Forgotten: an email sent December 9 2024

Audrey Laferriere <audreyjlaferriere@gmail.com>

---

Revoking Estate Grant June 27 2024 3 messages

---

Audrey Laferriere <audreyjlaferriere@gmail.com>	Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 8:53 AM
To: Jenny mead <jennymead722@gmail.com>, Candace Cates <ccates@cfselaw.ca>, lcard@fultonco.com, Cassandra Douma <douma@mussiogoodman.com>
Prior to filing the affidavit in support of my request to have the estate grant revocation hearing on 16 December 2024, I am sending you the body so you are aware of my points. I welcome any comments. Affidavit December 8 2024 xxx   A F F I D A V I T   That I (Audrey) of Vancouver BC make oath and say as follows:   That the Estate Grant sealed by Registrar’s signature on June 27 2024 be revoked. Due process was not followed.   That Audrey disputed Jenny’s P1.  Audrey’s P1 was not resolved by a court hearing so the Estate Grant should not have been sealed by signature of the registrar on June 27, 2024. The registry relies on lawyers not to serve P1s or file P2s if there are disputes.  Disputes do not need to be in the form of a P29.   That Jenny was not authorized to file the P1/P2 as there were multiple P1s and only one applicant could file the P1.   Jenny’s P1 was not served on the Public Guardian and Trustee, the Committee of Estate.   That there was a conflict of interest that could bias decisions made by the administrator. (Estate Settlement Agreement).   That prior to August 15, 2023 the Defendant (Jenny) wanted the Plaintiff (Audrey) to be the administrator and continued until Candace was hired.   Jenny is approxiately 70 years old and weighs 80 pounds.  Jenny by her own admission, is in ill health and did not want to be the administrator.  Jenny suffering from PTSD makes decision-making difficult. And she tends to avoid things. Avoidance is a common trait for those with PTSD.    I agreed to be the administrator of the Estate on the condition that if or when Jenny was up to it, we could then co-administer the Estate together.      On August 15, 2023 Audrey mailed a P1 to the interested parties. No one opposed the application.    In answer to Ron’s P1, after speaking with Jenny she said she did not want Ron to be the administrator, Audrey filed a Dispute Note on September 12, 2023 reflecting this.  I also did not want Ron to be the administrator.  I had experience with him and I believed he lacked integrity.  Exhibit          On September 19, 2023 a P1 was mailed naming Ron and Jenny as co-applicants. Jenny said that she had no knowledge of the P1 being issued. She reitereated to me that she did not want to co-administer the Estate with Ron.   After Jenny hired Candace in January 2024, Jenny mailed a P1 on May 8, 2024 to the beneficiaries with an Estate Settlement Agreement. The letter said that there was urgency to sign the Estate Settlement Agreement.   The Estate Settlement Agreement was drafted by Candace in collaboration with Leah, the lawyer for Ron.   There was no mention of I being the administrator or co-administrator.  I was deeply concerned as I believed Jenny could not be the administrator alone. She was not qualified.   On May 10, 2024, the Plaintiff phoned Jenny and Jenny said apologetically that she was pressured to sign the P1 and the Estate Settlement Agreement.    Audrey emailed Candace accusing her of coercing Jenny to do the P1 and coercing her to agree to the Estate Settlement Agreement.   I believed having my P1, Jenny’s P1 could not advance unless a court intervened as there were now multiple applicants and only one could file the P2. The most qualified would be chosen.   I told Candace I was disputing the P1 and the Estate Settlement Agreement. I told her of my agreement with Jenny that we were going to be co-administrators.   The Estate Settlement Agreement was STARTLING in that among things it contained the clause. Neither Jenny nor her family shall be required to pay any kind of rent or other payments or compensation to the Estate on account of their occupation and use of the Property for any period prior to or after the date of the Deceased’s death. Paragraph 11. Exhibit    Even the suggestion of free rent for Jenny and her family would mean that there was a conflict so Jenny should not be the administrator. No rent has been paid by Jenny or her daughter’s family since December 2022 and the utilities approximating $1,000 a month are currently being paid by the Estate.    Jenny’s P1 was not served on the Public Guardian and Trustee, who was the representative of the Deceased. Neither was the Estate Settlement Agreement. The PGT was the Deceased’s representative and his Committee of Estate.  The PGT was the Estate’s interim administrator.    Although Candace knew I was disputing Jenny’s P1 and had just hired a lawyer, she on May 31 2024 filed a P2 package in the probate registry.   The P2 package was not served on me.   The P2 package was not served on the Public Guardian and Trustee.   The P2 should not have been filed as the Audrey’s P1 stood in the way of filing the P2.  Only one applicant has the authority to file a P2.  In cases of multiple applicants the court has to first decide who is the best qualified and Candace skipped that step.   On June 27, 2024 the Estate Grant was sealed by signature of the Registrar.  I was not advised of this.   On October 16 2024 the Estate Grant was released from the probate registry by precipe upon payment of the probate fees.     I was not served the P2 which was a violation of due process.  This prevented me from knowing what was going on and also prevented me from questioning/disputing the P2 package if there were errors. Serving the P2 is a necessary check by the interested parties to detect errors/fraud before the stamping of the estate grant not after it. Misunderstandings that could gain costly lawyer fees would be minimalized.   Neither the P1 nor the P2 was served on the Public Guardian and Trustee, who was the Committee of Estate of the deceased and who had a statutory duty to manage the estate.  The Public Guardian and Trustee would have had an opinion if Jenny should become the administrator as the PGT was involved in a dispute with Ron and Jenny in 1992 (Kamloops SC8654) over who should be Rockey’s committee of estate and committee of person.  This dispute fueled the existing toxicity between Jenny and Ron. The PGT decided Jenny should be the Committee of Person and the PGT would become the Committee of Estate. The toxicity after the petition continues to this day.  In all probability, the PGT would have advised that neither Jenny nor Ron should be administrator to this Estate, either jointly or singularly as their toxicity would in all likelihood negatively affect the probate.   Audrey relied on the Public Guardian and Trustee to look after the estate as an interim administer.   I did not want Jenny to be the administrator because (1) she did not want to be (2) she was not qualified and (3) she was coerced to be the P1 applicant (4) was coerced to approve the Estate Settlement Agreement.  Although the ESA was to her benefit, she was nevertheless coerced.  The ESA was a collaboration made by Candace and Leah.   From May 2024 to now, I tried unsuccessfully to contact Jenny and Ron. I was told by the lawyers I could contact the beneficiaries even though they had lawyers.  Later this was rescinded.  I wanted to know what was going on and why they were opposed me being administrator.  I advised them of the conflict and that due service was neglected.   I was threatened (May 2024) by Candace that if I did not consent to withdrawing my Dispute Notice against Ron that I would have to pay solicitor-client costs as she was going to make an application to the court.  I was also threatened multiple times by my lawyer if I attempted to dispute anything further it would drain the estate of its assets.  I was facing reverse extortion. If I did nothing I would not have to pay but if I did something I would have to pay.   I found these threats untenable.  They caused me much upset, anxiety and disbelief.  I had to allow unethical behavior to go unnoticed to protect the estate from bankruptcy.  I had to allow an administrator to administer the estate when she was unsuited.  I had to overlook due process violations. And, I had little hope of hiring another lawyer as it would be very difficult.  Lawyers do not want to do estates unless all the interested parties are on board.  Jenny was able to get multiple lawyers as her in-law is the former mayor of Kamloops and now its MLA.  Candace’s firm has billed more than $1,000,000 for work they did for the City. To quiet me, Wes sent me a bill dated October 3, 2024.  It was for $5,324.86 which I considered exorbitant, a sign of my pending in penury.  The writing was on the wall.  Anything further would be insane. It would drain the estate and cause me financial ruin. There was no mention that my lawyer tried to pause the estate grant. He must have known that Candace had filed the P2 and everyone was waiting for the Estate Grant.  From the two conversations I had with Cassandra it was as if her comments were premised on the fact that the Estate Grant was probably already sealed. The Estate Grant would stop further disputes as the expense would be unrealistic to persue.  Wes made no effort to resolve my concerns.  He said that since the beneficiaries objected to me being administrator, it would never happen.  Not true, choosing an administrator is not a popularity contest, it is who is the best qualified.  Jenny by her own admission said she was not suitable and did not want to be the administrator.  Jenny’s prior lawyers (James and Shahdin) both pushed for Jenny to co-administer the estate with Ron and when they realized that it was not going to happen, they fired her.  After Shahdin fired Jenny, Leah then proposed that Jenny administer the estate alone with the blessing of Ron. Bewildering. Candace ignored my P1.  I was told if I tried to exercise my rights/concerns, the majority would win.  Not true. Ron had groomed the Willett girls who took no interest in the estate but provided them misleading information.  Threatening me with something that might not happen is fraud. I was being threatened not to expose unethical behaviors and due process errors.   As nothing was happening on the estate, I decided to start collecting information for the P2 which I intended to file. I had no knowledge that a P2 was already filed and my efforts made me look like an idiot.   On September 6, 2024 I sent Candance an email.  Knowing something was amiss, Candace should have paused the final release of the P19.   But instead she had the estate grant released on September 16 2024 by precipe upon the expiry of my Dispute Note against Ron.  However, that expiry note had no bearing on my dispute pertained to Jenny’s P1.  Since my dispute regarding Jenny was not resolved, then the dispute was outstanding.  The Estate Grant should not have been signed or released.    Because my dispute was not documented by filing a P29 that did not mean my dispute was moot and Candace knew that. The registry relies on the lawyers to make sure no surprises happen, like disputes surfacing or disputes not being resolved before the estate grant is sealed or date stamped. It relies on lawyers not to dupe the registry.  The estate grant should not stand.   Up until last week I was emailing asking Jenny to resign because of the unethical behaviour of her lawyer.  The Estate Grant was obtained by fraud. I suggested we go back to our original agreement that I be the administrator or we co-administer the estate. She never responded.   Not only did Candace know there were issues not resolved, but so did Leah, the lawyer for Ron, and Wes/Cassandra, the lawyer for the Plaintiff and the Public Guardian and Trustee.  They knew the drill as to when the estate grant would most likely be sealed and they deliberately waited until Ron’s Notice of Dispute expired. Candace should have made a court application to cancel my Dispute Note against Ron as she threatened. After an Estate Grant is sealed, it is exponentially difficult to revoke. Catch-me-if-you-can. This type of unethical behavior is systemic among estate lawyers. It erodes public trust.  It is stealth.  It is trickery.   I was advised that I only had thirty days to file an application to revoke the Estate Grant.  I filed one with a hearing date being December 16, 2024.     There was conflict/confusion as well as who was the lawyer for Jenny and who was the lawyer for the estate.  Candace said she was the lawyer for Jenny yet she performed functions that a lawyer for the estate would do.   A lawyer’s duty is to uphold the law and the integrity of the legal system.  This means they must follow legal procedures and act ethically.  They cannot engage in or condone illegal or unethical behavior, even if it might benefit their clients or themselves.   None of the lawyers acted ethically. James and Shahdin abandoned Jenny. Ron told me that he did not want to co-administer with Jenny, it was Leah’s idea. Candace used stealth to get the Estate Grant.   The reason for WESA is for disputes/misunderstandings to be resolved informally before an Estate Grant is sealed. Preferably even before a P1 is served.  Unfortunately, this is not happening.  The philosophy among estate lawyers seem to be catch-me-if-you-can.  Maybe it was that way before WESA 2014. Maybe it is a legal strategy.  Make a scenario happen so that any dispute would be very difficult if not impossible to pursue.  Probate would be made easier for the lawyers. What sane person would take the chance of draining a modest estate of its assets.  Let the unqualified administer, let lawyers bully clients, let due process fall.    Because due process was not followed, and all the lawyers knew it, the Estate Grant should be revoked. The Courts cannot condone the behavior displayed in this probate. Each of the lawyers who condoned this behavior should be estopped from billing their clients.   Whatever the dialogue the fact that the P1 was not served on the PGT, that should be enough to revoke the Estate Grant.

---

 

Odds of living to 100 is 0.03%

 The probability of living to 100 years old in British Columbia, Canada, is relatively low but gradually increasing. As of recent data, centenarians make up about 0.03% of the Canadian population, meaning that for every 100,000 people, approximately 30 reach their 100th birthday.

British Columbia has one of the highest life expectancies in Canada, with women living an average of 84.7 years and men around 80.5 years. Factors that influence longevity include genetics, healthcare access, lifestyle choices, and environmental conditions.

Costs of a funeral is getting expensive.  I was quoted $20,000.

And I was advised today that I need surgery and there will be an additional cost of $5,000.

Moving to Kamloops

 When I get better I have decided that I will move to Kamloops. I liked the smallness of the City rather than Vancouver.  

Can lawyers pervert WESA.

 Any comments on experiences wherein lawyers have perverted WESA please let me know.

audreyjlaferriere@gmail.com   778.689.2276

favor banks

Lawyers who cannot be trusted.

 Yesterday I received an email from the agent for Candace Cates that I should consult with a lawyer as I did not understand why I had to sign an Order that I did not agree with.  Now within 24 hours she has changed her mind and demand that I sign the Order without giving me the opportunity to consult with a lawyer.  I have asked the other parties to the estate to fire both Canadace Cates and Leah Card. 

Hate.

 I was told that I hated my family.  I do not hate anyone.  However, my family is hateful.  They do whatever it takes to get a piece of silver and they do not care who they covet.  There is no honesty, there is no truth. There is no integrity. 

I am still very ill.  I feel very uncomfortable.  I feel very weak.  

February 7 2025

I was at a hearing today.  I should not have gone as I was not well.  Anyways I lost.  I did not do the right technical stuff.  

I feel that I was raped because I wore a short skirt.  

I do not know the details but then Candace true to form hasn't sent me a summary but then why should she.  We are suppose to be working together and Candace's idea of working together is to ignore me.  

February 3 2025 Kamloops hearing, a disappointment

 I was at a short hearing asking for an adjournment addressing among things false affidavits Jenny and Ron filed in the Kamloops Court house January 13 2025. That did not do seem to make a difference.  Canadace/Leah went on and on that the estate was being delayed. What a joke that is when, in fact, Jenny and her family wants the estate to be delayed so they could continue to live on the property rent-free for at least another year. Maybe longer as no one is going to buy the property unless it gets cleaned up as it smells like a barn. There would not be any delay if Jenny just resigned from being administrator because she was not qualified and she and her family were in a serious conflict of interest.  Procedurally due process was not done. Everthing was fine until Candace got hired telling Jenny that she could get more than what she was entitled to.What I do not understand is what does Ron expect to get out of this at this late date. He believed that he was going to be the administrator but that did not happen. He attempted to have the property listed. All the interested parties say they want the matter over with it.  How can that possibly happen. . And how can Candace and Leah who are officers of the court allow untruthful and irrelevant information to be part of affidavits filed in the court registry?  This information was included to distract from the fact that the estate is being defrauded. Both Candace and Leash should be disbarred.  We expect more from lawyers.   

Constructive conspiracy to defraud an estate of money.

 I was told by a retired professional, there is nothing to stop an adminiatrator/executor from opening a trust account, put the proceeds of the sale of assets in it, then withdraw the money and run.. You do not even have to disappear, you can explain that the money was spent.  If there is no money what can the beneficiaries do. 

A trip to Kamloops

 I had to go to Kamloops on Sunday. It takes a lot of time even for such a short distance. One day travelling there, one day travelling back, and the days recovering after the hearing. I am still not over the exhaustion of it all. Being old is not the place to be. 

I am very angry over what is happening. Two lawyers in Kamloops are not being cooperative and I am finding myself having to go to Kamloops because they prefer not to allow me to consent to adjournments. They prefer the cost of going in front of a judge to get an adjournment rather than call me. They are going to get me, and at my age and my limited financial resources, they are. I cannot believe how vicious they are. They know you are vulnerable because of age and history and they do not care. It is their clients attacking me, not them, they are only following instructions. They know the law and they do not have to be kind. They wrote affidavits that their clients signed defaming me. I am sure their clients did not fully understand what they were signing as clients for the most part just sign affidavits because their lawyer told them to do it. Sign here, to get it over with., do not worry about perjury. Perjury is like shoplifting, everyone is doing it and there is no serious consequences. The affidavits contained outrageous ridiculous allegations which were not true. It is hard to describe my anger. The only thing I know is that I am stresed to the point I find it hard to do anything. And to add to the stress, my computer is not functioning the way it should. And using a computer at the library has limitations and is inconvenient.  

Another wasted day of my life

 After reading Jenny's affidavit that she was in good medical health, I went to her FACEBOOK looking for a recent photograph of her which was there showing her being extremely thin. Evidence to prove she was ill. It was taken during the time she told me that she was not well and she could not eat.  She was always tired and had no energy.  She spoke of her future being in a wheelchair.  

What is missing are all photographs of her, her family, her daughter's family, and in particular the wedding she attended when her daughter married into the current MLA for Kamloops' family.  Peter Milobar is into secrecy and confidentiality to the point that he cannot be trusted.  He also was the mayor of Kamloops for three terms.  I would not be surprised if he told Jenny to get rid of anything that could identify that Jenny is part of his family. I am fed up with secrecy to the point it is harmful.  And Candace who is Jenny's lawyer did huge work for the City of Kamloops. . That is why Jenny did not have to pay a $20,000 retainer to Candace, Lawyers are always doing free bono work for relatives of clients if the client is a corporate one with money, money, money. it is called connections. .  But Ron had to pay a $20,000 to Leah. 

 

I have always maintained that Jenny and I should co-administer the Estate. At the beginning Jenny wanted me to be the administrator and I agreed with the proviso if Jenny felt up to it we could co-administer the estate.  Everything would have been dealt with in an upfront clear manner.  Why was this so difficult.  No one could tell me why I could not be co-administer.. I was being judged by a pack of crazy people, no reason, just nothing.. I even proposed at one time that I, Jenny and Ron all of us be co-administrators. No. No. No.  The lawyers only wanted ONE administrator who they could bully.  It is easy to control a dumb naive client. And Candace made the decision that Jenny should be given an unfair portion of the estate.   

And when I tried to get a lawyer in Vancouver, ONYX said that I could not talk to my siblings and ONYX had a four month wait period before they would do anything. 

In the affidavit Candace said that the estate settlement agreement was not an agreement between Jenny and any other beneficiary.  So who was the agreement with;  It is nonsense.  What was the ;purpose of the estate settlement agreement.  If it wasn't among parties how could it be enforced.

When I read the agreement, it screamed at me that it was an open cheque book. And I would like to know why it took Candace and Leah four months to compose it.  There was a reference that it was all Ron's fault as he had issues with Jenny.  On December 21, 2023 he totally supported Jenny to be an administrator, and then he had issues with her being an administrator.  All of us as interested parties should know what issues they were so that we, each of us, could then know what is going on and not just wait and allow the open cheque book to unfold.  What issues did Jenny and Ron have that necessitated an estate settlement agreement.  Estate lawyers are so busy these days that once they snare you as a client you are put on a waiting list.  In this case it was always four months between anything being done.  It is not me, it is not the court registry, it is the lawyers that are causing delay.  I did not get seriously involved with the probate as I was waiting for Jenny to get a lawyer which I thought best to share.  Jenny's first lawyer lasted four month, Jenny's second lawyer lasted four month; and then with Candace the same thing, four months to put together the estate settlement agreement.  And then four months before I found out about the estate grant.  

I will always remember on May 10 2024 when Jenny told me that she was forced to do the P1 and agree to the estate settlement agreement.  She said that she could not stand the pressure any more. She was distraught, Who was pressuring her. When we first spoke in 2023, she said she wanted me to be the administrator as I was the oldest. I did the P1 to be the administrator then we waited for her to get a lawyer in Kamloops.  I want to know who pressured her. And the lawyer I hired in Mary 2024 was equally as bad.  He had me sign a retainer agreement and then nothing happened until after the estate grant was issued and then he says to me that it is too late to oppose Jenny being the administrator.  It did not matter if she was qualified or not, pressured or not.  Or the fact that Candace under stealth got the estate grant issued,  

Facebook

 From Jenny's facebook page, which is now deleted.

the Probate Industrial Complex: Beware

 The Probate Industrial Complex. When lawyers create exorbitant fees. I recently was a party to a group of retired women and lawyer fees for estates were being discussed. Comments were made that some lawyers charge up to $1,000 an hour.

I then remembered Sherry Lund's opin talking of the probate industrial complex.

A Warning About the Probate Industrial Complex

By Sherry Lund

November 6, 2023

A well-organized crime wave is sweeping across this country, and it is positioned to devastate a generation. With baby-boomers holding one-half of the nation’s wealth, their money, homes, investments, and family treasures, all thought to be destined for loved ones, are in real danger of being swept into the possession and bank accounts of strangers. Families will be destroyed, life savings plundered, and homes sold out from under the owners with no recourse.

Why? Because in America today, a stranger can legally take control of your finances, remove you from your home, sell your assets, take away your rights including your right to vote, and separate you from your friends and family, despite objections, and profit from the entire horrific ordeal.

What started as a way to protect the vulnerable within the probate court system, has instead developed into a billion-dollar industry spawning the Probate Industrial Complex comprised of profiteers, called fiduciaries, guardians, guardian ad litem, doctors and conservators, who capitalize on unexpected illness, family dysfunction, and/or naivete and use their victims as an ATM. If it had not happened in my family, one of America’s most iconic names, I would have never believed it was true. For almost 14 years we struggled as my stepson, the grandson of Walt Disney, was held hostage to the greed and corruption of the Probate Industrial Complex. Our family was vexatiously attacked by attorneys with no evidence of wrongdoing, nothing short of court-condoned terrorism, slander and theft of assets. Our attorneys were punished by the court for zealously fighting for our rights.

Many years and tens of millions of dollars later, our case is over – but the lives I have witnessed left in the wake of destruction waged by these modern-day pirates, pillaging at will, is a cautionary tale, not to be ignored. The pattern and practice, often referred to as “The Playbook”, that these bad actors employ is quick, efficient, and effective at stripping the individual of their rights and separating them from their loved ones and their finances, all done without due process. This is human trafficking and racketeering at its finest.

The New York Times recently reported that the 73 million baby boomers, the oldest turning 80 this year, hold $78.3 trillion of the nation’s $140 trillion in assets. Now consider that because there are no national requirements for reporting how many Americans are in guardianship and conservatorship, or regulations protecting the money under management, the cases of abuse and corruption are well disguised and rarely prosecuted. What could possibly go wrong in this picture? With historically high amounts of wealth held within an aging population with minimal safeguards in place to protect them from being victimized by the Probate Industrial Complex, this situation demands action.

Many American families have a loved one who, due to injury or disease, can’t manage their day-to-day life. This is when folks often look to “professionals” for support. On the surface, all seems well when seeking out legal guidance. That is until it is not, and your world, your life, is no longer yours, visitation with your children and grandchildren is denied, the money you saved, and the home you worked hard to pay off, in hopes of living there until you die, then leaving it to your children, is now in the hands of a stranger. And it is happening all over our country in every probate court.

We may very well witness the largest transfer of wealth in American history, going from private individuals to court-appointed actors, not the family members or charities for which it was intended. Congress needs to act, and act quickly to put guardrails in place to prevent such piracy. Courts must be made to follow the laws and uphold the citizens’ Constitutional Rights. No one should be above the law.

SL

Sherry Lund is a probate reform advocate and president of the Celebration Stem Cell Center.

Miss Snowflake

To Miss Snowflake.

I am reading 6k of the affidavit you wrote for Jenny.  I am 70 years old and I have not been diagnosed with any medical condition, physical or mental that impair my ability to perform my legal duties as the administrator of the Estate.  What clever use of words.  You miss the point.  What are her qualifications.  Does she know how to spell?  Jenny told me often that she was ill and did not want to be the administrator of the estate.  Now that Candace told her that she could rip off the estate and not pay any rent, then all of a sudden Jenny is in good physical and mental health.  Prior to Candace there never was mention that she and Sandford and her adult daughter and her adult husband and her adult  grandchildren could live on the property for free.  Jenny was not coerced that she could rip off the estate, she agreed because her lawyer said she could.  Dear Miss Snowflack, what clever wording.  

I also want to know why did you include the two letters from my lawyer in the affidavit.  My lawyer had nothing to do with what happened.  In fact nothing happened and that is why he is no longer my lawyer. He was told that my sister was not qualified to be the administrator and for him to make sure it did not happen  He did nothing and on June 27 2024 Jenny was made administrator, You got nothing else to do except pad affidavits with nonsense. This case is a perfect example of the probate industrial complex. 

Rents in Canada

 

A three bedroom home in Vancouver rents for $4,380 before utilities.  

Another bader Day

 I find it very hard to deal with each day.

It seems I am always having difficulties with my computers.

My husband used to say that the internet was going to be the death of us all.

I believe him.  All the time I spend trying to do computer work is always with its problems.

Like right now there is a line between each sentence.  I do not know what I did to get the computer to do 

that.

Now, I have a bottle of apple juice and I can't twist the cap.  Getting old.  It takes strength to open bottles.

Earlier my screen was black and I couldn't do anything;

And then after a few hours I noticed the screen was live.

Another Bad Day

Another bad day.  I spent most of today and yesterday trying to make my computer workable.  No such luck.  I had to send my computer in for repair.  Last time it was in repair for three weeks.  It worked for a month and then it was in again.  Computers are so stressful.  I was wanting to type out a document and I do not think I will be able to do it as all my comments are lost and it will take me forever to reconstruct the information.   

the Pyrrhic effect in probate .

Serving documents.

While a lawyer might consider the strategic implications of serving documents at a later stage, they are bound by ethical standards and professional conduct rules. Deliberately delaying service to create a pyrrhic effect and deter interested parties from engaging in the administration of the estate could be seen as unethical and potentially harmful.

In the estate I am witnessing, the probate lawyer served the P2 package for the Estate Grant five months after the registrar signed the probate grant. This stealthy behaviour is concerning. The P2 package should have been served on the interested parties before it was filed in the probate registry. The probate lawyer might say that you, as an interested party, can still voice your displeasure, but it may fall on deaf ears. Bringing this matter to court would be a Pyrrhic victory—not worth the trouble.

At one point, I was threatened by the lawyers that they were going to get me, and it appears they have succeeded. I was never told why they wanted to get me. Maybe being old is the reason.  I do not know. I am going to have to spend my modest inheritance to prove they engaged in stealthy behavior, even though it would probably result in a Pyrrhic victory. It would be up to me to apply at my own cost to the court. While I would likely win, at what cost? Improper service could be addressed after the estate grant was sealed, but to what purpose? The court would probably instruct the parties to re-serve the information, which feels akin to shooting the messenger.

What a way to bring disrepute to the legal process—using the system to get someone. But then no one would know about it except me, and the lawyers, as I would not do anything about it because of the Pyrrhic effect.  

 

WESA: purpose. Wills Estates Succession Act (BC)

 WESA was designed with the intention of encouraging informal resolution of conflicts.  This to reduce the time, cost, and emotional strain associated with formal legal proceedings.  Court intervention is the last resort when informal methods do not work. Lawyers are expected to resolve disputes, not the courts.  How is that possible as lawyers are not independent decision makers.   

This isn't what is happening.  WESA was legislated in 2014, enough time for creative lawyers to circumvent the intent of the law.  As soon as one lawyer circumvents the intent, others follow as soon as they see how easy it is.  Lawyers bully clients all the time and clients are easily intimidated.  I wonder how many millions of dollars have been diverted since 2014 as it is economically wise to allow fraud to happen than to deal with it.  Relative to the value of the estate, what is a few hundred dollars, or a few thousand dollars, or a few million dollars.  Once an executor/administrator is appointed by way of the P1 form, they can fleece the estate, with the help of their lawyers.  Lawyer fees will stop most (everyone) from making anyone accountable. It is legal extortion.  

When a lawyer tells you to allow a wrong as to remedy it would cost more than the wrong, my anger will not go away, nor will the nausea that I am feeling.

Ethical v. Ethics

 It always amazes how infallible people think they are.

Especially lawyers.  

I had the occasion to attend a hearing this morning and it was adjourned.

The lawyers involved knew of the hearing and yet would not tell me that they were seeking an adjournment.  They could have told me up to yesterday.  But instead I had to travel from Vancouver to Kamloops to be told that the matter was adjourned. There is such a thing as a phone or an email. A phone call costs nothing, a court appearance to ask for an adjournment cost $600.  

I call this unethical behavior.  If I had a lawyer they would never have done this.

And they are notable citizens of Kamloops, both are partners in law firms.

What will go wrong will go wrong

 This past weeks has been like hell for me.

For two days Iwas in so much pain I could not walk, nor could I focus as the pain in my neck was unbearable.  Today I am a little functional but have a gigantic headache.

I am trying to draft out an affidavit outlining the chronology and reasons leading up to the granting of an estate grant.  Reading over it it screams that due process was violated.  Even though WESA does not explicitly say what due process is in an estate matter, it was left by the legislators for the lawyers to know what due process is. The legislatures did not anticipate that the lawyers would not serve documents to gain an advantage to use WESA to exclude disputants from disputing anything.  Waiting until the estate grant is issued would cause any dispute to be too difficult exponentially in time, money and paper to revocate an estate that was not honest. I get it if there are 100 beneficiaries most which were willed nominal sums like $100 do not have to be served the P2 as it is an administrative nightmare, but the significant beneficiaries should be served the P2 and also a Notice that the P19 (estate grant) would be issued.  I do not think that reasoning is valid now as the administrative burden can be lifted as all the documents can be served by one email with cc to all the interested parties.  Due process being a check so any disputes not discussed prior to the P1 or the P2 filing can be dealt with. The way it is now, it is "catch me if you can."  Get the estate grant as quickly as possible, and that would in all probability end further disputes of modest estates.

The purpose that the interested parties should be served after an administrator/executor is appointed is to prevent fraud; intentional or unintentioal. It would be easy for interested parties to discover fraud if they knew what was going on. Also it would stop misunderstandings/confusion as it would be detected beforehand. It also nominates the best qualified to be the administrator.

Lack of due process brings distrust to the legal process.  If there is no legal process then there is no rule of law. Transparency is critical so there is no surprises and everyone is treated fairly.

I am thinking. What I am doing is ridiculous.

 I am in the midst of trying to make an application to help someone to revoke an order.  At the end of the day the money involved might only be $10,000 hardly a sum to do much about.  But what upset me is that due process was not followed and call me stupid to take this on but if there is no due process there is no rule of law.  Due process ensures that laws are applied fairly and consistently, protecting individuals' rights and maintaining justice. Without it, the legal system would lack the necessary checks and balances, leading to arbitrary and unjust outcomes. Transparency is part of due process. Police enforce the laws and lawyers enforce due process.  Stealth due process should not happen.

A very bad day continues

 I do not know what is happening to my body.  The pain is a so bad I can't move much and I can't even type.  And to make it worse I lost all my documents in WORD as that computer died on me.  

My draft for the new application is gone and I fear that I will not be able to meet the deadlines.

I am so exhausted I cannot think thus not able to compose.  And my vision is blurring.  

Battle Ground for Fraud

 I came across the Supreme Court Rules (Probate) 2005 and even then a probate is a battlefield.   The  person who is named executor or an administrator and the possibility for fraud exists.  Because he controls the information, it would be extremely difficult for a beneficiary to audit what an executor or administrator is doing. The executor only has to pay you your inheritance as set out in a will.  But if he doesn't what can you do.  Think.  Romance scam.  Think.  Catch me if you can. Of course you can go to court but it is prohibitive expensive for a modest estate.   Forget the lawyer thing, the executor can fire the lawyer at any time, liquidate all the assets. and run.  

Most of this confusion goes to privacy. All I get is everything is confidential.  If a person is dead why is privacy an issue. Not only is it up to the executor to share information it is also up to the interested parties in an estate to share information.  When a beneficiary won't even share her email address, then we are in trouble.  Privacy protects crooks. And everyone is a crook.  It is just the degree that can upset.  If you have an expense account you will abuse it. Maybe not at first but after a few times it becomes easier.  

A very bad day

 I woke up in seriour pain.  I never get back pains and this morning I could not move much.

It is now 8:10 pm and my back still hurts.

I am working (no thinking) on a project and I do not know how to present it, word it.  My back pain is interfering with my focus and construction.

The problem is when you live alone, there is no one to help you if you are immobile.  Since this has never happened before, maybe the pain will just go away.

My project has to be finished by Wednesday.  I hope tomorrow being Saturday, it will just go away.  

New tort.

 

Collaborataive Constructive Fraud to Thwart Due Process.

This is when multiple lawyers who are wilfully blind resolve a legal issue by bypassing due process, usually for the sake of efficiency.

If you have experience with this tort, please let me know.

778.689.2276

Witnessing a probate, absolutely shocking

 I am witnessing probate.  I am absolutely sick over the lack of transparency and the resulting confusion and misinformation.  I am mostly concerned over the discretion that lawyers can use to deny beneficiaries information and there isn't anything real you can do about it.  If they want to put a knife in your back, they can.  It is called abuse of discretion; constructive fraud.  As I age I see more and more things that I get angry over. And WESA is one of them.  There is no legal reasons to abuse WESA but given discretion (power) to anyone eventually the abuse will happen.  Human nature dictates it so. In history and now.   

Quebec Tells Doctors They Won't Prosecute Them For Murder -- A Lawyer Ex...

Judicial Review Cho v. Mavis McMullen Housing Society, a travesty of justice.

 The judicial review for Cho v Mavis McMullen Housing Society will be heard on Monday November 18 2024 at 9:30 am. Attend this interesting educational court hearing. Cho is being evicted by a charity because a visitor took a few empty soda cans that were on a patio common area property. Tenants are responsible for the behavior of their visitors. Market value .30 cents. Mavis McMullen decided to evict a 89 year old woman from her home. Good move. I demand that Dr. Brenda Hogan, psychologist, resign. Brenda is the President of the Board of Directors. Evictions should be approved by her and not by a janitor. Their web page is superior. If they can create a great web site, I am sure Brenda has the expertise of knowing how to handle a criminal who takes empty cans and a 89 year old tenant. Punishment does not fit the crime. Anyone associated with Mavis McMullen Housing should be ashamed. The hearing is at Supreme Court 800 Smythe Street (Robson Square) ask the information desk for the court room number. Action No. VLC S S 247593. Cho v. Mavis McMullen Housing.

Pharmaceutical Rep Turned Whistleblower Reveals the Shocking Truth About...

89 year old woman gets evicted because a visitor steals a soda can

 I wish I knew how to move among social medias.  In this case Vancouver Sun November 12 2024 reported that a 89 year old woman is facing eviction because a visitor of hers stold a pop can.  Our society has gone crazy by allowing idiot janitors who are given powerby BC Housing to inflict harm to others because they can and in this case I am sure the unions protect them.  Or worse yet a board of directors.  

I hope this causes an uproar over the abuses that BC Housing and non-profit housing providers do against tenants. Policing functions being downloaded to janitors is all too common. We are defunding the police and letting pricks run the world. No tenant should be subject to such cruelty by BC Housing, a government authority. In any event, punishment should fit the crime. A visitor steals a soda can, and the tenant gets evicted. If you steal a can of soda from London Drugs you do not get evicted from your home but maybe that is the next step in our evolution for law and order. This is not North Korea where one dissenter says something and his family for three generations gets imprisoned. Where the fuck are the housing advocates. They are all in the clear because this old woman took a soda can which clearly is a criminal offence and she should be sentenced to the streets. Security cameras caught her. Security cameras are for serious offences and only the police can use them as evidence. So how was this non-profit able to use them in a residential tenancy action? The Chos should be suing all the idiots involved. The stupidity is there. In fact a Me2 movement should start and a class action started to include all the tenants who have been evicted/blacklisted by housing authorities who cause emotional and financial harm to tenants no matter their age. This over a fucking soda can. The world is going crazy and I feel I am going crazy as well.

audreyjlaferriere@gmail.com 778 689 2276

7:12 AM · Nov 13, 2024

Visit to City HallEverything is

 Continuing from two weeks ago when I attended at Vancouver City Hall and was deterred from going to the third floor because there was now a policy that says you cannot do that. I was told it was only for Wednesday, the day of council meetings. However, I was given false information. Yesterday I wanted to deliver another letter to the third floor and I had to answer to a person at the gateway to the elevators as to what my purpose was. When I was there two weeks ago I left the first letter with security to deliver to the City Clerk's Office.

Yesterday I was told that the City Clerk never received it. So much for trusting security. The letter was to tell the City that I intended to sue them because for nine months I have been sending emails to the mayor, the city manager, non-market housing, and legal and no one answered one of them.

The other day I came across information that says that the City has slandered me and defamed me. It was all done internally so I suspect that is okay. It causes me to be fearful of going near City Hall as these vigilantes could then attack me without consequences.

The City has gone crazy under Sim and he should be defunded.

It took me awhile to figure out why I was upset over the pending police state of City Hall.

City Hall has already been a part of me in that it was my City Hall and years ago when I had or wanted to attend at City Hall it was like meeting a friend who was not judgmental each employee was someone who wanted to help/converse with me. Now it is nothing. Everything is behind locked doors, no person to person connection. So sad.

Another Regretful Day

 I was at Save One Foods and I noticed the person ahead of me going through the checkout.  He bill must have been $200.  I was watching her and a large bag of sugar under the grocery kart went through and it was not scanned.  This isn't the first time I have seen such behavior.  A store clerk asked her if she paid for the sugar and she said yes.  The clerk did not ask to see the receipt. The clerk was young and accepted the woman's statement.

Finding a lawyer

 I do not know why I even try.

I was referred to a lawyer.  She was working at a large law firm in Vancovuer. 

When I tried to contact her I was told that she no longer worked there.  And they would not give me her new address.  

Then reception said if I needed a lawyer to go and request on on their webpage.  I said why can't I leave my name with her for a lawyer to call me.  I told her what would happen if I did not have an email address.

She said that if I did not have an email address for me to find another law firm.

Why would this huge law firm only respond to their web page. 

Why.  Is it as soon as they receive a message they are checking your credit before they talk to you.

WATCH FULL: RFK Jr. hosts American Health Crisis Roundtable with doctors...

Obesity is killing America.

  

A Psychological Analysis of Trump’s Personality by Dr. Jordan B. Peterso...

Why Triump should win ...

The Great Partisan Shift | Robert F. Kennedy Jr. | EP 484

Fraud on the court ...

 Fraud in court refers to dishonest actions that compromise the integrity of the judicial process. 

The tort of Conspiratory Constructive Fraud

 The tort of Conspiratory Constructive Fraud.

Lawyers have engaged in constructive fraud to benefit their clients, hoping that the fraud will go unnoticed. 

Constructive fraud involves a breach of duty or a legal or equitable obligation that leads to harm or undue advantage, even without fraudulent intent. 

It can occur in various fiduciary relationships, including those between lawyers and clients.

What the FUCK are the police doing.

 This is crazy.  This has happened in Vancouver.  Similar case in Kamloops.  The police do not have to be asholes.  

BRITISH COLUMBIA: In July 2024, while walking and filming on a sidewalk outside a police station, a man was unexpectedly and forcefully arrested by a police officer. He was subsequently charged with mischief and municipal corruption. The man has now retained The Democracy Fund (TDF) to defend against these charges.

The details surrounding the alleged wrongdoing remain unclear, raising questions about the circumstances leading to the arrest.

TDF Lawyers are concerned that police did not have reasonable or probable grounds to arrest and charge a man for peacefully walking on public property. 

“We will be requesting full disclosure of all evidence related to this case and will initiate a Crown pretrial in the coming weeks so that we can understand how our client allegedly violated the law,” stated senior litigation counsel Adam Blake-Gallipeau.

SEND MONEY TO DEMOCRACY FUND AS EACH ONE OF US WILL NEED THEM.  

The case in Kamloops.

While the RCMP is often taken to task about their lack of action when panhandlers and ne'er-do-wells loiter outside downtown businesses, one Kelowna senior is finding out the Mounties have a different approach after he spent too much time outside the detachment.

Cornelius Clemens Sierhuis, 66, appeared at the Kelowna courthouse, Oct. 9, having been convicted on the rarely used charge of mischief that "obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property."

Sierhuis' conviction relates to an incident in February 2023 whereby he spent four hours outside the Kelowna RCMP attachment on Ritcher Street approaching officers and trying to amend a court injunction.

He wouldn't take no for an answer when officers correctly told him it was a Saturday and he'd have to go to the courthouse on Monday to deal with the matter.

Crown prosecutor David Reznikov said there was no allegation Sierhuis had assaulted or pushed any of the officers but he had "belligerent conduct" towards the RCMP.

"It's obvious that Mr. Sierhuis has an animosity towards the RCMP and that animosity is a factor," the Crown told the court.

He was arrested and represented himself in court and was ultimately convicted of the mischief charge.

The senior's prompt arrest is the polar opposite of the perception of many in their dealings with the RCMP.

A recent survey in Kamloops found businesses frustrated with RCMP and bylaw officers some saying they felt abandoned by police. Over the years local media have reported multiple stories about people sharing their frustrations with the RCMP's perceived lack of action.

While Sierhuis ended up in handcuffs outside the cop shop he had a different take on the events.

"I have no shame or guilt over what happened here," Sierhuis told the court. "I respected those two officers that treated me like garbage."

The court heard that the day before the senior showed up at the Kelowna RCMP detachment, he was involved in an altercation with a neighbour at a rooming house where he lived.

Police gave him an undertaking not to go near the neighbour and not to go to the rooming house.

However, he wanted the undertaking changed so he called the RCMP detachment multiple times on Friday and again Saturday morning.

"I did everything I could over the phone, and I was completely blockaded. I had no choice. The roof over my head was being threatened," he said. "I had to go talk to someone."

Once at the cop shop, which was closed to the public as it was a Saturday, Sierhuis approached officers as they went in and out of the building.

"I never spoke to one person more than once. I never harassed anybody. I accepted everybody's answer and moved on hoping I could find one officer that would do his job properly," Sierhuis told the court.

Officers told him there was nothing they could do and he needed to go to the courthouse on Monday.

Nevertheless, he continued to remain at the police station and at one point banged on the door.

At the sentence hearing, the 66-year-old spoke at length, saying he was at the RCMP station "pleading" for help.

"Nobody wanted to help me. And then to get rid of me, they arrested me," he said.

Along with a sentence of two years probation, the Crown proposed a 50-metre no-go condition barring Sierhuis from going near the RCMP detachment or from calling the non-emergency line.

Provincial Court Judge David Ruse didn't agree with the no-go order.

"It's not like he has made a habit of going to the RCMP office and pestering them," Judge Ruse said. "It's a public institution. The public should be allowed to access (it)."

Ultimately, the senior was given 18-months of probation.

Election Day October 19 2024

 Election Day.

I was hoping my day would be better.  When I attempted to go out of the front door, I was met with rain, and the yard was soaked, meaning I would have to wear my rain boots.  To my annoyance, I could not find my rain boots.  Inprovise.  I could wear plastic bagson my feet so the water would not soak my socks.  The problem with that was since plastic bags were outlawed there were no plastic bags.  

As I was walking on 42nd to the pooling station, something did not seem right. None of the houses on either side of the street had a FOR SALE sign in front, which was very unusual. I do not know why no houses were for sale; there must be some unknown/mysterious reason for this. I had an unsettling feeling.

I did vote.  There was only a few people at the polling station.  I could not understand that either.  No one cares to vote I thought.

Then I went to London Drugs.  There was a sign saying: LD has 10,000 items on sale. Lots of bargains.

I do not know what the hell is wrong with me.  Each time I think I am being a good person I regret it. But then maybe I should not even associate with anyone.  Life wold be easier.  What amases me is that then you look like you did something wrong.  Do not shoot the messenger or the person who is trying to help you.

Access Pro Bono

 I had a conversation this afternoon with a gent who was banned by Access Pro Bono. He said he got an email from Access Pro Bono saying that they would not give him help because he used his nickname rather than his legal name in his application.  They accused him of fraud. Nick name: Nick. Rather than his legal name, Nicholas. 

I am totally fed up with organizations that are supposed to help the poor. They are very creative in getting rid of clients.  

If a lawyer suspects that a client does not fully understand what she is signing and still leads her to commit perjury, it is both unethical and criminal.

Unethical: The lawyer is failing in their duty to ensure that the client fully understands the legal documents and proceedings. This violates professional conduct rules and can lead to disciplinary actions such as suspension or disbarment.

Criminal: Leading a client to commit perjury, especially when the client may not fully understand the implications, involves knowingly facilitating a crime. This can result in criminal charges against the lawyer, including potential imprisonment.

In this scenario, the lawyer’s actions breach both ethical standards and criminal laws, reflecting a serious abuse of their professional and legal responsibilities.

Can you demonstrate in front of a police station The world is going crazy.

 Does this mean no one can demonstrate in front of a police station.  Or is it just for those that pester.

from INFONEWS 

October 13, 2024 - 7:00 PM

While the RCMP is often taken to task about their lack of action when panhandlers and ne'er-do-wells loiter outside downtown businesses, one Kelowna senior is finding out the Mounties have a different approach after he spent too much time outside the detachment.

Cornelius Clemens Sierhuis, 66, appeared at the Kelowna courthouse, Oct. 9, having been convicted on the rarely used charge of mischief that "obstructs, interrupts or interferes with any person in the lawful use, enjoyment or operation of property."

Sierhuis' conviction relates to an incident in February 2023 whereby he spent four hours outside the Kelowna RCMP attachment on Ritcher Street approaching officers and trying to amend a court injunction.

He wouldn't take no for an answer when officers correctly told him it was a Saturday and he'd have to go to the courthouse on Monday to deal with the matter.

Crown prosecutor David Reznikov said there was no allegation Sierhuis had assaulted or pushed any of the officers but he had "belligerent conduct" towards the RCMP.

"It's obvious that Mr. Sierhuis has an animosity towards the RCMP and that animosity is a factor," the Crown told the court.

READ MORE: Truck thief chased down and caught by owner in Lake Country

He was arrested and represented himself in court and was ultimately convicted of the mischief charge.

The senior's prompt arrest is the polar opposite of the perception of many in their dealings with the RCMP.

A recent survey in Kamloops found businesses frustrated with RCMP and bylaw officers some saying they felt abandoned by police. Over the years local media have reported multiple stories about people sharing their frustrations with the RCMP's perceived lack of action.

While Sierhuis ended up in handcuffs outside the cop shop he had a different take on the events.

"I have no shame or guilt over what happened here," Sierhuis told the court. "I respected those two officers that treated me like garbage."

The court heard that the day before the senior showed up at the Kelowna RCMP detachment, he was involved in an altercation with a neighbour at a rooming house where he lived.

Police gave him an undertaking not to go near the neighbour and not to go to the rooming house.

However, he wanted the undertaking changed so he called the RCMP detachment multiple times on Friday and again Saturday morning.

"I did everything I could over the phone, and I was completely blockaded. I had no choice. The roof over my head was being threatened," he said. "I had to go talk to someone."

Once at the cop shop, which was closed to the public as it was a Saturday, Sierhuis approached officers as they went in and out of the building.

"I never spoke to one person more than once. I never harassed anybody. I accepted everybody's answer and moved on hoping I could find one officer that would do his job properly," Sierhuis told the court.

READ MORE: Veteran Summerland RBC manager jailed for swiping $850K from seniors

Officers told him there was nothing they could do and he needed to go to the courthouse on Monday.

Nevertheless, he continued to remain at the police station and at one point banged on the door.

At the sentence hearing, the 66-year-old spoke at length, saying he was at the RCMP station "pleading" for help.

"Nobody wanted to help me. And then to get rid of me, they arrested me," he said.

Along with a sentence of two years probation, the Crown proposed a 50-metre no-go condition barring Sierhuis from going near the RCMP detachment or from calling the non-emergency line.

Provincial Court Judge David Ruse didn't agree with the no-go order.

"It's not like he has made a habit of going to the RCMP office and pestering them," Judge Ruse said. "It's a public institution. The public should be allowed to access (it)."

Ultimately, the senior was given 18-months of probation.

Sierhuis will be back in court later this month to find out whether he's guilty or not of an assault charge following the altercation at the rooming house.

Candace Cates and Leah Card

 I am having a very upsettling experience with Candace Cates and Leah Card, both lawyers from Kamloops BC.  If you have had an unsettling experience with both or either of these lawyers, let's talk.

778.689.2276      audreyjlaferriere@gmail.com

Was Diddy Destroyed By BlackRock & Diageo? Latest Shocking News! - Attwo...

WATCH FULL: RFK Jr. hosts American Health Crisis Roundtable with doctors...

"Catch Me If You Can Scenario. Lawyers Not Being Ethical And No One Will Notice. Fraudsters Being Confident No Will Go After Them.

I have had it.

I haven't been very active on my Voice of Gone Ballistic blog.  I'm nearing the end of my life, so it seems like a waste of time. Others can comment. I'm afraid to go outside because every time I do, I see corruption. Not big corruption, because that's beyond my pay grade, but small corruption.

This afternoon, I was given a coupon for Freshslice Pizza. It was a bargain: two slices and a drink for $5.00, including tax. Luckily, I had a $5.00 bill. At the cash register, the cashier quoted me $5.40. I did not have .40 extra. I asked why 40 cents more, as the coupon said with tax. He explained it was the recycling fee.

I looked it up, and there it was: you are being charged a container recycling fee and a deposit fee. I understood that these fees are charged by grocery stores but I did not know they are being by a restaurant.  

But the deposit fee is only ten cents and the recycling fee is only 2 cents.  So why 28 cents more. Maybe they are charging 28 cents for the paper plate.

I accused the young man of dishonesty as one would believe that the omission of the recycling/deposit fee on the coupon for $5.00 was a sneaky way for a consumer to take advantage of the $5.00 coupon.

What Freshslice Pizza should have done was state the price of the pizza slices and drink and list the sales tax, GST tax, recycling fee for one can of pop, and deposit fee.

JUST ANNOUNCED Trudeau's EX WIFE DESTROYS Him In LEAKED Clip

Disgraceful Neglect: Trudeau government offering MAiD to veterans