Here’s Another Entirely New Perspective In A Lack Of Consumer Protection And A Good Example Of How Extreme Things Have Gotten

So here’s an interesting diversion from the normal insulting lack of consumer protection in buying a new home from this builder

I’ve told you about the constant stream of lies and misrepresentations coming from all levels of this builder, from their COO to their office manager, to their site supervisor.

We did their work for them again a few weeks back by taking photographs of a visible deficiency (we showed them photographs) and emailing them to the office manager, who has continually proven incompetent with not only keeping track of emails, but totally unaware that when she makes changes with a customer she had to send a copy of those changes to the site workers (my wife discovered this and we had to educate the woman).

We had to have our master ensuite redone thanks to this very “dropping of the ball“.  It wasn’t the first time.

So,  the office manager lost the photo apparently and once again the office manager chose to burden the customer to find it and resend it.

And when she tries to have her customer serve as her archive or library assistant, for work drastically overdue, she always accompanies her message with a “little-girl-type insult“!

You can’t make this kind of stuff up!

So, through a number of emails, it is concluded (I had to sit down and write it out) that a photograph wasn’t even needed as you can see the split in the eve trough easily.

And then, this morning around 8:30 a.m. or so I see the pathological site supervisor (“Rick Wells“) who allegedly couldn’t see the water running down at the corner of the eavestrough the other day when it was raining and he was on site (a rare occasion for this guy – let me quote one of his workers:  “he shows up a couple times a week and yells for about a half hour and then everything is back as usual“).

I’m not the only owner here that has had this type of problem with this guy.  I undestand another neighbor actually put a “restraining order” on him restricting him to ever step back onto their property!

So I went out to show him and he erupted into a fit of rage, storming over onto my property and within a quarter of an inch from me standing literally “nose to nose” when I had to tell him if he touched me I was about to hurt him like he has never been hurt before“!

There’s something unique about “man to man” confrontations as bullies always blow so big right up to the point where their prey stands up to them (and I’ve got a history)!  And I meant what I said.

You see, I grew up in a world where fist fights were daily fare!  Things were settled “mano-o-mano” where we didn’t “threaten” or try to “intimidate” (I just never have intimidated easily).  We would simply “strike first and strike hard” and leave a reminder not to come back thinking this was just a lucky outcome (if you know what I mean)!

He immediately coward down and left my property to the safety of the roadway (which is owned by our condo corporation) thus still private property.

And his entire demeanor changed from the aggressor to the “infant child” screaming obscenities throughout our residential community at the top of his lungs alleging that I was everything you can imagine (in a childish way) right down to my “having a small penis” (I don’t know how he would think he knows the size of my penis).

The encounter went on for about fifteen minutes and when he finally walked off screaming the entire way down to the end of our community.

Now, I have his bosses cell phone number (we talk almost weekly by phone or email) so I called Muzammil and was greeted by his voice mail so I started my narrative, when I see from the corner of my eye Mr. Wells, charging at me again so I put the phone up between us and told him to say good morning to his boss.

The filth, swear words, and attacks about my alleged “penis size” accelerated.

All the grading contractors were absolutely amazed and shocked!

I returned home and emailed his boss, giving a legal instruction that he “preserve that voicemail as it may be proven evidentiary down the road” and specifically warned him that failure to preserve it “could be seen as ‘intentional destruction of evidence’“.

He called me moments later, cursing both his office manager for her unprofessionalism in her emails to my wife and self and informed that he had not hesitated to call me back so had not heard the tape.

I described the content of the voice mail to him as he repeatedly expressed shock and insisted on calling Rick Wells immediately, which I assume to be simply more blather and cover up tactic.

So, the police showed up about an hour later and I brought them into my home and went over the sequence of events.

I was surprised by the attending officer’s (a Constable of the Oakville Police Department) quick discount of the events as I described them.  I understand and respect that these guys and women have a tough job and deserve our respect and support, however they are not perfect and the telling of this brief exchange suggests that there is room for improvement.

I had an earlier similar experience in my condo with a security guard and another one actually in my other condo in the gym where tensions arose and mano-o-mano-type stuff was introduced and in conversation with the attending Toronto police officers, “the simple act of rushing up and getting into someone’s face is in fact ‘assault’“.

The Constable, we learned had made his decision long before arriving or at least arriving and honestly listening to the facts.

This was as a result of the Constable being fundamentally uninformed about the law but was more than willing to share his misinformed perspective.

He quickly and confidently quoted the law (this can be seen on his partner’s vest-cam video) that, in his opinion, is that “I had said nothing to suggest to him that any criminal activity took place“.

I was shocked to hear his view as it absolutely contradicted that given me by Toronto officers and, not being someone who is shy or would shy away from an argument I informed the Constable that “apparently the law in Oakville is different than the law in Toronto” and I quoted him the position given to me on two occasions by Toronto officers.

Well, our interchange didn’t go anywhere specifically because of Constable’s inaccurate understanding of the law.

I simply came back into my computer and Googled “does assault require physical contact” and here’s what I discovered:

Assault (tort) – Wikipedia   Because assault requires intent, it is considered an intentional tort, as opposed to a tort of negligence. Actual ability to carry out the apprehended contact is not necessary. In Criminal Law an assault is defined as an attempt to commit battery, requiring the specific intent to cause physical injury.

Now, this blog is not about who is right and who is wrong in this instance.

It is all about our police officers running around “falsely confident in their knowledge” of the law and allowing that false confidence to interfere with them truly getting the facts.

The officer misunderstood or misinterpreted the law (he was quick enough to emphasise to me that “he was quoting Canadian Criminal Law” when in fact, he was actually “misquoting Canadian Criminal Law”).

No hard feeling!  It just resulted in one lunatic the builder’s, Site Supervisor (yes the same guy that painted the interior of my flaw riddled house “BEFORE” caulking it, and did such a poor job that my wife and I had to literally take over quality control for there to any hope of getting a quality home).

I hold a great deal of respect for our Police men and women and I admire their willingness to face risks every day to protect society but when one deviates from servant to misinterpreting law, I’m confident that we can all agree that the two just don’t mix.

I would hope that the police come and gather the facts.

I wasn’t aware that they are to discount the facts and severity of a situation for some arbitrary measuring stick (clearly this officer doesn’t have a law degree or he would probably be a lawyer) based on a misconception of the law.

The Constable approached this situation with a bias based on a misinterpretation of the law.

I tried to show him the definition to assist him in not making the same mistake twice but he wanted nothing to do with my position.

He actually stepped up a step on my front porch as the discussion drew to a close and asked: “did I just threaten you“?

I made clear to him that we both knew that the way he moved casually up a step and having a 250-pound man storm across a street and onto your driveway within a half inch of your nose screaming at you, is in fact “assault“, according to the law.

Disappointingly he wanted nothing to do with my argument.

You can only deal with the facts but you also have to deal with facts that are real.

I’m Charles

 

 

Leave a Reply

RSS
Follow by Email
Facebook
Facebook
GOOGLE
LinkedIn