In a poll taken by 24 Hours newspaper it revealled that 92% believe that the justice system is broken. With my experience these past months with the courts the poll should be closer to 99%.
.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Saturday, May 29, 2010
CCAP (Carnegie)
I attended at the CCAP meeting at the Carnegie on Friday. Wendy from the very beginning of the meeting was relunctant to talk about DERA and she put it at the end of the agenda saying that there might not be time. During the meeting she had members read out in detail two pages single spaced minutes and two pages single spaced stats about how poor we are compared to the rich. It was as if she wanted to fill in the meeting with trivia. At the end of the agenda items she tried to say that there wasn't time to discuss DERA but the members overruled her. They wanted to know about DERA. Sister Elizabeth was there and said that DERAdvocacy would now focus on advocacy rather than housing. I found that very interesting as I have not yet received an answer to my query to the Law Foundation to clarify whether or not it was cancelling its funding to DERA in June 2010. If the Law Foundation was going to renew it it would not be a secret. A few members of the community spoke (one of them directed his comments to Sister Elizabeth about finances) and someone said that this is a subject for a special meeting which is what meetings do when they do not want to discuss a topic and the topic is lost forever. Meeting over. Of all organizations in the DTES Carnegie should be demanding to know what really happened within the governance of DERAHousing to force BC Housing to do what it did. I am a director and I do not know. And I will never know until there are thousands of DTES residents storming for the truth......deraGATE
Thursday, May 27, 2010
phoenix DERA
There was talk of phoenixing DERA at the UBC meeting last night. A few of us agreed to meet at 11:30am on Friday at the CCAP meeting on the 3rd floor at Carniegne. We have to keep the towers under community control as well as the advocacy. If DERA goes, then genetification has won. BC Housing seems to be in some rush to to kill the avoaero jet plane. In the history of DERA there has been a lot of good men involved and all they have to do is come together now. There is alot of talk about keeping historical buldings and since DERA is historical we need DERA. There won't be much to overtake DERA just a few good men who believe in the community. Come to the meeting and this topic will be discussed. Otherwise contact me.
At the UBC meeting Jim Green said he "wasn't going to go there." I wonder why he would be opposed to saving DERA. I remember Kim Kerr saying the "vaults" of DERA held evidence that Jim Green wasn't stellar when he was DERA's executve-director. The only thinga I know about Jim Green is that he doesn't answer his emails and the knowledge that Kim Kerr screamed at him on the streets of the DTES that he was a traitor to the people here.
At the UBC meeting Jim Green said he "wasn't going to go there." I wonder why he would be opposed to saving DERA. I remember Kim Kerr saying the "vaults" of DERA held evidence that Jim Green wasn't stellar when he was DERA's executve-director. The only thinga I know about Jim Green is that he doesn't answer his emails and the knowledge that Kim Kerr screamed at him on the streets of the DTES that he was a traitor to the people here.
Monday, May 24, 2010
DERAdvocacy (revised Tuesday 3:30 PM))
Now that DERAHousing is in receivership (I am not sure of the details) but I was told yesterday which I do not believe that the receiver-manager is throwing out DERAdvocacy from its offices at 12 East Hastings by the end of the month. I believe this maybe false information has come from Sabrina. To confirm if this is true or not please call the lawyer for BC Housing, James Coady 604-647-4105 jcoady@boughton.ca. Don't call anyone on the Board as all of them seem to know less than Sabrina about what is going on. Or you can try to call me Audrey 778-329-1250. The offices were renovated a few years ago at a cost of $40,000 so why would BC Housing want to throw out DERAdvocacy as DERAHousing has no need for the space.
If any of the tenants see unnecessary and costly work being done keep notes, form a group, post the information, let me know. We should all be documenting all unnecessay expenses and behavior as the money the receiver-manager is paying belongs to the public. And it is up to the public to make sure no one is creating unnecessay work. The receiver manager by a court order has a blank cheque to do whatever he wants. Kim did what he wanted without oversight and now the receiver manager is doing the same without oversight. It is time every member in the community becomes an interested auditor.
It was also relayed to me that BC Law Foundation is going to not fund the advocacy program any more. The contract expires in June 2010. The only way to save DERAdvocacy is if a few good men to get on the board and convince BC Law Foundation that from now on rules will be followed and transparency ensured. 604.688.2337 lfbc@tlfbc.org or jcumming@tlfbc.org
There are vacancies on the Board and everyone who lives in the DTES is member of DERAdvocacy and he can serve as a director. I remember Robyne Livingstone saying to me (he lives in Pendera) that DERAdvoacy does good every day. It has just been unfortunate that the existing Board has not done its legislated job due to lack of training and Kim's perferred way of accounting taking money from Paul to pay Peter was not the way to balance the books.
DERAdvocacy has a brand that the residents of the DTES recognize and it should not be lost. I do not want to see it lost. Members can also organize and petition the law foundation to keep DERAdvocacy run by the people in the DTES.
.
If any of the tenants see unnecessary and costly work being done keep notes, form a group, post the information, let me know. We should all be documenting all unnecessay expenses and behavior as the money the receiver-manager is paying belongs to the public. And it is up to the public to make sure no one is creating unnecessay work. The receiver manager by a court order has a blank cheque to do whatever he wants. Kim did what he wanted without oversight and now the receiver manager is doing the same without oversight. It is time every member in the community becomes an interested auditor.
It was also relayed to me that BC Law Foundation is going to not fund the advocacy program any more. The contract expires in June 2010. The only way to save DERAdvocacy is if a few good men to get on the board and convince BC Law Foundation that from now on rules will be followed and transparency ensured. 604.688.2337 lfbc@tlfbc.org or jcumming@tlfbc.org
There are vacancies on the Board and everyone who lives in the DTES is member of DERAdvocacy and he can serve as a director. I remember Robyne Livingstone saying to me (he lives in Pendera) that DERAdvoacy does good every day. It has just been unfortunate that the existing Board has not done its legislated job due to lack of training and Kim's perferred way of accounting taking money from Paul to pay Peter was not the way to balance the books.
DERAdvocacy has a brand that the residents of the DTES recognize and it should not be lost. I do not want to see it lost. Members can also organize and petition the law foundation to keep DERAdvocacy run by the people in the DTES.
.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
"The true danger is when liberty is nibbled away, for expedience, and by parts."--Edmund Burke
From my experience this past month, this is also happening within our justice court system.
.
.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
It is over.
The Order for a Receiver was granted yesterday 18 May 2010 by the Supreme Court of BC at 3:30 p.m. Crosby Management is now managing the buildings. All tenant evictions have been cancelled. I do not know anything else. BC Housing should have been educating the fuckups rather than wait until it was too late. Education would have been in the public interest. If the government wants to deal with societies, then it should make sure the directors of a Society know what they are doing.
.
.
Monday, May 17, 2010
BC Housing vs. DERA
The judge refused to accept my notes. I spent a few days going over BC Housing documents and I wanted the court to see them. I thought the notes were relevant. However, I will never know as the judge did not read them. I was rather disappointed. But it wasn't his fault as BC Housing and DERA said I had no standing I argued that I was a director of DERA but it went nowhere. So I decided if the courts are not interested maybe a few readers would appreciate my research.
NOTES : BC Housing v. DERAHS (S-102159)
I am a director of DERAHS and as such have an interest in these proceedings. I was elected as a director of DERAHS on 17 April 2009.
That the Plaintiffs know of my legal interest in the proceedings yet it has refused to consent to add me as a defendant and will contest my application that is scheduled to be heard on Friday May 22, 2010.
I only had access to the multiple volumes of evidence of BC Housing in the court file for one-half hour on Thursday and on Friday. From the affidavit evidence I can only conclude that the Plaintiffs are more to blame for the mismanagement of DERAHS than DERAHS. BC Housing is in a superior position and it is using its superior position to destroy the Defendants societies.
The Plaintiffs knowing full well that by paying the property taxes in February 2009 and lease payments in 2008 and holding back DERAHS subsidies to repay these debts that it would have a domino effect which would result in the demise of DERAHS and eventually DERA.
In one of the BC Housing Affidavits it said that BC Housing is to provide guidance and direction to the Board of directors of non-profit societies ...... in resolving ongoing issues with respect to the management of their properties. This demonstrates that BC Housing looked upon society governance differently than for for-profits. BC Housing recognized that it had to oversee and educate societies to protect the public interest but it failed to do so. The Plaintiffs were irresponsible and negligent. BC Housing was not doing its job.
Last August 2009 I had occasion to ask Lydia, the auditor, to forward a copy of the 2008 DERAHS financial statements to me. She said that she was currently in negotiations to cook the books with BC Housing. This was not her exact words but close. I remember emailing this woman back saying that I was under the understanding that an auditor does an audit on a specific date and cannot change it one year later on the instructions of BC Housing.
From the files late on Friday afternoon I located a draft 2008 financial statement as an exhibit. I read the notes referred to under "related party transactions" and it showed that Kim Kerr’s company did $211,182 of work for fiscal period ending 20 September 2008. Later I saw a copy of the final 2008 financial statements in an exhibit and next to related party transactions next to Kim Kerr company was $0. I am sure Lydia, the auditor, would look forward to giving evidence as to why the draft was different than the final version of the 2009 financial statements of DERAHS.
Unauthorized related party transactions in which DERAHS executive-directors were involved have been done since the time of Jim Green. In the evidence of BC Housing it referred to the previous executive director, Teri Hanley, and her own company during business with DERAHS. Terri left DERAHS in 2004 in the midst of a scandel. So why would BC Housing think a new executive-director, Kim Kerr, would do things differently.
The executive-director, Kim Kerr, has made it public knowledge and personally told me that during his management of the Marie Gomez building, a 76 unit building subsidized by BC Housing, that he never paid the mortgage or property taxes. Nothing was mentioned in the pleadings about the $mismanagement of the Marie Gomez residences which prior behavior I think should be material to these proceedings.
From the time of my election to the DERAHS Board on April 17 2009, the Plaintiffs have refused to allow me to be part of any information between it and DERAHS. At no time did any director, except the president nun, know of any serious breach of the operating agreement or lease and I suspect she really did not understand anything.
The Plaintiffs only dealt with the executive director, the president of the Board, and the auditor for anything they wanted clarified and only then their involvement was very infrequent and random. At no time did the Plaintiffs contact or even email individual directors of the Board although the Plaintiffs knew each director is singularly and jointly responsible for any financial misdeeds or contractual deficiencies of DERAHS. To the best of my knowledge the president of the Board did not forwards copies of the writ and statement of claim to the other directors.
The Plaintiffs knew of the dysfunctional history of Kim Kerr, the belief of the president that wrong is right if it is for the greater good, and the culture of corruption and secrecy in the DTES. All this is common knowledge in the DTES.
At no time did the Plaintiffs to my knowledge contact any other board member except the president and the auditor, past or present, as to the missing monies, the fact that the City was going to sell the properties for failure to pay property taxes, the many $100,000s conflicts of related parties, and the other claims as set out in the Statement of Claim. This is evidenced in the DERAHS minutes that the Plaintiffs have which do not refer to any of these items.
The BC Housing review of DERAHS in 2007 did not alarm anyone to serious mismanagement of DERAHS including BC Housing. In fact Kim Kerr let it be known that this report card showed that DERAHS buildings were among the best run buildings in the purview of BC Housing. It was believed at that time and it was common knowledge that this review constituted a “forensic audit” and I verily believe that the directors including the president believed this to be the case.
At no time did the Plaintiffs inform me of any mismanagement. In fact although I was a director, my comments to BC Housing were never explained, but then that is the habit of BC Housing, not to reply to anyone including tenants.
The Plaintiffs will submit that the appointment of a receiver-manager by this short leave application would better serve the ends of justice. I disagree, it will only serve to quickly cover-up the mismanagement of BC Housing and its failure to protect the public interest and deprive me of my legal rights.
The Plaintiffs threatening the court that if a receiver manager is not appointed via short leave then it will have no option but to terminate the leases and operating agreements and obtain vacant possession of the buildings shows contempt and is insulting.
The Plaintiffs have known for years of serious mismanagement and now they want the courts to quickly help them (the government) from a potentially embarrassing situation. The property taxes were not paid since 2006. The Plaintiffs agreed to terms of repayment of the missing monies in 2009 by cutting DERAHS subsidies and then one year later they commence an action to dissolve DERAHS.
The Plaintiffs as well as the Defendants have done everything possible to prevent me from doing my job as a director as legislated in the Society Act.
The Plaintiffs are further guilty of lack of foresight, condoning mismanagement that has resulted in this action, and conspiracy to deny me of my legal rights. This short leave to appoint a receiver manager should be refused.
Audrey Jane Laferriere
Director DERAHS
17 May 2010
NOTES : BC Housing v. DERAHS (S-102159)
I am a director of DERAHS and as such have an interest in these proceedings. I was elected as a director of DERAHS on 17 April 2009.
That the Plaintiffs know of my legal interest in the proceedings yet it has refused to consent to add me as a defendant and will contest my application that is scheduled to be heard on Friday May 22, 2010.
I only had access to the multiple volumes of evidence of BC Housing in the court file for one-half hour on Thursday and on Friday. From the affidavit evidence I can only conclude that the Plaintiffs are more to blame for the mismanagement of DERAHS than DERAHS. BC Housing is in a superior position and it is using its superior position to destroy the Defendants societies.
The Plaintiffs knowing full well that by paying the property taxes in February 2009 and lease payments in 2008 and holding back DERAHS subsidies to repay these debts that it would have a domino effect which would result in the demise of DERAHS and eventually DERA.
In one of the BC Housing Affidavits it said that BC Housing is to provide guidance and direction to the Board of directors of non-profit societies ...... in resolving ongoing issues with respect to the management of their properties. This demonstrates that BC Housing looked upon society governance differently than for for-profits. BC Housing recognized that it had to oversee and educate societies to protect the public interest but it failed to do so. The Plaintiffs were irresponsible and negligent. BC Housing was not doing its job.
Last August 2009 I had occasion to ask Lydia, the auditor, to forward a copy of the 2008 DERAHS financial statements to me. She said that she was currently in negotiations to cook the books with BC Housing. This was not her exact words but close. I remember emailing this woman back saying that I was under the understanding that an auditor does an audit on a specific date and cannot change it one year later on the instructions of BC Housing.
From the files late on Friday afternoon I located a draft 2008 financial statement as an exhibit. I read the notes referred to under "related party transactions" and it showed that Kim Kerr’s company did $211,182 of work for fiscal period ending 20 September 2008. Later I saw a copy of the final 2008 financial statements in an exhibit and next to related party transactions next to Kim Kerr company was $0. I am sure Lydia, the auditor, would look forward to giving evidence as to why the draft was different than the final version of the 2009 financial statements of DERAHS.
Unauthorized related party transactions in which DERAHS executive-directors were involved have been done since the time of Jim Green. In the evidence of BC Housing it referred to the previous executive director, Teri Hanley, and her own company during business with DERAHS. Terri left DERAHS in 2004 in the midst of a scandel. So why would BC Housing think a new executive-director, Kim Kerr, would do things differently.
The executive-director, Kim Kerr, has made it public knowledge and personally told me that during his management of the Marie Gomez building, a 76 unit building subsidized by BC Housing, that he never paid the mortgage or property taxes. Nothing was mentioned in the pleadings about the $mismanagement of the Marie Gomez residences which prior behavior I think should be material to these proceedings.
From the time of my election to the DERAHS Board on April 17 2009, the Plaintiffs have refused to allow me to be part of any information between it and DERAHS. At no time did any director, except the president nun, know of any serious breach of the operating agreement or lease and I suspect she really did not understand anything.
The Plaintiffs only dealt with the executive director, the president of the Board, and the auditor for anything they wanted clarified and only then their involvement was very infrequent and random. At no time did the Plaintiffs contact or even email individual directors of the Board although the Plaintiffs knew each director is singularly and jointly responsible for any financial misdeeds or contractual deficiencies of DERAHS. To the best of my knowledge the president of the Board did not forwards copies of the writ and statement of claim to the other directors.
The Plaintiffs knew of the dysfunctional history of Kim Kerr, the belief of the president that wrong is right if it is for the greater good, and the culture of corruption and secrecy in the DTES. All this is common knowledge in the DTES.
At no time did the Plaintiffs to my knowledge contact any other board member except the president and the auditor, past or present, as to the missing monies, the fact that the City was going to sell the properties for failure to pay property taxes, the many $100,000s conflicts of related parties, and the other claims as set out in the Statement of Claim. This is evidenced in the DERAHS minutes that the Plaintiffs have which do not refer to any of these items.
The BC Housing review of DERAHS in 2007 did not alarm anyone to serious mismanagement of DERAHS including BC Housing. In fact Kim Kerr let it be known that this report card showed that DERAHS buildings were among the best run buildings in the purview of BC Housing. It was believed at that time and it was common knowledge that this review constituted a “forensic audit” and I verily believe that the directors including the president believed this to be the case.
At no time did the Plaintiffs inform me of any mismanagement. In fact although I was a director, my comments to BC Housing were never explained, but then that is the habit of BC Housing, not to reply to anyone including tenants.
The Plaintiffs will submit that the appointment of a receiver-manager by this short leave application would better serve the ends of justice. I disagree, it will only serve to quickly cover-up the mismanagement of BC Housing and its failure to protect the public interest and deprive me of my legal rights.
The Plaintiffs threatening the court that if a receiver manager is not appointed via short leave then it will have no option but to terminate the leases and operating agreements and obtain vacant possession of the buildings shows contempt and is insulting.
The Plaintiffs have known for years of serious mismanagement and now they want the courts to quickly help them (the government) from a potentially embarrassing situation. The property taxes were not paid since 2006. The Plaintiffs agreed to terms of repayment of the missing monies in 2009 by cutting DERAHS subsidies and then one year later they commence an action to dissolve DERAHS.
The Plaintiffs as well as the Defendants have done everything possible to prevent me from doing my job as a director as legislated in the Society Act.
The Plaintiffs are further guilty of lack of foresight, condoning mismanagement that has resulted in this action, and conspiracy to deny me of my legal rights. This short leave to appoint a receiver manager should be refused.
Audrey Jane Laferriere
Director DERAHS
17 May 2010
Thursday, May 13, 2010
SEE BC Housing kill DERA (revised 15.04.10)
Let BC Housing ensure the corrupt cultures of the non-profits in the DTES continue.
Don't belive that the Society Act protects the public interest, it doesn't. And don't believe that BC Housing
(the government) is protecting the public interest, it isn't.
COME ONE. COME ALL.
It will happen on Monday at 9:45 a.m. May 17, 2010, at the Supreme Court House at 800Smithe Street (Robson Square). Get courtroom number from list on wall next to security desk in lobby.
The application before the court will be to appoint Deloitte & Touche as the receiver manager with powers to fire everyone and go after tenants past and present for not paying their fair rents (what fun). I am sorry I made a mistake Deloitte & Touche cannot file the employees as they are all CUPE workers (who work for CUPE but not DERAH); they can only fire the executive-director, office accountant, all the suppliers, Lydia the auditor, and all the directors. I am not sure what other powers Deloitte will have but I am sure we will never learn what really happened in DERAH after it invades the properties. The fire will be out and the dirty laundry washed.
As of Friday the Court was not advised of a new solicitor for DERA (Cameron Ward quit at a most inappropriate time), so DERAH will not be legally represented. No sane lawyer will ever take this case on such short notice.
With all their high priced help and short leaves of dates and processes to keep everything as secret as possible, BC Housing's default position (chosen evidence) will finally be voiced in open court.
It is scheduled to last three days. Admission is free.
This is open court and everyone is invited.
.
Don't belive that the Society Act protects the public interest, it doesn't. And don't believe that BC Housing
(the government) is protecting the public interest, it isn't.
COME ONE. COME ALL.
It will happen on Monday at 9:45 a.m. May 17, 2010, at the Supreme Court House at 800Smithe Street (Robson Square). Get courtroom number from list on wall next to security desk in lobby.
The application before the court will be to appoint Deloitte & Touche as the receiver manager with powers to fire everyone and go after tenants past and present for not paying their fair rents (what fun). I am sorry I made a mistake Deloitte & Touche cannot file the employees as they are all CUPE workers (who work for CUPE but not DERAH); they can only fire the executive-director, office accountant, all the suppliers, Lydia the auditor, and all the directors. I am not sure what other powers Deloitte will have but I am sure we will never learn what really happened in DERAH after it invades the properties. The fire will be out and the dirty laundry washed.
As of Friday the Court was not advised of a new solicitor for DERA (Cameron Ward quit at a most inappropriate time), so DERAH will not be legally represented. No sane lawyer will ever take this case on such short notice.
With all their high priced help and short leaves of dates and processes to keep everything as secret as possible, BC Housing's default position (chosen evidence) will finally be voiced in open court.
It is scheduled to last three days. Admission is free.
This is open court and everyone is invited.
.
Sunday, May 9, 2010
It is Sunday and a beautiful day. It is too bad that beautiy is destroyed by human kind.
I heard on Thursday that the accountant for DERA, Bosso, quit. She must be one of the few who know that the definition of what a receiver-manager really means: it means the court appoints a receiver-manager and he comes in and fires everyone. I could never understand this woman. She knew for years of irregularities and yet she did nothing. As long as she had money to go to Europe she was happy. I asked her once why didn't she take an interest in what was happening and she replied why should she. I remember telling her to quit as she wasn't working for a for-profit she was working for a social justice organization. There is nothing wrong with the institutions in the DTES only the people that work in them.
On Wednesday when I was in court Kim said to the court that the court would have to wait until Sister Elizabeth, a director of DERA, came back from her retreat in France to receive instructions from the Board. At this crucial time in the history of DERA why is the nun in Europe. Kim is the one that tells the Board what to do. I couldn't believe him saying to the judge that Sister Elizabeth was needed as she doesn't have any more say than any other director except to pull the religious card. The judge asked Kim how many directors DERA had and Kim replied twelve. I would like to know who the twelve directors are. If there are now twelve directors did the Board appoint a full slate without benefit of an election.
On Wednesday I walked down Hastings Street from Carrall to Princess with a poster sign stating that DERA fired Lily. No one seemed concerned. What surprised me was that Carnegie (Wendy and Jean) and VANDU (Ann) did not know of this event even though it happened a week before. A woman devotes 18 years of her life to the DTES marginalized and nothing.
I heard on Thursday that the accountant for DERA, Bosso, quit. She must be one of the few who know that the definition of what a receiver-manager really means: it means the court appoints a receiver-manager and he comes in and fires everyone. I could never understand this woman. She knew for years of irregularities and yet she did nothing. As long as she had money to go to Europe she was happy. I asked her once why didn't she take an interest in what was happening and she replied why should she. I remember telling her to quit as she wasn't working for a for-profit she was working for a social justice organization. There is nothing wrong with the institutions in the DTES only the people that work in them.
On Wednesday when I was in court Kim said to the court that the court would have to wait until Sister Elizabeth, a director of DERA, came back from her retreat in France to receive instructions from the Board. At this crucial time in the history of DERA why is the nun in Europe. Kim is the one that tells the Board what to do. I couldn't believe him saying to the judge that Sister Elizabeth was needed as she doesn't have any more say than any other director except to pull the religious card. The judge asked Kim how many directors DERA had and Kim replied twelve. I would like to know who the twelve directors are. If there are now twelve directors did the Board appoint a full slate without benefit of an election.
On Wednesday I walked down Hastings Street from Carrall to Princess with a poster sign stating that DERA fired Lily. No one seemed concerned. What surprised me was that Carnegie (Wendy and Jean) and VANDU (Ann) did not know of this event even though it happened a week before. A woman devotes 18 years of her life to the DTES marginalized and nothing.
Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Cameron Ward bails on DERA
Late yesterday afternoon Tuesday, May 4, 2010, Cameron Ward advised DERA that he would no longer be its lawyer. I am disappointed as I felt he would go to the end on this. But then this is a "unique and special case" (so said the judge this morning in chambers) that maybe Cameron knew he couldn't win it so he bailed. Another hero of the DTES lost. The two motions that were before the court were adjourned generally. I am not sure what "adjourned generally" means but I will find out and advise.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Affidavit to Support my Motion to be named a Defendant
Both the lawyers for BC Housing and DERA refused to grant me a consent order so that I could be added as a Defendant. I do not know why. I guess thwarting justice is what they do. Then the question is if each of the defendants past and present are liable for the misdeeds of DERA why weren't they all cited as Defendants.
There is another hearing on Wednesday at 9:45 a.m.. Boughton and Company, the lawyers for BC Housing wants to strike paragaph 13 of Cameron Ward's Statement of Defence as it might prove embarrassing to BC Housing. The public is invited to attend.
File No. S-102159
Vancouver Registry
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITSH COLUMBIA
BETWEEN;
BRITISH COLUMBIA HOUSING MANAGEMENT COMMISSION AND PROVINCIAL RENTAL HOUSING CORPORATION,
PLAINTIFFS
A N D;
DOWNTOWN EASTSIDE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
HOUSING SOCIETY, DOWNTOWN EASTSIDE RESIDENTS
ASSOCIATION AND KIM KERR,
DEFENDANTS
A F F I D A V I T
I, Audrey Jane Laferriere, of Vancouver, British Columbia, make oath and say :
1. That I am a director for the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association Housing Society, and a director for the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association (hereinafter referred to collectively as the “Defendant Societies”) in this action and as such have personal knowledge of the matters and facts hereinafter deposed to, save where stated to be on information and belief and where so stated I verily believe the same to be true.
2. That I was elected a director of the Defendant Societies on 17 April 2009.
3. That at the second Board of Directors meeting I was asked by the President of the Defendant Societies, Sister Elizabeth Kelliher, to resign. I refused.
4. That during my directorship I was never advised of the seriousness of the claims of the Plaintiffs although on numerous occasions I asked for information and advised the Plaintiffs that the Defendant Societies did not inform me of dealings or information concerning the Plaintiffs.
5. That on 10 February 2010 I was illegally impeached from the board of the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association, but not from the board of the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association Housing Society. The resolution pertaining to my impeachment from the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association, was never filed with the Registrar of Societies.
6. That after 10 February 2010 I was no longer advised when board meetings were to be held although I advised the Boards of the Defendant Societies and Kim Kerr that failing to do so was illegal.
7. That on 25 March 2010 the Plaintiffs commenced this action against the Defendants.
8. That I told the Plaintiffs and the Defendants that in my capacity as a director of the Defendant Societies I wanted to be included in the action as I was singularly and jointly liable for the mismanagement and financial misdeeds as alleged by the Plaintiffs.
9. That on April 1, 2010, not knowing if the Defendant Societies were going to file an Appearance, I entered one on behalf of the Defendant Societies with a notation that I wanted to be added as a Defendant by a consent order. I then personally served the parties with the Appearance.
10. That not knowing if the Defendant Societies were going to file a Statement of Defence I filed a Statement of Defence on April 16, 2010, on behalf of the Defendant Societies, and served it on the parties.
11. That on Tuesday April 27th 2010 I again requested that the parties sign a consent order to have me added as a Defendant.
12. That I have a valid legal interest in these proceedings, my participation in these proceedings is necessary to ensure that all matters in the proceeding may be effectually adjudicated upon, and is in the best interests of justice, and I want to be added as a Defendant.
SWORN BEFORE ME at the
City of Vancouver, Province of
British Columbia, this 3rd
day of May 2010.
Audrey Jane Laferriere,
Applicant.
There is another hearing on Wednesday at 9:45 a.m.. Boughton and Company, the lawyers for BC Housing wants to strike paragaph 13 of Cameron Ward's Statement of Defence as it might prove embarrassing to BC Housing. The public is invited to attend.
File No. S-102159
Vancouver Registry
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITSH COLUMBIA
BETWEEN;
BRITISH COLUMBIA HOUSING MANAGEMENT COMMISSION AND PROVINCIAL RENTAL HOUSING CORPORATION,
PLAINTIFFS
A N D;
DOWNTOWN EASTSIDE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
HOUSING SOCIETY, DOWNTOWN EASTSIDE RESIDENTS
ASSOCIATION AND KIM KERR,
DEFENDANTS
A F F I D A V I T
I, Audrey Jane Laferriere, of Vancouver, British Columbia, make oath and say :
1. That I am a director for the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association Housing Society, and a director for the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association (hereinafter referred to collectively as the “Defendant Societies”) in this action and as such have personal knowledge of the matters and facts hereinafter deposed to, save where stated to be on information and belief and where so stated I verily believe the same to be true.
2. That I was elected a director of the Defendant Societies on 17 April 2009.
3. That at the second Board of Directors meeting I was asked by the President of the Defendant Societies, Sister Elizabeth Kelliher, to resign. I refused.
4. That during my directorship I was never advised of the seriousness of the claims of the Plaintiffs although on numerous occasions I asked for information and advised the Plaintiffs that the Defendant Societies did not inform me of dealings or information concerning the Plaintiffs.
5. That on 10 February 2010 I was illegally impeached from the board of the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association, but not from the board of the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association Housing Society. The resolution pertaining to my impeachment from the Defendant, Downtown Eastside Residents Association, was never filed with the Registrar of Societies.
6. That after 10 February 2010 I was no longer advised when board meetings were to be held although I advised the Boards of the Defendant Societies and Kim Kerr that failing to do so was illegal.
7. That on 25 March 2010 the Plaintiffs commenced this action against the Defendants.
8. That I told the Plaintiffs and the Defendants that in my capacity as a director of the Defendant Societies I wanted to be included in the action as I was singularly and jointly liable for the mismanagement and financial misdeeds as alleged by the Plaintiffs.
9. That on April 1, 2010, not knowing if the Defendant Societies were going to file an Appearance, I entered one on behalf of the Defendant Societies with a notation that I wanted to be added as a Defendant by a consent order. I then personally served the parties with the Appearance.
10. That not knowing if the Defendant Societies were going to file a Statement of Defence I filed a Statement of Defence on April 16, 2010, on behalf of the Defendant Societies, and served it on the parties.
11. That on Tuesday April 27th 2010 I again requested that the parties sign a consent order to have me added as a Defendant.
12. That I have a valid legal interest in these proceedings, my participation in these proceedings is necessary to ensure that all matters in the proceeding may be effectually adjudicated upon, and is in the best interests of justice, and I want to be added as a Defendant.
SWORN BEFORE ME at the
City of Vancouver, Province of
British Columbia, this 3rd
day of May 2010.
Audrey Jane Laferriere,
Applicant.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Although I have been asking the lawyers for BC Housing, Boughton and Company, and for DERAH, Cameron Ward, to be added to the pleadings so that I can learn what is going on. Both have refused. Cameron's answer was he hadn't received instructions from his clients, DERAH. Sounds like a lawyer talking: did he even ask his client. BC Housing didn't even acknowledge my numerous requests. So now I have to do the court thing and it is not as simple as I was led to believe. Although there is provision in the Rules of Court to be added as a defendant, I haven't been able to determine if this has ever happened before: a guilty party being asked to be named as a defendant. I am a director of DERAH, guilty as hell, and I should know what is happening.
The big day for arguments for appointing a receiver-manager by the Supreme Court is May 17th 2010. All who can attend should and be informed. Watch Cameron Ward in action.
The big day for arguments for appointing a receiver-manager by the Supreme Court is May 17th 2010. All who can attend should and be informed. Watch Cameron Ward in action.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)