A quick question. . .

Moderator: Burnaby49

User avatar
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:17 pm

A quick question. . .

Postby arayder » Mon Apr 24, 2017 1:34 am

Robert Menard's at it again:

https://www.facebook.com/robert.menard. ... 3851429689

As near as I can tell Bobby is acting as “agent” for a “JV” who seems to be having a problem with the fire codes in District of North Cowichan.

Do the Canadian experts have any opinion as to whether Bobby is violating the court order banning him from acting as a lawyer in B.C.?

https://www.lawsociety.bc.ca/Website/me ... nction.pdf

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5823
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby Burnaby49 » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:03 am

I doubt that mass of verbiage qualifies as legal advice or assistance. I've forgotten the circumstances that Menard got that ban and I'm not going to bother researching it but I think it was more pointed towards him acting in court rather than acting as an agent. Since Menard (as far as I know) is not currently residing in British Columbia the court and Law Society probably wouldn't bother to pursue this.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

User avatar
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:17 pm

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby arayder » Mon Apr 24, 2017 2:27 am

Burnaby49 wrote:I doubt that mass of verbiage qualifies as legal advice or assistance. I've forgotten the circumstances that Menard got that ban and I'm not going to bother researching it but I think it was more pointed towards him acting in court rather than acting as an agent. Since Menard (as far as I know) is not currently residing in British Columbia the court and Law Society probably wouldn't bother to pursue this.


Thanks Burnaby. I imagine the North Cowichan authorities are not going to be buffaloed by the letter, which I suspect was written to get attention in the subculture.

User avatar
eric
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby eric » Mon Apr 24, 2017 3:15 am

It's low hanging fruit which no matter how it turns out, only increases his reputation. I think we're not getting the whole story here, something must have happened to attract the attention of the municipality.

User avatar
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:17 pm

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby arayder » Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:27 am

eric wrote:It's low hanging fruit which no matter how it turns out, only increases his reputation. I think we're not getting the whole story here, something must have happened to attract the attention of the municipality.


Menard promises but never delivers.

A couple of months ago he was hyping an “April Showers” talk fest to be put on in connection with a local University. The fee was going to be $100. A few gullibles expressed real interest, so who knows how much Bobby raked in before he the project went the way of freeman valley, the ninja goat and the ACCP.

When JV gets taken to task by North Cowichan for whatever fire code he didn’t follow Bobby will have already moved on to his next fantasy based scam.

LordEd
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 863
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 4:14 pm

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby LordEd » Tue Apr 25, 2017 12:55 am

Let us also not forget that this so called ‘illegal suite’ is in no way interfering with, harming or affecting the livability of the neighbourhood or the quality of life of residents, and has been in place for well over a decade.
Is there no harm? Bylaw officers usually work on complaints, so that could indicate somebody was 'interfered with, harmed, or had their livability of hte neighbourhood affected enough to spend their time and complain to the city.

User avatar
eric
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Admiral of the Quatloosian Seas
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby eric » Tue Apr 25, 2017 1:26 am

From what I can tell, the actual infraction was a building code infraction respecting a secondary suite. These are enforced as a Municipal Bylaw Infraction. Alberta just changed their last resort method of enforcing bylaw infractions today....
http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-new ... e-officers
Summary - previously in Alberta, if you were being silly and not paying a minor fine a Bylaw Officer could fill out a Long Form Information, the Courts would issue a Failure To Appear warrant, and you would be arrested and be a guest of the Queen until you paid the fine. From what I can tell BC still has this on the books and "JV " may encounter problems if he follows Bobbie's advice. By the way, the police hate these FTA warrants. Along with the possibility of wasting scarce enforcement resources it means that a lot of people, especially street people, will never approach a cop voluntarily to provide information.

Burnaby49
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Quatloosian Ambassador to the CaliCanadians
Posts: 5823
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:45 am
Location: The Evergreen Playground

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby Burnaby49 » Tue Apr 25, 2017 2:26 am

I've got no clue how Bylaw infractions are handled in BC. Never had any personal experience on the issue. You're probably right about somebody complaining. I have a friend who, by himself, built an extension to the back of his house right in close-quarters residential Vancouver. It was a clear bylaw infraction and all of his neighbours could see him doing it. However he got along well with his neighbours and nobody turned him in.
"Yes Burnaby49, I do in fact believe all process servers are peace officers. I've good reason to believe so." Robert Menard in his May 28, 2015 video "Process Servers".

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeI-J2PhdGs

User avatar
arayder
Banned (Permanently)
Banned (Permanently)
Posts: 2117
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 4:17 pm

Re: A quick question. . .

Postby arayder » Tue Apr 25, 2017 3:19 pm

Menard likes to talk about the law and a community's rules as being something one can opt out of the same way one decides not to go to a house party.

Bobby has convienently ignored the reality that his "friend" JV at some point decided to live in North Cowichan the same way one decides to attend a house party.

So what's the difference between moving to North Cowichan then ignoring the building codes and showing up at a house party and doing something untoward in the punch bowl?


Return to “Canada”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest