Home » General Reading

Category Archives: General Reading

About Us

We are a help website with links to some very useful Landlord & Tenant Board, Privacy Commissioner, Upper Law Society links and some interesting posts in the news that you can view and follow.

logo_twitter follow us on facebook logo_googleemail us

Categories

Canadian PIPEDA Laws

privacy-commissioner-canada

 

Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act or PIPEDA for short

A Guide For Businesses & Organizations

Complying with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act

In Canada, we are protected by two federal privacy laws. The Privacy Act covers the personal information-handling practices of the federal government and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) is Canada’s new private sector privacy law, which came fully into effect on January 1, 2004. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada is here to help provide information and guidance to businesses across Canada as they gear up for the implementation of PIPEDA.

Good privacy is good business

IPIPEDAn an increasingly competitive marketplace, businesses rely on personal information to identify and stay in touch with their customers. They use it to seek out new customers who might be interested in their products. They want to find out what the market is looking for and what it will bear. And they want information about their employees, so that they can administer benefits and ensure a safe and productive workplace.

Obtaining and using that personal information in ways that don’t offend the fundamental human right of privacy is the challenge for modern businesses.

Respecting and protecting privacy is a key element of good customer relations — and that makes it a key element of competitive advantage. Your customers want privacy, your employees need it and your competitors are going to provide it.

It’s not an abstract legal concept. It’s simple consideration, respect and courtesy — the essence of a good relationship with your customers and employees. Showing respect for privacy is part of showing respect for your customer, and respecting your customer is the cornerstone of a strong customer relationship.

 

PIPEDA in brief

PIPEDA sets out ground rules for how private sector organizations can collect, use or disclose personal information in the course of commercial activities. It balances an individual’s right to privacy with the need of organizations to collect, use or disclose personal information for legitimate business purposes.

PIPEDA has been coming into effect in stages. As of January 2001, the Act has applied to personal information about customers or employees in the federally-regulated sector in the course of commercial activities. It also applies to information sold across provincial and territorial boundaries. As of January 2002, the Act has also applied to personal health information collected, used or disclosed by these organizations.

Since January 1, 2004, PIPEDA applies right across the board — to all personal information collected, used or disclosed in the course of commercial activities by all private sector organizations, except provinces which have, by then, enacted legislation that is deemed to be substantially similar to the federal law. To date, Quebec, British-Columbia, Alberta, and, in matters relating to health care, Ontario, New Brunswick and Newfoundland and Labrador, have promulgated legislation deemed substantially similar to the federal law.

Although the application of the Act expanded in 2004 to commercial activities that normally fall under provincial jurisdiction, it does not extend to employment in those activities. The only place PIPEDA applies to employment is in federal works, undertakings, or businesses. This means that if you are operating a federal work, undertaking or business — PIPEDA applies to your employment practices. But for the rest of businesses, it does not. It’s a good idea for businesses and organizations to review their privacy practices in employment anyway, because it’s very likely that provincial privacy laws will apply to employment.

 

The basic outline of PIPEDA looks like this:

  • If your business wants to collect, use or disclose personal information about people, you need their consent, except in a few specific and limited circumstances.
  • You can use or disclose people’s personal information only for the purpose for which they gave consent.
  • Even with consent, you have to limit collection, use and disclosure to purposes that a reasonable person would consider appropriate under the circumstances.
  • Individuals have a right to see the personal information that your business holds about them, and to correct any inaccuracies.
  • There’s oversight, through the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, to ensure that the law is respected, and redress if people’s rights are violated.

 Your responsibilities under PIPEDA

PIPEDA reflects the realities of the business world. It’s based on the Canadian Standards Association’s Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information, which is incorporated into the legislation. The Code came out of a collaborative effort by representatives of government, consumers and business groups, and lists 10 principles of fair information practices, which are summarized as follows:

  1. Accountability: Appoint an individual (or individuals) to be responsible for your organization’s compliance; protect all personal information held by your organization or transferred to third party for processing; and develop and implement personal information policies and practices.
  2. Identifying purposes: Your organization must identify the reasons for collecting personal information before or at the time of collection. Before or when any personal information is collected, identify why it is needed and how it will be used; document why the information is collected; inform the individual from whom the information is collected why it is needed; identify any new purpose for the information and obtain the individual’s consent before using it.
  3. Consent: Inform the individual in a meaningful way of the purposes for the collection, use or disclosure of personal data; obtain the individual’s consent before or at the time of collection, as well as when a new use is identified.
  4. Limiting collection: Do not collect personal information indiscriminately; do not deceive or mislead individuals about the reasons for collecting personal information.
  5. Limiting use, disclosure, and retention: Use or disclose personal information only for the purpose for which it was collected, unless the individual consents, or the use or disclosure is authorized by the Act; keep personal information only as long as necessary to satisfy the purposes; put guidelines and procedures in place for retaining and destroying personal information; keep personal information used to make a decision about a person for a reasonable time period. This should allow the person to obtain the information after the decision and pursue redress; destroy, erase or render anonymous information that is no longer required for an identified purpose or a legal requirement.
  6. Accuracy: Minimize the possibility of using incorrect information when making a decision about the individual or when disclosing information to third parties.
  7. Safeguards: Protect personal information against loss or theft; safeguard the information from unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, use or modification; protect personal information regardless of the format in which it is held.
  8. Openness: Inform your customers, clients and employees that you have policies and practices for the management of personal information; makethese policies and practices understandable and easily available.
  9. Individual access: When requested, inform individuals if you have any personal information about them; explain how it is or has been used and provide a list of any organizations to which it has been disclosed; give individuals access to their information; correct or amend any personal information if its accuracy and completeness is challenged and found to be deficient; provide a copy of the information requested, or reasons for not providing access, subject to exception set out in Section 9 of the Act; an organization should note any disagreement on the file and advise third parties where appropriate.
  10. Provide recourse: Develop simple and easily accessible complaint procedures; inform complainants of avenues or recourse. These include your organization’s own complaint procedures, those of industry associations, regulatory bodies and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada; investigate all complaints received; take appropriate measures to correct information handling practices and policies.

Individuals who feel their privacy rights have been infringed upon can complain to the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. The Commissioner’s role is that of an ombudsman, trying to find solutions to privacy problems, resolving complaints through negotiation and persuasion, and using mediation and conciliation if appropriate.

What is personal information?

Personal information includes any factual or subjective information, recorded or not, about an identifiable individual. This includes information in any form, such as:

  • age, name, ID numbers, income, ethnic origin, or blood type;
  • opinions, evaluations, comments, social status, or disciplinary actions; and
  • employee files, credit records, loan records, medical records, existence of a dispute between a consumer and a merchant, intentions (for example, to acquire goods or services, or change jobs).

Personal information does not include the name, title, business address or telephone number of an employee of an organization.

What is not covered by the Act?

  • The collection, use or disclosure of personal information by federal government organizations listed under the Privacy Act
  • Provincial or territorial governments and agents of the crown in right of a province
  • An employee’s name, title, business address or telephone number
  • An individual’s collection, use or disclosure of personal information strictly for personal purposes (e.g. personal greeting card list)
  • An organization’s collection, use or disclosure of personal information solely for journalistic, artistic or literary purposes

For more information

We recognize that gearing up to protect privacy isn’t easy. It takes time, attention and resources. But part of our job is to help you with it.

For more information to help your business prepare for the implementation of PIPEDA, contact the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada at 1-800-282-1376 and request a copy of our Guide for Businesses and Organizations: Your Privacy Responsibilities free of charge This Guide also includes a Privacy Questionnaire with some common sense questions you can use to help you get started.

For this and other useful information, such as the Commissioner’s findings under PIPEDA, you can also visit our Web site at www.priv.gc.ca or you can write or call :

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
112 Kent Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1H3
Telephone: (613) 947-1698
Toll-free: 1 (800) 282-1376
Fax: (613) 947-6850
Web site: www.priv.gc.ca
Follow us on Twitter: @privacyprivee

Did Dykstra’s reveal Marijuana Grow Op houses to Royal Lepage reality ?

In well documented court battles on our website, that lasted three years and went from 4 Landlord and Tenant Board hearings in 2013 to vexatious civil cases in 2014 being filed, to the 2 Human Rights allegation hearings brought against Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra of Barrie’s Dykstra Bros Electric and ex OPP retired officer Paul T Smith and his paralegal / property manager girlfriend Catherine A Stewart there has been no mention of their claims it was listed in the Marijuana Grow registry as stated in civil court by Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal inc.

24 Victoria Street-Barrie - Had Marijuana grow op bust
24 Victoria Street-Barrie – Had Marijuana grow op busted May 2012

The home at 24 Victoria Street was raided May 2012 and found over a 100 marijuana plants growing in the basement. The young mother, Diana T had several young kids living there and was left with the mess to clean up after Dykstra’s did nothing about the mold and mess left after the grow op was dismantled bagged and taken away. The home at 24 Victoria Street has been listed for sale by the owners, Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra of Dykstra Bros Electric and has been listed by a realtor working for Royal Lepage, with no mention of the May 2013 marijuana bust or the excessive mess and mold problems left after the grow op dismantled.

Barrie policeThe Barrie police incident report provided willingly by Diana T is discussed in another upcoming posts after Dykstra evict Diana and her kids from 24 Victoria Street and later added her as a witness to their civil claims. We will post an interview we did with Diana detailing her eviction and why she would never have been a witness for the Barrie Slum lords for their civil case after being named as a witness by Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal inc for their trial.

Dystra house on Victoria St BarrieThe Dyksta’s also own 40 Ellen Street, Barrie Ontario that was used by the tenant that lived there to grow legal medical marijuana for disability purposes. There are many posts on Privacy Violators website that discuss the methods used by Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal during the legal battle to have the tenant evicted. The tenant had filed Human Rights allegations against Dykstra Bros Electric and Landlord legal after his Human rights were violated.

The Human Rights Tribunal hearing, mediation, evidence and testimony entered by Catherine Stewart of landlord Legal inc is discussed in detail to educate the public on the lies told by the HRTO and the alleged methods unbecoming a paralegal that are being filed  again for a complete investigation by the Law Society of Upper Canada by the ex tenant. Privacy Violators website will continue to update the progress of the LSUC complaints being lodged against Catherine A Stewart of Landlord legal inc and the owner of Landlord Legal property management company working for landlords only.

Follow our posts concerning Landlords who fail to disclose to the realtors, the two houses that failed to be placed on the Marijuana Gro Op Registry list and were used for extensive marijuana grow ops, putting the potential home buyer in danger of possible health risks associated with marijuana gro ops and additional costs to repair the damage done by the pot growers.

Marijuana gro op bust
Royal Lepage list 2 marijuana grow homes for Dykstra brothers

Did Royal Lepage know ahead of time the units were gro ops, yes indeed, the ex tenant had sent a letter to them when he was evicted and Catherine Stewart stated in court the damage done and the mold issues and how the Dykstras had to now list the homes as potential dangers to the buyer but continued to list the properties.

Privacy Violators sent a potential home buyer to the home listed by Royal Lepage to see if any details of the marijuana bust or gro ops would be mentioned by the selling realtor, and it was not brought up by the realtor at all.We will be releasing the interview about the buyer, details that were discussed and his overall feelings of purchasing a marijuana gro op house.

BUYER BEWARE !!

MARIJUANA GRO OP HOMES AND THE FAILURE OF THE OWNERS TO DISCLOSE THE POTENTIAL RISKS AND HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH CONTAMINATED HOMES FROM MARIJUANA GRO OPS TO THE BUYER !!

Bill Dykstra
Bill Dykstra
Ralph Dykstra
Ralph Dykstra
Don Dykstra
Don Dykstra
Nancy-mom-300x300
Nancy Aikens mother (involved neighbor)
GEDSC DIGITAL CAMERA
Nancy Groves/Aikens

Follow our new posts about further details of the marijuana gro op registry that was proposed by the police.

Follow our posts about Realtors rights and responsibilities to the seller and the buyer of marijuana gro op homes.

 

 

Landlord Legal owner, threatens Human Rights Applicant with “Criminal Charges” on paralegals website !

Catherine-StewartA licensed member of the Law Society of Canada, Catherine April Stewart LSUC #P00985, owner of Landlord legal inc has openly threatened to have criminal charges brought against a party that has filed Human Rights allegations against her paralegal firm, LANDLORD LEGAL inc and her Dykstra Bros Electric, Ralph, Donald and William Dykstra clients.

The person referred to has been in, or is still pending with legal matters in Landlord & Tenant Board, Superior Court Canada for civil, Human Rights, and pending Supreme Court of Canada proceedings with parties mentioned throughout the posts on Privacy-Violators.com blog. Bookmark us and share our articles.

Law Society Upper Canada
Rule 2
Professionalism
2.01 INTEGRITY AND CIVILITY
Integrity
2.01 (1) A paralegal has a duty to provide legal services and discharge all responsibilities to clients, tribunals, the public and other members of the legal professions honourably and with integrity.
(2) A paralegal has a duty to uphold the standards and reputation of the
paralegal profession and to assist in the advancement of its goals, organizations and institutions.
Civility
(3) A paralegal shall be courteous and civil, and shall act in good faith with all persons with whom he or she has dealings in the course of his or her practice.
2.02 UNDERTAKINGS & TRUST CONDITIONS
2.02 (1)A paralegal shall fulfill every undertaking given and shall not give an undertaking that cannot be fulfilled.

(2) Except in exceptional circumstances, a paralegal shall give his or her undertaking in writing or confirm it in writing as soon as practicable after giving it.

(3) Unless clearly stated in the undertaking, a paralegal’s undertaking is a personal promise and it is his or her personal responsibility.

(4) A paralegal shall honor every trust condition once accepted.

RULE 4: Advocacy
duty to clients, tribunals and others, disclosure of documents, interviewing witnesses, communication with witnesses giving testimony, the paralegal as witness and dealing with unrepresented persons

Outside Interests and Public Office
(4) A paralegal who engages in another profession, business, occupation or other outside interest or who holds public office concurrently with the provision of legal services, shall not allow the outside interest or public office to jeopardize the paralegal’s integrity, independence, or competence.
(5) A paralegal shall not allow involvement in an outside interest or public office to impair the exercise of his or her independent judgment on behalf of a client.

TRUST CONDITIONS
2.02
(1) A paralegal shall fulfill every undertaking given and shall not give an undertaking that cannot be fulfilled.
(2) Except in exceptional circumstances, a paralegal shall give his or her undertaking in writing or confirm it in writing as soon as practicable after giving it.
(3) Unless clearly stated in the undertaking, a paralegal’s undertaking is a personal promise and it is his or her personal responsibility.
(4) A paralegal shall honor every trust condition once accepted.

RULE 7: Duty to Licensees and Others – duty to act with courtesy and good faith

RULE 8: Practice Management – general obligations, marketing, advertising and insurance

RULE 9: Responsibility to the Law Society – communications from the Law Society, duties to report, professional misconduct and conduct unbecoming a paralegal

The Law Society has never been notified by paralegal Catherine Stewart, owner of Landlord legal inc, that allegations of illegal entry and illegal lock change had been brought against this paralegal Aug 2013 in Barrie LTB court, by the HR applicant and NONE of the accused showed for the hearing in Sept 2013.

The Law Society has not been notified by Landlord Legal inc that there has been pending Human Rights allegations against her legal firm since May 2014, and is now including a pending amendment for allegations of personal Human Rights breaches.


The Human Rights (HR) Applicant has a pending claim and allegedly added Catherine April Stewart as a pending personal Respondent to the alleged HR discrimination allegations brought up by an ex tenant of Dykstra Bros Electric of Barrie, Ontario.

cropped-cbk.jpgLegal documents were delivered Aug 11 2015 to the Respondents address on file for pending Human Rights proceedings against her clients and her legal firm, located at 117 Bayfield Street Barrie, Ontario when Catherine April Stewart tried AGAIN, to have the Applicant charged, for trespassing, or whatever the police would be willing to charge him with from her allegations !!

The Barrie Police officer in question, harassed the ex tenant further, when he called the Human Rights applicants, personal cell number.

The officer demanded that the Human Rights Applicant come into the police station, again for questioning, the Applicant told him “NO FUCKING WAY” and told him to stop calling the cell number, stop harassing him and talk to Mr Graves, the person who delivered the legal documents if he had a problem.The phone number was changed because of the constant harassment and demands of the Barrie police from these harassing and vexatious complaints.

Another false allegation to the Barrie police involved Detective Cst Steele, in which he called the Human Rights Applicants cell phone as well and THREATENED to have a WARRANT ISSUED if he did not turn himself into Barrie Police.

The allegations of Howard Tavroges and Catherine Stewart stemming from the HR applicant ATTENDING a public and open forum Landlord and tenant Board courtroom, to obtain FURTHER PROOF of Howards Tavroges conflict of interest allegations, releasing private and privileged information allegations, to Landlord Legal inc, while he had signed working as a representative for Orillia Legal Clinic,in a paralegal capacity for the ex tenant.
Tavroges signed the joint agreement with Ms Stewart on July 18th 2013 for an LTB Order, which she made the tenant fight her firm in Superior Court to retrieve monies owed, while Mr Tavroges had been or was representing Landlord Legal inc, in LTB matters at the same time legal proceedings connected were pending in 2013 and 2014, and still pending in 2016.

” It was a hiccup of the law ” ~ Quote by Barrie police detective Steele, after calling his cell number given to him from Stewarts files, and threatening a warrant for the arrest of the Human rights Applicants, after receiving complaints and further vexatious and harassing allegations from C A Stewart & Howard Tavroges.

Detective Steeles as a police officer, C A Stewart and H Tavroges as licensed paralegals, should have known or aught to known, Human rights Codes, the Criminal Code of Canada as well as, RTA 2006,LSUC Rules of Conduct, Rules of Procedures for proceedings and all other RIGHTS of the HR Applicant.

Other alleged police contact, threats and harassment will be posted on PRIVACY VIOLATORS website, when ALL the requested freedom of Information documents, video recordings and incident reports are collected.

Stewart and Tavroges as paralegals should have known or aught to have known the LTB Tribunal was an open and public forum for EVERYBODY, and as such the Applicant can attend whenever he feels the need to watch justice in action or whatever other reason he chooses to do so.

C A Stewart should have known or aught to have known not to obstruct legal methods of delivering legal documents and would probably not be served as often, in front of her colleges and peers, at the Landlord and Tenant Board Tribunal courtroom, located on the 2nd floor of 34 Simcoe Street, Barrie Ontario, Canada.

The documents were hand delivered to the legal office of Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal inc, by a Mr B Graves, and not the involved party, though he had the right according to the Rules of Procedures to do so, when Stewart called the Barrie police again, this time, Cst Bareo (not sure of name spelling, but will be checking, when freedom of information and incident report requests are completed for ALL the incidents.)

Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra of Dykstra Bros Electric ltd / Paul T Smith / Catherine A Stewart / Landlord legal inc are ALL Respondents to the Human rights allegations, and have claimed to have hired Toronto based David Strashin, Sept 2015 to represent ALL parties, after paralegal Catherine A Stewart has represented involved parties since May 15th 2013, and alleged to have seriously delayed legal proceedings deliberately.

David Strashin has NOT FOLLOWED the Rules of Procedures for the HRTO 16250-13 (Dykstra Bros Electric) & HRTO 17699-14 (Landlord Legal inc / C A Stewart / Paul Smith). David Strashin is known to have other past business references, or relationships from 2011, with Landlord Legal as mentioned on the paralegals website on “In the News” category on, Hoarding Tenants.

The owner of Landlord legal inc, paralegal Catherine Stewart, has called the Barrie police on many unsubstantiated and false allegations against the HR Applicant since May 2013 when she was hired by Ralph Dykstra, Donald Dykstra and William Dykstra.

The property manager Catherine Stewart and her Dykstra Bros are alleged to have illegally entered/altered locks on Aug 15 2013.

Catherine Stewart, Ralph Dykstra, Donald Dykstra and William Dykstra DID NOT SHOW for the tenants rights application CET 33911-13 that accused them of the break in and lock change while the Barrie police watched.

Catherine Stewart calls the Barrie police on FALSE PRETENSES to “KEEP THE PEACE” knowing an LTB ORDER was in place, signed personally by Catherine Stewart ( SEE PARALEGAL RULES OF UNDERTAKINGS) and the tenant had legal possession of his rental unit !!. Officers M Beard and Cst Turner incident reports stating they told Stewart she DID NOT HAVE LEGAL DOCUMENTATION or the RIGHT TO ENTER but Catherine Stewart orders it done anyways !!

The paralegals alleged boyfriend Paul T Smith is also accused of Human rights violations against the past tenant caused when Paul Smith attended 40 Ellen Street, Barrie, Ontario in May 2013 to perform duties for Dykstra Bros, and Catherine Stewart.

Paralegals and Lawyers should not or should know NOT TO THREATEN or harass parties they are involved in proceedings against with CRIMINAL ARREST, FURTHER LEGAL THREATS or any kind of threat meant to harm the other party or to delay, coerce or influence the proceedings they are involved in.

Catherine-Stewart-pic1-150x120Landlord Legal inc owner has openly threatened an ex tenant with criminal charges on her Landlord legal website while Human Rights/Civil allegations pending ( http://landlordlegal.ca DEC 2015 to Jan 22nd 2016) of her paralegal firm, alleged boyfriend and Dykstra Bros electric owners allegedly have been defending alleged discrimination against the Human Rights of the tenant.

Images showing the serious threats to the ex tenant, Tenant Rights Applicant and the Human Rights Applicant made from the owner, Catherine April Stewart,for Landlord Legal inc publicly advertised paralegal services website threatening CRIMINAL CHARGES after numerous unsubstantiated and FALSE ALLEGATIONS made to the Barrie Police.
Read the posts surrounding the Barrie police confrontations and the paralegals attempts to have the Human Rights Applicant charged with anything !!:  http://privacy-violators.com/the-posts-watcher/barrie-police-continue-to-harass-ex-tenant-for-barrie-paralegal-catherine-april-stewart/

Barrie police refuse to charge the paralegal numerous times with the numerous unsubstantiated and false allegations she makes, of the ongoing harassment, allegations of false documents submitted for legal proceedings or for Applicant to press criminal harassment charges for the break in and illegal lock change witnessed by attending police officers and instructing paralegal that she had NO RIGHT or LEGAL DOCUMENT required to enter 40 Ellen Street, Barrie Ont on August 15th 2013. when Catherine Stewart and the Dykstras’ were present and proceeded to order the locksmith to cut security chain and enter unit illegally.

.

Catherine Stewart, owner of Landlord Legal filed civil matters Oct 2013 against the ex tenant, knowing of the pending HUMAN RIGHTS matters, amended the SCC 1851-13 application after a year to a personal claim, being told the matter was in the wrong court and needed to go to a higher court to deal with the publication of legal proceedings against her and her Dykstra Bros Electric company of Barrie clients.

The paralegal website also depicts or has publicized a photo of Nima Wilson, a black female tenant, that was evicted several times and the story of the tenants involvement with the process, further harassing and embarrassing the poor tenant for Landlord-Legal-website-page-and-info-1Landlord legal paralegal firms own eviction advertising purposes for LANDLORDS to “EVICT TROUBLED TENANTS”

Catherine Stewart’s personal SCC1851-13 allegations are still pending, and public record, as of Feb 2016 and after she filed original claim in Oct 2013 to delay the Law Society complaints and the Human Rights allegations against her alleged boyfriend, her firm and Dykstra Bros Electric of Barrie owners’.

The SCC1851-13 civil matter filed by C A Stewart is still pending, as Stewart has taken NO ACTION after being told it was IN THE WRONG court.

Catherine Stewart also claimed she had hired David Strashin to represent her for the higher court in July 2014 but again has not taken any action to further her claims.

The Applicant has claimed his Charter Rights, Fundamental Freedoms 2(b) and will continue to defend the public forums, open court and HR publicized findings in all proceedings he is involved in with Catherine Stewart, Paul T Smith,Ralph Dykstra,Donald Dykstra and William Dykstra.

The paralegal should have informed her clients the LTB, Civil and Human Rights are public forums and public documents to the proceedings and freedom of information requested are public documents as stated on the bottom of the LTB forms and additional forms filed for proceedings and can be used as such.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know not to create “CONFLICT of INTEREST” and if so, to remove themselves from ALL legal proceedings they are directly involved in.

Howard tavrogesHoward Tavroges is accused of releasing paralegal privileged information to owner Catherine Stewart after working for the Orillia Community Catherine-StewartLegal Clinic and representing the HR applicant during LTB matters for the July 18th 2013 Joint Submission agreement and further working for Landlord legal representing her firm in LTB matters while she fights the LTB ORDER signed by Catherine Stewart and Howard Tavroges.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know they are to advise clients and not act illegally for the clients they represent

 

CHARTER OF RIGHTS
Section 2(b)
Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication

You have the right to think and believe what you want. You have the right to express those thoughts, without being afraid of being punished or silenced. The Supreme Court of Canada has said these freedoms are important for:

self-fulfillment
participation in social and political decision-making
the free exchange of ideas

Freedom of the press is essential in a democracy. Newspapers and other media are an important way for people to learn about what is going on and express their ideas.

Paralegals and what is known as “SHARP PRACTICE”

This post refers to the term “Sharp Practice” in relationship to the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) Rules of Conduct, for paralegals and lawyers, refers to and occurs when the LSUC licensed parties use methods to abuse the process of legal proceedings that are not following the rules of the Law Society, not warranted, not standardized or legal, meant to hide their clients and disrupt or delay ANY legal proceedings or ANY COURT matters they are involved in !!.

Sharp practice is a pejorative phrase to describe sneaky or cunning behavior that is technically within the rules of the law but borders on being unethical

Gaming the system (also referred to as gaming the rules, bending the rules, abusing the system, cheating the system, milking the system, playing the system, or working the system) can be defined as using the rules and procedures meant to protect a system in order, instead, to manipulate the system for a desired outcome

Legal abuse refers to abuses associated with both civil and criminal legal action. Abuse can originate from nearly any part of the legal system, including frivolous and vexatious litigants, abuses by law enforcement, incompetent, careless or corrupt attorneys and misconduct from the judiciary itself.

Legal abuse is responsible not only for injustice, but also harm to physical, psychological and societal health

Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender.

A single action, even a frivolous one, is usually not enough to raise a litigant to the level of being declared vexatious. Rather, a pattern of frivolous legal actions is typically required to rise to the level of vexatious. Repeated and severe instances by a single lawyer or firm can result in eventual disbarment.

SHARP PRACTICE is frowned upon by the Law Society of Upper Canada Rules of Conduct.Many Paralegals and Lawyers use Sharp Practice in their legal firms participation in the legal system further causing back logs of legal proceedings needlessly in defense of their firm or their clients.

Examples of Sharp Practice, is not showing, or notifying parties, using acting agents, locksmiths and other parties related to their cause, that have NO PHYSICAL BUSINESS ADDRESS anywhere, to deliver Court Summonses when they are, or clients are involved in legal proceedings.

Remember SHARP Practice = do whatever it takes, does not matter if they present at, or commit a criminal act, the LSUC rules, the Criminal Code, PIPEDA, Chart Rights, Human Rights or the Rules and procedures in any court proceeding you or your client are involved in.

Should you breach other peoples INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS if your a well known LANDLORD ONLY RIGHTS ACTIVIST  ?
Rights are for everybody…not just landlords !

How do you justify defending the rights of anyone… when you are alleged to have constantly violate the rights of others ??

Eviction Specialist, C A Stewart of Landlord legal inc refused to accept her alleged boyfriends Paul t Smith summons issued June 2013, delivered to her legal office at 117 Bayfield Street when Smith acted as an agent on Landlord legal inc behalf and her law firm was directly involved in the LTB Tribunal, and HR matters the tenant had filed.

Eviction Specialist, C A Stewart of Landlord legal inc, uses agents or sub contractors companies like Paul Richardsons’ Central Lock & Key, that has NO BRICK & MORTAR STORE, to enter tenants units, change locks and other duties she needs done. Central Lock & Key were hard to get a summons served to, as they are MOBILE UNIT ONLY and Mr Richardson son, Cody Richardson threatened the tenant. and tried to hit his vehicle with the Central lock & Key company van while attempting to serve them summonses for Superior Court Civil matters.

Paul Richardson saves a phone recording for 2 years from attempts to get him served for LTB matters in 2013, and lies about the date of the recording, and plays it on the witness stand to allegedly deceive the court, and help C A Stewarts Dykstra clients in court.

Using “acting agents” or “sub contractors” that are next to impossible to summons, or that paralegals can block access to, is a very common practice done among paralegals and lawyers who practice SHARP PRACTICE frowned by the LSUC.

Landlord Legal signs and enters testimony and allegations from Rob Scruton that have not been heard in any court, not even once into Dykstra civil matters.

Landlord Legal enters and serves documents, evidence and her signed statement of Scrutons testimony breaking rules of procedures and rules of a fair proceeding.

Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal, and her clients Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra of Dykstra Bros Electric, DO NOT SHOW AGAIN for the motions to dismiss the evidence and testimony Stewart entered against the rules of procedures for civil hearing SCC#1852-13.

Landlord Legal places Rob Srcuton on her witness list, though she serves against the rules by not giving “proper notice” or the required “will says” to interview the surprise witness from Innisfil, Ontario, Canada. Stewart does this surprise tactic less than 2 weeks before a hearing date. All evidence and will says were court ordered to be delivered to all parties prior to the Landlord Legal inc tactic used.

Catherine Stewart should have known or aught to have known the rules of procedures for small claims court.

Catherine Stewart of landlord legal should have known or aught to have known it was wrong to sign affidavits for her witness, Rob Scruton, when Stewart is directly involved in the Civil proceedings and Human Rights allegations against her firm. False testimony and conflict of interest concerns and allegations just to influence a proceeding Landlord legal and her Dykstra clients are directly involved in.

Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal should have known or aught to have known the testimony she signed for Rob Scruton had never seen one day in court, but enters his testimony she signed anyways to a legal proceeding she was involved in directly.

Paul T Smith, retired OPP officer of 30 years is another witness NOT ON THE WITNESS LIST EITHER, Catherine Stewart of landlord legal inc has not provided proper notice or the will says, for her alleged boyfriend. Paul T Smith ends up on the stand in civil court Dec 2015, for C A Sewarts Dykstra clients, although he is connected to breaching Human Rights while acting as an agent for Landlord legal and Dykstra Bros Electric,  and had absolutely no knowledge of the allegations in her Dykstra clients proceedings.

Landlord Legal should have known it was wrong to keep using alleged boyfriend Paul Smith, to serve the documents against the rules of procedures, when her alleged boyfriend and Stewart have pending Human rights allegations against them since May 2014.

After not showing for the motions to dismiss the evidence, Stewart has the motions heard the same day and in front of the same Judge hearing the Dykstra hearing.

Stewart also files another motion to split ( after motioning to join ) her personal SCC#1851-13 civil matter filed the same day as Dykstras claim, which Stewart was  told by the Judge in March 2014, was filed in the wrong court to deal with her demands to have this website shut down.Filed Oct 2013 and still in the wrong court in February 0f 2016…can you say harassment and vexatious

Landlord Legal motions to bring her personal civil matter to be heard with her clients in 2014, HR applicant demanding rights to a speedy trial hearing

Paralegals and Lawyers have an obligation to Minimize costs during ALL legal proceedings against ANY party.

Paralegals and Lawyers have the obligation to HONOR UNDERTAKINGS they have agreed to and have signed on behalf of their clients.

Paralegals and Lawyers have the obligation to protect confidential and privileged information and documents they have obtained.

Paralegals and lawyers have the obligation to follow ALL THE RULES OF CONDUCT of the Law Society of Upper Canada.

Paralegals and Lawyers have the obligation to follow THE RULES OF PROCEDURES in all legal proceedings.

Licensed Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to have known all the Rules and Regulations of the ;

  1. Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO)
  2. Criminal Code of Canada
  3. Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA)
  4. Personal Information and Electronic Document Act (PIPEDA)
  5. Residential Tenancies Act 2006 (RTA)
  6. Rules of Procedure in ALL COURTS representing any party
  7. Rules of Conduct (LSUC)
  8. Should be Knowledgeable in the area they practice

Paralegals and Lawyers should not or should know NOT TO THREATEN or harass parties they are involved in proceedings against with CRIMINAL ARREST, FURTHER LEGAL THREATS, NO TRESPASS OR NO CONTACT LETTERS or any kind of threat meant to harm the other party or to delay, coerce or influence the proceedings they are involved in.

Catherine-StewartLandlord Legal inc owner has openly threatened an ex tenant with criminal charges on her Landlord legal website while Human Rights/Civil allegations pending ( http://landlordlegal.ca DEC 2015 to Jan 22nd 2016) of her paralegal firm, alleged boyfriend and Dykstra Bros electric owners allegedly have been defending alleged discrimination against the Human Rights of the tenant.

Images showing the serious threats to the ex tenant, Tenant Rights Applicant and the Human Rights Applicant made from the owner, Catherine April Stewart,for Landlord Legal inc publicly advertised paralegal services website threatening CRIMINAL CHARGES after numerous unsubstantiated and FALSE ALLEGATIONS made to the Barrie Police.
Read the posts surrounding the Barrie police confrontations and the paralegals attempts to have the Human Rights Applicant charged with anything !!:  http://privacy-violators.com/the-posts-watcher/do-barrie-police-continue-to-harass-ex-tenant-for-barrie-paralegal-catherine-april-stewart/Barrie police logo

Barrie police refuse to charge the paralegal numerous times with the numerous unsubstantiated and false allegations she makes, of the ongoing harassment, allegations of false documents submitted for legal proceedings or for Applicant to press criminal harassment charges for the break in and illegal lock change witnessed by attending police officers and instructing paralegal that she had NO RIGHT or LEGAL DOCUMENT required to enter 40 Ellen Street, Barrie Ont on August 15th 2013. when Catherine Stewart and the Dykstras’ were present and proceeded to order the locksmith to cut security chain and enter unit illegally.

 

Landlord Legal website.

Catherine Stewart, owner of Landlord Legal filed civil matters Oct 2013 against the ex tenant, knowing of the pending HUMAN RIGHTS matters, amended the SCC 1851-13 application after a year to a personal claim, being told the matter was in the wrong court and needed to go to a higher court to deal with the publication of legal proceedings against her and her Dykstra Bros Electric company of Barrie clients.

Catherine Stewart has locksmiths attend to remove locks after 2 Barrie police officers tell Landlord Legal, that it is  “not legal” and “no proper documentation” to do so, but DOES ANYWAYS  illegally but states on her website the proper way to get to the SHERIFFS’ office and get the proper paperwork… We figured it is a case of “do as I say and not as I do , or teach”. 

Catherine A Stewart of Landlord legal also gives lectures that instructs and teaches landlords not to put tenants on the defensive as well, and to “GO LOOK IN THE WINDOWS WHEN TENANT NOT HOME. wow, can anyone say Trespassing,not to mention teaching  landlords, real estate persons, agents and other attendees a serious tenant invasion of privacy.

Catherine Stewarts personal SCC1851-13 allegations are still pending, and are public record, as of Feb 2016 and after filing original claim in Oct 2013, to delay the Law Society complaints, and Human Rights allegations against her company, her alleged boyfriend, and Dykstra Bros Electric owners’.

The SCC1851-13 civil matter filed by C A Stewart is still pending, as Stewart has taken NO ACTION after being told it was IN THE WRONG court.

Catherine Stewart also claimed she had hired David Strashin to represent her for the higher court in July 2014 but again has not taken any action to further her claims.

The Applicant has claimed his Charter Rights, Fundamental Freedoms 2(b) and will continue to defend the public forums, open court and HR publicized findings in all proceedings he is involved in with Catherine Stewart, Paul T Smith,Ralph Dykstra,Donald Dykstra and William Dykstra.

The paralegal should have informed her clients the LTB, Civil and Human Rights are public forums and public documents to the proceedings and freedom of information requested are public documents as stated on the bottom of the LTB forms and additional forms filed for proceedings and can be used as such.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know not to create “CONFLICT of INTEREST” and if so, to remove themselves from ALL legal proceedings they are directly involved in.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know they are to advise clients and not act illegally for the clients they represent.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know they are to advise and regulate those clients on how to behave during proceedings with courtesy, civility, integrity and honor and not bring unrelated matters, disrupt proceedings with threats, unsubstantiated claims or any other method used to intimidate or influence a proceeding.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know they are not allowed to be present at or participate in illegal acts like break ins or illegal lock changes.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know it is wrong and against the rules of procedures to block all CONTACT when the legal representative has come on record and has the obligation to receive legal documents required for legal proceedings without justifiable reasons or a properly applied for peace bond, injunction or court order that states the reasons and the remedy.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know NOT TO FILE vexatious legal proceedings meant to delay proceedings and harm applicants financial situation causing further intentional harm.

Paralegals and lawyers should know or aught to know the rules and responsibility governing minimizing losses and the rules for UNDERTAKINGS.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know to “CONTACT” other parties involved if “NOT ATTENDING” within a reasonable amount of time, to not further costs from “witness fees”, waste the “courts time” and waste  “applicants time”

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know the rules and, to be civil, courteous and respectful to everyone, and to respect ALL RIGHTS given to the Applicants or Respondents in any legal proceeding.

PIPEDA and your practice

Paralegals and Lawyers should have known or aught to have known to act with Civility,Integrity and Honesty at all times when dealing with another party or their representatives.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to have known it was wrong and illegal to enter or misrepresent documents or information into legal proceedings when the document does NOT EXIST in any stated court files.

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to have known to keep confidential documents, court evidence and other privileged legal information secured and away from other tenants they rent to in the same building as their LEGAL OFFICES.

Meaford office closed June 2015

Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know to CONTACT legal proceedings and ALL PARTIES, they have come ON RECORD for the proceedings with phone,fax, and contact information and to NOTIFY ALL PROCEEDINGS of ANY CHANGES to office closures and changes to the information they had provided to the courts and the opposing parties.

Landlord Legal cubicle officeCatherine Stewart of Landlord Legal rents 2 buildings to an account company firm, who has received many confidential legal documents unsecured several times on behalf of Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal inc, from hand deliveries and process severs.

Paralegals and Lawyers who switch offices, and block communication from parties involved in legal proceedings are in fact breaking the rules of procedures, hiding their clients and preventing the ease of communication meant to make legal proceedings transparent, easier and straight forward is one form of known  “HARD PRACTICE”.

There are a lot of paralegals that do “SHARP PRACTICE” to make sure their clients have an edge over the Applicants to further financial stress, hinder, delay and frustrate the involved parties and interfere with the legal processes.

Read the stories surrounding Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal and her clients, Ralph Dykstra, Landlord Legal owner Catherine April StewartWilliam Dykstra, Donald Dykstra, owners of Dykstra Bros Electric of Barrie as well as the allegations against Landlord legal and Catherine Stewart, use your judgement and see if you feel that Landlord legal inc uses the frowned upon Hard Practices in her legal firm.

Let Privacy Violators know of ANY paralegal or Lawyer that you have been involved with uses methods listed here on our website to gain advantages over the other party they are involved with in legal proceedings.

The Human Rights allegations against Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra of Dykstra Bros Electric company of Barrie, Ontario started in 2013 and proceedings continue at the HRTO as of January 20th 2016 when David Strashin, apparently came on record but has not notified the HRTO or involved parties of this fact and according to the HRTO Rules of Procedures during proceedings.

The Human Rights allegations against Paul Smith, Catherine Stewart and Landlord Legal  paralegal firm of Barrie, Ontario started in 2013 and proceedings continue at the HRTO as of January 20th 2016, when David Strashin, apparently came on record to represent the LTB paralegal who has represented, and delayed the Dykstra Bros allegations, for the last 3 years, in HRTO, but has not notified the HRTO or involved parties of this fact according to the HRTO Rules of Procedures.

With the HR Applicant filing many LSUC allegations, complaints, and concerns starting back from May 24th 2013, with many more complaints to file up to February 2016, Landlord legal has not even been investigated once in the last 3 years by the Law Society of Upper Canada, or the Barrie police from the many complaints filed by the applicant while waiting for the pending HR matter to finish.
Stewart had in Oct 2013 blocked the Law Society complaints by filing and stalling vexatious claims to delay the complaints and the human Rights allegations filed against her legal firm, boyfriend and her Dykstra clients.

3 years and STILL working as a paralegal in our legal system, with many pending unanswered allegations, including illegal entry, illegal lock change, abuse of process allegations, Rules of procedures breaches,entering false documents into legal proceedings allegations, harassment allegations, threatening, coercing and the Human Rights allegations against her legal firm, boyfriend and her Dykstra Bros Electric clients, but still in the legal system.

The HR applicant has requested a time extension from the Law Society of Upper Canada, to file the many allegations and concerns regarding Landlord legal inc, Howard Tavroges and new claims against David Strashin of Toronto. Read the posts on the Law Society of Upper Canada refusing to investigate complaints filed June 2013 against Landlord legal inc

The Law Society of Upper Canada complaints filed against Howard Tavroges, and Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal inc of 117 Bayfield Street, Barrie have been delayed when Stewart claims over legal proceedings are ongoing and the LSUC delayed investigating the May 2013 claims brought forth by the ex tenant over privacy invasion and illegal break in and illegal lock change after a mediated settlement July 18 2013 in LTB Tribunal matters.

Additional methods known to be Sharp Practice will be added to the above compilation as time and need to educate warrant it.

Report Sharp practice and additional  methods used here and we can discuss the rise in court proceedings caused by the needless delays of the paralegal or Lawyers involved.

CHARTER OF RIGHTS
Section 2(b)
Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication

You have the right to think and believe what you want. You have the right to express those thoughts, without being afraid of being punished or silenced. The Supreme Court of Canada has said these freedoms are important for:

self-fulfillment
participation in social and political decision-making
the free exchange of ideas

Freedom of the press is essential in a democracy. Newspapers and other media are an important way for people to learn about what is going on and express their ideas.

Section 15.

Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

All Lives Matter !! .. Except at Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario

The hash tags #Black lives matter and #All lives matter have been the public issue and in the news over the last couple of years.No matter what your race,creed,religion, or background we are suppose to have protection from the wrong doers in today’s society.

All lives matter is not something that Renu Mandhane, head of the Human Rights Commission, can say about the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, located at 655 Bay Street, where they operate their Mickey Mouse HRTO court system in Toronto, Canada.

The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) is run by Registrar Richard Hennessy and is suppose to have lawyers, acting as impartial mediators when dealing with Human Rights allegations brought up to the Tribunal to be heard.

The HRTO constantly breaches its own mandate when dealing with issues brought forth by Canadian citizens who attempt to right the wrong done to them concerning violating their Human Rights in Canada.

Quoted from Social Justice Tribunals Ontario website : The Code prohibits:

  • Discrimination against a person because he or she has a relationship, association or dealing with someone who is identified by one of the grounds listed above.
  • Reprisal (a legal term that means punishment or retaliation) or threats of reprisal, because a person has either claimed their rights, refused to discriminate against someone else or was a participant in a human rights proceeding.
  • Sexual solicitation or advances by a person who is in a position to give or deny a benefit.
  • Reprisal or threats of reprisal for rejecting a sexual solicitation or advance.

Quoted from the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario website :

What We Do


If you believe you have experienced discrimination or harassment, you can file an application with the HRTO. The HRTO resolves claims of discrimination and harassment brought under the Human Rights Code in a fair, just and timely way.

The HRTO first offers parties the opportunity to settle the dispute through mediation. If the parties do not agree to mediation, or mediation does not resolve the application, the HRTO holds a hearing.

Hearings and mediations are held in Toronto, Hamilton, Kingston, London, North Bay, Ottawa, Sarnia, Sault Ste. Marie, St. Catharines, Sudbury, Timmins, Thunder Bay and Windsor. See also: Practice Direction on Hearings in Regional Centres.

HRTO decisions are made by adjudicators called vice-chairs or members. HRTO adjudicators have experience, knowledge and training in human rights law and issues.

The HRTO’s Rules of Procedure, Practice Directions and Policies apply to its proceedings

The HRTO is one of seven tribunals which form Social Justice Tribunals Ontario (SJTO). HRTO does its work in keeping with the core values of SJTO:

  • Accessibility
  • Fairness and independence
  • Timeliness
  • Transparency
  • Professionalism and public service

Harassment is a form of discrimination. The Code defines harassment as “a course of vexatious comment or conduct that is known, or ought reasonably to be known, to be unwelcome”. It includes offensive comments or actions directed at you that are related to one or more of the Code grounds.

Diane Lynn Smith of Barrie practiced law illegally under several names !

Law Society of Upper CanadaThe complaints to the Upper Law Society of Canada, against Diane Smith of Smith Paralegal Services, were originally filed on June 8th 2013.

A Barrie tenant alleged that Diane Smith had harassed him by sending a letter representing herself as a legal “lawyer” and representative for Nancy Groves, when she was not legal to do so.

In the complaint to the Upper Law Society of Canada (ULSC)  it had come to light that Diane Smith had been practicing law, but her Paralegal license was not in good standing with the ULSC for her to do so.

It was also determined that Smith Paralegal Services was engaging in professional misconduct when she harassed a tenant who was involved in several pending court cases with his landlords and had sent the letter that made references to her fees as “Attorney fees”.

Upon filing a civismithl claim in Barrie against Smith paralegal Services, an investigation has revealed that Diane Smith had been advertising and practicing law in Ontario under the name Diane Merry Paralegal Services, with the same address and cell number that had used in her other law practice.

There are no records for Diane Merry of Merry Paralegal Services, 58 Masters Drive, Barrie listed in the Upper Law Society of Canada   “Lawyer and Paralegal Directory“.

ALWAYS CHECK THE LEGAL STATUS AND COMPLAINTS FOR ANY LAWYER OR PARALEGAL YOU HIRE, OR HAS CONTACTED YOU FOR ANY MATTER !

Further investigation has revealed that Diane Smith had sold or transferred her home at 58 Masters Drive, Barrie, Ontario, to M Phillips, on November 1 st, 2013, a couple of weeks before Diane Smith was scheduled to appear in front of the  Upper Law Society Hearing Panel December 13th, 2013.

Diane Smith DID NOT APPEAR before the ULSC panel to answer for the allegations against her and now appears to be hiding her assets, knowing the outcome of the ULSC allegations and pending lawsuits filed against her.

Other addresses or associated businesses that Smith Paralegal Services has been connected with;

Justice Served
125 Anne Street South
Barrie, Ontario
L4N 7B6

Smith Paralegal Services
58 Masters Drive
Barrie, Ont
L4M 6 W9

D Merry Paralegal Services
58 Masters Drive
Barrie, Ontario
L4M 6W9

Did Howard Tavroges violate Client Privilege & Privacy Rights working for Landlord Legal inc at same time as her civil lawsuits and allegations ?

NEW UPCOMING NEWS AND POSTS

Howard tavrogesWe will be looking into and releasing new posts on Howard Tavroges, and his new job with Catherine April Stewart of Landlord Legal in Barrie Landlord and Tenant tribunal with Privacy allegations and conflict of interest issues being raised against Tavroges.

Howard Tavroges Upper Law Society of Canada recent profile was changed and now shows as a private practice with a Barrie address, but Tavroges has knowingly kept the Community Legal Clinic phone number and fax number (deceiving people) , listed on the Upper Law Society website, although he knows that he no longer works for the clinic since last year and has additional confidential information concerning the tenants pending court actions against C A Stewart and her clients, Dykstra Bros Electric.

The tenant has noted this and many more details in his inquires to the ULSC over  many concerns about Howard Tavroges and April Stewart of landlord legal that need to be answered.

** Not to mention the huge PRIVACY CONFLICTS & CONFLICT OF INTEREST allegations brought up in the Ntavrogese-image_400x400EW and pending complaints to the Upper Law Society of Canada concerning Landlord legal inc and Howard Tavroges.

We are looking at all the legal options the Barrie tenant has against Howard Tavroges & April Stewart of Landlord legal inc after our private investigation revealed disturbing and serious conflicts of interest issues with April Stewarts, interests and letters, to the legal clinic of his private business affairs, only known to Howard Tavroges when he represented, advised and mediated for the tenant previously in LTB case against Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal inc.

We will be releasing an update to the previous civil case SCC #1546-13.. Dykstras lose motions.. finally paid July 25th 2013 Sean Henry court order.

We will be releasing an update to the August 2013 ULSC complaints previously filed against Catherine April Stewart of Landlord legal inc.

We will be releasing an update on “How The Upper Law Society of Canada Investigates Your Complaints !”

We will be releasing an update to the SCC #1852-13 case that April Stewart of Landlord legal inc had filed on behalf of Dykstra Bros Electric against their tenant. ** Stewart asks to withdraw case..Barrie Tenant files $25,000 counter claim

We will be releasing an update to the SCC #1851-13 case that Stewart filed for herself against a Barrie tenant. ** Stewart asks to withdraw case.. Barrie Tenant files $25,000 counter claim

We will be releasing an update and details to the $25,000 counter claim filed by the tenant against April Stewart & Dykstra Bros Electric

We will be releasing an update and details to the pending Central lock & Key of Barrie civil lawsuit being filed.

We will be releasing an update and details to to Privacy-Violators intent to file a Lawsuit to defend its Constitutional Rights against April Stewart & Dykstra Bros Electric when Stewart sent a Cease and Desist letter and interfered with its operations without obtaining a proper court injunction.

We will be releasing an update and details to the Best Hosting Canada.com intent to file a class action lawsuit for all the accounts that are on its servers, against April Stewart and Dykstra Bros Electric for infringing and interfering with its business operations and the websites Constitutional Rights when April Stewart sent a Cease and Desist letter without obtaining a proper court injunction.

We will be releasing an update and details of the Barrie tenants intentions of filing a lawsuit against the Queen and the Attorney General for the Barrie Police conduct and Tenants Rights violations stemming from an  incident involving Ralph Dykstra, Bill Dykstra, Don Dykstra, Central Lock & key and April Stewart at the Dykstras property at 40 Ellen Street,Barrie Ontario,August 15th 2013.

We will be releasing an update on the Human Rights HRTO #16250-13 case filed December 2013 against Ralph Dykstra, Bill Dykstra and Don Dykstra of Dykstra Bros Electric inc.

We will be releasing an update on the Human Rights case HRTO # 17699-14 filed May 2014 against April Stewart of Landlord Legal and her employee Paul Smith, who disclosed personal, confidential and private Medical Marihuana Access Program information in front of birthday guests during an intent to enter on May 23rd 2013.  * April Stewart had a do not contact or enter her properties against the tenant and also refused the summons from the Barrie Police for her employee, Paul Smith when it was issued for the CET #33911-13 LTB hearing in June 2013.

We will be releasing NEW POSTS on other Privacy violations we have found.

Did Executive Director Micheal Hefferon, lawyer Holly Gnomes and law student James Roundell  from the Community Legal Clinic in Orillia break ULSC rules for not protecting their client by not disclosing Howard Tavroges worked for Catherine April Stewart of Landlord Legal inc.while the Community Legal Clinic represented the tenant against C A Stewart and her clients in a Civil Court matter SCC #1546-13 to retrieve funds originally mediated by Howard Tavroges on July 15th 2013 with Catherine Stewart ?

71 Colborne Street East
P.O Box 275
Orillia, Ontario
L3V 6J6

Orillia: 705-326-6444
Toll Free: 1-800-461-8953
Fax: 705-326-9757

Toll Free Fax: 1-877-326-9757

 

Email: info@communitylegalclinic.ca

– See more at: http://www.communitylegalclinic.ca/content.aspx?pID=283#sthash.JdCFPv4Y.dpuf

We are asking the Upper Law Society of Canada that very question!!

We are asking for the ULSC to explain the rules of  client privileged information, conflict of interest and paralegal privacy violations with the NEW claims brought forward to investigate C A Stewart for her involvement in the August 15th 2013 lock removal incident which she had called the Barrie police on false pretenses and they stood and watched as the tenants rights were violated .

We will press the issue and continue to update these posts as they are completed.

We will be releasing details of Barrie tenants intent at legal actions against Mike Harris of Coin Hoarders Treasury, a commercial tenant of Dykstra Bros Electric with allegations of illegally monitoring the tenant for Dykstra Bros Electric use, throughout the tenants ordeals last year between Ralph Dykstra, Don Dykstra and Bill Dykstra.

We will be releasing an update and additional details to the Civil Court Claim #766 filed against Diane Smith paralegal. AKA Diane Merry Paralegal

 LOTS TO READ… LOTS TO LEARN !!

STAND UP AND PROTECT YOUR RIGHTS !!

Famous Privacy Quotes

Privacy quotes from famous people that we have found. Email us any that you want added to our list.

Annabel Pitcher “I stared up at the sky and raised my middle finger, just in case God was watching. I don’t like being spied on.”
~ Annabel Pitcher, My Sister Lives on the Mantelpiece

 

Katherine Neville“Privacy – like eating and breathing – is one of life’s basic requirements.”
~Katherine Neville

 

Marlon Brando“Privacy is not something that I’m merely entitled to, it’s an absolute prerequisite.”
~ Marlon Brando

 

“Privacy is the right to be alone–the most comprehensive of rights, and the right most valued by civilized man.”
~Louis D. Brandeis

“Privacy – like eating and breathing – is one of life’s basic requirements.
~Katherine Neville

“If we don’t act now to safeguard our privacy, we could all become victims of identity theft.”
~Bill Nelson

“I have as much privacy as a goldfish in a bowl.”
~Princess Margaret

“Law-abiding citizens value privacy. Terrorists require invisibility. The two are not the same, and they should not be confused.”
~Richard Perle

Upcoming Events

There are no upcoming events at this time.

May 2019
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday
April 29, 2019 April 30, 2019 May 1, 2019 May 2, 2019 May 3, 2019 May 4, 2019 May 5, 2019
May 6, 2019 May 7, 2019 May 8, 2019 May 9, 2019 May 10, 2019 May 11, 2019 May 12, 2019
May 13, 2019 May 14, 2019 May 15, 2019 May 16, 2019 May 17, 2019 May 18, 2019 May 19, 2019
May 20, 2019 May 21, 2019 May 22, 2019 May 23, 2019 May 24, 2019 May 25, 2019 May 26, 2019
May 27, 2019 May 28, 2019 May 29, 2019 May 30, 2019 May 31, 2019 June 1, 2019 June 2, 2019
error: Content is protected !!