Tuesday, December 21, 2021

TAKESHAH GENTLES, REGISTRAR, AT THE DIVISIONAL COURT, IN TORONTO. HOW COULD THIS HAVE HAPPENED?. MOTION RECORD WENT MISSING FROM COURT FILE, AT THE URGENT MOTION HEARING, ON DECEMBER 20TH. MOTION HAD TO BE ADJOURNED.

THE DIVISIONAL COURT, IN TORONTO AND THE REGISTRAR, TAKESHAH GENTLES, NEED TO EXPLAIN TO ME AND TO THE PUBLIC, HOW THE MOTION RECORD'S CONTENT, WAS MISSING FROM THE FILE, AT THE HEARING?. 

WAS THIS AN ATTEMPT, TO INTERFERE WITH, THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE? IN MY VIEW, IT WAS NOT AN OVERSIGHT, BUT A DELIBERATE ATTEMPT, TO INFLUENCED THE OUTCOME OF THE HEARING. 

AND AS A RESULT, THE URGENT MOTION, HAD TO BE ADHOURNED, AND RESCHEDULED, FOR ANOTHER HEARING, IN JANUARY OF 2022.

MORE HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE IS EVIDENT, BY THIS LATEST INCIDENT, IN THE CANADIAN COURT, AGAINST ME. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME, THAT DOCUMENTS HAVE GONE MISSING, FROM THE COURT FILES, IN REGARDS TO MY CASE. AND THE REGISTRAR, TAKESHAH GENTLES, NOT BEING ABLE TO GIVE AN ACCOUNT, AS TO HOW THIS COULD HAVE HAPPENED?. THIS LATEST INCIDENT, WILL NOT GO UN INVESTIGATED. 

THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND OTHER INVESTIGATIVE BODIES, WILL BE ASKED TO INVESTIGATE, THIS LATEST INCIDENT. DOCUMENTS JUST DON'T GO MISSING, FROM COURT FILES, WHEN THERE IS A HEARING. 

 The equitable relief that was sought in that urgent motion, also was not heard, because of the fact that the Motion Record's content, according to the judge, Justice Matheson, who presided over the hearing on December 20th, was missing.  And only the front and back covers and the Table of Content, of the Motion Record, was available at the hearing. She also had proof that the Motion Record was filed with the Divisional Court, because the counsel for the landlord, had filed his responding motion, to my urgent motion and from his materials, she was able to see some of the contents, that was a part of my Motion Record, the judge said. But as for my Motion Record, to go with the urgent motion that was filed on December 1, 2021, it went missing from the court file, and only the covers and the table of content, was available at the hearing.

The public should also be aware, that aside from filing the physical copies of my motion, with the Divisional court, litigants are also suppose to file an electronic copy and upload it to the Case Line. Because of the difficulty, that I was having uploading, my documents to case line, the court at that time, had only the physical copies of the motion. Including, the Motion Record and Factum, regarding my urgent motion for equitable relief, that was seeking an order, pending my appeal in the Divisional court, to be let back into my apartment, while the appeal is before the court.  Naturally, I was looking forward to having the hearing of the urgent motion on December 20th, but was disappointed when the judge Justice Matheson, informed me at the hearing, that she only had before her, the covers and the table of content only, of the Motion Record. Which basically, contained the evidence that I was relying on, at the hearing. I was given a choice by the judge, to proceed with the hearing, without the documents, or to adjourned the hearing. The judge also claimed that she was able to see what documents were missing from my Motion Record, that was file with the court, by viewing the Respondent's Responding Motion Record (to my Motion). So it was evident from that information, that the court had my documents, that was filed, pertaining to my urgent motion, since the Divisional court and the landlord's counsel, was served at the same time. Why my documents went missing, from the court file, at the time of the hearing, should be seriously considered, by any reasonable person, who is reading this article. 

By the way, Justice Matheson took over the hearing, on December 20th, after I had filed a motion last week, to recused another judge of the Divisonal court, Justice Corbett, who was the Case Conference judge, from hearing the Urgent Motion, after what amounts to be evidence, of the apprehension of bias, on his part. Next thing I know, my documents went missing from the court file, for the hearing of that urgent motion. And the court staff, who are responsible for the administrative duties of the court, including the Registrar, as the Manager of the court, Takeshah Gentles, are mum on the matter.

As of this date, Takeshah Gentles, as the Registrar, have not looked into my inquiry, about the missing documents, from the court file. I will not let this matter rest, because of the harm done to me, due to the delay that was caused, by the adjournment of the case, until some authority has investigated thoroughly, what has happened and to make sure that something like this, never happens again. Not to me, or to any other self represented litigant, in any Canadian court.







Thursday, December 16, 2021

TORONTO JUDGE, DAVID CORBETT, HAS REFUSED TO RECUSED HIMSELF, FROM HEARING MY URGENT MOTION, ON DECEMBER 20TH. AS THE CASE MANAGEMENT JUDGE, HE HAS SHOWN SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE OF BIAS AND SYSTEMATIC RACISM, INVOLVING MY CASE, IN THE DIVISIONAL COURT.

THE CASE MANAGEMENT JUDGE, DAVID CORBETT, OF THE DIVISIONAL COURT, IN TORONTO, HAS REFUSED TO RECUSED HIMSELF, FROM HEARING MY SECOND URGENT MOTION, AFTER HE HAD MOOTED THE FIRST MOTION AND APPEAL THAT GOES WITH THAT MOTION, FOR EQUITABLE RELIEF. AND WITHOUT CONDUCTING, A HEARING, FOR BOTH.

THE CASE MANAGEMENT JUDGE, OF THE DIVISIONAL COURT IN TORONTO, JUDGE DAVID CORBETT, WAS SERVED WITH MY MOTION, TO RECUSE HIMSELF, FROM HEARING MY URGENT MOTION, FOR EQUITABLE RELIEF, ON DECEMBER 20, 2021. THE MOTION WAS MADE, AFTER THE JUDGE HAS CONTINUED TO ACT IN A MANNER, THAT SHOWS THAT THERE WAS EVIDENCE OF BIAS, OR THE APPREHENSION OF BIAS, ON HIS PART, AND THAT THIS DOES NOT GO WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, THAT WOULD ALLOW ME TO HAVE A FAIR HEARING, SHOULD HE MAKE HIMSELF THE TRIAL JUDGE AND HEAR MY URGENT MOTION. 

THE JUDGE RESPONDED, TO THE MOTION TO RECUSE HIMSELF, BY SETTING A DATE FOR JANUARY 7TH, WHERE THE PARTIES WILL RESPOND TO IT AND THEN A DATE IN THE FUTURE, TO HEAR THE MOTION. AND ALL OF THIS WAS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY. ALL HE HAD TO DO WAS TO REMOVED HIMSELF, FROM BEING THE TRIAL JUDGE, AFTER HE HAS BEEN THE CASE CONFERENCE JUDGE, FOR SEVERAL MONTHS, CONCERNING MY APPEALS AND URGENT MOTIONS, BEFORE THE DIVISIONAL COURT, FROM THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD. AND AS THE CASE CONFERENCE JUDGE, HE WAS ALSO PRIVY TO INFORMATION, ABOUT THE CASE, BEFORE IT WAS HEARD AT A HEARING, OR TRIAL. 

* Previously, at the Case Conference on November 17, 2021, the said judge, Corbett, had made the statement, that another judge, or himself, will hear the motion. He already knew, that by case managing the appeal, that he was also not qualified, to be the trial judge, at the hearing on December 20th.

* A further bias on the part of Judge D. Corbett, was to give the landlord's lawyer, and the L&T Board, two weeks to respond to my urgent motion, that was filed with the court on December 1st. While he gave me until December 7th, to file any other materials. In fact, the hearing is scheduled for December 20th and I have been given by the same judge, less than two days to respond, to the defendant's responding motion, to my urgent motion. Since I was served with their  responding motion on December 16th and the hearing is on Monday, December 20th, I hardly have two full days, to respond to their motions.  And there are two other parties, to this appeal. So, Judge Corbett, has given me two days to provide my written response, regarding the two other parties to this appeal. They got fifteen days, or two weeks and I got only two days, to respond, from the same judge.

* Judge Corbett, has never had a hearing of my earlier urgent motion, or appeal, before mooting and dismissing them.  Try appealing a case that has never been heard and see if that is possible. 

* By mooting that appeal, he also done away with the protection in the order, from the L&T Board, that was being appeal/reviewed. As I had only disagreed with part of the order, but wanted the other protections in the same order to continue. No thanks to Judge Corbett, that order now has been dismissed and without a hearing at the Divisional court.

* He continues to give his decisions, via email and through the court staff. Instead of making an order, or an endorsement, of his decisions.

* Making impossible demands, such as wanting me to argue against some "undisputed facts", in the decision of the Board, that were in fact disputed, by the evidence that I have presented. E.g. That the keys were returned by the former tenant on July 28th, when the audio evidence said otherwise.



Ontario Judge, David Corbett, of the Divisional Court,
in Toronto, continues to hear my appeals and urgent motions, while showing evidence of bias and 
possibly reprisal, against me, for discussing publicly on my Blog, about his actions. He is also the 
case conference judge, who has been facilitating my appeals, for months and now wants to be the trial judge, as well. And without granting me any reliefs sought, in my previous urgent motions. Indeed, there has never been a hearing until now, scheduled for December 20th, where he continues to make himself, the presiding judge, over my matters before the court. Despite the obvious signs of bias on his part. All that this judge has been doing, was to send his decisions, via emails and through the court's staff, rather than to made an order, or endorsement, of his decisions. 


CONCERNS WERE RAISED, WHEN THE JUDGE WENT BACK ON HIS OWN ORDER AND DENIED ME THE RIGHT TO CONTINUE WITH MY APPEAL AND URGENT MOTION, BY MOOTING THEM  AND LATER DISMISSING THEM. THOSE TWO MATTERS WERE FILED ON OCTOBER 19, 2021 AND ON OCTOBER 29TH THE SAID JUDGE MADE AN ORDER, TO STAY THE APPEAL, UNTIL THE HEARING OF MY T2 APPLICATION, AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, AT WHICH TIME THE ORDER STATED, THAT I COULD THEN LIFT THE STAY AND CONTINUED WITH THE APPEAL. THE JUDGE LATER RESCINDED THAT ORDER AND AT THE CASE CONFERENCE HEARING, ON NOVEMBER 17TH, HE THEN DENIED LIFTING THE STAY ON THE APPEAL, CONTRARY TO HIS OWN ORDER.

THAT ORDER THAT WAS STAYED, (FROM THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, DATED SEPTEMBER 22, 2021), ALSO PROTECTED MY TENANCY AND MY PROPERTY, FROM THE LANDLORD'S ACTIONS. 

ALTHOUGH MAKING THE ORDER, TO STAY THE APPEAL AND THE URGENT MOTION, THE JUDGE WENT BACK ON HIS OWN WORDS AND MOOTED THE APPEAL AND THE URGENT MOTION.  THE JUDGE ALSO DID NOT SIGN HIS OWN ORDER. THIS POSED A PROBLEM LATER ON, WHEN I WANTED TO APPEAL HIS DECISION, TO MOOT BOTH THE URGENT MOTION AND THE APPEAL.  






Friday, November 19, 2021

FACING SYSTEMATIC RACISM, IN CANADA. ALONE AND PERSECUTED. HOW THE COURT AND THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, ARE ALSO INVOLVED. AND THE BLACK LEGAL CLINIC, THAT HAS WORKED ALONG WITH THEM, AGAINST ME.

LET ME START OUT BY EXPOSING BLAC. BLACK LEGAL ACTION CENTER AND ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MOYA TEKLU.  THIS CANADIAN LEGAL CLINIC, LIKE OTHERS THAT ARE FUNDED BY THE GOVERNMENT, THROUGH LEGAL AID ONTARIO, SHOULD BE EXPOSED. I AM GOING TO EXPOSED THE LIE, THAT IS PERPETUATED, BY THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MOYA TEKLU, ABOUT THE CLINIC'S ROLE IN, SPECIFICALLY, DEALING WITH SYSTEMATIC RACISM, AFFECTING BLACKS IN ONTARIO. 

IT IS NOT TRUE. BLAC, DO NOT HELP INDIVIDUALS, AS IT HAS CLAIMED ON ITS WEBSITE AND OTHER PLACES, WHO ARE DEALING WITH SYSTEMATIC RACISM. I HAVE CONTACTED, THE BLACK LEGAL ACTION CENTER, TO HELP ME, IN DEALING WITH THE SYSTEMATIC RACISM, THAT I AM FACING IN THE CANADIAN COURT AND TRIBUNAL  AND I DID NOT EVEN GET BACK A RESPONSE. I ALSO CONTACTED THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MOYA TEKLU, THROUGH BLAC AND SHE ALSO DID NOT RESPOND TO MY REQUEST. 

Moya Teklu
BLAC'S Executive Director
Who has denied me the opportunity 
to get legal assistance, from the legal clinic
in fighting against, the systematic racism, 
that I am facing in Canada. 
Personally, she is a "Roast Breadfruit". Black on the
outside and white inside. A typical "House Nigger". 
And a willing participant, in helping to destroy
another black person. 

THEN I WANT TO EXPOSED, HOW THE DIVISIONAL COURT AND THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, ARE NOT NECESSARILY CONCERNED, ABOUT EITHER ME, OR ABOUT MY RIGHTS. THAT SUFFERING HARM, AS PART OF ITS SYSTEMATIC RACISM, THAT IT HAS PRACTICED AGAINST ME, MATTERS LITTLE TO THEM. (I will expound on this later).

EXPOSING, MOYA TEKLU, BLACK EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND SORAYA LEMUR, WITH THE PARLIAMENTARY BLACK CAUCUS : HOW THE SYSTEM HAS USED THEM AGAINST BLACKS..

TODAY'S HOUSE NEGROES.  DIFFERENT ERA, BUT THE SAME ATTITUDES.  

Moya Teklu
Executive Director of the Black Legal Action Center
BLAC, in Toronto. 
She has also worked, with the racist system, against me. 
By denying me, the opportunity, for the Legal Clinic
to take on my case, in fighting against, the systematic racism,
that I am facing, in the court and tribunal, in Canada.











Soroya Lemur
MPP Greg Fergus staff, who is in charge
of complaints, of systematic racism, that are
directed, to the Black Caucus, in Ottawa, Canada.
She has never explained, when asked by me, who at 
BLAC, Black Legal Action Center, had told her
that they could, or would not assist  me, in fighting
against the systematic racism, that I am facing
in the Canadian court and tribunal.




















WHEN YOU GO TO THE BLACK LEGAL ACTION CENTER, BLAC, THERE IS A GLOWING REPORT, OF ITS SO CALLED COMMITMENT, TO HELPING BLACK PEOPLE, IN ONTARIO AND CANADA. BUT NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.  LIKE BLACK LIVES MATTERS, BLACK PEOPLE ARE LEFT TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, AGAINST AN UNJUST SYSTEM THAT PREYS ON THEM. THESE SO CALLED LEADERS DO NOT HELP. SOROYA LEMUR, IS MPP GREG FERGUS STAFF AND BOTH ARE MEMBERS OF THE PARLIAMENTARY BLACK CAUCUS IN CANADA.

BUT THE REALITY IS FAR DIFFERENT, FROM WHAT IT HAS PUBLICLY CLAIMED. I AM HERE TO EXPOSED IT NEW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MOYA TEKLU AND HOW BOTH SHE AND BLACK, HAS IGNORED MY REQUEST TO LOOK INTO THE SYSTEMATIC RACISM, THAT I AM FACING. IT IS SHAMEFUL. 

WHAT BLAC, OR THE BLACK LEGAL ACTION CENTER, ACTUALLY DOES, IS TO WORK WITH THE SYSTEM, TO DESTROY SOME BLACK INDIVIDUALS' LIVES. TO "SCREW US", SO TO SPEAK. I CALL THESE HOUSE NIGGERS, "ROAST BREADFRUITS" AND "FRONTS" FOR THE OPPRESSIVE RACIST SYSTEM, THAT KEEPS US DOWN.  THEY ARE SELF CENTERED AND CARES NOTHING ABOUT THE BLACK COMMUNITY, BUT IN ADVANCING THEIR CAREERS. NARCISSISTS, WHO WILL SELL YOU OUT, TO ADVANCE THEMSELVES. IF YOU ARE BLACK, THEN YOU KNOW WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT. THESE "TOKENS", THAT WE COULD ACTUALLY DO WITHOUT, AS FAR AS THE ADVANCEMENT OF THE BLACK COMMUNITY.  

SOMETHING STRANGE HAPPENED, AFTER THE DIVISIONAL COURT IN TORONTO AND SPECIFICALLY, JUSTICE DAVID CORBETT, WAS MADE AWARE, THAT THE BLACK  CAUCUS IN OTTAWA, CHAIRED BY MPP GREG FERGUS, WAS LOOKING INTO MY COMPLAINT, AGAINST THE SYSTEMATIC RACISM, THAT I WAS FACING IN THE COURT. MPP GREG FERGUS STAFF, BEGAN TO ACT STRANGE. PREVIOUSLY, THEY HAD ACTED COURTEOUS AND FRIENDLY, NOW THEY WERE GIVING ME THE "RUN AROUND". FOR INSTANCE, SOROYA LEMUR TOLD ME SPECIFICALLY, THAT SHE HAD "CONTACTED BLAC, OR THE BLACK LEGAL ACTION CENTER, TO ASSIST ME, BUT SHE WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL, IN GETTING BLAC TO HELP ME. WHEN I ASKED HER WHO SHE HAD SPOKEN TO AT BLAC, I DID NOT GET A RESPONSE, FROM SOROYA LEMUR. TO THIS DAY, SHE HAS NEVER ANSWERED MY QUESTION. SOMEONE AT THE DIVISIONAL COURT, I BELIEVED, HAD GOTTEN TO HER AND TOLD HER TO NOT HELP. TO "SUPPRESS" THE REQUEST.  I CANNOT HELP BUT TO WONDER, WHO AT THE DIVISIONAL COURT, IN TORONTO, HAD CONTACTED THAT ORGANIZATION, OR EVEN MPP GREG FERGUS'S OFFICE, TO BLOCK MY EFFORTS, WITH THE PARLIAMENTARY BLACK CAUCUS?

AND STRANGELY, EVEN MY EMAILS FROM THE COURT, HAS GONE MISSING. VERY STRANGE, BUT NOT ENTIRELY. BECAUSE EMAILS CAN BE DELETED, BY THE SENDER AND IT WILL ALSO BE DELETED, AT THE RECIPIENT'S END. I HAD ONE SUCH EMAILS, FROM A COURT STAFF, AT THE DIVISIONAL COURT, A FEW DAYS AGO, AT THE CASE CONFERENCE, THAT I HAD WITH THE SAME JUDGE. THE EMAIL STATED THAT THE JUDGE, DAVID CORBETT, HAD LISTENED TO THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD'S RECORDING, OF MY HEARING ON NOVEMBER 10TH. I IMMEDIATELY RESPONDED TO IT, BY SENDING IN TO THE COURT, COPIES OF MY RECORDINGS, MARKED AS, EXHIBITS  "A" AND EXHIBIT"B". THE EMAIL TOPIC CAME UP BY THE JUDGE MENTIONING IT, TO WHICH I HAD EXPLAINED TO HIM ABOUT RECEIVING THE EMAIL FROM THE COURT. HE TOLD ME TO SEND IT TO THE REGISTRAR AND WHEN I COULD NOT FIND IT, SINCE IT WENT MISSING, I CAME TO LOOK LIKE EITHER AN IDIOT, OR A LIAR. WHICH I AM NOT. AND FOR THAT MATTER, OTHER EMAILS FROM THE DIVISIONAL COURT STAFF TO ME, HAVE ALSO GONE MISSING. I LET THE JUDGE KNOW MY OPINION ON THE MATTER AND THAT IS WHERE THE MATTER HAS NOW RESTED. UNTIL NOW. 

BACK TO SEROYA AND BLAC. THE BLACK LEGAL ACTION CENTER IN TORONTO. SOROYA LEMUR, COULD NOT EXPLAIN TO ME, WHO SHE HAD SPOKEN TO AT BLAC, THAT HAD TOLD HER, THAT THE CLINIC WOULD NOT TAKE ON MY CASE. OR TO TRY AND HELP ME. PERSONALLY, I BELIEVED THAT THEY ARE ALL WORKING TOGETHER AGAINST ME. 

BUT NEVER MIND, I HAD ALSO CONTACTED, BLAC DIRECTLY AND HAD ALSO NOT GOTTEN A RESPONSE. THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, MOYA TEKLU, WAS ALSO CONTACTED AND SHE ALSO DID NOT RESPOND, TO MY REQUEST FOR HELP. SO IT IS A LIE, FROM BLAC ORGANIZATION, THAT IT HELPS INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE FACING, SYSTEMATIC RACISM. THAT IT HELPS THEM TO FIGHT THEIR CASES. THAT IT ALSO TAKES ON TEST CASES, DEALING WITH SUCH INDIVIDUALS.



Wednesday, November 17, 2021

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. 

 



 


BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT LTD AND THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD.

Thursday, October 21, 2021

DIVISIONAL COURT JUDGE, DAVID CORBETT'S, ABUSE OF POWER. DECIDING, AS A ...

I AM SEEKING EQUITABLE RELIEF, IN MY URGENT MOTION, TO THE DIVISIONAL COURT, UNDER SECTION 96(1)(2).  AND THE JUDGE, DAVID CORBETT, IS TRYING TO USE SEC. 2.1.01, UNDER THE SAME ACT (RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE), TO BLOCK MY APPEAL AND ALSO THE URGENT MOTION, FROM PROCEEDING IN THE COURT. 

The appeal is citing as an error of law, on the part of the Landlord and Tenant Board Member, a lack of procedural fairness, which is an error of law. And also grounds for a appeal, before the Divisional court. Basically, while the member has preserved my tenancy in the order that he had made on September 22nd, BUT, he has not allowed me to remain in my home, WHILE my tenancy was preserved in the order.  And to appeal this decision, by way of a review to the Divisional court in Toronto, this is what the corrupt judge, David Corbett, has called a frivolous and vexations proceeding, that he is considering dismissing. So he has agreed with my tenancy being preserved under the RTA, while I remained outside of my home?.  And if someone's tenancy is preserved or maintained, does that not also include all of the rights as a tenant?. Including, being able to reside in your home, while the tenancy is preserved?  So how could this judge see my appeal and review of that contradicting decision, in the order of the L&T Board member, as "frivolous and vexatious?". Do I not have a right to remain in my home, while my tenancy, is maintained in the said order?.  


DIVISIONAL COURT JUDGE, DAVID CORBETT'S, ABUSE OF POWER. DECIDING, AS A SINGLE JUDGE, ON MY APPEAL.

SYSTEMATIC RACISM, TARGETING BLACKS, AND PERSONALLY TARGETING ME, IN THE CANADIAN COURT. Divisional court judge, David Corbett's actions, is amounting to an abuse of power and a lot more. The judge, is wanting to use his power, to block my appeal, in the Divisional court. It started off with the deputy registrar, Saurabh Baweja, bringing my appeal before this judge, instead of allowing it to go before the panel of three judges, as it out to have been. As all appeals to the divisional court, must go before a three judges panel. However, in my case, the racist actions targeting me and trying to have my appeal thrown out, must be exposed. It is also a part of the persecution, that I am facing, in Canada. Where that country carries out torture and other human rights abuse crimes against me. Cruel and Unusual treatment punishment and degrading treatment, is what I have been subjected to, from the Canadian government and its courts. This video is for those who are facing torture, including psychological torture, at the hand of their government. As well as this video is for the general public, to educate and to exposed the corrupt practices, of the courts in Canada and how it really works. In the plot to destroy my life, many are involved in a conspiracy so big, that I am not able to mention all of the names, of those involved. Suffice it to say that there are many. The conspirators are in the government, and the police. As well as others working with NGO, organizations. They are also in the courts and abusing my rights there as well. Saurabh Baweja, Sandra Therould, are deputy registrars, in the Canadian courts, that I have witnessed, them working against me. Not to mention the judges, of those same courts. Such as judge David Corbett, Michael Penny and others, who have Made it their personal ambition, to use their positions of authority, to try and destroy my life. As with this latest situation, in the divisional court. Their goal is to break me, physically and psychologically. Their aim is to destroy me and to silenced me. CANADA CARRIES OUT TORTURE AND OTHER HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES. I AM A VICTIM OF TORTURE, IN CANADA. CANADA HAS ALSO CARRIED OUT GENOCIDE, IN ITS UGLY PAST. CANADA IS A COUNTRY, THAT THRIVED ON CORRUPTION AND THAT IT THE CURRENT PROBLEM, WITH THAT COUNTRY. Support human rights bloggers like me, who exposed its actions and who are human rights abuse victims, in Canada.

Thursday, October 7, 2021

FILING A COMPLAINT, AGAINST CANADA AND EXPOSING HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE IN CANADA.


International complaints - Canada.ca

FOR THOSE OTHER INDIVIDUALS, WHO ARE ALSO EXPERIENCING THE ABUSE OF THEIR HUMAN RIGHTS, IN CANADA, I HAVE PROVIDED THIS LINK AND YOU CAN USE IT TO CONTACT THOSE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS BODIES AND START A CASE.

I HAVE DONE THAT AND I ALSO ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THE SAME.

Monday, October 4, 2021

Thursday, September 23, 2021

BLATANT EVIDENCE OF CORRUPTION, AND SYSTEMATIC RACISM, AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, 47 SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST, TORONTO. VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, CUSTOMER SERVICE MANAGER, MARIA AND REPS. HARIANYA, CORINA AND OTHERS.

SYSTEMATIC RACISM AND THE PERSONAL BIAS, OF LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD MEMBERS.

TENANT ILLEGALLY LOCKED OUT AND THE BOARD MEMBER, IAN SPEER'S DECISION, TO CONTINUED WITH THE ILLEGAL LOCK OUT, WHILE MAINTAINING THE TENANCY. IN OTHER WORDS, HE HAS CONDONED, WHAT THE LANDLORD DID, ILLEGALLY..AGAINST THE RTA

I WOULD HAVE BEEN TREATED DIFFERENTLY, IF I WAS WHITE. 


PROOF, THAT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, LOCATED AT THE 47 SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST, TORONTO, ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, SUCH AS HARIANYA AND CORINA, KEVIN DEHAAN, AS WELL AS THE VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, ACTIONS AGAINST THE TENANT (ME), IS INTENDED TO CAUSE HER, SERIOUS HARM.

THE TENANT (ME), WAS ILLEGALLY LOCKED OUT AND THE BOARD MEMBER, IAN SPEER'S DECISION, TO CONTINUE WITH THE ILLEGAL LOCK OUT, WHILE MAINTAINING THE TENANCY. IN OTHER WORDS, HE HAS CONDONED, AGAINST THE RTA, WHAT THE LANDLORD DID, ILLEGALLY.

THE EXPEDITED HEARING, MENTIONED IN THE INTERIM ORDER, DATED SEPTEMBER 22ND, FROM VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, AND THE ACTUAL DATE, PROVIDED BY THE BOARD,DATED, SEPTEMBER 23, FOR TWO MONTHS LATER, TO NOVEMBER 10TH. THE TENANT WOULD THEN BE WAITING, THREE MONTHS, FOR A HEARING AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, SINCE BEING ILLEGALLY LOCKED OUT OF HER HOME.

AN INSULT TO JUSTICE. 

THOSE INVOLVED SHOULD BE CHARGED, FOR THE CONSPIRACY INVOLVED, IN INTERFERING WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. 

ON SEPTEMBER 21, EMAILS AND TELEPHONE CALLS, FROM CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVES, AT THE SOUTHWEST OFFICE, AT 47 SHEPPARD AVENUE WEST, OF THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, SUGGESTED THAT THE TENANT'S APPLICATION WAS PROCESSED AND A HEARING DATE WAS READY TO BE ISSUED, ALMOST IMMEDIATELY, BY THE BOARD. THIS WAS ALSO RELAYED TO THE TENANT DIRECTLY, BY HARIANYA AND IT WAS INTENDED TO GET THE TENANT'S APPLICATION AND URGENT MOTION, TO BE SEEN BY THE SAME MEMBER, THE VICE-CHAIR, TO DEAL WITH BOTH MATTERS, AND TO MAKE A DECISION, AGAINST THE TENANT.

THE UNFAIR DECISION, OF VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, WHO DENIED THE TENANT (ME), THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE REINSTATED IN HER HOME, WHILE SHE WAITS FOR A HEARING DATE. ACCORDING TO THE ORDER, OF THE VICE-CHAIR, HE HAD MAINTAINED HER TENANCY, IN THE INTERIM ORDER, BUT DESPITE THAT FACT, HE DID NOT SEE IT NECESSARY, TO ALLOW HER TO BE IN HER HOME, AFTER THE ILLEGAL EVICTION, BY THE LANDLORD.  IT IS INCONCEIVABLE, THAT HE WOULD NOT KNOW, THAT THE TENANT WOULD ALSO SUFFER FURTHER HARM, THAN ALREADY BEEN DONE, BY THE LANDLORD, IF SHE CONTINUES TO BE LOCKED OUT OF HER HOME, ILLEGALLY. 

TO ADD INSULT TO INJURY, THE "EXPEDITED" HEARING DATE, TO HEAR THE MATTER BEFORE THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, WAS ISSUED FOR NOVEMBER 10TH, THREE MONTHS, AFTER THE TENANT HAD FILED HER URGENT APPLICATION TO THE BOARD, REGARDING THE ILLEGAL LOCK OUT AND ALMOST TWO MONTHS, AFTER THE INTERIM ORDER WAS ISSUED, REGARDING HER URGENT MOTION. 

(See the article, below this one, for more information, relating to this article. Including a copy of the tenant's urgent motion and the order of the vice-chair, Ian Speers, at the Landlord and Tenant Board.


 


 


 
THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD'S ACTUAL RESPONSE, TO THE INTERIM 
ORDER.



 









 

Wednesday, September 22, 2021

CORRUPT BOARD MEMBER, AND VICE- CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, AT THE SOUTH WEST LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD OFFICE, MADE ORDER PRESERVING THE TENANCY OF TENANT, WHO WAS ILLEGALLY LOCKED OUT, BUT WOULD NOT REINSTATE THE TENANT, AS THE INTERIM ORDER ASKED, PENDING THE TENANT'S T2 APPLICATION, TO BE HEARD.

THE CONSPIRACY AND CORRUPTION, DIRECTED AGAINST ME, AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD. 

VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, DECISION, TO LET A TENANT (ME), REMAINED LOCKED OUT OF HER RENTAL UNIT, AND DENYING HER THE RIGHT TO REMAINED IN HER HOME, PENDING THE OUTCOME OF HER T2 APPLICATION. 

ACCORDING TO THE VICE-CHAIR'S ORDER, ISSUED ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, THE INTERIM ORDER, "PRESERVED" THE TENANCY, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, DENIED THE TENANT, ACCESS TO HER HOME, UNTIL HER APPLICATION CAN BE HEARD. 

- THE HARM DONE TO THE TENANT, BY THE ILLEGAL LOCK OUT, WAS NEVER A PART OF HIS CONSIDERATION, WHEN MAKING THE ORDER.  OR WHEN APPLYING THE RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT.

- IAN SPEERS, DECIDED IN THE INTERIM ORDER, THAT HE WOULD NOT REINSTATE THE TENANT (ME), BACK INTO HER HOME, ON AN EX-PARTE BASIS, EVEN THOUGH THE LANDLORD COUNSEL, DAVID RUBIN, WAS SERVED WITH A COPY OF THE URGENT MOTION, BY THE TENANT'S  LEGAL AID LAWYER, KYLE WARWICK.  DAVID RUBIN CHOSE NOT TO RESPOND TO THE MOTION. 

REGARDING, L&T BOARD VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, THIS SHOULD BE SAID, THAT, NO COMPETENT PERSON, WITH AN OUNCE OF DECENCY AND MORAL STANDING, AND DUTY TO THE PUBLIC, WOULD IN ACT IN SUCH A MANNER, AS TO MAKE AN ORDER, MAINTAINING A TENANT'S TENANCY, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, PREVENTING HER FROM BEING IN HER HOME, UNTIL THE BOARD'S HEARING, ON THE ISSUES.  THE VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS ACTIONS, WAS INTENDED, TO CAUSE FURTHER HARM TO THE TENANT, WHILE SHE WAITS FOR HER APPLICATION TO BE HEARD.  HIS ORDER WAS MADE, FOR THAT PURPOSE. THE OTHER PURPOSE OF HIS ORDER, AS IS CLEARLY SHOWN IN THE ORDER, IS TO AGREE TO THE ILLEGAL EVICTION, BY THE LANDLORD. IT IS PART OF THE CONSPIRACY INVOLVED.

THE CONSPIRACY AND THE CORRUPTION, INVOLVED, LEADING UP TO THE DECISION, OF THE VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS.  THE UNSETTLING DETAILS, OF HOW MY MATTER, WAS DELIBERATELY, SET APART AT THE BOARD, FOR UNUSUAL TREATMENT, THAT WAS INTENDED TO HARM ME, AS A TENANT. 

LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, WHO LIED AND WHO HAVE ACTED, TO INTERFERE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, INCLUDED, HARIANYA, A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE, AT THE BOARD. THIS WOMAN'S ACTIONS, IN LYING ABOUT WHO FORWARDING THE URGENT MOTION, TO A DIFFERENT MEMBER, OTHER THAN THE VICE CHAIR, WAS BY HER ACTIONS, ATTEMPTING TO INTERFERE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION, OF JUSTICE IN MY CASE.

* ON SEPTEMBER 14TH, AN URGENT MOTION WAS FILED WITH THE L&T BOARD, SEEKING   AN INTERIM ORDER, TO RE-INSTATE ME INTO MY HOME, UNTIL I GOT A HEARING DATE,   REGARDING MY T2 APPLICATION. (URGENT MOTION, PROVIDED BELOW).

* TENANT'S URGENT MOTION, WAS NEVER VIEWED, BY A REGULAR BOARD MEMBER, AND WAS KEPT FROM BEING VIEWED, BY A BOARD MEMBER, FOR A WEEK.  

* ON SEPTEMBER 21 ST, THE TENANT LEARNED, THAT HER URGENT MOTION, THAT WAS FILED WITH THE BOARD, WAS STILL SITTING AROUND AND THAT NO BOARD MEMBER, HAD REVIEWED IT, LET ALONE MAKING A DECISION ON IT. 

* ON SEPTEMBER 21 ST, THE TENANT WAS ADVISED, BY A CUSTOMER SERVICE OFFICER, HARIANYA, THAT SHE WAS GOING TO PUT, "BOTH THE TENANT'S T2 APPLICATION AND THE URGENT MOTION", BEFORE THE VICE-CHAIR, FOR A DECISION TO BE MADE, ON BOTH MATTERS, IMMEDIATELY.  BECAUSE, SHE ALSO CLAIMED, THE TENANT'S (ME), T2 APPLICATION, WAS NOW PROCESSED AND THE VICE-CHAIR, WAS GOING TO REVIEW BOTH. NATURALLY, I PROTESTED AND ASKED HER NOT TO DO SO, SINCE THIS WOULD BE PREJUDICE TO ME, HAVING BOTH THE T2 AND THE URGENT MOTION HEARD TOGETHER, BY THE SAME PERSON. HARIANYA, THEN TOLD ME, THAT SHE WAS NOT GOING TO GO AHEAD AND DO SO, SINCE I DID NOT WANT THAT DONE,  IN THIS MANNER.  BUT SHE DID, GO AHEAD AND HAD THE VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, REVIEWED MY URGENT MOTION AND I ALSO BELIEVED NOW, THE T2 APPLICATION AS WELL. THOUGH THAT IS NOT STATED IN THE ORDER.  HARIANYA, IN FACT, CALLED ME DIRECTLY, FROM HER PHONE, AT THIS TEL. NUMBER, 416 314-0354, AFTRER SPEAKING TO CORINA, ANOTHER CUSTOMER SERVICE OFFICER. THIS ONE LOCATED AT THE 47 SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST, OFFICE, ACCORDING TO KYLE WARWICK, THE LAWYER, WHO REPRESENTED, ME AT THE BOARD. KYLE WARWICK, LAWYER, HAD SAID THAT HE WOULD BE AWAY,  AND WOULD NOT RETURN UNTIL, TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 21ST. 

* THE REASON THAT THE BOARD ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF, WANTED THE T2 AND THE URGENT MOTION, TO BE HEARD TOGETHER, AFTER SUPPRESSING THE URGENT MOTION, FROM GOING BEFORE A MEMBER, FOR A WEEK, TO BE REVIEWED, I BELIEVED, WAS TO PREVENT THE URGENT MOTION, TO REINSTATE THE TENANT (ME), FROM HAPPENING.  FIRST, NO BOARD MEMBER, GOT TO SEE THE URGENT MOTION, FOR AN ENTIRE WEEK, AFTER IT WAS FILED WITH THE BOARD, AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, THE URGENCY, BY THE BOARD,  IN HAVING BOTH MATTERS, HEARD TOGETHER AND BY THE VICE-CHAIR, SPECIFICALLY.  AFTER SPEAKING WITH HARIANYA AND VOICING MY CONCERNS, THAT THE URGENT MOTION, AS WELL AS THE T2 (MOTION TO SHORTEN THE TIME FOR A HEARING), BE HEARD, BY A DIFFERENT BOARD MEMBER AND NOT THE VICE-CHAIR, IT WAS STILL DONE ANYWAY.  SHE IN FACT TOLD ME, THAT SHE WAS GOING TO PRESENT THE URGENT MOTION, TO THE TEAM THAT DEALS WITH URGENT MOTIONS AND FOR IT TO GO TO A REGULAR BOARD MEMBER, BUT I LATER LEARNED, THAT THIS WAS NOT DONE.  


* THE CONSPIRACY AND THE CORRUPTION, INVOLVED, BY THE BOARD AND OTHERS INVOLVED, INCLUDING, I ALSO BELIEVED, THE LANDLORD'S AGENTS AND COUNSEL, DAVID RUBIN, AS WELL AS OTHERS, WAS TO NOT HAVE THE INTERIM ORDER, SEEKING THE REINSTATEMENT, OF THE TENANT (ME), GRANTED AND THAT IS WHY THE URGENT MOTION ,WAS SITTING AROUND AT THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, FOR A WEEK, WITHOUT BEING VIEWED BY ANY MEMBER, UP UNTIL THE TIME, THAT THE VICE-CHAIR IAN SPEERS, MADE HIS DECISION, IN THE ORDER, NOT TO RE-INSTATE THE TENANT, BACK INTO THE RENTAL UNIT, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, MAINTAINING HER TENANCY.  

* AND FOR THE RECORD, THERE IS NO BARBARA O'CCONOR, WHO IS A TENANT, ON MY T2 APPLICATION.  SHE WAS THE FORMER TENANT AND LEASE HOLDER, WHO HAD MOVED OUT OF THE APARTMENT, AT THE END OF JUNE 2021, WHEN I HAD TAKEN OVER THE LEASE.  AS FAR AS THE ACT IS CONCERNED, SHE IS HISTORY. AS FAR AS MY T2 APPLICATION IS CONCERNED, SHE IS A WITNESS AND NOT A TENANT. THAT WILL BE HER ROLE AT THE UPCOMING HEARING. (UPON MY REQUEST).  

* THE CRIME INVOLVED HERE, IS GROSS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS. AND THE REMEDY FOR THAT, IS A CASE AGAINST THE INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE, WHO ACTED IN THEIR PUBLIC DUTY, OR CAPACITY, TO USE THEIR POSITIONS, TO CAUSE INJURY TO THE VICTIM.  THE SOLUTION IN MY VIEW, IS A CASE WITH THE UNITED NATIONS, INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, CITING A VIOLATION BY CANADA AND ITS PUBLIC AND GOVERNMENT  OFFICIALS, UNDER THE CONVENTION OF TORTURE, AND IN FACT OTHER TREATIES, TO VIOLATE MY HUMAN RIGHTS AND MORE SINISTER, TO CARRY OUT CRUEL AND UNUSUAL  PUNISHMENT AND DEGRADING TREATMENT, AGAINST ME. 

* THAT IS WHERE THEY ARE ALL HEADING, AS DEFENDANTS, WITH REGARDS TO MY CHARGES AGAINST THOSE INDIVIDUALS, IN THE INTERNATIONAL COURTS OF JUSTICE.

BELOW, IS THE URGENT MOTION THAT WAS FILED, WITH THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, AND ASKING FOR AN ITERIM ORDER, REINSTATING THE TENANT (ME), UNTIL THE TENANT'S T2 APPLICATION, IS HEARD. 











LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, VICE-CHAIR, IAN SPEER'S INTERIM ORDER, DATED SEPTEMBER 22ND, PREVENTING TENANT (ME), FROM BEING REINSTATED INTO HER HOME, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME, MAINTAINING HER TENANCY.  AND KNOWING FULL WELL, THAT IN DOING SO, THAT THE TENANT (ME), WOULD BE FURTHER HARMED, (WHICH WAS HIS INTENTION),
WHILE WAITING FOR HER T2 APPLICATION, TO BE HEARD.  WHOSE PURPOSE IS HE SERVING?. THE TENANT'S OR THE LANDLORD?. 
WHY IN HIS DECISION, DOES HE WANT TO HARM THE TENANT FURTHER, BY CAUSING HER NOT TO BE IN HER HOME, WHILE MAKING AN ORDER, WHICH CONTINUES TO MAINTAIN HER TENANCY?. 
AS FOR HIS REASONING, THAT THE URGENT MOTION, WAS AN EX-PARTE MOTION AND THE OTHER SIDE, SHOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY, TO ARGUE THEIR SIDE OF THE CASE. WHAT WILL THEY BE ARGUING?.  THAT THEY HAD A RIGHT, TO GO AGAINST THE RTA AND TO ILLEGALLY EVICT THE TENANT, WITHOUT AN ORDER FROM THE BOARD?.  CLEARLY BY HIS DECISION, AND IN HIS CORRUPT VIEW, THE VICE CHAIR, IAN SPEERS, AGREES WITH THE ACTIONS OF THE LANDLORD. 
THAT ALONE, SHOULD HAVE HIM REMOVED, FROM BEING A VICE-CHAIR, AND FROM MAKING ANY DECISIONS, IN REGARDS TO TENANTS, AT THE BOARD.







Thursday, September 16, 2021

THE UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL PROCEDURE, TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL, AND THE SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON TORTURE, IS LOOKING INTO MY COMPLAINT, REGARDING HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE, IN THIS LATEST SITUATION.

THE CIRCLE OF CANADIAN GOVERNMENT AND PUBLIC OFFICIALS, WHO ARE NAMED IN THE REPORT, TO THE SPECIAL PROCEDURE BRANCH, OF THE UNITED NATIONS, WHO ARE DIRECTLY, OR WHO HAVE PROVIDED SUPPORTING ROLE, TO THE CONTINUANCE OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE, THAT I AM FACING, AS A PART OF ITS CRUEL AND UNUSUAL TREATMENT AND TORTURE REPORT, AGAINST THAT CANADA.

-MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING, ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, CATHY TRAPANIER AND ALYSSA CATES. THE MINISTRY ITSELF AND THE MINISTER'S OFFICE, WHICH HAS DELAYED, INVESTIGATING, THOSE TWO PERSONS, IN THE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, WHO DID NOTHING TO ENFORCED MY RIGHTS. 

-THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD AND THE MEMBER, ASSOCIATED WITH THE CASE AND WHOSE DELAY, IS CAUSING, FURTHER HARM TO THE TENANT.

-THE MPP'S OFFICE, OF ROBIN MARTIN, WHO HAD PROMISED, TO GET THE MINISTER'S OFFICE, TO LOOK INTO THE ACTIONS, OF CATHY TRAPANIER AND ELYSSA CATES, WHO HAVE IGNORED MY RIGHTS, UNDER THE RTA. AND HAVING SIGNED THE CONSENT FORM, FOR HER ASSISTANT, TO CONTACT THE MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING ON MY BEHALF, I HAVE NOT HEARD BACK FROM THAT OFFICE SINCE.

-THE ROLE OF THE TORONTO 12 DIVISION POLICE AND THE PRIVATE LANDLORD AND WHETHER OR NOT, THE POLICE WAS INVOLVED, IN ASSISTING THE PROPERTY MANAGERS, WHO HAD VIOLATED MY RIGHTS, AS A TENANT.

-DOWNSVIEW COMMUNITY LEGAL CLINIC AND WHY IT TOOK THEM FIVE WEEKS, TO RESPOND TO MY CALLS, FOR LEGAL HELP, AS A LOW INCOME PERSON. THEY ONLY RESPONDED A FEW DAYS AGO, SINCE I CONTACTED THAT LEGAL AID CLINIC, BACK IN AUGUST, AFTER I WAS LOCKED OUT OF MY HOME. THE SPECIAL PROCEDURE BRANCH, IS TO LOOK INTO OTHER ISSUES, OR CONCERNS, THAT I HAVE ALSO PRESENTED, CONCERNING, THE LEGAL AID CLINIC AND ITS TREATMENT, OR CONCERNING ITS SERVICES TO ME. 

BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. AND THE ROLE IT HAS PLAYED, AS A PRIVATE LANDLORD, WHO WAS ALLOWED, BY THOSE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, TO GET AWAY, WITH IGNORING THE LAW, PERTAINING TO THE RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT, 2006. DUE TO THE CONSPIRACY AND THE CORRUPTION, INVOLVED.

THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, WAS SERVED, WITH AN URGENT MOTION, THAT WAS FILED BY A LAWYER, REPRESENTING THE TENANT, WHO WAS LOCKED OUT OF HER HOME ILLEGALLY. AND IT HAS DELAYED, IN MAKING A DECISION ON THE MATTER, CONCERNING THE INTERIM ORDER, THAT THE LAWYER WAS SEEKING, UNTIL THE TENANT'S APPLICATION, THAT WAS ALSO FILED EARLIER, CAN BE HEARD.  THE LEGAL AID LAWYER, FROM THE DOWNSVIEW COMMUNITY LEGAL AID CLINIC, HAS CITED ALL OF THE REASONS, BASED ON LEGAL GROUNDS, WHY THE MOTION SHOULD BE GRANTED, AS IT IS AN INTERIM ORDER, THAT HE IS SEEKING, UNTIL A HEARING DATE IS PROVIDED, BY THE L&T BOARD, WHEN THE TENANT'S T2 APPLICATION IS HEARD. WHICH WE ARE TOLD TAKES TWO MONTHS TO BE PROCESSED, FROM THE DATE OF THE APPLICATION, TO THE BOARD.  IN THE MEANTIME, THE LAWYER IS ASKING IN THE MOTION, FOR AN INTERIM ORDER, FOR THE TENANT TO BE REINSTATED, IN HER HOME, AS SHE WAITS FOR A HEARING DATE, FROM THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, OF HER T2 APPLICATION, THAT WAS FILED IN AUGUST.

THE BOARD HAS NOT RESPONDED TO THE URGENT MOTION, AND THIS HAS CAUSED FURTHER HARM TO THE TENANT. THIS PARTICULAR TENANT, ALSO HAS A MATTER BEFORE THE UN'S HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL AND THE SPECIAL PROCEDURE BRANCH, CITING IMMEDIATE HARM AND THE CONTINUED HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSE, DIRECTED AT HER, BY PUBLIC AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, OF THE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT.

Thursday, September 2, 2021

ALYSSA CATES AND CATHY TREPANIER, FOR THE MINISTRY OF, MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS AND HOUSING, HAS FAILED TO CARRY OUT THEIR DUTY, TO TENANTS.

ALYSSA CATES, DIRECTOR AND CATHY TREPANIER, COORDINATOR, IS THE REASON, THAT I AM STILL LOCKED OUT OF MY RENTAL UNIT. THEY HAVE BOTH FAILED, TO TAKE ANY ACTIONS, INCLUDING, REFUSING TO CONTACT, THE LANDLORD ON MY BEHALF, IN ORDER TO REGAIN, MY APARTMENT. 

CATHY TREPANIER, COORDINATOR, IN THE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, ACTED CORRUPTLY, BY NOT CONTACTING THE LANDLORD, TO ENFORCED MY RIGHTS, UNDER THE RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT, 2006. AS A RESULT, SALIM MANJI AND BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. CONTINUES, TO DISOBEY THE RTA, BY LOCKING ME OUT OF MY APARTMENT, ILLEGALLY. 

I HAVE BEEN LOCKED OUT OF MY APARTMENT, ILLEGALLY, FOR MORE THAN A MONTH AND DESPITE THE URGENCY OF THE SITUATION, I AM STILL WAITING FOR A HEARING DATE, FROM THE L&T BOARD. 

CATHY TREPANIER, CLAIMED THAT IN ORDER TO ACT,  THAT SHE WOULD REQUIRE, THE FORMER TENANT, TO CONTACT HER AND TO PROVIDE TO HER, HER OWN DOCUMENTATION, REGARDING THE FORMER TENANCY, WITH THE LANDLORD. NO WHERE IN THE ACT, DOES IT SAY, THAT THIS ACTION IS REQUIRED, BY THE ENFORCEMENT DIVISION, IN ORDER TO MAKE THE DECISION, TO TELL THE LANDLORD, TO PROVIDE THE REPLACEMENT KEYS AND TO APPLY TO THE BOARD, FOR AN EVICTION ORDER.

CATHY TREPANIER AND ALYSSA CATES, ARE ANOTHER TWO EXAMPLES, OF THE SEVERAL CANADIAN GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES, WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE CONSPIRACY, TO HAVE ME REMAIN HOMELESS, ALONG WITH THE POLICE. AS A RESULT OF THE CONSPIRACY, THE LANDLORD AND ITS AGENTS, BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC AND SALIM MANJI, AS WELL AS JENNIFER NICKEL AND SAMANTHA GIBSON, HAS MADE NO MOVE, TO OBEY THE LAW AND TO TAKE THE MATTER, TO THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD, AS THEY ARE REQUIRED UNDER THE RTA, TO DO. 

ON SEPTEMBER 1ST, THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA, COMPLAINT DIVISION, HAD CONTACTED ME, ABOUT RECEIVING MY COMPLAINT, AGAINST THE PARALEGAL, DAVID RUBIN AND HIS ROLE IN THE EFFORT, TO INTERFERE WITH THE, ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, REGARDING THIS CASE.  

SALIM MANII, PRESIDENT, OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. AND THE LANDLORD'S AGENT, IS ALSO UNDER INVESTIGATION, AS A BOARD MEMBER, DUE TO MY COMPLAINTS, ABOUT HIS ACTIONS IN DISREGARDING THE LAW, WHILE STILL SITTING ON THOSE PUBLIC BOARDS. 

FINALLY, THE UNITED NATIONS, SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR ON TORTURE, is ADDRESSING, MY URGENT REQUEST, TO INVESTIGATE THOSE CANADIAN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, WHO HAVE ACTED TO CAUSE ME HARM AND CONTINUES TO DO SO, WITH IMPUNITY, IN CANADA. ALL OF THE GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS MENTIONED, ARE THE SUBJECT OF MY COMPLAINT, TO THE UN, ON AN URGENT BASIS.  ALL OF THEM ARE TRYING THEIR BEST, TO WITHHOLD SOME OF THE BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS, SUCH AS SHELTER, FROM ME, AS A MEANS OF PUNISHMENT AND TO DELIBERATELY  CAUSE ME HARM.

Tuesday, August 31, 2021

PARALEGAL, DAVID RUBIN, IS UNDER INVESTIGATION, BY THE LAW SOCIETY, REGARDING, WHETHER HE HAD VIOLATED THE CODE OF CONDUCT, REGARDING HIS CLIENT, SALIM MANJI'S DISHONESTY.

 PARALEGAL, DAVID RUBIN, IS JUST ONE OF THE MANY PEOPLE, THAT ARE INVOLVED, I BELIEVED, IN THE CONSPIRACY, TO INTERFERE WITH THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, REGARDING THE LANDLORD AND TENANT MATTER. 

RUBIN IS KNOWN IN HIS PRACTICE, TO REPRESENT LANDLORDS AND IT IS NOW CLEAR, BY HIS ACTIONS IN MY CASE, THAT HE IS WILLING TO ALSO IGNORE THE LAW AND THE RTA, IF IT MEANS, HELPING OUT HIS CLIENT. 

WHAT IS CLEAR, IS THAT IF DAVID RUBIN, AS COUNSEL, HAD INSTRUCTED HIS CLIENT, SALIM MANJI, OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. TO FOLLOW THE LAW AND THE RTA AND ITS GUIDELINES, THEN HIS CLIENT WOULD NOT HAVE CONTINUED TO DEFY THE LAW. A FORMAL COMPLAINT WAS FILED AGAINST DAVID RUBIN WITH THE LAW SOCIETY. 




Monday, August 30, 2021

SALIM MANJI'S ACTIONS, TO BE INVESTIGATED, BY THE CHAIR FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, OF THE ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM. AS A BOARD MEMBER.


THE MESSAGE IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR, TO SALIM MANJI, PRESIDENT, OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. DO NOT CONTINUE, TO REPRESENT THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST, OR TO SIT ON ANY PUBLIC BOARDS, WHILE YOU CONTINUE, TO DEFY THE LAW. 
Salim Manji
His personal corruption, is evident
in how he has defied the law and continues
to prevent me from getting back into my home,
by refusing to provide me with the replacement
keys, as the RTA, states. Under a criminal charge, 
he would be facing a charge of, Disobeying an
Order of Court, under the Criminal Code of Canada.
Salim Manji's counsel, is David Rubin, and he is
also under investigation, by the Law Society, 
regarding this same matter.

I AM IN APPRECIATION, FOR THE HELP THAT I RECIEVED, FROM THE ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM, OR THE ROM, IN GETTING ACCESS TO ITS BOARD CHAIR, AND THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, IN REGARDS TO MY COMPLAINT, ABOUT SALIM MANJI, ONE OF ITS BOARD OF DIRECTORS. THANKS FOR BOTH THE EMAIL AND THE TELEPHONE NUMBER, THAT WAS SENT TO ME, BY A PARTICULAR STAFF, AT THE ROM. YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE. THANK YOU.  

PREAMBLE:  THE RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT, 2006, IS AN ACT OF PARLIAMENT. IT IS A STATUE AND LIKE ANY OTHER ACTS, THAT WAS CREATED BY THE CANADIAN PARLIAMENT, IT IS AN ORDER OF COURT.

SALIM MANJI, PRESIDENT, OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. OPEN DEFIANCE OF THE RTA, WHICH I HAVE EXPLAINED IN THE PREVIOUS ARTICLE, IS GROUNDS FOR ACTION, WITH BOTH THE LANDLORD AND TENANT BOARD AND THE CRIMINAL COURT. IN THE CASE OF THE COURT, THE CHARGE WOULD BE, DISOBEYING ORDER OF COURT. 

WHEN THE RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT, ORDERS YOU TO DO SOMETHING, YOU HAD BETTER DO IT. TO DEFY IT, IS TO DEFY THE LAW ITSELF. SALIM MANJI, CONTINUES TO IGNORE THE ACT AND TO LOCK ME OUT OF MY HOME, DESPITE THE PROTECTION AFFORDED ME, BY THE RTA. IT IS DONE BY PURE MALICIOUSNESS AND WITH EVIL INTENTIONS. HIS ILLEGAL ACTIONS, IN DEFYING THE RTA, WHICH IS AN ACT OF PARLIAMENT, REPRESENTING THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA, SHOULD NOT BE IGNORED, WHILE HE CONTINUES TO ACT AS A BOARD MEMBER AND TO REPRESENT THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST. THE ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM, DEFINITELY REPRESENT THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST AND SALIM MANJI, LACKED THE MORAL AND PERSONAL INTEGRITY, TO REPRESENT THE PUBLIC, AS A BOARD MEMBER.


Tuesday, August 24, 2021

SALIM MANJI, PRESIDENT OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. AND OTHER EMPLOYEES, OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. CONSPIRACY, WITH THE TORONTO POLICE 12 DIVISION, TO BLOCK ME, FROM GETTING BACK INTO MY HOME.


THE CONSPIRACY AND CORRUPTION, INVOLVING, BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. PRESIDENT, SALIM MANJI AND OTHER EMPLOYEES OD THE COMPANY, SAMANTHA GIBSON, JENNIFER NICKEL AND SHANTELLE PANTHAKI, WORKING WITH THE TORONTO POLICE 12 DIVISION, TO BREAK THE LAW, BY ILLEGALLY LOCKING ME OUT OF MY APARTMENT AND TO KEEP ME FROM GETTING BACK INTO MY APARTMENT. 

Salim Manji, President of Barney Rivers Investment
Inc. He and others of that company, is involved, in
the conspiracy, with the T.O. Police 12 Division, to 
ignore the law, and the RTA, and have illegally,
locked me out of my apt, without an order from the
L&T Board. They have also refused to let me back into
my rental unit, and continues to ignore the law, with
the backing and the protection of the T.O police.

SALIM MANJI, IS MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, FOR A NUMBER OF PUBLIC COMPANIES AND THUS REPRESENTING THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST. IT IS MY VIEW, ALSO, THAT SALIM MANJI, SHOULD NOT BE ON ANY PUBLIC BOARDS, REPRESENTING THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST, SINCE HE HAS SO LITTLE REGARDS FOR THE LAW.


THE PERPETRATORS, HAS THE BACKING AND THE PROTECTION OF THE TORONTO POLICE 12 DIVISION. THE EXTREME MEASURES, THAT WAS TAKEN BY BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. PRESIDENT AND ITS EMPLOYEES, INVOLVED MISCHIEF, AGAINST ME. AN EXAMPLE OF THIS, IS ONE SUCH PERSON, SAMANTHA GIBSON, THE PROPERTY MANAGER, AT 1440 LAWRENCE AVENUE WEST, APARTMENT BUILDING AND THE 12 DIVISION POLICE, WORKING TOGETHER. THEY BOTH SHOWED UP, WHERE I AM NOW STAYING WITH A WOMAN, WHO OFFERED TO HELP ME, (OUTSIDE OF 12 DIVISION JURISDICTION).

 AND ACCORDING TO THAT PERSON, SAMANTHA GIBSON (WITH THE BACKING OF THE 12 DIVISION POLICE), TRIED TO TURN HER AGAINST ME.  SHE CLAIMED THAT SAMANTHA GIBSON, SHOWED UP AND ASKED TO SPEAK WITH HER.  SHE SAID THAT SHE SAW HER (GIBSON), STANDING AT THE ELEVATOR, NEAR HER APARTMENT DOOR ASKING TO SPEAK WITH HER. SAMANTHA GIBSON THEN DECIDED TO SPREAD FALSE RUMORS AND MISINFORMATION, ABOUT ME TO HER, WITH THE HOPE THAT IT WOULD INFLUENCE HER ENOUGH, TO PUT ME OUT ON THE STREET. SHE WAS TOLD THAT I WOULD PHYSICALLY HARM HER, IF SHE ALLOWED ME TO STAY IN HER HOME AND ALSO THAT MY HANDS ARE "DIRTY" AND I AM NOT THE PERSON THAT I PRETENDED TO BE.  SHE CLAIMED THAT SAMANTHA GIBSON, WANTED HER TO ACT UPON HER ALLEGATIONS AND TO SEE ME AS A BAD PERSON AND TO THROW ME OUT, ON THE STREET.  SHE ALSO CLAIMED, THAT SAMANTHA GIBSON, CONTACTED THE HUMANE SOCIETY, WHO ALSO  CAME WITH HER TO THE BUILDING, TO TAKE AWAY MY ANIMALS. SHE CLAIMED THAT SAMANTHA GIBSON, THE 12 DIVISION POLICE AND THE HUMANE SOCIETY, SHOWED UP LAST WEEK AND THAT SHE WAS TOLD TO NOT HAVE ME IN HER HOME.  SHE SAID THAT SHE WOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY SAMANTHA GIBSON, AS SHE STOOD AT THE ELEVATOR NEAR HER DOOR, AS SHE CARRIED OUT HER MALICIOUS ATTACKS AGAINST ME. 

THE WOMAN SAID THAT SAMANTHA GIBSON, ALSO SPOKE WITH OTHER TENANTS, OF THE BUILDING AND TOLD THEM TO CONVINCE HER THAT I WAS A BAD PERSON, TO HAVE AROUND HER. ALL WITH THE INTENTION OF FORCING ME OUT ON THE STREET AND MAKING ME HOMELESS. AS GIBSON HAD DONE EARLIER, BY CHANGING THE LOCK, ILLEGALLY, ON MY APARTMENT DOOR.  SHE IS CONVINCED THAT SAMANTHA GIBSON, CAN BE RECOGNIZED BY THE VIDEO SURVEILLANCE IN THE BUILDING, AS WELL AS BY HER, DIRECTLY.  THE MISCHIEF (CHARGE), THAT BROUGHT SAMANTHA GIBSON, PROPERTY MANAGER, FOR BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. TO THE WOMAN'S HOME TO DO ME HARM, WAS ALSO EVIDENT TO SEVERAL OTHER WITNESSES, SOME OF WHOM SHE ALSO USED FOR THAT PURPOSE. 

JENNIFER NICKEL, MANAGER OF THE RENTAL PROPERTY, HAS STATED THAT SHE IS NOT OBLIGATED, TO CHANGE THE LOCK BACK, DESPITE WHAT THE RTA SAYS.

JENNIFER NICKEL, SAMANTHA GIBSON, SHANTELLE PANTHAKI AND SALIM MANJI, ALL HAVE IGNORED THE FACT, THAT THE 60 DAYS HAD PASSED, IN WHICH THEY WERE TO TAKE ACTIONS, WITH THE BOARD, IF THEY WANTED TO EVICT ME. BY NOT DOING SO, THEY ARE DEEMED BY THE RTA, TO AGREE, WITH THE LEASE TO BE ASSIGNED TO ME. 




SALIM MANJI, THE PRESIDENT OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. ALSO CONDONED THE ACTIONS OF SAMANTHA GIBSON, JENNIFER NICKEL AND SHANTELLE PANTHAKI, BY NOT TELLING THEM TO ABIDE BY THE LAW, BY GIVING ME THE REPLACEMENT KEYS AND TO WAIT FOR THE HEARING AT THE L&T BOARD, TO DECIDE ON THE MATTER. MANJI HAD HIS PARALEGAL, DAVID RUBIN CONTACTED ME, WHO ALSO FEIGNED IGNORANCE OF THE LAW AND INSTEAD OF RE ENFORCING THE ACT, WITH HIS CLIENT, HE AGREES WITH HIM. NOW I AM WAITING FOR THE POSITION, OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND THE CHAIRMAN, OF BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. TO SEE IF THEY WILL DO THE RIGHT THING, ABOUT BARNEY RIVERS EMPLOYEES, GOING AGAINST THE LAW, REGARDING THIS MATTER.

MY VIEW, AS ALREADY STATED, IS THAT SALIM MANJI, SHOULD NOT BE REPRESENTING, THE PUBLIC'S INTEREST, AS A BOARD MEMBER, ON ANY OF THOSE PUBLIC BOARDS, THAT HE SITS ON.  INCLUDING THE ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM (ROM), AMONG OTHERS. HE IS OBLIGATED, TO HAVE A MORAL STANDING AND TO RESPECT THE LAW. WHICH HE HAS NOT SHOWN, IN REGARDS TO THIS MATTER.

AMONG THE OTHER CO-CONSPIRATORS, IS THE PARALEGAL MICHAEL BLOTT, I BELIEVED, WHO REFUSED TO HELP ME, AND WHO WAS IN TOUCH WITH SAMANTHA GIBSON, BY MY REQUEST. HE INSTEAD WORKED AGAINST ME. HE KEPT THE ENVELOPE, CONTAINING THE DOCUMENTS AND THE RETAINER, ON HIS DESK FOR THREE DAYS, UNOPENED, AND DID NOTHING TO HELP ME, REGARDING MY MATTER, WITH BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC.




Wednesday, August 18, 2021

MICHAEL EDWARD STEVEN, BLOTT, PARALEGAL, WHO STOLE MY MONEY AND DID ABSOLUTELY, NO WORK ON MY BEHALF. NOT EVEN A TELEPHONE CALL TO ME, AFTER HE WAS PAID.

Michael Blott, Paralegal and son of Alan Blott, a Toronto lawyer

THE CONSPIRACY, INVOLVING, A PARALEGAL, THAT I HAD RETAINED, MICHAEL, BLOTT AND THE 12 DIVISION POLICE AND SAMANTHA GIBSON, PROPERTY MANAGER, WITH BARNEY RIVERS INVESTMENT INC. 

The conspiracy, was to get me to leave the place where I was staying, and to become homeless, after the lock was changed illegally, on my apartment door. I believed that the persons mentioned, were involved and I will be providing more evidence of this later on. Or at a later date. But for now my focus is on this crooked paralegal, Michael Blott, who literally stole my money and did not do any service to me, but in fact, worked to caused me further harm, I believe, as part of the conspiracy, to force me to become homeless, by both the police and the management of Barney Rivers Investment Inc. who owns the building, that I am a tenant of and who had changed the lock illegally, on my door, since August 3rd, after paying them my rent, of almost $1200.00 for the month of August. 

Taking a client's money and doing absolutely no work, on their behalf, is stealing. Not even a telephone call to the client to say, "I did this, or I did that, regarding your case", should be regarded, as an unethical conduct, by the Law Society of Upper Canada, against such a paralegal, as Michael Blott. Who had me to believe that he was a lawyer and this misleading information, is also online as well. Which he has not corrected. For two days, the envelope containing the money and documents, that I had left at his office. located at 1752 Eglington Avenue West, remained on his desk, unopened. Because the office is situated at ground level, I was able to pass by and see the unopened envelope on the desk of this man, Michael Blott, in the office that he also shares with his father, lawyer, Alan Blott, just as I had left it, after dropping it through the letter slot, unopened. As he had instructed me to do.

Envelope that was left unopened, for
2 days on the desk of Michael Blott



ROXANNE PARIS, A MANAGER, IN THE URGENT CIVIL INTAKE OFFICE, AT THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE, TO BE FACE A CHARGE, OF OBSTRUCTING JUSTICE, CONSPIRACY AND CORRUPTION, AND BREACH OF PUBLIC TRUST. IN DELIBERATELY, BLOCKING, MY URGENT MOTION, IN THE COURT.

AFTER FILING MY URGENT MOTION, AT THE COURTHOUSE, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE, I WAS TOLD THAT IT WENT DIRECTLY, TO THE CIVIL URGENT MO...