Journal tomhudson's Journal: [Stupid Landlord Trix] - Judge serves the landlord in court! 8
Well, today was yet another hearing. This one was about my demand that the case be re-tried because the original court failed to rule on several of my claims (I can understand that - after the first hour we probably both wanted to shoot him because of his whining, so mistakes were made).
-
Mistake #1: Remember, this is Quebec, so the first question the judge asked us is if we were comfortable proceeding in french. I replied in the affirmative (in french, of course
If you were born here, you have no real excuse not to know both languages. Both the english and the french regard people who don't at least make an effort as at least impolite, if not outright ignorant.
-
Mistake #2: He claimed that he had never seen the motion, and he needed time to look at it. Now at every impasse, I've said "no problem, judge" when the other side has asked for time, even when a reasonable person would have had grounds to contest it. Judges like that. He, on the other hand, has a history of opposing everything
The judge asked if I had sent him a copy - I replied that I had, and it was probably in the now-thick pile of registered mail that was marked "refused". I could take a minute and go through it and get the relevant notice - again. However, judges don't like it when you repeatedly waste their time with such stupidity as ducking notices, than coming to court and pleading ignorance
"Don't bother, I'll serve him here." So, the clerk made another copy of everything, and then gave it to him, saying "Now you're served."
Moral of the story: Don't give a judge too many reasons to smack you down in front of your opponent
-
Mistake #3: After I asked a question about the timing of the next hearing (it won't be this year - pity) he then said he'd like to ask her a question, but only after I leave. Stoooo-pid!!!
It was a race between the judge and me, but I think the judge won. I objected - "That's totally illegal" (maybe next time he should look up the law wrt "ex parte" arguments at hearings). The judge gave him another smack-down, first by telling him she couldn't hear anything about the case without both parties present. When he continued, she said "I can't do that. Go ask the clerk outside if you have a question about something." If you had been there, you'd have know that was a "polite" hint to GTFO.
-
Mistake #4: Don't be stupid enough to give me a chance to pretty much confirm that you've been ducking legal notices from the city. In other words, he probably doesn't even know what's in the city inspector's report - the report that he doesn't think I can get a copy of "because it's against the law" for the city to give me a copy.
(If he's too stupid to get a copy in the future, I'll be happy to let him look at mine AFTER a few choice questions
-
Mistake #5: Don't get me reviewing the law because I'm trying to figure out your next move
In this case, I just reviewed the text of the applicable laws and noticed a statute that entitles me to claim an additional $1,200.00. If he hadn't been so stupid with all the contestations and delays, I would have missed it.
This guys stupidity is getting documented quite nicely - and every judge that handles the case gets to see it when they get the file dumped on them.
Oh well, I *was* going to dump another 100+ pages into the file
I'll post links when I've uploaded it to the net.
Best of luck on a quick resolution (Score:2)
Sorry for you that it's dragging out so long...
Re: (Score:2)
At this point I'm kind of enjoying myself. I *am* trolling him, and I admit it. If he had a lawyer (or kept the one he got for one hearing), this thing could have been over long ago, but if he thinks he can run a con past a judge when I'm there showing his lies at every step, he's wrong.
And since I now know more about his financial situation than when this started, there's a fair chance that if I get everything I ask for, he's bankrupt, which explains pretty much all his behaviour. Desperate people so
Yes! (Score:2)
As to your suing him for defamation? I'd do it. Scar his record so if he does this to others then they can point to him being difficult to deal with.
Your journal on this subject is about the only reason I continue to visit Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
I've started to organize the data I have (emails, photos, vids) so I can post them on the net as a sort of educational HOWTO for people. There are so many people who are intimidated by the system, or who let themselves be bullied, and there are plenty of people who do the bullying because it works right now,
He's always whined that I'm just a "professional tenant looking for a payout" as some sort of justification, when all this could have been avoided if he hadn't pulled one lie too many, and later on w
I love this story... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There are a lot of things in my life that I could write a book about that are far more interesting - including some pretty extreme stuff that I've never mentioned on slashdot :-) The problem is, most people just wouldn't believe it was a true story, so I'd have to write it as a work of fiction - and then, it would be panned as fiction because it's "not believable enough."
I actually DID start to write it up a long time ago ... but there's one or two crazy people out there who have a history of violence w
I agree.. (Score:1)
with Talinom, on a couple of points. I only really read journals of a few people on Slashdot anymore - and I really love the updates on this. I also think you should go after him for the defamation. I think you will have a pretty easy time of it.
If you do put up something on facebook, let me know, my username is the same as here. :)
Re: (Score:2)
For the defamation, I figure "sticks and stones". Better to punish him in court, and I'll still hurt him where it counts ...
If I put something up there specific to this, I'll post here, obviously, but I'll also drop you a line there :-)
Thanks for the encouragement.