Robbins SCE Research
Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US & the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Donate
Vol. I Criminal Complaint submitted to Canadian Justice Minister Jody Wilson Raybould v B.C. lawyers Ron Bakonyi, Robert Ellis (BMO Bank), M. Kleisinger (LSBC); BC Justices Elaine Fenlon - Chris Hinkson (affidavit)
  May 25, 2016

Commentary
Minister of Justice Canada, Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, House of Commons, Ottawa, Ontario K1A OA6 Legal Alt: 1 (613) 992 1460 Constituency Office: 1245 W. Broadway, Suite 104, Vancouver, B.C., Legal Alt: (604) 717 1144
B.C. Prosecution Services Criminal Justice Headquarters, PO Box 9276 STN Prov Gov't Legal Alt: 1 (250) 387 0090
Re: Submission of Criminal Complaint relating to Law Society of British Columbia members: Ronald Bakonyi (Bakonyi & Company); Robert Ellis (Ellis Roadburg); Michael Kleisinger (Compliance Officer – Law Society of British Columbia; Lauri Anne Fenlon (Fenlon J.); Chris Hinkson QC (C.J.); Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation (“CMIC”) & Peet & Cowan Financial Services (“C”); BMO Bank of Montreal, Board of Directors of CMIC & PC; Board of Directors of BMO Bank of Montreal, BC Attorney General & Justice Ministry, BC Court Services (BCGEU), RCMP & Others.
With respect to the above captioned subject matters and persons please consider this letter to be my request for a criminal complaint to be filed.
Please note the provision of a 102 page affidavit establishing the events which ground the allegations. In exhibit please note my analysis of Martin's Criminal Code, copies of (2) relevant civil judgments, Transcript Evidence, Court Clerk's notes pertaining to forged court orders and stay of execution orders ignored by legal counsel.
I believe the chronology and facts will support the allegations engulfing the conduct and actions of two constitutionally appointed justices.
I would note that the Coquitlam RCMP participated in the taking of our property – under threat of arrest knowing full well the extenuating circumstances involved in court procedure. I would also note that the fraudulent (unconscionable) loans at the heart of this issue were provided to Surrey main office who failed to respond.
Please note that this complaint will be communicated to other parties including the Parliamentary Press, the Privy Council, International Federation of Jurists (Switzerland), the State and Justice Department of the United States, as well as the United Nations Human Rights & Canadian Human Rights, as well as other organizations to record a chronology of communication of transmission.
This information will also be posted at www.robbinssceresearch.com and a separate website will be established in pdf for presenting documents in the public interest.
I may be contacted at ------- but prefer to communicate in writing for a historical audit of matters given the degree of the abhorrent conduct and actions alleged.
Sincerely, Glen P. Robbins
A F F I D A V I T
My name is Glen Robbins, of ----- ------, Burnaby, British Columbia and I MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS:
1. That or about May 2nd, 2015 I served (by way of Canada Post), (on behalf of myself, my wife Ita Robbins, and mother in law Frana Matich) (and others circa Sept 2015), (two) Applications for leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada relating to matters pertaining to BCSC file No.: H130330. [Please note the document is time stamped “May 07, 2015 Supreme Court of Canada” (bottom right hand corner)]. In the top left hand corner of Volume I (not designated), the document is time stamped “Law Branch Direction Generale Du Droit”. This designation means that the Law Branch (registry lawyer) took possessions of it. This application was approved for filing by the Supreme Court of Canada subject to payment and Form 23. (Copies of front page (inc. 'vetted' attached as Exhibit “A”)
2. That, I believe these submissions, have significant value in context of reading this affidavit evidence in conjunction with extensive research & extracts from Martin's Criminal Code included, as well as further evidence of allegation of conduct, which I verily believe rises to the standard of personal and collective criminal action, which allegations are directed at Ronald Bakonyi lawyer of Bankoyi & Company, Mr. Bakonyi's clients Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation & Peet and Cowan Financial Services, the Officers & Board of Directors of both of those companies; Robert Ellis lawyer of Ellis Roadburg, Mr. Ellis's clients BMO Bank of Montreal, the Officer and Directors of BMO Bank of Montreal, Lauri Ann Fenlon (Madame Justice Fenlon), Fasken Martineau law firm (national professional law firm), Michael Kleisinger lawyer with Law Society of British Columbia, the Governance of Law Society of British Columbia, Benchers of Law Society of British Columbia, Board of Governors Law Society of British Columbia; BC Attorney General and Justice Ministry, BC Attorney General Suzanne Anton & former BC Attorney General Shirley Bond (currently Labour Minister), Chris Hinkson (B.C. Supreme Court Justice Chris Hinkson), BC Trial Scheduling manager Sue Smolen, BCGEU Board of Directors (on behalf of BC Supreme Court registries in Vancouver, British Columbia & New Westminster British Columbia.
3. That, at pages 5-6 of the Volume I is an order provided by Madame Justice Saunders of the BC Court of Appeal “Citation: 2014 BCCA 377” Docket # CAO41833 of the application hereinafter denoted as “5-7, 2015 SCC”. This order is linked to an appeal of vacant possession (dated April 24th, 2014 from lower court decision under file # H130330) from BC Supreme Court (NB that is a conventional appeal and not leave to appeal as required for originated order Nisi).
4. The application before Madame Justice Saunders included application to stay of proceedings of vacant possession order made April 24th, 2014.. Orders are made September 18th, 2014 and October 3rd, 2014 by Justice Saunders in relation to the stay motion related to the appeal of the vacant possession order.
5. That at the time this application was made to BC Court of Appeal, neither myself nor my wife Ita Robbins were aware that court clerk's notes indicated a formal stay order was in place made April 7, 2014 by Madame Justice Kloegman, or that Ronald Bakonyi had neglected to include this stay order in the order he produced for filing with the court. That myself, my wife and her mother (who attended with me to application hearing April 7, 2014 were under the belief that I (because the first application to be heard was mine to be added as party (BCSC H130330), was to contact BC Supreme Court Trial Scheduling Division, the 1st day of May 2014 to arrange for a trial hearing of: (a) my application to be added as party; (b) the appeal of conduct of sale made December 9, 2013 by Master Tokarek; (c) if necessary, the application for vacant possession.
6. That the Volume filed at Supreme Court of Canada extensively expressed our truth about the hearing before Madame Justice Kloegman of April 7, 2014 including expressing Her Honour's direction during the application hearing (adjourned generally) of Ronald Bakonyi for Cambridge Mortgage (“CMIC”) to her court clerk to phone down to Trial Scheduling to obtain a trial hearing date, and that when Trial Scheduling (Vancouver courthouse) informed the court clerk that Vancouver courthouse only takes such requests the first week of each month, that Madame Justice Kloegman than directed me (because I controlled the application and Mr. Bakonyi had failed to file a response to application in the time required), that I would phone trial scheduling May 1, 2014 for hearing date.
7. That part of the orders of Justice Kloegman included deadlines (April 14th & 18th, 2014) for myself and Ita Robbins and Frana Matich to file any further application material, and for Ronald Bakonyi on behalf of “CMIC” to file further material (not yet filed at all). These deadlines under BC Civil Rule section 8 would require a response within certain period of time which dates would have permitted a response time inclusive of service, landing either on hearing date April 24, 2014 (but beyond April 23, 2014 adding as party) or just before May 1, 2014 (setting of trial date for more than 2 hours).
8. That the record at Supreme Court of Canada reveals that at no time did Mr. Bakonyi file and serve any application materials within the time required by order of Madame Justice Kloegman made April 7, 2014 and that in fact Mr. Bakonyi did serve application material April 29, 2014, a full 11 days after the date for so doing.
9. That during this period of April 2014, I contacted Mr. Bakonyi (who admits to same on record in another proceeding) to adjourn generally, the hearing dates of April 23rd and 24th, 2014 (as these dates were under the complete control myself and my wife respectively), and given that no response had been filed and served prior to the Kloegman J. orders of April 7, 2014 or thereafter at this point in time (April 19, 2014), in order to accommodate the direction and order of Madame Justice Kloegman made April 7, 2014, I verily believed that our dates of application for April 23, and 24th, 2014 for chambers hearing were adjourned under the stay order of Kloegman J, made April 7, 2014.
10. That I am aware that the BC Attorney General, & Justice Ministry, BC Law Society Governance, B.C. Chief Justices Robert Bauman & Chris Hinkson are well aware of what I believe to be certain breaches in the Criminal Code & administration of justice but have taken no action despite having the authority to do so.
11. That I verily believe that the primary role of any Chief Justice (including Robert Bauman and Chris Hinkson) is to ensure the proper administration of justice in the courthouses they are ultimately responsible for, and further believe that Chris Hinkson and Robert Bauman were in conflict over the interests of fellow lawyers and their position of authority in the courts and were willing to abdicate their responsibility to myself, my wife (and another).
12. That in September 2014 (prior to being aware of the Order Made After Application made by Ronald Bakonyi on behalf of Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation and Robert Ellis on behalf of BMO Bank of Montreal) or the court clerk's notes indicating a stay of proceedings was in place dated August 7, 2014, I requested BC Chief Justice Robert Bauman hold an inquiry into the actions and conduct of both these lawyers and the Justice Lauri Fenlon in relation to the hearing of May 9, 2014.
13. That a letter was also sent to the Canadian Judicial Council at the same time a letter of complaint was made to the Law Society of BC at or about August 2013 by Ita Robbins and Frana Matich in relation to the notice of hearing document of April 15, 2013 filed under BCSC H130330, and the false submissions made at hearing May 9, 2013 in relation to the order of Mister Justice Grauer made October 3, 2011.
14. That the Law Society of BC did not make a decision regarding the complaint of Ita Robbins & Frana Matich until October 2013 at or about the same time that Michael Kleisinger had begun to threaten me personally with contempt charges relating to the Grauer J. order which allegations were baseless.
15. That my wife Ita et al, filed complaint with the BC Ombudspersons Office who did not bother to respond.
16. That my wife and I file then asked BC Supreme Court Chief Justice Robert Bauman to make an inquiry and he refused to take action, instead having his registrar write back and indicate that it was inappropriate to write to him, even though the law clearly permits a written request to the chief justice following complaint to BC Ombudsperson.
17. That based on additional information new complaints have been made regarding the conduct of Ronald Bakonyi, Robert Ellis and Michael Kleisinger to the Law Society of BC for which no response has yet been provided (more than 60 days following complaint 2016 which would now include the Order Made After Application filed May 31, 2013 under BCSC H130330 & Stay order of Madame Justice Kloegman dated April 7, 2014 also under BCSC H130330).
18. That on July 14, 2014 when our house located at 1355 Honeysuckle Lane, Coquitlam, BC and all property and content including clothes and family heirlooms was in process of being taken by those persons/parties I allude to herein, in specific actions I allege to be in breach of the Criminal Code of Canada, including bailiffs and RCMP at our door threatening arrest (see S.C.C. submissions) if the house were not given up voluntarily.
19. That in return phone call I was informed by my brother of law that he had made inquiries and the legal advice he received was that only a stay of proceedings would negate any vacant possession order, and that if the house was taken while a stay was in place his advice was that the damages to us could be significant.
20. That when I pursued this line of demand for Inquiry to the BC Ombudsperson Office no one in that office at that time bothered to make contact with me.
21. That although it is understood that a vacant possession is valid for enforcement (without a stay order in place), the record of evidence will show that in fact, a stay of proceedings had already been put been in place as against the conduct of sale order of May 9, 2013 by Master Tokarek. The stay order against the conduct of sale was granted good until April 30, 2014 by Madame Justice Kloegman on April 7, 2014 in relation to an appeal of the order of Master Tokarek.
22. That the stay order was in place against the my January 2, 2014 application to be added as party
23. That if the orders I sought in relation to my application to be added as party had been achieved I believe the Order Made After Application of May 31, 2013 under BCSC H130330 would have been discovered as fraudulent and then linked to the conduct of sale, and we would have been seeking criminal charges at that time. Under the BC Civil Rules if order(s) had been achieved the petition for foreclosure would be struck and the petitioner would be compelled to file a notice of claim which was what we had intended all along.
24. That I further believe the actions and conduct of Michael Kleisinger of the Law Society of British Columbia and Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson (from specific period commencing September 2013 until date of hearing March 21, 2014 and order made April 10, 2014 (BCSC S111171 (“the Grauer order”) in relation to a hearing, and trial they mutually and illegally produced-- from a Rule 8 application (for vexatious proceeding order against myself dated April 10, 2014), undertaken with their full knowledge and consent of conspiracy in breach of the BC Civil Rules, administration of justice, abuse of power, abuse of office and further believe that the actions of these two officers including the chief justice were purposefully designed to aid and abet and advance the criminal activities of Ronald Bakonyi, Robert Ellis and Lauri Fenlon, with active malice aforethought, -- in order to ensure that I was not able to be properly heard at April 23, 2014 hearing for my application to be added as party under BCSC H130330 (which would have raised the issue of the forged/fraudulent Order Made After Application dated May 31, 2013 for May 9, 2013 under BCSC H130330), AND -- to ensure that the facts of the use of this forged/fraudulent order also used to obtain conduct of sale order made December 9, 2013, and the false order produced for hearing of appeal of conduct of sale order set for hearing April 24, 2014, stay order made April 7, 2013 valid until April 30, 2014, were not properly identified and lawfully dealt with.
25. That in so performing these acts Mr. Kleisinger on behalf of the Law Society of BC and Chris Hinkson QC (Chief Justice) also were intending to cover up a case of unconscionable loan, mortgage fraud, constructive fraud, and breach of public office by BC Land Title in permitting a mortgage they knew to be false, which if discovered through the 30 page response to petition made by Ita Robbins et al under BCSC H130330, would have identified massive fraud in real estate mortgages in the Province of BC, through self regulating mortgage brokers likely involving hundreds of millions -- to billions of dollars of loan and real estate fraud, as well as the hundreds of millions of dollars being paid to lawyer members of the Law Society of British Columbia for signing mortgage they knew to be illegal or unconscionable.
26. That I verily believe these actions and activities in sum total amount to a criminal conspiracy which cannot be denied by any reasonable person armed with the facts.
27. That in Affidavit #1 of Vera Cosovan Sworn March 6, 2014 (filed March 20, 2014) under the foreclosure file H130330 wherein she states: “I, Vera Cosovon, Realtor, of Sutton Group West Coast Realty, #301-1508 West Broadway, in the City of Vancouver, in the Province of British Columbia MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS: @ para 1. “I am employed by the Petitioner (Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation) and I am authorized by the Petitioner, to make this Affidavit on its behalf, I have been involved with the attempted listing of the Property herein and as such, I have personal knowledge of the matters and facts hereafter deposed to, save and except where the same are stated to be based upon information and belief, and where so stated, I verily believe the same to be true”; @ 2. “I have read and reviewed a copy of the entered Order for Conduct of Sale (“the order”) granted December 9, 2013 in these proceedings, and I have been retained by the Petitioner to sell the subject Property pursuant to the Order”; @ 3. “On or about February 14, 2014, I listed the property for the Petitioner pursuant to the Petitioner's instructions and the Order for Conduct of Sale:; @ para 4 .. “It is my belief that Ms. Robbins and Ms Matich are not cooperating with the Court Order for Conduct of Sale.”; @ para 5: “Since February 14, 2014, I made 2 attendances at the subject property and I made requests on both occasions for access to the property to the Order for Conduct of Sale. On both occasions I was refused access and entry to the property, on the first occasion I was refused access by Glen Robbins and on the second occasion I was refused by a female occupant of the property”; @ para 6 ..... “At this point, I believe that Orders for forced entry, changing of locks, vacant possession and Writ of Possession is necessary to allow me to properly list and sell the subject Property without further delay or interference.”
28. That all of the communications and warnings made to Ms. Cosovon were reported to Sutton Realty including all local Vancouver local offices, the head office for Canada, the Vancouver and Fraser Valley Real Estate Boards, the BC Attorney General, federal Justice Minister and Canadian Press.
29. That the evidence at 'desk 210' exists (to be repeated as often as necessary) BC Supreme Court, Vancouver courthouse at 800 Smithe St., [available at all times to the public or to lawyers, managers of the court, other justices of the court], from clerk notes associated with the April 7, 2014 application for vacant possession (and other orders), indicates that a stay order was placed on the Conduct of Sale order good until April 30th, 2014. (See Affidavit exhibits at end).
30. That Mr. Bakonyi, legal counsel for Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation “CMIC” had conduct of production of drawing and filing court orders at all times and in all places involving BCSC H130330 and failed to include the stay order of Kloegman J made April 7, 2014 in relation to the conduct of sale order granted December 9, 2013.
31. That I have taken every conceivable step of notice to the clients of Mr. Bakonyi on behalf of myself, my wife and others of what I have alleged herein in terms of criminal activity, and they have taken no steps to resolve or mitigate the issue, and I thereby presume that they instructed their lawyer Ronald Bakonyi to act in a criminal manner on their behalf.
32. That Mr. Bakonyi knowingly and with active malice failed to produce full order of April 7, 2014 of Kloegman J. whilst in his custody to do so, and thereafter this breach of duty obtained orders of dismissal against my January 2, 2014 application to be added as party on April 23, 2014 and to obtain order for dismissal of appeal of Master Tokarek's order of conduct of sale, and for order of vacant possession.
33. That I reasonably believe there were multiple times in which Mr. Bakonyi defrauded the attending justices, myself, my wife and mother in law. That I further believe this was undertaken with the complicit assistance and where applicable the prevailing authority of the BC Supreme Court, Law Society of British Columbia & BC Attorney General's office, both chief justices Bob Bauman & particularly BC Supreme Court chief justice Chris Hinkson and justice Lauri Ann Fenlon, (and Arnold-Bailey J.).
34. That Mr. Bakonyi exhibited a pattern of malfeasance/misfeasance at all times and places in this matter in his capacity as an “officer of the court”. The evidence will show his activities were aided and abetted by many others in places in public office involving a wide ranging breach of public trust.
35. That a cadre of BC Supreme Court justices were aware of the ongoing criminal activity I allege was perpetrated by Ronald Bakonyi and Robert Ellis under H130330 including most specifically Elaine Fenlon (BC Supreme Court Justice) and Chris Hinkson (BC Chief Justice) with ongoing nonfeasance of Chief Justice for British Columbia Robert Bauman.
36. [At pages 7, 8 & 9 of “5-7, 2015 SCC” is Writ of Possession document dated July 9, 2014 signed by Deputy District Regular H. Dhinjal of BC Supreme Court (who is not a lawyer). The Writ of Possession is an element of the Vacant Possession order (obtained with stay order in place on conduct of sale). The Writ of Possession Form 52 was provided to the BC Supreme Court along with the Order of a Justice Wilcock from Chambers Monday June 2, 2014 under Docket # CAO41787 (also related to lower court H130330). This matter related to an appeal of an April 23rd order pertaining to BC Civil Rule 8 application for Glen P. Robbins to be added as a party. (The order was made ex parte)].
37. That I am aware from speaking with many managers of BC Supreme Courts (of late), that court registries in BC Superior Courts do not check documents on the basis that they are not lawyers, yet find it convenient to pick and choose a few orders they will sign including something as serious as a writ of possession order (when tenants receive better protection).
38. That I understand that BC Court Service managers insist the registry policy sometimes referred to as 'smile and file', is based upon the fact that registry officers “are not lawyers”, a policy recently confirmed by “Darla” analyst with BC Deputy Attorney General's office involving matters pertaining to BC Court Services.
39. That “Darla” also confirmed during that same conversation that documents such as a response to petition are considered a defence intended to be heard by the court and it is not necessary for persons to attend to hearing for the defence to be valid.....(news to me). This position was affirmed by Manager BC Supreme Court Chilliwack.
40. That I am aware that Ita Robbins & Frana Matich filed an comprehensive response to petition and affidavit at or about April 20, 2013 which Fenlon J. was well aware of, and acknowledged in transcript evidence.
41. That Mr. Bakonyi and his client(s) had plenty of opportunity to confess their malfeasance and misfeasance prior to and following obtaining a writ of possession and illegally executing it.
42. That on pages 201-202 of the April 2015 submissions to the Supreme Court of Canada is a Notice to Mediate filed at New Westminster registry. This Notice to Mediate follows a notice of claim filed under BCSC 149328, served in November 2013, in compliance with the BC Attorney General Regulations compelling parties to attend to Mediation. “Cambridge” failed to comply with this regulation and the BC Civil Rules. (Mr. Bakonyi admitted at hearing May 5, 2014 before Justice Arnold Bailey in New Westminster Supreme Court under BCSC 150326 that he had been served with the Notice to Mediate. The time period for arranging a hearing with Mediator would have preceded the hearing of the conduct of sale order of December 9, 2013).
43. That at all times and in all places, the Attorney General of British Columbia and both chief justices of the superior courts were fully aware of these ongoing matters on the basis of relentless communication by my self in conjunction with my wife Ita.
44. That what is clear is that the Application of the ORDER OF A JUSTICE drafted by Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corp (“CMIC”) legal counsel Ronald Bakonyi could not have derived from “orders granted to the Respondent on April 23, 2014 and April 24, 2014” as the matter before Justice Wilcock at BCCA, related to Glen Robbins application to be added as party of January 2, 2014 dismissed April 23, 2014 which order under BC H130330 was made during a stay period ordered by Madame Justice Kloegman April 7, 2014, which Mr. Bakonyi purposefully neglected to disclose the the Justice making the order at ex parte hearing April 23, 2014, April 24, 2014 (Smith and Davies JJ), or to BC Court of Appeal Justice Willcock.
45. That I verily believe these actions and activities undertaken by Mr. Bakonyi and his clients Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation & Peet & Cowan Financial Services, including specifically Francis Peet and Jonathan Cowan are sufficient as cause to bring criminal charges against them.
46. This information, in relation to the stay order of Kloegman J. made April 7, 2014, on top of the fraudulent/forged orders produced, signed, filed on May 31, 2013 under BCSC H130330 by “Bakonyi”, “Cambridge”, “BMO”, & “Ellis”, later used as evidence to obtain conduct of sale order December 9, 2014, is further evidence of a conspiracy to defraud myself, my wife and mother in law, and to defraud the courts, and bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
47. That a reasonable person armed with the facts would readily see that Mr. Bakonyi had no valid legal basis for seeking a writ of possession July 10, 2014, given his knowledge and position as an “officer of the court” with lawful designation of 'attorney general' with full access to the justice system, that a 'stay order' was put in place April 7, 2014 by Kloegman J. as against the conduct of sale order of Dec 9, 2013 not due to expire until April 30, 2014.
48. That Mr. Bakonyi's clients- the owners and Board of Directors of Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation and Peet & Cowan Financial Services, planned with active malice aforethought, to make Order Made After Application on May 31, 2014 with partner in the malfeasance Robert Ellis of BMO Bank Bank of Montreal, and further made plan to use this order forgery (much later actually signed by co conspirator Lauri Fenlon) to obtain the conduct of sale (December 2013).
49. That Mr. Bakonyi's clients, the owners and Board of Directors of Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation and Peet & Cowan Financial Services, deliberated, planned, schemed with active malice aforethought to exclude Madame Justice Kloegman's order for stay of the conduct of sale order until April 30, 2014 from court clerk's notes filed at Vancouver registry BC Supreme Court desk 210, in order to obtain ex parte orders dismissing my application to be added as party, and the appeal of the conduct of sale order filed by Ita Robbins et al.
50. That the owners and Board of Directors of Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation and Peet & Cowan Financial Services possess a financial interest in Sutton real estate or alternatively the real estate market, and knew when they planned their criminal actions that the real estate market was on a sharp rise and realized the opportunity to steal the property from Ita Robbins et al in order to resell through a third party nominee from Toronto who obtained a mortgage with zero amount down and who realized a profit of nearly $700,000 over and above the nearly $80,000 they stole through the mortgage and $400,000 obtained through unconscionable illegal loan.
51. That Rule 13-(31) of the BC Court Civil Rules states: “The Court may, at or after the making of an order, (a) stay the execution of the order until such time as it thinks fit..”
52. That I understand in the democracy of Sweden and others, a person cannot be made a judge until they are a court clerk first}.
53. That the notes of the court clerk at desk “210”(introduced later as exhibit (not photograph) declare that Kloegman J. made stay order of conduct of sale until April 30, 2014, and Mr. Bakonyi saw fit to ignore her order and not to include those provisions of the stay order in the order he wrote up and filed and provided to his client Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation, who is turn provided it to Sutton Realtor Vera Cosovon.
54. That I note that Jonathan Cowan owner Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corp and Peet and Cowan Financial Services had failed to include triable issues in his affidavit in support of originating petition under H130330. That a failure to disclose triable issues made it much easier to obtain order Nisi which is virtually impossible to appeal.
55. That I believe this conspiracy to defraud myself, Ita Robbins & Frana Matich planned and executed by “Bakonyi” “Ellis” and others occurred in order to cover up an unconscionable criminal loan agreement by “PCFS” with later fraudulent mortgage registration of “CMIC”.
56. That I verily believe that the owners of Peet and Cowan Financial Services and Cambridge Mortgage Investment Corporation on advice of legal counsel Ron Bakonyi, or alternatively after bullying Ronald Bakonyi, or promising him more work and clients, consciously elected to defraud myself, Ita Robbins and Frana Matich and the BC Superior Courts, BC Court of Appeal and Supreme Court of Canada, rather than lose the loan amount from their own pockets (which insurance would not pay), and to create panic among investors and shareholders (TSX), and were more desirous of causing us harm and to line their own pockets with money, than show any concern for the life liberty or property of myself or my wife Ita Robbins or for the sanctity of the law or their responsibility to the community at large.
57. That under the BC Civil Rules a conduct of sale order must first lawfully be in place before a vacant possession application can be made. A stay of order made against a conduct of sale order would make an order for vacant possession impossible to obtain owing to procedure of the court and honour to the proper administration of justice.
58. That I am unable to find any case anywhere in this province where an individual not a lawyer has represented themselves in a civil case where that person commenced an action and took it all the way to securing orders they sought with damages announced.
59. That I am a capable self litigant and where a fair forum is provided and opportunity for equitable hearing is also available I am the equal to or better than many or most lawyers in the Province of British Columbia.
60. That I reiterate in November 2013 a Notice to Mediate was filed and served on Cambridge Mortgage Investment & Peet & Cowan Financial Services, (which filing and service was acknowledged by Ronald Bakonyi in matter before Arnold Bailey J. BCSC 150326) with regard to lawsuit filed against the firm (commenced prior to the foreclosure order under BCSC H130330), and further proclaim that offer was made to settle (on without prejudice basis) the matter relating to the foreclosure irregularities in March 2014 (filed at Supreme Court of Canada under docket 35772), which offer featured provision of settlement that the existing principle remain with the term ending July 2015.
61. That the ignoring of the stay order made by Madame Justice Kloegman April 7, 2014 in the obtaining of vacant possession order April 24, 2014 was undertaken within weeks following this offer to settle.
62. That I verily believe this Notice to Mediate and offer to settle is clear evidence that even in the face of abuse of court processes, and what I allege to be criminal activity and criminal actions at the point of the Superior Courts of the province that neither myself nor my wife (et al) were looking for something for nothing and at all times and all places within all court processes conducted ourselves with grace and dignity, a standard that all of the persons I have advancing these allegations against refused to consider despite being obligated to do so by the Constitution and Oath.
63. That myself and my wife want immediate return to our home located at 1355 Honeysuckle Lane, Coquitlam BC, and the return of our material possessions in the tens or hundreds of thousand of dollars returned to us forthwith.
64. That I believe the dismissal of the conduct of sale appeal order of April 24th, 2014 under BCSC H130330 is ultra vires the stay order of Kloegman J. made April 7, 2014 valid until April 30, 2014, and the intentional ignoring of this order impugns the integrity of the justice system and the legitimacy of court orders generally, as it is well known to both chief justices Robert Bauman and Chris Hinkson that they should also be indicted on criminal charges, particularly Chris Hinkson where I believe there may have additional motive for helping the crimes along
65. That I note that Madame Justice Kloegman retired from the bench soon after the raid to steal our family home and property and just months following the hearing before her April 7, 2014.
66. That I verily believe Ronald Bakonyi at all times working at the instruction of Jonathan Cowan owner of “CMIC” and Peet and Cowan Financial Services “PCFS” “knowingly and fraudulently” obtained ex parte orders dismissing the appeal of the conduct of sale, and obtaining the vacant possession order.
67. That I verily believe that had a hearing before Trial Scheduling been obtained May 1st, 2014 pursuant to the actual order for stay of conduct of sale order of Kloegman J. made April 7, 2014, it would be heard at earliest date in June or even July 2014 where under scrutiny of more formal trial proceedings the forged Order Made After Application made May 31, 2013 would have been surely discovered.
68. That I verily believe that Mr. Bakonyi failed to disclose the stay provisions of the order of Kloegman J from April 7, 2014, because he realized that the matters would not be heard for possibly months to come, and this was not acceptable to his client Jonathan Cowan, who process servers at Dye and Durham hired by Ronald Bakonyi described as “very aggressive”.
69. That, but for Mr. Bakonyi filing his application for vacant possession for hearing April 7, 2014 no order would have been made for stay of proceedings by Kloegman J, the hearing of my application to be added as party to H130330 would have proceeded as planned for April 23rd, 2014 with the hearing of the appeal of my wife Ita's (et al) conduct of sale order on April 24, 2014.
70. That I believe Mr. Bakonyi and his clients made the conscious decision to cheat both the system, myself, my wife and another.
71. That I believe “Bakonyi” “Cowan” “Cambridge” “Peet & Cowan” “Ellis” “BMO Bank”planned and participated with malice aforethought in theft of well over $1,000,000 in property from myself, my wife and mother in law in breach of provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada, and further believe that if charged and convicted must be ordered to serve a two year jail sentence.
72. That I intend to show that Ronald Bakonyi on behalf of “CMIC” as well as others in positions of public office and authority undertook with planning, cunning, conniving, deceit fraud and targeted active malice to attain their nefarious objectives for their clients and themselves as officers of the court, and outside their authority to do so, to purposefully and willfully cause harm to myself, my wife Ita Robbins and mother in law Frana Matich, which harm I further believe is representative of malfeasance and misfeasance, the former the criminal constitution of these alleged actions, and the latter the tort consideration, and further believe those charged with custody of the administration of the civil justice system in BC were willfully blind permitted these crimes to occur.
73. [That the April 23rd, and April 24th, 2014 hearing dates under H130330 were obtained by myself & Ita Robbins & Frana Matich by way of Requisition under our mutual individual rights under section 15(1) of the Legal Profession Act to do so. These dates were ours respectively to adjourn (to those April 2014 dates) without consent, as no response to application had been filed by Mr. Bakonyi for “CMIC” in accordance with the rules permitting my unilateral custody of dates nor was a response to appeal filed and served].
74. I include in this evidence (and directly and indirectly to other paras), in relation to judicial notes obtained by me on December 7th, 2015 from desk '210' Vancouver courthouse subsequent to an appointment made with the court manager responsible for custody of these notes a few days earlier. (Attached hereto is Exhibit “A”)
75. At 2:02:320 under “VLC-S-H-130330 [BCSC H130330]..(application for conduct of sale) “please note that Mr. Robbins attended and was denied standing to speak.” At 2:02:38 Glen Robbins introduces himself and submits to the Court.... “I am the husband...representing my wife by legal power of (Enduring) attorney (registered at Land Title BC”. At 2:12:35.....Master Tokarek states: “I am not going to hear from you....you (sic) cannot make submissions.” “At 2:14:42 Master Tokarek states: “My hands are tied....this order is clear..” (False/fraudulent Order (in the name of) Madame Justice Fenlon filed May 31, 2013 for May 9th, 2013 under H130330) includes in notes... “Write in hand in the preamble...he (Glen Robbins) was present but not allowed to make submissions.”
76. That, based on attending to desk 210 on December 7, 2015 and again on February 22, 2016, I understand that confirmation of my own hand notes can be made on the same day requested within 'one half hour or so' from point in time of request.
77. I include in furtherance of the evidence provided in relation to these court clerk notes collected December 7th, 2015 by me, further evidence of notes in relation to an April 7th, 2014 application made by Mr. Bakonyi on behalf of “CMIC” for Order of Vacant Possession commencing at 10:27:32 before Madame Justice Kloegman (In attendance: R. Bakonyi for applicant “CMIC”; Glen Robbins and Frana Matich (for respondents). Mr. Bakonyi tells the Court “On December 9th, at tab 12... “Order of Master Tokarek...Mr. Robbins...not entitled..leave to speak on behalf of Ita Robbins and Frana Matich.”.
78. That I note that these notes attest to the attendance of one party to action BCSC H130330 (Fran Matich) and that Transcript evidence will show that I did all the speaking at hearing contrary to the forged Order Made After Application made May 31, 2013 which stipulates that “Glen Robbins has no standing and is prohibited from speaking on behalf of Ita Robbins & Frana Matich in this proceeding.”
79. That Transcript Evidence of the hearing April 7, 2014 reveals that I was granted leave to speak by Madame Justice Kloegman in relation to both my application to be added as party under BCSC H130330, and also in relation to the appeal of Master Tokarek of the conduct of sale order (on behalf of Frana Matich), which makes division from the language included in the forged Order Made After Application or contradicts any interpretation that any refusal of right of audience would apply throughout the course of all application relating to final sale, as Madame Justice Kloegman granted me the right to speak on behalf of Frana Matich in her section 15 (1) capacity as respondent party in BCSC H130330, leaving the legal inference from a subsequent justice to mean that the proceeding was restricted to the foreclosure hearing only and not to any subsequent application.
80. That the Vacant Possession order made April 24, 2014 (ex parte) during the stay period ordered by Kloegman J. reveals Transcript Evidence from Justice Smith that if I had attended to speak on behalf of my wife he would not have heard from me, not because of the forged Order Made After Application made May 31, 2013 by Fenlon J. (and introduced as evidence at ex parte hearing in obtaining vacant possession order), but rather because of the order made by Chief Justice Hinkson made April 10, 2014.
81. That both Chief Justice Hinkson on March 21, 2014 hearing of Law Society of BC (I allege contemptuous court process under BSCC S111171 (described in detail herein) on the court record, and next day Sue Smolen Trial Scheduling manager indicated that the reserved judgment of Hinkson CJ would probably take 60-90 days owing the “extensive material” Hinkson CJ needed to investigate) or be issued late May or June 2014.
82. That I verily believe that when the Law Society of BC determined a stay order had been put in place by Kloegman J on April 7, 2014 until April 30, 2014 (which would bypass the original hearing dates of April 23, 2014 and April 24, 2014) along with member Ronald Bakonyi with whom they had been in contract on this matter since before May 9, 2013, they were confronted with the reality that the whole conspiracy up to that point in time would be exposed on April 23, 2014 at my application to be added as party, and made contact with Hinkson CJ to provide a more expeditious order (made 19 days later) in order to keep me from making my case in the event I attended, which I did not do.
83. That I believe the Court Clerk's notes provided in Exhibit “A” to be evidence of the linkage of the forged/fraudulent ORDER MADE AFTER APPLICATION of May 9, 2013 filed under H130330, to Mr. Bakonyi's next nefarious action effecting 'laundered' forged/fraudulent Order made by he and Robert Ellis May 9th, 2013 [filed May 31st, 2013] under H130330, and its advancement through court processes with false statement and false evidence submissions to the Court {Master Tokarek} for conduct of sale order December 9, 2014, enabling and now providing fraudulent grounds for the omissions of stay order of Kloegman J made April 7, 2014 is evidence confirming allegations of irrefutable linkage to conspiracy to defraud and theft, as well as other criminal actions.
84. That at 10:50:47 Justice Kloegman states: “So I would make the stay of execution until April 30, 2014.” At 11:07:04 (Kloegman J stipulates): “Neither party can file anything further without leave of the court.” are the transcribed notes from desk 210 of BC Supreme Courthouse, Vancouver registry taken by me following appointment December 7, 2015).
85. That it was my clear understanding from attending before Justice Kloegman with Frana Matich on April 7th, 2014 that it was her intention, when she: (a) directed court clerk to phone Trial Scheduling to ascertain hearing date and (b) rejecting being seized of the matter, & stayed the conduct of sale order until April 30th, 2014.
86. That I acknowledge and am aware that the Reasons for Judgment of Mister Justice Grauer under BCSC S111171 refers to certain submissions made as “ingenious” in relation to powers of attorney and correlation with biblical considerations later published by writer Ian Mulgrew in the Vancouver Sun, particularly I believe offending the sensibilities of some lawyers particularly the inordinate number of lawyers of Jewish heritage involved in claims involving myself and my wife including Ronald Bakonyi, Robert Ellis (Ellis Roadburg), Michael Kleisinger Law Society of BC, as well as Robert Bauman; wherein BC Supreme Court Mister Justice Grauer states as follows at Page 11 paras [43] & [44] in Robbins v Law Society of BC “Mr. Robbins does not make the mistake made by Mr. Bryfogle and other in arguing that he is not entitled to act as an “attorney” in the American sense, using the synonym for “lawyer”. MR. ROBBINS IS MORE INGENIOUS. He points metaphorically to the Christian sacrament of the Eucharist. As the bread through the transubstantiation becomes the body, asserts Mr. Robbins, so does he via Power of Attorney, become his wife....On this analysis, he is in effect his wife acting in person as permitted by s 15(1)(a), not Glen P. Robbins acting in the name of another person as prohibited by section 15 (5). It is a nice point.”
88. That I verily believe that my Catholic background and the Catholic background of my wife, in conjunction with our advocacy to save our home and property from the predations of persons in the legal industry oft considered dominant in matters of finance was also intended in context of the actions taken by these persons constitutes a hate crime against myself, my wife and another based on religion discrimination.
87. That I note the number of lawyers of Jewish background who are lawyers is nearly 15 times the average of the population of such persons in demographic of Canadians and they represent at least one half of the persons about whom allegation are being alleged.

Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US and the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Site Map
Copyright Robbins SCE Research Inc. ©2017