Explore your opportunities! Create an account or Sign In
The most trusted and popular consumer complaints website

[Resolved] Shelvan Kannuthurai

Posted: Jul 29, 2015 by    

Fraud

Complaint Rating:  94 % with 16 votes
94% 16
4.7
Contact information:
Metro Zen
100 - 200 Consillium Road
Scarborough, Canada
Phone: (416) 915-5548
metrozen.ca
Shelvan (PannirShelvan Kannuthurai is a fraud. He tries to run businesses and once he gets as much money as he can from innocent people he closes the business and files for bankruptcy. Shelvan and his wife work together with other individuals to defraud innocent families. He works with an individual named Tom Thiru to scam others.

Over a decade ago he opened up a school business and got students from around the world to pay high tuition fees. Once they came here, he did not provide them with what they deserved. He lied and made it seem as though the school is legitimate but in reality it was all fantasy.
http://www.asiantribune.com/man-dreamer-or-schemer

Shelvan also opened up a charity foundation named Inukshuk Foundation.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2010/07/29/parents_run_day_camp_after_coaches_staff_quit.html

Shelvan also was behind a scheme in a mortgage fraud with an innocent family. He discharged a husband and wife's mortgage without their consent and even admitted to doing it! That family is now in loss of over $500, 000 and they are begging for justice.

Shelvan is now trying to scam more people but at a larger scale. If you see the website for MetroZen you will be shocked as it looks legitimate. In reality he does not even work. He just has big plans with other people's hard earned money.
http://www.mortgagebrokernews.ca/news/fsco-warns-of-unlicensed-mortgage-developer-182729.aspx
https://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/about/warning-notices/Pages/warning-metrozen-10-17-2014.aspx

Please be aware of this individual. Please do not fall into his trap. He will fraud you.

Shelvan Kannuthurai

Resolution statement


FSCO has taken action. (FSCO conclusion) For the reasons set out above and such further and other grounds as the Superintendent may specify, the Superintendent has issued the interim suspension order and proposes to permanently revoke the licences of Metrozen Capital and Ms. Seifollahi. https://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/about/enforcement/enforcement-online/Documents/2016-jan-1063-Metrozen.html
Updated by truth211, Feb 19, 2017
Saying false statements in court to get judgment in your favour. Please explain this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6lcNSOPuMUQ

Why this was not used in court? Because lawyer JM decided to not bring it up. All lawyers worked together to make it as if this fraudulent act had never happened.
Complaint comments Comments (21)    Updated: Complaint country Canada Complaint category Real Estate

Comments

Sort by: Date | Rating
A  24th of Aug, 2015 by    +3 Votes
The legal system needs to step up and stop individuals like this from pursuing businesses and continuing to scam people. I heard about the story about the family who was frauded by Shelvan Kannuthurai. He frauded that poor mans family and now he is working over 50 hours a week to pay back debt. Shelvan on the other hand is acting as if nothing happend and he is "running" yet another business.

The family went to court to sue a lawyer named Sanjay Kumar Doshi. This lawyer was the one who filed the discharge on the innocent family's mortgage. The family did not get judgement in their favour so they are now appealing the matter. The judge even states in the judgement that Shelvan generated money from the discharge. All the information is on Canlii.

This guy should not be the CEO of any company. He deserves to be behind bars. He needs to learn to work for his money instead of taking it from hard working people.
A  24th of Aug, 2015 by    +3 Votes
This man is a scam artist. I know of many cases where he has lured people into business schemes and taken all their money and found a way to get himself out of the loop so he cannot be punished for his crimes. Do not trust this man with your money, I repeat do not do business with this man, he is very unethical and will screw you over at any chance he gets. Anyone else who has been tricked by this man needs to come forward, we need to put this all over the media to stop this criminal.
A  7th of Oct, 2015 by    +2 Votes
The Financial Services Commission of Ontario (FSCO) has issued a warning to consumers and industry professionals about an unlicensed mortgage brokerage that is soliciting the public to invest in a condo project in Toronto.

“MetroZen (Canada), a real estate development company that works alongside Zen Mortgage Corp., is not licensed to solicit mortgage business, ” an official statement from FSCO reads. “FSCO has been notified that the company is soliciting the public on its website, metrozen.ca, to invest in a large-scale condo project called MetroZen located at Highway 401 and Markham Road.”

FSCO has also warned that the two individuals involved with company – President Ralph Idema and Business Development Manager Cathy Yan – are also unlicensed by the commission.

Zen Mortgage Corp. claims to endeavor to construct socially and economically responsible projects through (unlicensed) syndicate investment.

“We are driven to revitalizing neglected properties within our rapidly-growing cities and seek out hidden jewels in prime locations, ” the company’s website states. “With some tender love and care, we re-develop them into imaginative, affordable and environmentally-sound homes that offer an exclusive lifestyle and ultimately upgrade the surrounding community.”
N  23rd of Mar, 2016 by    +2 Votes
Please Don't Trust him or his Financial Institution ".Metro Zen " he cheated so many people, I know he cheated his best friend who helped him in so many ways and lends more than $750, 000 to run an education centre. Poor man, he trusted him a lot and when he needed money, he lent to run his business. But Mr Panneershelvan is an ungrateful man, he never paid back his loans and without his knowledge, he sold the property for a $1, 000, 000 and cheated him with the help of some lawyers and Home Trust. This man used fake documents, I.D's to transfer the money to his lawyer's Trust and cheated his friend and wife. Poor man, he lost more than 1 Million Dollars including interest and legal fees. This man Shelvan and his friend Tom Thiru, cheated so many people by lending less amount of 2nd or 3rd Mortgages on the property and tricked them using fake documents and I.D's and with the help of their lawyer team, easily they will get the default Judgements from the wrong courts. Recently, I heard from one of his community lawyers, that Shelvan and his team cheated this innocent man and got a favourable Judgement against him and put him on the road, also heard that both Shelvan and his partner Tom Thiru cheated so many people fraudulently by grabbed these innocents property and sold for market value and put them on road. I don't know how they are escaping from Justice. Even now Shelvan is trying to start new businesses to trick the innocent and steal money from them saying that they are going give away high-interest returns when they invest in their Incorporated Financial Institutions. I recently searched and found that Shelvan's Incorporation named as "Metro Zens" licence was suspended /revoked by Financial Services Commission in Jan.2016. But I am really wondering how he got a licence from Federal Government, and its so...suspicious even he was already under the Investigation/Examination of Provincial Government, how he got a Licence from Federal Government. Even I checked for his Partner Tom.Thiru, he is also holding numerous unlicensed Incorporations/V.K.T Fincial Concept Inc / V.K.T.Wealth Management, and some other Financial Institutions and running Mortgage Lending Business using mail box.. As Office address. So Many lawyers are supporting these people for their Fraudulent Activities . Even though I noticed Shelvan's partner Tom.Thiru posted his Liberal Support with the M.P. Of Ajax Hon. Mark Holland. I am being to know that these two people cheating the public by showing photos taken with politicians, and blasting their support of politicians... What a shame ...!!! I heard that Tom Thiru is a Conservative member and strong supporter, earlier he wagged his tail with Conservative... and cheated his own community and now he is trying to show the community that he is a .real supporter of Liberals. I noticed through the Complaints board he already mentioned about his ability of financial advice/planning. I suspect, how these people and the financial brokers are escaping from the Law and Justice. I found with the Law Society of Upper Canada that 2/3 lawyers who supported these two crooks were already suspended and 1/2 lawyers licences were revoked. My best advice is beware of these two Financial Investors and stay away from them, please. Shelvan's friend is crying for Justice and spending money on legal fees. He lost his hard earned money, health and working day and night to seek a favourable Judgement to recover his money from Shelvan and his Partner Tom.Thiru.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2010/07/29/parents_run_day_camp_after_coaches_staff_quit.html


N  24th of Mar, 2016 by    0 Votes
Recently, a lawyer named Kumar S Sriskanda's license was taken from him because he was involved in mortgage frauds. (http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onlst/doc/2015/2015onlsth188/2015onlsth188.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAJc3Jpc2thbmRhAAAAAAE&resultIndex=1)

also recently, Metrozen went under investigation from the FSCO https://www.fsco.gov.on.ca/en/about/enforcement/enforcement-online/Documents/2016-jan-1063-Metrozen.html

My guess is Tom Thiru and Sanjay Kumar Doshi will be next. All of them worked together and now the truth is starting to be revealed.


N  9th of May, 2016 by    +1 Votes
Please remove my and my wife photo from the site
N  9th of May, 2016 by    0 Votes
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO


RE: YAMUNAKUMARI NITHIANANTHAN
Plaintiff

- and -

THIRUKUMAR THIRUNAVUKARASU, MPIRE REALTY
GROUP INC., V.K.T. FINANCIAL CONCEPT INC.,
VIGNESWARAN PONNAMPALAM, SUTHARVILI THIRUKUMAR, SANJAYKUMAR DOSHI, THANGAVEL KESAVAN,
LESLIE PHILPOTTS and 1769656 ONTARIO INC.
Defendants

BEFORE: Spies J.

COUNSEL: Todd Robinson and Kate Byers, for the Plaintiff

Bradley Phillips, for the Defendant Thangavel Kesavan

Bryan Skolnik, for the Defendant Sanjaykumar Doshi

HEARD: April 11, 2016

ENDORSEMENT

Introduction

[1] This action was commenced in 2010 and concerns a dispute with respect to the title to the property at 22 Gaitwin Place in Scarborough, Ontario that was owned by the plaintiff. The plaintiff alleges that both a second mortgage and a third mortgage were fraudulent and that the power of sale proceedings brought by the second mortgagee in November 2009, which resulted in her losing the property, was also fraudulent. As a result, the plaintiff seeks damages from numerous defendants. Sanjaykumar Doshi was the plaintiff’s lawyer on the second mortgage and Thangavel Kesavan was her lawyer on the third mortgage, registered in March 2008.

[2] The plaintiff seeks an order declaring that the Full and Final Releases she signed on July 28, 2011 in favour of the defendant, Sanjaykumar Doshi and the Full and Final Releases that she and her husband signed in favour of the defendant Thangavel Kesavan (referred to collectively as the “lawyer defendants”) are invalid and of no force and effect and an order declaring that the Notice of Discontinuance, dated May 7, 2012, as against the lawyer defendants is invalid and of no effect and that it be set aside.

[3] The position of the plaintiff is that immediately after signing the Releases, she and her husband, who signed the Release in favour of Mr. Kesavan, decided not to proceed with any settlement with the lawyer defendants. The plaintiff maintains that contrary to her instructions, her former lawyer, Mr. Goswami, mistakenly delivered the Releases to counsel for the lawyer defendants just before getting off the record and then Mr. Morton, who took over as her counsel, failed to follow her instructions and mistakenly served a Notice of Discontinuance as against the lawyer defendants which was served on counsel for the lawyer defendants and counsel for the other defendants. Counsel who received these documents were Mr. Phillips, counsel for Mr. Kesavan and Mr. Skolnik, counsel for Mr. Doshi.

The Evidence

[4] The motion proceeded on the basis of affidavit evidence only. The plaintiff swore an affidavit. On behalf of Mr. Kesavan, an affidavit was sworn by Adam Hummel, an associate at Mr. Phillips’ firm. On behalf of Mr. Doshi, Judy Chang, an assistant at Mr. Skolnik’s firm, swore and was filed an affidavit, essentially adopting the contents of Mr. Hummel’s’ affidavit. No affidavits were filed by any of the lawyers who have direct personal knowledge of this matter. None of the parties sought to conduct any cross-examinations on the affidavits or Rule 39.03 examinations of the lawyers who have personal knowledge of the matters in issue.

[5] A preliminary issue raised by Ms. Byers is that the responding affidavits are inadmissible and unreliable as they contain hearsay evidence from Mr. Phillips and Mr. Skolnik with respect to contentious issues that go to the heart of the matter and that they have attempted to circumvent the rule that a barrister cannot be both a witness and counsel.

[6] In particular Ms. Byers complains that the affidavits allege that a settlement was agreed to with Mr. Goswami. As Mr. Phillips submitted, in the Fresh as Amended Notice of Motion, one of the grounds for the motion is stated to be that on February 17, 2012, without the knowledge of the plaintiff and contrary to her instructions, her former counsel confirmed a settlement and sent the Releases to counsel for the lawyer defendants.

[7] I accept the submissions of Mr. Robinson that the plaintiff is not bound by a statement of fact set out in the grounds in support of her motion but I do not fault counsel for the lawyer defendants arranging to have others in their firm swear affidavits. This is commonly done on motions so that counsel familiar with the action can argue the motion. An affidavit can be made on information and belief where the source is stated. In addition to the Notice of Motion which confirmed that a settlement had been reached, the thrust of the plaintiff’s affidavit is that her counsel were mistaken or acted contrary to her instructions, not that there was no completed settlement agreement. That was something that is now argued by counsel for the plaintiff. It is only with hindsight that it can be said that it would have been preferable for Mr. Phillips and Mr. Skolnik to swear the affidavits on this motion.

[8] There is no dispute that the documents filed in the motion records, being copies of emails and letters, are authentic. As set out in para. 28 of the plaintiff’s Factum, there is no dispute that signed releases were sent by Mr. Goswami and the Notice of Discontinuance was sent by Mr. Morton to counsel for the lawyer defendants. For the reasons that I will come to, this motion can be determined by relying solely on the undisputed facts as reflected by those documents, without regard to the contested hearsay evidence concerning oral communications between counsel. I will however include this evidence in my chronology although I have identified it as hearsay to indicate that I have placed no reliance on this evidence in deciding this motion.

The Chronology

[9] In July 2011, the plaintiff retained Suvendu Goswami to act as her counsel. She admits that at that time, Mr. Goswami recommended she discontinue the action against Messrs. Doshi and Kesavan.

[10] In a letter from Mr. Skolnik to Mr. Goswami, sent by fax on July 25, 2011, Mr. Skolnik stated that when he and Mr. Goswami last spoke, Mr. Goswami had advised he would seek instructions from his client to discontinue the action against Mr. Doshi (double hearsay). Mr. Skolnik stated that he had received instructions and “can advise that my client is prepared to consent to the delivery by your client of a Notice of Discontinuance on a without-cost basis, provided the enclosed Release in favour of my client is executed by yours”. Mr. Skolnik stated that he was sending a copy of this correspondence to Mr. Phillips as he suspected that Mr. Phillips would be seeking similar instructions. He finished the letter by asking that Mr. Goswami have his client “execute the Release and return same to me along with a Notice of Discontinuance”.

[11] By letter dated July 26, 2011, Mr. Phillips confirmed to Mr. Goswami that further to their recent telephone conversation (contents not disclosed but would be double hearsay) and Mr. Skolnik’s letter of July 25, 2011, that he similarly had instructions that his client was prepared to consent to the delivery by Mr. Goswami’s client of a Notice of Discontinuance on a without-costs basis, provided that the enclosed Release in favour of his client was executed by both the plaintiff and her husband, who was a signatory to the subject mortgages.

[12] On July 28, 2011, the plaintiff and her husband attended at Mr. Goswami’s offices and signed the Releases although she swears that they did so “reluctantly”. She claims that immediately afterward she contacted Mr. Goswami to inform him that she did not want to discontinue her action or release either lawyer “given their significant involvement in the fraudulent transactions at issue in this action”. There is no evidence that these new instructions were put in writing at that time.

[13] Mr. Phillips sent a follow-up letter to Mr. Goswami by fax on October 7, 2011. In that letter, Mr. Phillips stated that his letter of July 26, 2011 “was sent following your confirmation that your client is prepared to discontinue this matter on a without-costs basis, as against my client” (double hearsay). Mr. Phillips requested that Mr. Goswami return three originally executed copies of LawPro’s standard Full and Final Release which had been previously sent and that the Notice of Discontinuance be served and filed so that “we may close out our file”. Mr. Skolnik was copied on the letter. To be clear, given the submissions of counsel for the plaintiff, for the purpose of this motion I do not rely on the truth of the statement made by Mr. Phillips in this letter that Mr. Goswami confirmed that the plaintiff was prepare to discontinue the action on a without-costs basis.

[14] A few months later, in an e-mail to the plaintiff dated February 9, 2012, Mr. Goswami stated, “I have not proceeded to discontinue the action against the two lawyers as we awaited the results of the Newmarket motions and your further instructions.” [emphasis added] Counsel advised me that there was related litigation in a separate action in Newmarket. I note that this email does not make any reference to the Releases already signed and suggests that the plaintiff had only told Mr. Goswami to hold off on the Notice of Discontinuance. By this point Mr. Goswami had decided to remove himself from the record. He ended the e-mail with the statement that he left it to the plaintiff’s “new lawyers” to deal with the outstanding issues.

[15] In a letter dated February 9, 2012 faxed to Mr. Goswami and copied to Mr. Skolnik, Mr. Phillips stated that Mr. Goswami had, on two prior occasions, promised to provide his client’s executed Release (double hearsay) and it had still not been received. The letter concluded:

Please ensure that the executed Release is provided by no later than Friday, February 17, 2012.

We trust it will not be necessary to seek instructions to enforce the terms of the settlement, at which time costs will be sought as against your client. [Emphasis added]

[16] On February 17, 2012 Mr. Goswami sent a fax to Mr. Phillips attaching the Full and Final Release executed by the plaintiff. In the cover sheet he stated, “Original will be mailed soon. Please be advised that I am moving to remove myself from the Record in this action unless the plaintiff sends a notice of change of lawyer or a notice of intention to act in person.”

[17] I presume the same fax was sent to Mr. Skolnik. He wrote to Mr. Goswami by letter faxed on February 17, 2012 acknowledging receipt of the faxed copy of the Release, duly executed by his client. He stated, “While I thank you for same, I am curious as to why this Release which was executed on July 28, 2011 is just being delivered now.” Mr. Skolnik also expressed confusion about the fact that the fax cover sheet indicated Mr. Goswami would be moving to have himself removed as lawyer of record, given the only step remaining in the action was for him to deliver a Notice of Discontinuance. He went on to state:

You have previously written to both Mr. Phillips and I advising that the plaintiff was prepared to deliver a Notice of Discontinuance. Certainly, the execution of the Release would seem to confirm that view. I am therefore at a loss to understand why you do not simply deliver the Notice of Discontinuance and file same with the court.

Mr. Phillips and I do not want to have to be in a position to move to enforce the settlement. That would be needless waste of time and expense, the bulk of which would be borne by your client. [Emphasis added]

[18] I note that no letters are in evidence where Mr. Goswami advised counsel for the defendants that the plaintiff was prepared to deliver a Notice of Discontinuance although having signed the Release that would have necessarily followed as she had released the lawyer defendants from all claims.

[19] On April 3, 2012, Mr. James Morton served a Notice of Change of Lawyer on the defendants. By e-mail dated April 4, 2012, Mr. Morton wrote to the plaintiff and stated that he had been going through the file and that fully executed Releases were delivered to the lawyers for the lawyer defendants and he attached a copy of the Releases. He also referred to the fact that a motion was being brought by the remaining defendants to set aside the noting in default and default judgment, returnable April 13, 2012. He concluded with the request that he be given instructions as soon as possible. A portion of the letter is redacted on the basis of solicitor-client privilege.

[20] Presumably in response to that letter the plaintiff sent an e-mail to Jennifer Blaney of Mr. Morton’s firm at 4:39 p.m. on Friday, April 6, 2012. She apologized for the delay in responding and stated:

Mr. Goswami forced me to sign the document for removing Kesavan and Doshi and informed me that he wouldn’t file the document unless needed and without my instructions, I told him not to continue to releasing these individuals numerous times. Please let Mr. Morton know I agree with his suggestion to set aside the default and move forward. Can Mr. Morton please advice (sic) what would be the best way to continue with or without Mr. Doshi and Mr. Kesavan. [(Emphasis added])

[21] This email suggests that the plaintiff was still undecided about whether to continue her action against Mr. Doshi and Mr. Kesavan and wanted advice on that issue from Mr. Morton.

[22] At 9:16 p.m., on the same day, Mr. Morton responded by email:

I think releasing the lawyers was a mistake (Goswami’s mistake) but will proceed on the basis of this e-mail. Thanks again. (Emphasis added)

[23] The plaintiff relies on this email in support of her position that Mr. Morton made an error when he sent out the Notice of Discontinuance. She does not allege, however, having any further conversations with Mr. Morton and his email to her is ambiguous. It could be interpreted as Mr. Morton confirmed that he would decide what to do with the lawyer defendants as she was relying on him to advise her in that regard.

[24] On Sunday April 8, 2012, at 5:19 p.m. Mr. Skolnik sent an e-mail to Mr. Morton, copied to Mr. Phillips and Mr. Valitutti, who was acting for the remaining defendants, which stated in part:

As you know, my client (as well as Mr. Phillips’ client) entered into a settlement agreement with the plaintiff. To that end, the plaintiff has executed a release in favour of my client. Attached is a copy of same. The only remaining item to complete the settlement is for the plaintiff to deliver a Notice of Discontinuance. Despite repeated requests to the plaintiff’s previous counsel, the Notice of Discontinuance has not been forthcoming.

[25] Mr. Skolnik concluded by advising Mr. Morton that if his client was forced to remain in the action beyond that week, he would move for an order enforcing the settlement and seek costs for doing so. [Emphasis added]

[26] A few minutes later at 5:28 p.m., on the same evening Mr. Morton responded to Mr. Skolnik’s e-mail, stating:

This day I dictated letters which will resolve all these concerns; specifically, I agree to either a discontinuance from my office or consent to an order dismissing the action.

[27] The letters Mr. Morton was referring must be the letter dated April 9, 2012 faxed to the attention of Mr. Skolnik and Mr. Phillips which states, in part, as follows:

From discussions and materials provided by Mr. Skolnik, it appears that releases were delivered to your respective clients, but the action was not dismissed or discontinued as against them. I have sought and received instructions to discontinue the action as against both of your clients. It is my understanding that this discontinuance is what was agreed upon. The purpose of my letter is to confirm that this understanding is correct; should either or both of you wish to obtain an order (without costs) dismissing the action as against your clients, I would be content to be in a position to sign the appropriate consents. [Emphasis added]

[28] This letter is the strongest evidence that the plaintiff’s position that she did not instruct Mr. Morton to send the Notice of Discontinue is false. Although Mr. Morton appears to have been of the view that releasing the lawyers was a mistake on the Friday, two days later he dictated the letter confirming his instructions to discontinue the action or, if preferred, consent to an order dismissing the action, both without costs.

[29] By e-mail dated April 10, 2012, Mr. Skolnik confirmed that he and Mr. Phillips were content to receive Mr. Morton’s Notice of Discontinuance on a without-costs basis. Mr. Morton responded by an e-mail to Mr. Skolnik and Mr. Phillips which was copied to a “Jennifer Packwood, ” I presume someone at his firm, asking that she prepare “same to serve and file”.

[30] By letter dated May 7, 2012, sent by fax to Messrs. Skolnik and Phillips and counsel for the other defendants, Mr. Morton enclosed a Notice of Discontinuance, which he served pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194. There is no dispute that this document was then filed with the court, as it is referred to in subsequent court endorsements.

[31] Mr. Morton obtained an order removing his firm as solicitors for the plaintiff in August 2012. The plaintiff alleges that at a later assessment of his accounts, Mr. Morton apologized for delivering the Notice of Discontinuance. Presuming this is correct for the purpose of this motion, it is clear that by August 2012 the plaintiff knew that both the Releases and the Notice of Discontinuance had been sent to counsel for Mr. Doshi and Mr. Kesavan.

[32] The plaintiff was now self-represented. She took no immediate action to deal with the alleged mistakes of her two former lawyers.

[33] On June 4, 2013, the Registrar dismissed this action for delay. It was only then; almost a year after the plaintiff knew of the mistakes that she now alleges, that she prepared a Notice of Motion dated July 16, 2013 asking to reinstate the action. No relief was sought with respect to Mr. Doshi or Mr. Kesavan although in the grounds for the motion she stated her position that she had not instructed Mr. Morton to serve a Notice of Discontinuance.

[34] Master Glustein (as he then was) heard this motion six months later on January 7, 2014. He stated in his endorsement that the plaintiff’s position was that the discontinuance and releases against the lawyer defendants were effected contrary to her instructions. He noted that there was no existing claim against these two defendants and that the Master did not have jurisdiction to make a declaration as to whether a discontinuance or release was valid. As a result he made no order as against these defendants. He did, however, order the plaintiff to deliver an Affidavit of Documents within 60 days.

[35] In October 2014, the plaintiff attempted to bring a motion for 24 different orders including a request for punitive and exemplary costs and damages. There does not appear to be any claim dealing with the Releases. There may be relief sought with respect to the Notice of Discontinuance in issue on this motion although the plaintiff referred to a Notice of Discontinuance order given by Master Dash on May 10, 2012 that was obtained by Mr. Morton using improper invalid documents to mislead the court.” I am not aware of any order by Master Dash.

[36] On December 16, 2014, the plaintiff was still self-represented. She attended before Justice Himel in order to schedule this motion. Mr. Gaudreau as counsel for Mr. Kesavan attended the hearing. The scheduling of the plaintiff’s motion was adjourned to February 3, 2015. The plaintiff must have retained Mr. Robinson and Ms. Byers shortly thereafter. By letter dated February 3, 2015, Mr. Robinson confirmed that the motion scheduling date had been cancelled. The motion before me was not brought until February 1, 2016, another significant delay.

[37] I am advised that the plaintiff did prepare an Affidavit of Documents but no other defendants still in the action, nor Mr. Doshi or Mr. Kesavan, have done so. In other words, at most it can be said that since this action was commenced six years ago, the action is still at the pleadings stage.

Analysis

Merits of the motion

[38] Based on these uncontested facts and ignoring the impugned hearsay evidence, and having considered the submissions of counsel and the relevant case law, I have reached a number of conclusions as follows:

a) Although there is no evidence that I can rely upon of a formal offer and a formal acceptance, it is clear from the delivery of the Releases and the Notice of Discontinuance filed that there was a settlement agreement communicated between counsel that the plaintiff’s action against her former lawyers Mr. Doshi and Mr. Kesavan was to be discontinued without costs in exchange for the plaintiff and her husband signing the Releases;

b) Even accepting for the purpose of this motion that the plaintiff’s evidence that her two former counsel acted in error or disregarded her instructions, both Mr. Goswami and Mr. Morton had ostensible authority that counsel for the lawyer defendants could rely upon to complete the settlement agreement by providing all of the documentation required to their counsel;

c) Although I have discretion to not enforce the settlement agreement this is not a case where I should exercise that discretion.


[39] My reasons for coming to these conclusions are as follows.

[40] Ms. Byers submitted that there is no evidence of a settlement agreement because there is no evidence of negotiations between counsel leading to an offer to settle and an acceptance of that offer. As I have already stated, for the purpose of this motion I have not relied on the hearsay statements in the correspondence that states that such discussions in fact took place. This would be fatal in most motions to enforce a settlement agreement because the court would not be able to determine the terms of the agreement. That is not the case here.

[41] A settlement agreement is a contract and is subject to the general law of contract. As such there must be an intention to create a contract and agreement on all essential terms; Olivieri v. Sherman, 2007 ONCA 491 (CanLII), at para. 41.

[42] In this case even though there is no formal offer or acceptance in writing, there could be no doubt about the terms of the settlement agreement reached between counsel for the plaintiff and counsel for the lawyer defendants in that all of the terms of the settlement have been completed. This is not a case where a party is attempting to resile from a settlement where the court has to determine whether or not all of the essential terms were agreed upon. The plaintiff and her husband executed the Releases provided by counsel for these defendants without any modification and Mr. Goswami delivered those Releases to the lawyer defendants’ counsel. Mr. Morton then confirmed that a Notice of Discontinuance or consent dismissal would be without costs and served and filed a Notice of Discontinuance. There could be no clearer form of acceptance of the offers from the defendants to agree to a discontinuance of the actions without costs provided the plaintiff and her husband signed the standard LawPro Release. No costs were ever sought by these defendants after the Notice of Discontinuance was filed.

[43] In my view the delivery of the Releases and the Notice of Discontinuance to counsel for the lawyer defendants was as good as, if not better than, formal acceptance of the offer by a letter from counsel for the plaintiff advising that the plaintiff agreed to the terms of their offer namely that she was prepared to sign the standard LawPro release in exchange for the lawyer defendants consenting to a discontinuance of the action against them without insisting on their costs.

[44] There is no suggestion that counsel for the plaintiff sent these documents to counsel for the lawyer defendants inadvertently. Rather it is alleged that they either misunderstood or failed to follow the plaintiff’s instructions. As for the absence of evidence of negotiations, that is not relevant. The length of time parties negotiate an agreement is irrelevant to the question of whether or not a binding agreement was reached.

[45] On the issue of ostensible authority, Ms. Byers argued that Mr. Phillips and Mr. Skolnik could not have reasonably believed that Mr. Goswami and Mr. Morton had authority to provide the documents in issue. With respect to Mr. Goswami, the plaintiff relies on what Ms. Byers submitted were “red flags”; the fact that Mr. Goswami did not deliver the Releases until seven months later and only then after advising defence counsel that he was going to remove himself from the record. She submitted as well that this was possibly because of a breakdown in the solicitor-client relationship but she conceded that counsel for the lawyer defendants were not told what the reason was.

[46] In my view these facts do not undermine the well established principle of law that a lawyer has ostensible authority to effect a binding settlement on behalf of his client and unless the opposing side has knowledge of some limitation on the lawyer’s retainer, any settlement made by the lawyer will be binding on the client, regardless of any dispute between the lawyer and his own client as to the scope of the lawyer’s instructions; see Srajeldin v. Ramsumeer, 2015 ONSC 6697 (CanLII), 2015 ONSC 6697 (Div. Ct.) at para. 21, citing Scherer v. Paletta, 1966 CanLII 286 (ON CA), [1966] 2 O.R. 524 (Ont. C.A.), see also Sahota v. Sahota, 2016 ONSC 314 (CanLII), 2016 ONSC 314 (Div. Ct.) at para. 15.

[47] In my view the fact that Mr. Goswami advised counsel that he was going to move to get off the record does not change the fact that he had ostensible authority to provide counsel with the signed releases that had been signed by the plaintiff and her husband many months earlier. Mr. Goswami was still on the record and counsel for the lawyer defendants had no way of knowing why he was getting off the record. As for the delay, Mr. Goswami did not provide any explanation and in particular did not suggest it had to do with any change in instructions. The Releases were properly signed and witnessed and in the form sent by counsel for the lawyer defendants to Mr. Goswami.

[48] As for Mr. Morton, although it was not necessary for him to state that he had instructions from the plaintiff (see Srajeldin at para. 27), he did so. Ms. Byers did not make any submission that Mr. Morton did not have ostensible authority when he sent the Notice of Discontinuance to counsel for the lawyer defendants except that counsel should have realized that he had not had enough time to get instructions from the plaintiff since it was the weekend. That is not a submission that has any merit in my view.

[49] Ms. Byers submitted that the case at bar differs from the facts in Srajeldin because there were a lot of negotiations in that case and evidence of a clear an unambiguous offer and acceptance. I have already dealt with this issue. In my view the case at bar is on all fours with Srajeldin as Justice Molloy refused to set aside the settlement even accepting for the purpose of the motion that the lawyer for the plaintiff was acting without instructions; at para. 24.

[50] As for the argument that the Notice of Discontinuance is a nullity in that it was not validly served and filed because not all counsel consented, it was copied to Mr. Valitutti who was acting for the remaining defendants and he made no objection, which is consistent with the fact that his clients had not asserted any cross-claim against the lawyer defendants. Furthermore, the Notice of Discontinuance was filed and accepted by the court. The cases relied upon by the plaintiff are all cases where a Notice of Discontinuance was inadvertently filed. There is no evidence that this is the case here. As already stated Mr. Morton’s intention was obvious and deliberate. Furthermore, there is Rule 1.04(1) which provides that the Rules are to be liberally construed. I find that any technical breach of the Rules was just that; technical. The Notice of Discontinuance is valid.

[51] The question remaining then is whether or not I should exercise my discretion to set aside the Notice of Discontinuance and the signed Releases. In that regard, Justice Molloy succinctly summarized the law in Srajeldin starting at para. 33 where she reviewed the factors to be considered set out in Milios v. Zagas (1998), 1998 CanLII 7119 (ON CA), 38 O.R. (3d) 218 (Ont. C.A.).

[52] Considering the ten questions from Milios, identified by Molloy J., I conclude as follows. With respect to the first three questions, there is no evidence that the settlement is unconscionable or improvident. In fact the plaintiff admits that Mr. Goswami recommended that she not continue her action against the lawyers and they did not seek costs from the plaintiff at the time of the discontinuance, which they would otherwise have been entitled to. There is no evidence of unequal bargaining power in that all parties were represented by counsel at the relevant time. There is no evidence of any party acting in bad faith.

[53] The fourth question asks whether or not counsel acted without authority, which is a factor in favour of not enforcing the settlement. I have accepted that as a fact for the purpose of this motion but I must say that I find the plaintiff’s position that not one but two, litigation counsel either ignored her instructions or where somehow mistaken about her instructions difficult to believe. I would not be surprised if Mr. Goswami and Mr. Morton take a very different position. I note that in each case they responded to letters from counsel for the lawyer defendants threatening to enforce the settlement agreement and seek costs against the plaintiff. In any event, if the plaintiff’s position is correct she has a remedy against her former counsel for any losses suffered. Furthermore, confirming the settlement agreement does not prevent the plaintiff from seeking leave to examine the defendant lawyers in this action to obtain any relevant evidence they might have.

[54] Returning to the questions, the terms of the settlement agreement are clear in that they have been completed. The agreement encompasses all of the issues in dispute since Full and Final Releases were provided in favour of the lawyer defendants. The settlement was not negotiated with the parties physically in each other’s presence but as Justice Molloy observed in Srajeldin at para. 39, this is an irrelevant consideration in this case, which is not a family law case.

[55] With respect to the final three questions, it is now five years since the settlement agreement was reached and eight years since the events underlying the claim took place. As I have set out in the chronology, once Mr. Morton was off the record the plaintiff took no immediate action to deal with the alleged mistakes of her two former lawyers. In fact she did not do anything until almost a year later when the Registrar dismissed her action for delay in June 2013. Although I accept that as a self-represented litigant it is significant that she made no attempt to deal with this issue for many months.

[56] Once the plaintiff decided to take action I accept that she may have not known how to proceed, evident by the fact no relief was sought with respect to Mr. Doshi or Mr. Kesavan before Master Glustein (as he then was). She did state in the grounds for the motion that she prepared in June 2013 that she had not instructed Mr. Morton to serve a Notice of Discontinuance. However, the fact that the plaintiff delayed almost a year before taking this step is a factor in favour or not setting aside the settlement.

[57] Ordinarily the fact that this action is still at the pleadings stage might be a factor in favour of not enforcing a settlement. However, in this case it demonstrates the lack of commitment the plaintiff has to this action. It has been six years since the action was commenced. Furthermore, since her alternative is to claim any alleged losses from her former lawyers the fact she had not advanced this action beyond the pleadings stage means little to no prejudice in that regard, see Srajeldin at para. 41.

[58] I come then to the final question which is whether or not the lawyer defendants will suffer a disadvantage or other prejudice if the settlement is set aside. Ms. Byers submitted that apart from losing the benefit of the impugned settlement the defendants will not be prejudiced if the settlement is not enforced as they will still have an opportunity to defend the action. It is true that the lawyer defendants have not provided any evidence of any actual prejudice. However, in my view prejudice can be inferred from the sheer delay. Although I realize that the lawyer defendants will still have their files, to the extent the allegations of the plaintiff depend on their memory, and the memory of other witnesses, they will necessarily have been prejudiced in that memories fade over time. They settled the action in good faith five years ago and reasonably believed that this matter was closed four years ago. They were entitled to rely on the settlement. To require them to defend the action again means that they will lose the benefit of the settlement that they reasonably believed was reached years ago.

[59] Ms. Byers submitted that if I do not set aside the Releases and Notice of Discontinuance in this case I will be sending a “chilling message to the public and could well discourage open and candid settlement discussions and considerations”. In my view the opposite is true. Anecdotally it can be said that at least if not more of 95% of all civil actions settle at some point before trial. If in these circumstances the court were to set aside a settlement agreement, negotiating the settlement of claims would be discouraged as lawyers could not have any confidence that a settlement agreement reached with opposing counsel would not be interfered with by the court.

[60] As Justice Molloy noted in Srajeldin at para. 41, the public policy concerns are pressing;

Setting aside a settlement in circumstances where it was freely negotiated between two professionals would be highly unusual. To do so where there is no evidence of sharp practice or bad faith, no unequal bargaining power, and no suggestion that the settlement is unfair or improvident, is, in my view, unprecedented. There only injustice to the plaintiff is that she must now litigate her claim against her former solicitor rather than the TTC. Given the very early stage of the litigation against the TTC, there is little to no prejudice in that regard.

[61] In my view this is not a case where I should exercise my discretion to set aside the settlement.

[62] For these reasons the motion for an order declaring that two Full and Final Releases signed on July 28, 2011 in favour of the defendants, Sanjaykumar Doshi and Thangavel Kesavan are invalid and of no force and effect and an order declaring that the Notice of Discontinuance, dated May 7, 2012, as against Mr. Doshi and Mr. Kesavan is invalid and of no effect and that it be set aside is dismissed with costs payable to Messrs. Doshi and Kesavan on a partial indemnity basis.

[63] With respect to costs, all counsel provided Cost Outlines to me at the conclusion of the hearing of the motion. The plaintiff’s Cost Outline totals $13, 368 for fees and disbursements on a partial indemnity basis. It reflects a lot of duplication between Mr. Robinson, a 2008 call and Ms. Byers a 2015 call; it was not necessary in my view for two counsel to prepare and argue this motion.

Costs

[64] Although the plaintiff is not entitled to costs, having lost this motion, this Cost Outline is relevant to the expectations of the parties. Although I appreciate that counsel for the plaintiff had to do more work to put the Motion Record together, once that was done the time spent preparing the factum and argument should have been comparable to the Cost Outline of Mr. Phillips who took the lead on the defence of the motion since the interests and position of Mr. Kesavan and Mr. Doshi is the same.

[65] Despite the amount claimed by counsel for the plaintiffs, Mr. Robinson submitted that the costs claimed by Mr. Phillips and Mr. Skolnik were too high because they did not have to file much in the way of a responding Motion Record and as counsel for LawPro they are used to these types of motions. I do not accept those submissions.

[66] Mr. Phillips claims costs on a partial indemnity in the amount of $4, 518.63 for fees and disbursements. He is a 2000 call and his hourly rate on a partial indemnity basis is $250 (as compared to Mr. Robinson, a 2009 call at $250). Mr. Phillips did all the work himself save for one hour spent by a law clerk. His time for preparing a Responding Motion Record, factum, Book of Authorities and for preparation and attendance totaled 16.7 hours. As compared to the 53 hours of time spent by counsel for the plaintiff, I find that his request for costs is entirely reasonable.

[67] As for Mr. Skolnik, a 1996 call, his Cost Outline totals $2, 016.70 on a partial indemnity basis. His hourly rate on this basis is a very reasonable $195. His time totaled 7.2 hours (although only one hour for the attendance which took two hours) and he did all of the work save for .6 of an hour by a law clerk. Mr. Skolnik did prepare a brief affidavit but did not prepare a factum. I accept that he needed to review all of the materials prepared by counsel for the plaintiff and Mr. Kesavan. As compared to the hours claimed by Mr. Phillips, Mr. Skolnik’s time does seem a little high. I fix the costs of Mr. Skolnik for fees and disbursements in the amount of $1, 800.


Spies J.


Date: April 21, 2016
N  8th of Dec, 2016 by    +1 Votes
@Sanjaydoshi Doshi...Terry Walman...Have Judges to give favourable Judgement...!!! As lawyer ... You know my property there is no Power of Sale...!!! 3 Purported power of sale on my property. (1) Power of Sale.was Lawyer Kumar Sriskanda's brother who is living in Sri lanka did the sale...? Where the funds goes to ...? You know... Infront me you shouted with Tom.Thiru... And Lawyer Kumar Sriskanda to give his I.D'S... Lawyer Kumar Sriskanda signed the legal document in Tamil... And discharge the mortage... He opened and Bank Account in Woodside Square Mall BMO/TD bank using his money to cheat. Innocent public to steal their property/money/assets . Can you prepared to prove the Press or.Toronto Police/OPP/RCMP that Srisivaskanda Sithamparapillai and Vigneswaran Ponnambalam are living in Canada. Do you have their ID's(Photo)/Address and other personal information ? How you manage to register mortgage on a deceased person name Vigneswaran Ponnambalam... And helped Tom Thiru to sign all legal documents to steal the innocents property and money. As lawyer you helped Tom Thiru to escape from Justice. ...!!! You know what happened to Lawyers Kumar Sriskanda, Norman Silver, Kesavan Thanga Mudalai... Their licence were revoked by the.Law.Society...!!! You registered mortgage on my property by a deceased person Vigneswaran.Ponnambalam...and never give any proof of document for the money transaction and helped Tom Thiru to steal and escape from Justice. Can you prepared to produce Vigneswaran Ponnambalam and Sri Sivaskanda Sithamparapillai, in court or before the Police to produce them in Court. You know both of them only did the Purported Power of.Sale.and you helped.them to escape from Justice. You well known that Tom Thiru/Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu, does have licence to lend mortgage . Fysco already revoked.his agents licence, you only support.him in many cases to cheat/fraud innocents and allowed him to escape from Justice. Doshi...you and Tom Thiru know how to cheat innocents and escape from Justice with favourable Judgement. Please.call the Media and Police to prove that Tom.Thiru is stealng innocents/Public/Fanancial Institution Money/Property/Assets and escaping from Justice...!!! Still you are allowing and. Helping Tom Thiru to register illegal transfers on innocents property.
N  9th of May, 2016 by    0 Votes
remove my picture
N  11th of Jun, 2016 by    +3 Votes
Money is speaking every where...if the OPP or RCMP involved in this matter only everything will come out...the case never went for examination or discovery everything is set up. Even that lady have all the evidence...lawyers are making money. Even 2nd Mortgage was closed by the Lawyer Kesavan, his licence was revoked, because he frauded 13 property... ! 3 lawyers who were involved in this property matter were revoked by the Law Society of Upper Canada. (1) Kesavan Thangamudali. (2) Kumar Sriskanda. (3) Norman Silver. This lady's lawyers are making money only, they never filed any proper documents/evidence in Court., even they never proceed on time dragging the case, also never follow the Rules, that means never go for examination or discovery before the Trials. Really I am wondering, how the person Tom Thiru (going as so many names, his Legal name is Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu) doesn't have any Mortgage Lending Licence from Financial Service Commission, caneasily get Judgements from the Superior Court Judges. Actually this is a Big Mortgage Scam, When I searched and found lot of lawyers and Home Trust, even First Canadian Title Insurance involved in this Mortgage Scam, and getting favourable judgements in their favours and putting the innocents on the road.Tom Thiru/Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu aka Sutharvilli Thirukumar (Wife, but Tom Thiru filed/signed legal documents even affidavits on her name ) his Manager declared that Tom.Thiru and his financial Institution...VKT Financial Concept Inc(Doesn't have Fysco Licence) Assets is $ 100 Million, but he never declared or filed in Canadian Revenue Agency. Even Tom Thiru/Sutharvilli Thirukumar gave and filed affidavits in Court that his Father-in law and Brother-in law brought money (Million Dollars ) from Sri Lanka without declaring from both Country Immigration Departments.. I am really wondering there is No Justice or Law and Orders for these innocents. These Criminals escaping and still running these businesses without licence and not declaring /filing anything with CRA. Tom. Thitu's wife Sutharvilli Thirukumar declared Bankruptcy after cheated so many innocents and made Millions of Dollars. But...One day everything will come out... I don't know why these people never go to the Media to bring everything to the Public.
D  28th of Oct, 2016 by    0 Votes
Please remove my and my wife picture from the site, otherwise we will take appropriate legal action against you.Please read below Judgement of Court of Appeal .

Baskaran v. Doshi, 2016 ONCA 796 (CanLII)
Date: 2016-10-27
Docket: C60718
Citation: Baskaran v. Doshi, 2016 ONCA 796 (CanLII), , retrieved on 2016-10-28 Cited by ? documents Show headnotes PDF Email Tweet Share
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

CITATION: Baskaran v. Doshi, 2016 ONCA 796
DATE: 20161027
DOCKET: C60718
Rouleau, van Rensburg and Miller JJ.A.

BETWEEN
Sivapragrasam Baskaran and Karunawathy Baskaran

Plaintiffs (Appellants)
and

Sanjaykumar M. Doshi and Home Trust Company

Defendants (Respondent)
Todd Robinson and Christopher Selby, for the appellants

Sean Dewart and Chris Donovan, for the respondent

Heard and released orally: October 24, 2016

On appeal from the judgment of Justice Wendy M. Matheson of the Superior Court of Justice, dated June 9, 2015.

ENDORSEMENT

[1] Other than the issue of damages which we need not deal with, the appellants’ submissions are all tied to their argument that the trial judge erred in not applying the appropriate standard of care for a solicitor. Specifically, the trial judge did not apply the law on or make findings with respect to a solicitor’s duty to warn of the consequences flowing from signing or/and registering a mortgage discharge.
[2] We disagree. At trial, the plaintiffs testified that they never attended at the solicitor’s office. Their position was that he was negligent in failing to take reasonable steps to ensure that he was in fact dealing with the plaintiffs before purporting to act for them and discharging their mortgages. The plaintiffs’ counsel at trial conceded that if the trial judge found that contrary to the plaintiffs’ evidence they had indeed met with the solicitor and signed the discharges then the action failed.
[3] The trial judge accepted the evidence of the solicitor that the plaintiffs did meet and did execute the releases, and the trial judge rejected the evidence of the plaintiffs that they never attended. These credibility findings are well supported in the record.
[4] Given the concession of the plaintiffs’ counsel at trial, the trial judge was not in our view required to go on and specifically deal with whether the solicitor met the duty to warn of the consequences of signing and registering a discharge. That was not a live issue at trial. In any event, the only evidence at trial on that issue was that of the solicitor that he would have followed his normal practice, that is, of advising of the consequences of signing and registering a discharge.
[5] For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
[6] Costs to the respondent fixed $12, 500, inclusive of disbursements and applicable taxes.
“Paul Rouleau J.A.”
“K. van Rensburg J.A.”
“B.W. Miller J.A.”
N  27th of Dec, 2016 by    0 Votes
@Sanjaykumar Doshi Hey...Lawyer Doshi...This is another set up... The video is the only proof to give Judgement to that man... None of his lawyers produce in Court... Famous Lawyer James Morton tricked him... But one day very soon you will realize. When he came to your office, you are telling You don't know him and shouting that you will call the police, but how you manage to steal his mortgage more $780, 000 and helped Shelvan Kannuthurai /Panneershelvan Kannuthurai and his partner Tom Thiru/ Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu, ... Both of them to escape from JUSTICE...!!! You can easily get Judgement from the Judges, but the God's Judgement ... Now you think you won the case...!!! Good Enjoy it...One day... You will realize... For nothing you cheated so many innocents ... And put them on road for only money...!!! Good Luck and God Bless You and Your Wife Doshi...!!!
D  9th of Feb, 2017 by    0 Votes
See the attached Court file, Yamunakumari Nithiyananthan is the biggest fraud and dishonest person. She is vendetta against innocent people.


D  9th of Feb, 2017 by    0 Votes
After reading all this and having some private investigating on the complaints, The lady Yamunakumari Nithiyananthan and Nimalan Gunarajan has set up this complaints board website in 2009, which is right after both of them lost their properties for non payment of mortgage. Mr. Tom Thiru is a very good man, and I have known him for a long time. AsK anyone, he came from a high class family. Now there are trying to go through the social media to take a revenge on innocent people. What are they going to do if the bank took their property for non payment of mortgage? Yamunakumari's previous property known 22 Gaitwin place has been to power of sale by the three diffrent banks prior last time. What a scam artist these people. Now they have very well planned it and executing it as a good people in their own website. Get a life, now that we all know about it. Go to work and try to come up in life rather than digging your own grave. STOP cyber bullying people.
N  11th of Feb, 2017 by    0 Votes
@Niru Ka Hi... Niru Ka, stop this nonsence there is no Bank Power of Sale on my property, 22 Gaitwin Place, I lived in that Property from 1997 . This man Tom Thiru aka Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu and his wife doesn't have any mortgage on that property. 1769656 Ontario Inc. Doesn't have any mortgage lending licence from Financial service commission. There is proper legal document they gave VKT financial Concept Inc. /V.K.T. Wealth Management /17969656 Ontario Inc. And. Tom Thiru's Lawyer Terry Walman's unlicenced Mortgage Corporation ELLE doesn't have any Financial Service Commision Licence to lend mortgage to Public. Me and my family lived in this property peacefully from 1997. In 2009 Nov23 rd Tom Thiru used his friend/lawyer Terry Walman to get paid off my mortgage from Home Trust without my knowledge or consent using the Terry Walman's personal Cheque for $165, 750 and the staffs/lawyers from Home Trust helped both Tom Thiru and his lawyer to steal my property without our knowledge, actually its a matrimonial property, and Terry Walman Lawyer used his unlicenced ELLE Corporation to give 2$ donation a Person so called Vigneswaran Ponnambalam, he is a desceased person Tom Thiru create fake documents and ID's and used 15 Westney Shoppers Drugmart Post box as his residence address and this deceased person gave /transferred the property to Leslie Philpotts and gave mortgage through Tom Thiru 's unlicenced Mortgage Corporation for $315, 000 . This is a big Mortgage Scam, everything is in Toronto Land Registry about the funds, who took/share from my property 22 Gaitwin Place. (We can lie...in Canada . Everything is in record. But Leslie Philpotts never give any deposit or down payment or even he never paid any mortgages/bills/property Tax. Even he never lived in that property. LESLIE PHILPOTTS CAME TO COURT, WITNESS ME AND GAVE EVERYTHING IN AFFIDAVIT. Nov. 23rd 2009, Tom Thiru and his lawyers Norman Silver(his licence revoked) Terry Walman did this fraudulent transfer and 24th Nov. 2009, Tom Thiru came with Leslie and asked my family to leave the property I call the police and they chase them away. Then on Monday went to a Lawyer Aina Mayokun she checked the Title and told about the illegal transfer of the property and explained about the fraud. I retained her from that day I am fighting for Justice. But immediately Tom Thiru told Leslie Philpotts not worry and also told not to pay any mortgages and send him to Jamaica, filed the STATEMENT OF CLAIM IN Newmarket Court, served everything to Brimley /Eglington UPS mail box and mentioned that address as Leslie Philpotts Residents and Lawyer Norman Silver went to Newmarket Court and got default Judgement for Leslie Philpotts on MY. PROPERTY 22, Gaitwin Place, ...then got the writ of possession then quickly got the order for Writ of Posseession with help of Sheriff, /Court Officers/Judges/Lawyers Tom Thiru and his Lawyer Norman Silver altered the Sheriff Order(Govt. Document) add my name and came with them to my property break the locks, change the locks put my family on the road. Because of long weekend I couldn't go to court. The 43 Division police also believed that document was a proper court document. But the Sheriff gave the Key to Aton Simms(Tom Thiru's partner) they lived in my property from April 14th to April 20th because My lawyer also... Couldn't get original order on time. You don't believe Tom Thiru and his team lived in my property damaged my house, specially the Bathroom, stolen my Jewellery, cash, valueable things, Cheque books, documents (I have all the evidence/witnesses) Even Leslie Philpotts gave everything in his Affidavit. Then the Judge ordered to give the property back to us. YOU DON'T BELIEVE MY CASE IS A GENUINE CASE, BUT THE JUDGES GIVING JUDGEMENT IS... Very soon everything is coming to the light. No of my lawyers filed proper evidence in court. Never go for a examinatio/discovery or mediation ... YES... EVERYTHING IS A...!!! I have all the evidence to prove . Because of my previous lawyers negligence...Tom Thiru is Laughing...but... THERE IS NO BANK POWER OF SALE.. There is no power of sale order for that property. Only Terry Walman mentioned in regisration of title that its a Power of Sale. (1) Power of Sale mentioned in title by Srisivaskanda Sithamparapillai, who is living in Sri Lanka, and his Brother Lawyer Kumar Sriskanda(Licence Revoked) signed all the legal documents in Tamil language used fake documents/ID's/Address and opened bank accounts in his Srilankan brothers name in Woodside Square Mall BMO and TD Bank and certify the tamil signature on the same time by fraud he took all money. From 22 Gaitwin Place property. (2) Power of Sale mentioned on title was by Vigneswaran Ponnambalam is a deceased person, Tom Thiru signed all legal documents used fake documents/ID's and 15, Westney Ajax Shoppers Drugmart mail box as residence address took all money from the property. (3) Power of Sale mentioned in title is by the unlicenced 1769656.Ontario Inc. Owner Tom Thiru/Wife - Sutharvilli Thirukumar and so many others and took the money from that property 22 Gaitwin Place. Now Tom Thiru transferred the property to his friend. Georgia Quash 's Husband(2nd marriage) and his 1st time birth son (stepson)on Oct.23rd 2013 and took so many mortgages through strangers(Yes no proper verification documents/addresses/even no proper ID's) all mortgages are more than 10 people came on title as lenders on my property...I never lied to you All any body can get details from Land registry when you pay fees they will give you or lawyers have access to get all the records from the title. Now the page is in record is 7 ..I am the 2nd and owner. Hi...Mr. Niru you friend Tom Thiru is so smart to prepare/create fake documents /ID's /addresses and even he can easily create or alter Govt. Documents. There is no Bank Power of Sale or Default Judgements . Everything is created and purported power of sale only registred on my property and Tom Thiru and his team took all the money from my property and shared. One order from Hon. Justice Sachchs gave that the lady Georgia Quash is got 4th stage Cancer and the lawyers mention and request the judge to remove the CPL on Dec.6th 2016, for her treatment she is spending $14, 900 US dollars for the medicine from America/USA and gave to court Canadian Pharmacy bills ...and the Judge removed and put me to pay cost order $10, 000/ my question (1) Georgia is not on title why the judge remove CPL to help her to refinance the property (2) Cancer treatment covered by OHIP (not the expensive medicine) (3) 4th stage cancer patient has to be stayed hospital (4) So many medical corporations prepared to support the patient. (5) Breast Cancer Society or Breast Cancer Foundation is there to help. (6) So the Judge telling /allowing the fraudesters to steal any body's property to settledown their USA medical bill. (7) The Hon.Judge gave a message to the Public that if you are cancer patient you can illegally transfer anybody's property for the treatment and to settle the USA medical bills. All the Judgements are without proper evidence and its a Big set up. Yes... Very soon everything is coming to the light with all the proof. I am really surprising the Home Trust only frauded my mortgage and helped Lawyer Terry Walman and Tom Thiru/Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu to steal my property and make money by purported mortgages(more than 15 Diferrent mortgages on my property 22 Gaitwin Place) and now also how the Home Trust gave a mortgage on the same property already there is a lawsuit against them.) See...how Tom Thiru cheating the innocents to make money. I have proof of documents/cheques/affidavits in so many different name he is using. My property was transferred/signed legal documents by his nick name TOM THIRU its in land registry record. He cheated so many people more than 20 . His manager declared his assets is $100 Million. But in Dec. My lawyer gave documents that Tom Thiru/Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu and his wife Sutharvilli Thirukumar /Sutha Thirukumar declared bankruptcy /proposal through Kunjar Sharma Trustees. See...he is lied to Courts/Police/RCMP/OPP and all the Politicians. Banks/Financial Institutions and the Govt. Of Canada, Canada Revenue Agency. Please don't believe him My Police Entry is in Durham Police and 43 Division.. If you want come there I will bring and show you all with other 7 people who are crying for Justice who were Affected by Tom Thiru and his friend another partner Panneer Shelven Kannuthurai, from Metrozen Canada. Inc. He is thinking our case is over...!!! Now only the truth is going to come out... He lied to court gave fake documents and got the Judgement. Judges never knows the truth. But very soon its going to come out for the Public Alert. Very Soon Tom Thiru and Panneer Shelvan Kannuthurai will realize how they cheated their own communtity to make money by FRAUD.
N  11th of Feb, 2017 by    0 Votes
@Niru Ka Who are you to tell me to work...see you are also sailing in the same boat... Using so many names posting comments on others name. O.k Call the media and 43 Division Police and show the Bank Power of.Sale Court Order and for my and Gunaranjan's mortgage agreement ...why you lied to court and Police. Very soon some of the authority is going to release all your and your partner Shelvan Kannuthurai's involvement of fradulent activities.with all legal document proof all the Judges will. Realize about their Judgements. While you are living in a GLASS HOUSE... Don't throw stones on innocents, ...days are nearing ...!!! Judgement day is close to you.. Don't think that you can buy Justice throwing your fraud money on Lawyers. Very. Soon Everyone's prayers to be answered...!!! God is So Great...!!! So Powerful Person...!!! Your fraud money can't buy him...to get favourable Judgement and cheat the innocents. And put them on Road...!!! All mighty Lord is going to show you the Justice very soon. You also...creating so many names and mentioning that you are a GOOD MAN...PROFESSIONAL...What a shame of You...stole my property and advising me to go to work and try to come up in LIFE...oh...rather than... Digging your own grave...!!! Can you remember in Appeal court you told me and husband that in Tamil language ORU...KASUM...ILLAMAL... ORU SARTHAMUM SELAVU... ILLAMAL...O.C. YIL...UNN (My) VEEDU...ENNAKKU(You) KIDAITHTHATHU... ENDRU...!!! (Very soon God willl Answer You)
N  13th of Feb, 2017 by    -1 Votes
Yamunakumari, You have admitted that you have created this website in 2009 to bully people who has lend you the money to purchase this property. Ever since, this property was sold under power of sale from lender to next. As we all can see from the parcel search, you and your family members flip the property ownership from one family member to another family member on the way you are cheating all the Lenders. Here is the copy of the parcel search and Home Trust power of sale proceeding for non-payment of mortgage. As per the parcel search, It is pretty obvious to us that you were not paying mortgage to many banks and private lenders. You like to live free, without paying mortgage payment. It is not right and it is not fare. Please stop being dishonest and try to be a good person. STOP CYBER BULLYING...


N  14th of Feb, 2017 by    +1 Votes
@Niru Kan Do you have any proof of a single document that any body lend me money...bring to the Durham Police. Please bring them peronally to the police. Yes, show me the Court order of Home Trust Power of Sale. Your Lawyer Terry Walman gave his Personal Cheque and got my mortgage without my knowledge and consent. There is no default in my mortgage. Ombudsman involved in this mateer. I have all the proof of documents. Your all fraudulent activites Home Trust help you. On 26th Oct. When Hon .Justice asked about the fradulent transfef the First Canadian Title Insurance/Home Trust Lawyers never answer or submit any proper documents and got the judgement. Justice is Justice. Tom Thiru/Niru Ka/Niru Kanthan... You cheated so many people with these same lawyer team. O.k. How you came in my property ? If its a Power of Sale of 3 Banks do you have any proof of Court Orders ? Bring it to the Police and show me. You create gave Documents to by different Banks. Tom Thiru, the Land Rehistry. Deputy Registrar is waiting for a Court Order. You did big Mortgage Scam on my property. You and Georgia Quash family stolen my family and took more than $590, 000 mortgages from that property and shared. Tom Thiru don't think everything is over, very soon you will realize. Justice is Justice. You are stealing innocents property, money, assets and declared proposal/bankruptcy . You are so smart to creat fake documents and cheat Government Authority. This is not a cyber bullying...!!! This is a Public Alert/Awareness, because still you are cheating the innocents. Don't think that you are so smart to cheat Police/RCMP/OPP and Government of Canada, Immigrations Official and Canada Revenue Agency.. So you are telling that you can steal any body's property using fake documents and make money easily with help of your lawyer Team.. Don't fool your own community. You know one thing so many people already show the documents/evidence and shocked how the Judges are give judgement for them. Everything is a legal document. O.k. The Land Registry already did the Investigation and waiting for a Court Order.. Don't cheat the innocents please Tom Thiru/Niru Kanthan. Complaints Board is helping the Public. Its a Public Alert. You never used your legal name. You are using so many illegal/Nick names. Why... You transferred my property to your friend Georgia Quash by your Nick name 'Tom Thiru. Why you didn't post that document here. Yes, that's why land Registry is investigating. I have that evidence. You think that you can easily fraud innocents and Government of Canada by nick /fake name and ran away. No, Tom Thiru aka Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu., one day you have to answer it.
N  14th of Feb, 2017 by    +1 Votes
@Niru Kan Tom Thiru, don't cheat others where is the Power of Sale Court Order from Home Trust. ? Come to Durham Police and show me please. How stupid you are. Police can get that from Home Trust. You create and gave documents to 43 Division mentioned my property is on foreclosure by Scotia Bank. Then create a document and gave to Durham Police that its a TD Bank foreclosure for me. Who are you to me ? What is the relationship between you and me on that property. Same Question I asked the Lawyer Thambiyah Sripathy, infront of my husband when he mentioned that Kumar Sriskanda lawyer is begging to give up us to him our property, whenhe fradulently transferred in his brother Srisivaskanda Sithamparapillai, who never lived in Canada, Kumar Sriskanda signed all legal documents in Tamil, and at the same time KumarSriskanda certified his signature., its in the court already. But Professional Lawyer Kumar Sriskanda, after the fradulent transfer he mentioned in Title that its a Power of Sale. What shame of you all !!!Stealing innocents property then mentioning We are Professionals. I think this is also you creating. Why you put only 1 page of Title, its came to 7 pages after my ownership...All are fradulent transferrs by you and friend Geogia Quash family to steal money others by 2/3rd fradulentmortgages. You already took $590, 000/... I didn'tsay that during the investigation... They only said. Even they know where the funds were deposited... Please stop your lies/fake documents and get ready to face the criminal charges. Against you and your team. You know recent fraud of $200, 000 mortgage scam who the tamil couple did. Comparing with that, your fradulent Activities...Oh My God... How you and your wife SutharvilliThirukumar, Shelvan Kannuthurai/Geogia Quash family, and escaped from Law and Justice all these days. You thought you can buy the Law and Justice by your fraud Money. One day you will realize. My question, how you came in into my property 22 Gaitwin Place ? What is the connection between you and me ? Who are you ? What is the relationship between you and me ? Can you remember My lawyer Todd Robinson, from Leading/famous law Firm Cassels Brock filed motion in 393, University Superior Court, mention that I am the Original Beneficial Owner of 22, Gaitwin Place, and asked for the Honourable Court, to pay all the sales money in Court. Tom Thiru, you played a big fraud game(Mortgage Scam) on my property. ...very soon you are going to realize. You stopped all my lawyers not file any proper defense in court(I have all evidence) Can you remember, Leslie Philpotts mentioned in his affidavit that how your lawyer Mathiew Vallilutti begged him to sign document against me and how lawyer Gowsami create a fake fido message and you got a favourable Judgement from Hon Justice Gilmore, in Newmarket. Fido is asking me to give all the information to sue you all. When I send and inquired they said its a fake.document. That is the order you posted here. Wait... Tom Thiru... Case is not over. Now only started...!!! If you say that... This property is yours...so nobody can't buy property. In Canada. I lived with my family 17 years no default...No Power of Sale...purported power of sale mentioned onTitle. Show me the MLS listing. Where is the Accounts...!!! You are a stupid... Stopping my lawyers not to file proper evidence in Court... And easily getting judgements from the Judges who doesn't know the proper evidence. How they are giving a judgement to Unlicence Mortgage Corporation17969656 Ontario Inc. Its a Crime., and supporting your fradulent activities. Don't worry about my inside family members transfer of my property ? Who are you ? What is the connection or relationship between you and me or my Husband ? Its a matrimonial property...!!! Stop these nonsence please... Very soon every one is going to know with the proof/evidence document...then only you will realize. File your CRA reports with your proper genuine documents. Don't cheat Canada Revenue Agency and the Immigration Officials by your So many nick names.
N  14th of Feb, 2017 by    +2 Votes
@Jacob19 Who are you to say... That I didn't pay the mortgage to anybody, what is your problem ? Stupid... Why you are worrying about me or my family ? Are you related to me or my husband ? Oh... If I didn't pay the moretgage ... Why you crying ...that its not fare... Go to hell...!!! Stupid... So you agreed /accept that you came to steal my property... Because of jealously...you only said...!!! Stupid...what connections you have with my family... Its the sin for you...You totally damaged my family unity, happiness, peaceful life...My Church family is praying everyday...to get my property back. God is So Great...!!! All these sins will go to your family... Specially your wife and children going to supper...!!! That day Feb. 7th 2017, you sent the Durham Police Officer to Arrest me. What is the complaint ...You gave a complaint " THAT I SAID ...I AM GOING TO BREAK YOUR LEGS " Stupid...Who you are ? Gave a complaint against me and sent the Durham Police Officer to arrest me...!!! ITS A SHAME OF YOU...!!! Are you a man or a lady ? So for your criminal activities, who is going to Arrest you Mr.TomThiru/Thirukumar Thirunavukarasu. ? Who are you ? O.k. Very Soon... Everything is going to come out ... Don't worry. ...Soon you will realize...who you are...!!!

Post your Comment

Please check text spelling before submitting a comment
Your attitude towards Complaint Agree Neutral Disagree
Comment text
Attach photos (optional)

Contact Us
bdomains.com
     

Reply to

Send