i need to state again that i do not intend to leave windsor until i
complete my discography because i will not be able to afford the space
required to hold my gear much of anywhere else. i could have been done
by now, but i've wasted much of the last two years on nonsense. if i
leave for waterloo, which is my most likely next destination, i will
probably sell my gear before i go.
the idea of moving
to waterloo is to shift from an artistic purpose to an academic
(mathematical) one. i could very well end up living in the library for a
while. but, i was not expecting to end up in waterloo until i hit my
mid-40s or early 50s. i'll likely be in windsor for another 10-15 years
before i move on.
i intend to eventually end up in the northern end of the province, in my twilight years.
i
will not end up back in ottawa, unless it is homeless and penniless and
in the short term, before i move away again. i simply cannot afford to
live in the city.
Thursday, August 31, 2017
so, i woke up to an eviction order - signed hours after the mediation
process - that i needed to leave so that a parent could move in.
which one? the obese man's ex-wife?
does she like cockroaches?
they can do this in ontario. sort of. they have to demonstrate a need to put the parent there, which is probably going to be difficult. they can't just decide that they're going to stick mom in there for a year for the fun of it, they have to have a good reason. and, it has to be true, in the first place.
they have the burden of proof to demonstrate it, and they can expect a rigorous cross-examination.
frankly, even if they do have a parent to move in, and they need to, it's going to be hard for them to convince a judge that they just forgot to tell me that in mediation and that this has nothing to do with the last several months of harassment. so, we have bad faith on two levels:
1) the mediation agreement was arrived at in bad faith, and is consequently void.
2) the eviction order was provided in bad faith, and will fail. in fact, i think it's toothless: it's an intimidation tactic. i don't expect it to actually go to court. it's just supposed to scare me into moving.
i was hoping to push this forward into september. but, they broke the agreement in less than 24 hours.
again: was i fool to put it off? the answer is no: this would have happened anyways. putting the file on hold did not lead to a fake eviction notice, they would have done it anyways. but, it does allow me to put the harassment proceedings - and the fake eviction notice will be a part of them - into a single case, which both makes me seem less interested in conflict (which is true.) and less interested in financial gain (which is also true.). in the long run, it just strengthens my argument that there is a pattern of consistent harassment.
if anybody is capitalizing, it is the paralegal, who appears to be more interested in taking advantage of clueless property owners than building his own reputation. and, if i made an error it was in hoping for good faith from a lawyer. the ideal outcome remains in helping these people better understand what the law says; unfortunately, this guy seems like he wants to just take advantage of them.
i am going to have to spend some time in the next few days looking at moving options, as a backup plan, but that will not void any of the legal proceedings - including the inevitable filing of a false eviction claim, which i can theoretically file after moving. if that ends up happening, it will pay for the process. i don't expect my options to be very good (to avoid moving backwards, i will need to find a two bedroom all-inclusive apartment for less than $700/month - and, remember, i am legally incapable of working), but i have to explore them.
if i were to move out, and i saw that they relisted the apartment, re-opening the file under that premise would be a very strong argument: months of harassment culminating in a fake eviction notice would indeed land me a sum. and, if i'm moving out, i'll take it.
i need to do some cleaning tonight, and then get a few things mailed in the morning. i'll take a look at this over the next few days, with the aim to mail some things on monday.
which one? the obese man's ex-wife?
does she like cockroaches?
they can do this in ontario. sort of. they have to demonstrate a need to put the parent there, which is probably going to be difficult. they can't just decide that they're going to stick mom in there for a year for the fun of it, they have to have a good reason. and, it has to be true, in the first place.
they have the burden of proof to demonstrate it, and they can expect a rigorous cross-examination.
frankly, even if they do have a parent to move in, and they need to, it's going to be hard for them to convince a judge that they just forgot to tell me that in mediation and that this has nothing to do with the last several months of harassment. so, we have bad faith on two levels:
1) the mediation agreement was arrived at in bad faith, and is consequently void.
2) the eviction order was provided in bad faith, and will fail. in fact, i think it's toothless: it's an intimidation tactic. i don't expect it to actually go to court. it's just supposed to scare me into moving.
i was hoping to push this forward into september. but, they broke the agreement in less than 24 hours.
again: was i fool to put it off? the answer is no: this would have happened anyways. putting the file on hold did not lead to a fake eviction notice, they would have done it anyways. but, it does allow me to put the harassment proceedings - and the fake eviction notice will be a part of them - into a single case, which both makes me seem less interested in conflict (which is true.) and less interested in financial gain (which is also true.). in the long run, it just strengthens my argument that there is a pattern of consistent harassment.
if anybody is capitalizing, it is the paralegal, who appears to be more interested in taking advantage of clueless property owners than building his own reputation. and, if i made an error it was in hoping for good faith from a lawyer. the ideal outcome remains in helping these people better understand what the law says; unfortunately, this guy seems like he wants to just take advantage of them.
i am going to have to spend some time in the next few days looking at moving options, as a backup plan, but that will not void any of the legal proceedings - including the inevitable filing of a false eviction claim, which i can theoretically file after moving. if that ends up happening, it will pay for the process. i don't expect my options to be very good (to avoid moving backwards, i will need to find a two bedroom all-inclusive apartment for less than $700/month - and, remember, i am legally incapable of working), but i have to explore them.
if i were to move out, and i saw that they relisted the apartment, re-opening the file under that premise would be a very strong argument: months of harassment culminating in a fake eviction notice would indeed land me a sum. and, if i'm moving out, i'll take it.
i need to do some cleaning tonight, and then get a few things mailed in the morning. i'll take a look at this over the next few days, with the aim to mail some things on monday.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)