Friday September 29, 2017 – I made an appointment to drop off the rent to Yahkni’s new office. She wasn’t there. When I called her back, she was abrupt and rude, telling me that I’d misunderstood the time. I checked the recording of our call, and I hadn’t; she had. So I called her back to make another appointment, and this time, she was there. While I was having my time wasted the first time, John and Agostino showed up at the apartment to serve Marie with an N1 Notice (notifying us of an increase in rent, (Doc xxx)). John’s body language and attitude were hostile, but he didn’t say anything.
I got a receipt from Yahkni (the first ever in our tenancy with John that satisfied the regulatory requirements for a rent receipt, although I had to quibble on a few of them. There wasn’t a lot of consistency in the way rent receipts were filled out to this point. Things were looking up…). (Doc xxx)
Sunday October 1, 2017 – I sent Yahkni two emails. The first (Doc 178) asked for an electronic copy of the photograph disclosed: that alleged to be of John’s injuries. (It was dated a month after the alleged incident)
The second (Doc 179) raised a few concerns I had over some of the disclosure and John’s behaviour.
Monday October 2, 2017 – Wednesday October 18, 2017 – The apartment (particularly Bedroom 3) was a bit cold through the month of October. Marie spoke to Agostino several times, and asked permission to bleed the radiators. Agostino delayed at first, saying he had to check with John. After her second or third query, Agostino told her that he would enter to bleed the rads.
Thursday October 19, 2017 – I was leaving the building to wait for a ride to go to work (I’d started a new job) I noticed Richard Pollington holding up what appeared to be an old VHS camcorder, pointed at me. When I asked “What are you doing?” He didn’t answer, so I turned and walked away. As I was walking away, he said “The cops said we could have a camera outside”. I was tempted to ask what he meant by that but my ride arrived, so I got in and left. I wasn’t sure if Richard Pollington standing there with an antique camcorder was a “‘normal’ day to day activity” within the meaning of the Interim Order (Doc 175) so I didn’t take any pictures of him (we’d received the Interim Order in the mail a few days before). The only cell phone I had on my person at the time had a lousy camera anyway. (I may be off by a day or two on the date. I didn’t date my notes for the day).
Pollington hadn’t been present for the conversation between Allcroft and John on May 15, 2017, so I concluded that Richard’s remark was the result of John informing him of the contents of that discussion. Pollington was free to record what he wanted; he wasn’t subject to the restrictions of the Interim Order. And, in this day and age in the downtown of a large city, one expects cameras when outside and visible to the public. If he wanted to stand there and make a video of me walking down a sidewalk to the street, what did I care? There’s no law saying he can’t, to my knowledge (Following someone around, recording them with a camera, or recording someone in their home is a different matter. He hadn’t done that).
In the past week, I’d seen a woman (Christina Stamper, although I didn’t know her name at the time) that I’d recognized as a frequent visitor to the building (she always went to the side door to Pollington’s unit) taking pictures of the building exterior on the 99 side after speaking to John in the driveway below our living room window. That hadn’t bothered me much either, but I wondered why John would be interested in photos of the exterior of our apartment at this point. Christina Stamper would move into the building on January 1, 2018.
Friday October 22, 2017 – In the early evening, I left our unit by the back door. As I walked beside the building, I noticed John following me, holding up a cell phone as though making a video. He was about 4 feet away and had come up behind me silently enough that I was unaware of his approach until he was close. The phone was an old style flip phone, and I couldn’t see a camera lens in it, so I think John was just provoking, not recording.
I reached into my pocket for my cell phone. Before I could take my hand out, John had made the phone disappear and pushed past me (putting his hands on me and literally pushing) saying “Excuse me!” as he did. He followed up with his trademark “Did I say excuse me?” and kept walking. (His version of “excuse me” was one of John’s favorite methods of provocation, combined with a little physical intimidation. I did record several instances of it on camera. Reading a transcript, it appears perfectly innocent. Seeing it on video gives you a better idea, but still doesn’t convey the full experience. John takes an act of everyday courtesy and turns it into a provocation, somehow. It’s a bit creepy, and characteristic douchebag behaviour.) ). I did not record anything because all I would have recorded was John, walking away from me.
Saturday October 21, 2017 – Agostino delivered a Notice of Entry for October 24, 2017 to bleed the radiators (Doc 180). The Notice of Entry did not comply with the requirements of the Interim Order (Doc 175).
Sunday October 22, 2017 – There was a loud discussion on Pollington’s front porch. I was on the back deck and overheard parts of it (it was hard to miss. The conversation was shrill, angry and loud. I was wondering if it would be necessary to call the cops, but hesitated because it wasn’t really my problem aside from the disturbance it was creating.) The gist of it was that “the apartment” would not be ready for November first and might not be ready for December first, and there was a lot of work to do before “Chris” could move in (and at the time, I didn’t know who that was). “Chris” was throwing a fit (no other way to describe it) because the delay apparently interfered with her plans in some way. She was berating someone for “another fucking delay” and mentioned that her original plans were to move October 15, and that this was the second delay. A male voice assured her that “at least the move won’t be up those fucking stairs”. I suspected that John had promised our unit to Christina Stamper, on the assumption that his L2 application would be successful on Sept 25. If so, John’s assumption that our unit would be vacant by October 15 was a bit optimistic. Or, maybe the male voice meant another ‘upstairs’ move. I have no idea.
Monday October 23, 2017 – The night before Agostino was due to bleed the radiators, Marie called him with a noise complaint about Richard (AR-95). The recording app on her phone was set to pause during silences, and Agostino’s voice was very faint, so the recording is mostly Marie’s side of the conversation.
Tuesday October 24, 2017 – Agostino entered the unit and bled the radiators. The entire operation took less than five minutes, and there was nothing of note other than Agostino’s comments on his brother’s behaviour and character (Vid 30).
Wednesday November 1, 2017 – At 08:45 I called Yahkni and left a message asking to make an appointment to pay rent. She called back at 09:30 (AR-96) and we agreed that I would drop off the rent to her office before noon that day if possible, if not we would make later arrangements. Yahkni did agree to let me know if she left her office before noon.
At 11:39, I arrived at Yahkni’s office to find it empty. The sign on the door said it was open, but the lights were off inside, and Yahkni’s vehicle was not in the parking lot. I knocked, several times. I also tried calling Yahkni’s cell number and business number. I left a message on her voicemail (AR-97). There was no answer on either. So I took a few pictures to document her no-show, and sent her an email (Doc 181). The conversation was as follows:
rent for #2 99 east ave south 6 messages
Peter Bosch <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 11:56 AM
I was at your office 15 minutes ago but you were not there as agreed. Please call me to make arrangements to pick up the rent.
vidy Yakhni <email@example.com>
Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 2:19 PM
To: Peter Bosch <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Mr Boosh, As I indicated to you earlier, I was only going to be in the office until 12:00pm and will return sometime around 3_4:00pm.
I am presenly in court and will return to the office at 4:30, and will be there until 5:30pm.
Vidy yakhni [Quoted text hidden]
Peter Bosch <email@example.com>
Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 2:46 PM
To: vidy Yakhni <firstname.lastname@example.org>
I have made arrangements with Agostino to pay the rent later today.
Ms Yahkni, regardless of why you agreed to accept the rent, you did agree to accept it. I will not be the subject of more of the kind of games Mr Cerino has been playing. This is the third time I have made the trip to your office (a two and a half hour round trip by bus) and have only successfully managed to pay rent once. Each time arrangements were made by telephone in advance, and you were not there twice. Attached is a photograph with a date/time stamp of 11:47 am this morning, taken at your office. I took other photographs clearly showing the door was locked by deadbolt from the inside. The voicemail I left has a date/time of 11:46 am this morning. You did not respond to loud knocking on the door, shouted inquiries, or a telephone call. Your lack of professionalism and courtesy, together with your untruthful statements to me on the telephone, are offensive, Ms Yakhni. If you cannot manage to keep appointments, knowing that I must go to some effort to keep them, at least have the courtesy to let me know you won’t be there in advance.
I attached a photo to prove my point:
These photos show the shaft of the deadbolt. The door is clearly locked.
Curiously enough, (other than in a phone call on November 2, 2017) Yakhni did not comment on the photographs until after I’d disclosed them as part of (another, future) T2 application a few months later (from Doc 182):
vidy Yakhni <email@example.com>
Wed, May 23, 2018, 10:28 AM
I find that your conduct extremely inappropriate and unwelcome when you visited my office and took these images of my door lock WITHOUT PERMISSION OR any NOTIFICATION THAT YOU WERE DOING SO.
I am formally instructing you to permanently destroy all images relating to the locks on my office door and to confirm in writing that this has been done.
I reserve the rights to inform the Hamilton Police of this incident and to commence any legal proceeding to available to ensure the safety of my office.
Edge Paralegal Services
I’ll leave it to the reader to decide if there’s any legal standing for her demand to destroy photographs of her office door (visible from a public sidewalk nearby) by someone who was there by appointment. None of the photographs show the interior of the office, but they do show that the lights inside were off. Dealing with Yakhni was starting to feel a lot like dealing with John Cerino.
There were other incidents of Yahkni missing appointments, misinforming us (or trying to misinform us) about LTB procedures, and numerous instances of her stating outright falsehoods that I haven’t documented on this blog. (To be fair to Yakhni, most of those could be explained by John having misinformed her. Most, but not all. Yahni doesn’t hesitate to lie if she thinks she can get away with it.) She was frequently condescending and arrogant (outside of hearings) and would make remarks intended to provoke. She wasn’t very good at it. In short she acted like an unprofessional ass a lot of the time. She also appeared to have some difficulty with reading a calendar or a clock on other occasions.
At 14:15, Yakhni called me on my cell phone (AR-98), and tried to put the blame on me for missing her at the office. The conversation got a bit tense, and she instructed me to make rent payments to the landlord. So much for the Interim Order (Doc 175). Yahkni was acting more and more like John; make an agreement, then break it at the first opportunity.
At 17:09 Marie and I called Agostino a bit later to see if he could come by and pick up the rent, and to complain about his representative’s behaviour (AR-99). We made arrangements for him to come by the next day. Agostino said that he had to get in touch with the paralegal to “get a receipt”. He also said he called her twice to find out what happened, and had not had a return call. Agostino then said he went by her office “about an hour ago”. When I told him she said she would be in until 5:30, Agostino said he’d go over to her office immediately. I asked Agostino to call me if she was in, he said he would call only if she was in.
I then called Yakhni to let her know what was going on.(AR-100).
Thursday November 2, 2017 – At 10:10, Marie called Agostino (AR-101) as I was on the phone with Yakhni (AR-103). Marie tried to make arrangements to pay rent to Agostino while I listened to Yakhni lie repeatedly. Neither conversation was very productive.
An hour later, Agostino called Marie (AR-102) and said he’d be by to pick up the rent. Agostino asked Marie to ask me to write a letter stating that we had no problem with paying the rent to him in this manner. Marie agreed.
A few minutes later, Agostino arrived to collect the rent (Vid 31). We gave him a letter saying we had no objection to paying rent to him (Doc 183), and discussed recent events. Richard Pollington was along as a witness. I considered objecting to his presence, but the situation was complicated enough without adding that to it.
At this point, I was getting frustrated. What was the point of an order by a Board member if one of the parties was free to ignore it without consequence? Yahkni was escalating her policy of making anything as difficult as possible. Adversarial doesn’t mean you get to act like a prick. Yahkni’s statements that she ‘didn’t have to do this’ were ridiculous. She’s an officer of the court. It may have been a consent order but she did agree to it, which meant she (and John) were subject to it.