Merle Stein. 

IT IS A WELL KNOWN FACT, THAT PARALEGAL DAVID RUBIN, THE FOUNDER OF D&D ASSOCIATES PARALEGAL PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, HAS A VERY DISTURBING RELATIONSHIP, WITH THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD. HE IS AT THE BOARD OFTEN, REPRESENTING LANDLORDS AND IS ALSO VERY FAMILIAR, WITH THE STAFF AT THE BOARD.  AND UNUSUAL THINGS TEND TO HAPPEN, WITH CASES INVOLVING HIM, AT THE BOARD. SPEAKING FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE, WITH DAVID RUBIN AND HIS ASSOCIATES, AT D&D ASSOCIATES, IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT THEY HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE, TO SUBVERT THE LAW, IN THEIR ATTEMPT TO WIN THEIR CASES AT THE BOARD. I HAVE SEEN THEIR TRICKS AND CONTINUES TO SEE  IT, PLAYED OUT AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD. THE WITNESS AND FORMER TENANT, BARBARA O'CONNOR, HAS PUT IT QUITE NICELY, WHEN SHE WAS ASKED THE REASON, WHY THEY HAD COME UP WITH THE LETTER, FALSELY STATING, WHEN SHE HAD MOVED, OR HAD ALLEGEDLY, GIVEN THEM BACK THE KEYS, AFTER MOVING OUT. SHE HAS STATED, "IT'S A TRICK", ON THE OTHER TAPE, (WHICH I WILL ALSO POST HERE) AND "THEY WANT MORE MONEY". AND "THEY WANT ME TO PAY TWO MORE MONTH'S RENT". NO, WHAT THEY WERE UP TO, WAS TO TRY TO GET THE 60 DAYS, FROM THE TIME THAT SHE HAD MOVED OUT, AT THE END OF JUNE, SO THAT THEY COULD NOW APPLY THE ACT, UNDER SECTION 104(4), OF THE RTA. AND THEY HAVE RESORTED TO LYING, EVEN COUNSELLING THEIR CLIENT, SUCH AS SAMANTHA GIBSON, TO LIE UNDER OATH. ALTHOUGH, SHE IS WELL CAPABLE OF DOING SO ON HER OWN, AS A DESPICABLE EXCUSE FOR A HUMAN BEING. 

DAVID RUBIN AND HIS ASSOCIATES, INCLUDING MERLE STEINE, ARE ALSO COUNTING ON THE MEMBER, TO OVERLOOK WHAT THEY HAVE TRIED TO DO, TO SUBVERT THE LAW, AND TO ALLOW THEM AND THEIR CLIENT, TO SUCCEED.