I am sharing with you today parts of the Reply for HRTO that were sent on January 1, 2019, for the applications filed against me by Toxic Tenants. Reading this now in its entirety is very enlightening. It is also very educational on toxic behaviours.
Writing in this manner is what caused these Tenants to lose all their legal applications. They proceed to spend so much time speculating, not showing any actual proof, of what they claim occurred. No one will ever accept a person’s “speculations” over someone’s actions, as facts.
It appears that is in this document everywhere, followed by the writer’s personal opinions. There are no facts shown here nor in the attachments that show what they imply with their words is even possible, let alone true!
Looking back now this situation was very simple.
I was doing my job, it wasn’t personal to me. They even broke the rule of the RTA over deducting funds from their rent, no matter what it was for. They clearly show their actions that caused their eviction, but are trying to imply we should have allowed them to do what they did!!
This document is all about whining about what he thinks other people did, why he thinks they did it, and questions the HRTO, hoping to sway them into believing what they say. They show no evidence of what he says others have done, just speculates.
Divisional Court even agreed they had nothing and there was no racism on April 15, 2019, and they were pissed off over that, yet, they still say there was, and they decided to ignore the HRTO applications they filed after 19 months after losing in Divisional Court.
Even though Divisional Court states the Eviction was LEGAL, they ignore it and proceed to make the claims that it wasn’t. They show they have no respect for the rules and decisions made in their writings.
I read this completely for the first time a couple of years ago when I did the Request to HRTO to find out what documents were accepted out of all the emails sent during that 19 months of the process. It was enlightening to see what little HRTO accepted out of all that was sent to them by the Applicants, KR & AR, as it wasn’t as much as I thought.
Hearsay, speculations, suppositions, and questions being asked, as written by them in this document, do not show that they were racially targeted by me, especially not for any “retaliation” they might claim.
I could care less what they accused me of, as I knew they had no proof and it was all lies. I had my evidence to disprove their claims and they know it, which is why they ignored their applications later on.
They have never shown any facts, links, or any clear evidence that pointed to this as the reason they were evicted and never can, as I could care less what they looked like or what their family dynamics were. They were nothing to me when I was doing my job, just nameless, faceless, Tenants of 303. I didn’t get involved with Tenants and their lives.
If I truly was this type of person, why did I just pick on these Tenants and no one else? They are delusional in thinking that they were important enough for me to risk breaking the rules to target for “illegal” eviction, as they claimed. This is just more of their arrogant thinking!
They clearly tell you that there were other interracial couples living in the Building, I even rented to a few while I was there, yet, I just picked on these Tenants is what they want you to believe because I didn’t like their “family dynamics”?
I did my job, as everyone does when dealing with people, by their ACTIONS, not the words that come out of their mouths, as I have learned that Tenants lie to try and get their way in apartment buildings. I used their actions of writing their denials of Entry when requested for the Eviction. It was enough.
I was amazed by all the terrible assumptions being made by these Toxic People in this writing. They take my words and actions and speculate on what it means with their “it appears” statements, implying their allegations must be correct and they ask so many questions, implying that HRTO is accepting of their speculations as the truth when they have no idea how I think or what my motives were.
How could they truly know what they claim when they have nothing that proves it, just their word? I find their arrogance frustrating but, I have learned to ignore it as I can’t do anything about it. That is also on them!
They show their hand when writing like this… Rather than taking a situation they already gave in their applications and proving their allegations of racism and discrimination, which they were asked to do, they speculate instead and ask more questions, hoping to imply people in the direction they want them to go. It is so very confusing and that is their intention!
When will they learn that they cannot assume to know what another person is doing so blatantly as they do in their posts and documents like this?
Don’t they know that all their speculations just show how desperate they are for people to believe them?
Their statements made in this document show their sense that they were getting treated “unfairly” not that their Human Rights were violated.
As stated by HRTO in March 2019 “It is not clear the applicants have any evidence to establish a link between their race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, citizenship, family status, marital status, receipt of public assistance, association, and reprisal or threat of reprisal and what the respondents have alleged to have done.”
The Interim Decision sent out on March 8, 2019, shows what they were required to do to prove their case. This is why a Summery Hearing was scheduled for January 17, 2020, that the Toxic Tenants ignored. That action is all on them! They knew they were losing their case when they got this letter, just as I knew.
HRTO told them that the 300+ pages they sent do not prove their claims in their applications. HRTO was seeing it all as “general allegations of unfairness”
The Tribunal cannot decide general allegations of unfairness unrelated to the Code. It is not clear that the applicants’ allegations against the respondents may be reasonably considered to amount to a Code violation.
3. IS THERE NO REASONABLE PROSPECT THAT ALL OR PART OF THIS APPLICATION WILL SUCCEED? (SUMMARY HEARING)
[20] The applicants allege discrimination with respect to housing, goods, services and facilities because of race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, citizenship, family status, marital status, receipt of public assistance, association with a person identified by a ground listed above, and reprisal.WHAT IS A SUMMARY HEARING?
[21] Where it appears that there is no reasonable prospect that all or part of an application will succeed, the Tribunal may determine it is appropriate to hold a “summary hearing” on that issue. The summary hearing gives an applicant an opportunity to more fully explain the allegations contained in the application.It also provides the Tribunal with the opportunity to hear arguments from the parties before it makes its decision. In some cases, such as this one, the Tribunal combines a summary hearing with a preliminary hearing dealing with other issues.[22] No witnesses are called to testify at a summary hearing and the parties are not expected to submit documents for the summary hearing. Instead, the Tribunal will make its decision based on the materials already filed by the parties and their submissions in the summary hearing.[23] The Tribunal will dismiss an application after a summary hearing, if it determines that there is no reasonable prospect it will succeed. In some cases, the Tribunal may find that only part of an application has no reasonable prospect of success and the Tribunal may permit the remainder of the application to continue in the Tribunal’s process.Summary Hearing Issues to be Addressed
[24] It is not clear the applicants have any evidence to establish a link between their race, colour, ancestry, place of origin, citizenship, family status, marital status, receipt of public assistance, association, and reprisal or threat of reprisal and what the respondents have alleged to have done.That is,although the applicants may believe that the conduct of the respondents is connected to one or more of the above grounds, it is not clear that there is evidence available to prove the connection.The focus of this inquiry is on the evidence the applicants have or may be able to obtain. The applicants will be expected to explain what evidence they expect to be able to present at a merits hearing to support a link between the Code grounds identified in the Applications and what the respondents have alleged to have done[25] It is not clear that the issues raised in the Application falls under the Code.The Tribunal cannot decide general allegations of unfairness unrelated to the Code. It is not clear that the applicants’ allegations against the respondents may be reasonably considered to amount to a Code violation. The focus of this inquiry is on the legal basis for the applicants’ claim and whether or not there is any reasonable prospect the allegations may amount to a Code violation.[26] The section 8 reprisal protections only apply to the actions of a respondent that are intended as a reprisal for any of the following: (1) claiming or enforcing a right under the Code; (2) instituting or participating in proceedings under the Code; or, (3) refusing to infringe the right of another person under the Code. See for example Mirea v. Canadian National Exhibition, 2009 HRTO 32; Chan v. Tai Pan Vacations, 2009 HRTO 273, Noble v. York University, 2010 HRTO 878 at para. 31. To proceed with the Applications, there must be a reasonable basis to believe that the applicants could establish the respondents reprised against them for one of these three things.
Enjoy reading their entitled arrogant assumptions in this writing below as I did. I had a great laugh at some of it, it is so entitled and shows their extreme arrogance of thinking that what they have to say is so important for others to read.
That is the brunt of it, isn’t it? They feel that what they have to say, about other individuals, is just so important for others to see that they have to make it public. They are looking for support and validation for their actions, claiming to be “informing the public” when it is just about placing blame and making things hard for their Targets.
In time, you will see what I see in their writing, I have no doubts about that. They were throwing out allegations without any facts to back them up, just their personal assumptions.
Stella Reddy own racially motivated actions of harassment, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner and/or where any sensible person would have concluded that there was some alterative motive behind her actions and/or behaviour.
Mr. R takes various claims and proceeds to go on a rant about what HE THINKS it means. He claims to have “proven” that there was no need to have the fixed line of sight Swinn Camera in the position it was in to catch vandalism of the elevator door and Notice Board that was on the other wall.
Sure, if it was just the elevator door that was being scratched up, but it was the buttons and wall above those buttons, and the Notice Board on the side wall, that this camera had to show. The position we placed it in covered all of that.
Now, if the camera was placed in the hallway directly across from their apartment door, then I could understand their complaints, but it wasn’t. I sent them a picture of the view taken by this camera and you can’t see anything inside their apartment and they know it.
If this camera was such an issue, why was it that ONLY these Tenants complained about it? There were other cameras around in the common areas, including one in the hallway where you could see people entering and leaving their apartments.
This was nic-picking that’s all and it is another way to try and show their superiority in thinking they know better than I did on where the camera should be placed and they expected me to agree with their assessment and move it.
It has been proven that there was no requirement for the video camera to stay in that current position, that a better and wider “ direct view ” of the elevator door could have be obtained by simple moving it.What was also proven is that by moving the video camera, the only “ direct view ” that would have been lost was that into the Applicants unit upon exiting the elevator.It has also been proven by the newly installed surveillance system that was placed in the elevator is in the same area that was requested by the Applicant in August of 2017 as were denied by the 3 Respondents.Alto Properties Inc. owner okayed the new surveillance systems position, despite back in August 2017 claiming that the current view was the only view that had “ direct sight ” of the problem area.So why did Alto Properties Inc. owner and Stella Reddy refuse to move the video camera the first time when the Applicants asked?
Reprisal:
There is no evidence to support that myself nor the property owners tried to prevent the applicants from applying to any agency about any of their rights.
The applicants have submitted to you various letters, emails, and notices I issued during my job duties here that all include information for the tenants to look up what I am stating for themselves and it included the telephone number for the LTB, even the Notices of Entry has the rule on the bottom. I even included emails from contractors I received so they could contact them for themselves if they wished to find out why appointments were rescheduled, same for Pest Control.
There is even one email where I gave the applicants the name and contact information for the Scarborough Legal Clinic for them to call for advice, as they seemed to not want to believe anything I said or gave about RTA rules. I always gave the applicants information they could use to investigate what I am saying and in no way did I try to stop them from accessing any one for help.
You even have emails from David Strashin where he offers free advice to the applicants but they respond telling him they don’t need his advice and proceed to call him names.
There is no evidence to support their fear of reprisal for standing up for themselves either with human rights or with their tenancy. They had ample information that was provided by me to call others to verify what I was doing in my job.
I submit this application is vexatious and only done as retribution for issuing and going ahead with an eviction based on the tenants consistent refusal of access for repairs. They made up this story of racism and a previous meeting between us as a way to distract others from their actions.
If I had done as they claim, I am sure they would have said something sooner, way before their claims in August 2016 and especially when they finally did file their complaint on June 4, 2018.
To now claim they felt intimidated won’t wash as they have had no problem speaking up for their rights and getting at anyone who goes against them, even strangers as shown by comments from Mr. R to someone on one of the Facebook posts that you have. You will see a poll and a comment made by someone about the poll and Mr. R attacks him about his comment.
I know that if I had backed down and given in to the applicants demands for entry for these repairs, we would now not be in this position. It is only due to the fact that I stuck to the rules and procedures under the RTA and LTB, basically I did my job, which I now find myself in this position.
The website, www.859kennedyroad.com, the various Facebook posts and polls, were also done in retribution for the eviction and asked other people to comment to us about what they claim we did.
The attempts to start a Tenant Association in the building was a way for them to spread these lies to the other tenants here and in the hopes of finding others willing to work with them to have me fired, as I have documents for this Tenant Association that I submitted to you, showing what their agenda was.
As they noted on the website, “it could be nothing else as we have NEVER been late on paying our rent”. They are telling people that there was no other reason they were evicted, other than our discrimination and prejudices against them, and only them, as they do not mention they refused entry numerous times, though people can see it if they read through everything and listen to the recording he shares on there.
This website has paperwork issued by the LTB that holds various personal information including names, addresses and telephone numbers and the applicants also include personal information on the page itself. There is enough information on their website that someone could steal my identity if they wished. The applicants have gone out of their way to make every aspect of their accusations, which have yet to be proven by them to anyone, very public.
By posting all this information on the internet, he is exposing everyone to ridicule, including their minor children, as it is easy to trace their children also back to them through social media. In their endeavours to expose me for what they say I am, the applicants have also exposed themselves and have gone out of their way to also try and access mine and my family’s social media, as shown by the pictures he took from my niece’s site and of myself and the requests I received from him from another email to grant access.
He hid his real identity to try and access our social media, did it through one of the other websites he owns, Bird and Worm web design and some Nubbilo Event Management site.
I submit that this application, as well as the Appeal to Divisional Court, were submitted for the sole purpose of Reprisal against myself and the property owners for picking up for the landlord’s rights of entry to complete repairs to the apartment through process of the Landlord and Tenant Board.
These applications were brought against us for enforcing the rights of entry to the apartment and the lies they perpetuated against me of racism and prejudice was fabricated in order to give them something to come back at me with to try and hide their own behaviour. The lies about me are a smoke screen for their own actions and as a way to detract the focus from them onto me.
This behaviour is noted throughout the applicant’s paperwork. I say anything against them, and I am attacked for something else and they totally ignore their own behaviour.
Please whatever you do, hold the applicants accountable for their actions with this website, www.859kennedyroad.com and the Facebook posts as well as all the other incidents where they discriminate against others in their paperwork.
They called the adjudicator from the LTB “ghetto”, labelled all people dressed “sloppy/bummy” as from Hamilton, and tried to pressure other tenants into telling lies over interactions with me that did not happen.
As he discusses in text in his paperwork, he tried to pressure 203 into confronting me over something that he claims I did, but did not. These tenants refused to lie about incidents that didn’t happen, which is why these applicants filed on their own and are the only one who made any claims against me.
If I was an actual racist person I am sure the applicants would not have had any trouble finding any other tenants, past or present, whom feels I also violated their human rights and would have worked with them against me.
As they have no proof of their claims, as there was no previous meeting and there was no racism or discrimination against them by anyone, please dismiss this application and make them accountable for their own discrimination and harassment against others they wrote in here.
As you are aware, these false allegations made by the applicants have caused me undue mental health issues and I went into psychosis on July 4, 2018 when once again the applicants sent an email to the property owners in an attempt to embarrass me.
I quit my job that day and have been in extensive counselling and are on various medications for the severe depression, anxiety and PTSD symptoms I have been experiencing since.
I have spent the past 9 months living in fear of more retaliation from the applicants online and in person and as a result avoid leaving my apartment in case I run into them or anyone else whom may make nasty comments over their allegations.
Stella Reddy
It is the Applicants position that the now Stella Reddy has deliberately made absolutely no arguments, quoted or presented any legal grounds in her written response to this issue.
It is the Applicants position that Stella Reddy has chosen to forfeit her right to have any place at the table to argue any issues relating to appropriately dealt with, as she has deliberately not presented any documents or argument to collaborate and justify her request for a deferral and/or dismissal that she has requested.
It is the Applicants position that Stella Reddy has taken it upon herself to not present the required documents to collaborate or justify her request for deferral and/or dismissal.
Stella Reddy willfully and without any threats of reprisal, violence, repercussions or intimidation decided that she was not going to address the issue of deferral and/or dismissal that was requested by her in her response.
It appears that Stella Reddy thinks that it is the HRTO responsibility and obligation to make her positions fully known, or to create an argument on her behalf and to present documents that help justify her own request for a deferral and/or dismissal.
It is Applicants position that this is not the case, and that the now alleged former Stella Reddy should not have placed these inappropriate expectations upon HRTO, as it is solely HER responsibility to present, validate and defend her own request for deferral and/or dismissal.
The words above are repeated all throughout this document in various places and go on about a deferral and/or dismissal I don’t recall anything about. It is meaningless to have it there actually and just makes it confusing, so I removed it except for this one at the beginning so you can see it.
Below, they are implying once again with their deceptive way of explaining things. All of the allegations in this document are just pure speculation on their part, as they have no idea the thoughts in my mind.
I have learned that Toxic Adult Bullies can speculate all they want in trying to get other people to believe their narratives, but it will never stick, as you can see they are assuming things that it’s not possible for them to know.
All you need to do is read the released decisions from the Social Justice Network of Ontario on Canlii.org. Do a search of my name or even one of either of these Bullies and you will find everything that has been done already.
You will see for yourself that while these Toxic Bullies state the Form N5s they were given were “illegal”, they were not.
The SJTO didn’t see any of the Form N5s these Bullies write about here, just the ones issued in Aug & Sept 2017, where the adjudicator said the second one issued in Sept was “void” which this Bullies claim means “illegal“. They ran with “illegal” because it is what they want you to believe.
At no time do they show any evidence where it states any Tribunal Member said the Forn N5s given were “illegal” as that word is never used in the Order released.
It is clear that Alto Properties Inc. owner had as much of a hand in the racially motivated discrimination and reprisal against the Applicants as their now alleged former Stella Reddy did.
Alto Properties Inc. owner state in their response “ It is respectfully submitted that none of the actions of the Respondents were either discriminatory, nor did they constitute reprisal. There is nothing in the record before the Tribunal to suggest that there was a threat made by the Respondents with the intent of punishing or retaliate against the Applicant for claiming or enforcing his rights under the code. It is respectfully submitted that to the extent that any correspondence does exist and was direct to the Applicant. It was intended, as set out on Ornelas to respond to the Applicant’s perceived attempts to ruin the personal Respondent’s reputation and that of his business.”
First let us address the obvious. Alto Properties Inc. owner state “ There is nothing in the record before the Tribunal to suggest that there was a threat made by the Respondents with the intent of punishing or retaliate against the Applicant for claiming or enforcing his rights under the code. ”
That is correct there is nothing physical as in evidence, but what it also does not say is, There is nothing in the record before the Tribunal to suggest that there was ANY ACTIONS made by the Respondents with the intent of punishing or retaliate against the Applicant for claiming or enforcing HIS OR HER rights under the code. Suggesting to the Applicants that there must be something in the record.
( EXHIBIT # 23 ) It is clear by reading the Applicants 107 pages of Statement of Facts that the3 Respondents did not and would not have made the mistake of making any ought right threats to the Applicants by leaving any kind of paper trail.Instead the 3 Respondentsused illegal N5’s, which they knew were illegal and threats of eviction to try intimated the Applicants into compliance.Their constant attempts to deliberate inconvenience and harassment the Applicants and their endless attempts to put finical and emotional stress upon the entire family.Of course the 3 Respondents are smart enough to understand that implied ( read between the lines ) threats are far harder to prove then outright threats.There is no argument that Alto Properties Inc. owner are owners of the apartment complex 859 Kennedy Road where the Applicants live. There is no argument that the now alleged former Stella Reddy was working for them in March 20018 as the Property Manager despite her many attempts to claims she was not.It is the position of the Applicants that all the harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner by Stella Reddy against the Applicants had to be given the okay/thumbs up and embraced by Alto Properties Inc. owner.
( EXHIBIT # 11, # 12 ) It was at the time Alto Properties Inc. owner willfully and deliberately chose to ignore the Applicants concerns expressed in their letter(s) sent to them.Alto Properties Inc. owner stood by passively and encouraged and even participated alongside the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy to inconvenience and harass the Applicants in retaliation for calling her out and her bosses out on their racist behaviour.Alto Properties Inc. owner are as guilty of the same behaviour the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy as they stood by intentionally passive while giving the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy the green light to do their bidding in retaliation for their letters.
This is a list of PAST BEHAVIOUR where it was actually brought to Alto Properties Inc. owner attention about the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc.Stella Reddy own racially motivated actions of harassment, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner and/or where any sensible person would have concluded that there was some alterative motive behind her actions and/or behaviour.PAST BEHAVIOUR #1( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32The Applicants forwarded a letter in regards to the newly installed video camera in the elevator on August 29, 2016. Alto Properties Inc. owner and now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy decided that instead of moving the video camera 6 inches to the left or place it on the east wall of the elevator.The 3 Respondents left it where it was so it had direct sight into the Applicants unit when opening their door after exiting the elevator.It has been proven that there was no requirement for the video camera to stay in that current position, that a better and wider “ direct view ” of the elevator door could have be obtained by simple moving it.What was also proven is that by moving the video camera, the only “ direct view ” that would have been lost was that into the Applicants unit upon exiting the elevator.It has also been proven by the newly installed surveillance system that was placed in the elevator is in the same area that was requested by the Applicant in August of 2017 as were denied by the 3 Respondents.Alto Properties Inc. owner okayed the new surveillance systems position, despite back in August 2017 claiming that the current view was the only view that had “ direct sight ” of the problem area.So why did Alto Properties Inc. owner and now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy refuse to move the video camera the first time when the Applicants asked?Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” this “ NONSENSE ”?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #2( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 38, 39, 401st illegal N5 ( August 31, 2016 ) – It was proven by the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Member Kevin Lundy that this N5 given out by the 3 Respondents was given illegally as there was no 24 hour notice given and the Applicants had the right to refuse entry when Alto Properties Inc. owner and/or the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy appeared at their door requesting entry.
Again why did Alto Properties Inc. owner encouraged Stella Reddy to issue the Applicants this illegal N5?It appears that Alto Properties Inc. owner encouraged Stella Reddy to pursue her own racially motivated actions of harassment, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner in a joint effort.Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” this “ NONSENSE ”?PAST BEHAVIOUR #3 ( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )List of documents – 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49The Applicants on August 31, 2016 outlined in an 8 page letter to Alto Properties Inc. owner their previous concerns about Stella Reddy.If at the time Alto Properties Inc. owner were so concerned in regards to the Applicants concerns. Alto Properties Inc. owner could have freely asked the Applicants for more details and insight as to what was going on. But they deliberately refused to!Instead Alto Properties Inc. owner decided that they only wanted to hear one side of the story and they relied solely upon the lies of Stella Reddy who stated “ She has never been there.”as being the only actual facts about the situation.
Why were Alto Properties Inc. owners not concerned about the racially charged language and prejudice slurs used by their now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy when brought up by the Applicants?
Was it because they took the same view as the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy, that the Applicant was just some “ Black ” trying to use her complexion to get what she wanted?Maybe it was that they finally found someone who had shared the same views as them?Maybe they were afraid that they might be something to the Applicants concerns, and if true they would have to do something about it?Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” the situation?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #4 ( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 55, 57,58
The Applicants on October 17, 2016 outlined in a 2 page letter to Alto Properties Inc. owner how again they were left sitting around all day by Stella Reddy and were only notified of the cancelation by Ace Glass hours past the scheduled time.Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” this “ NONSENSE ”?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #5 ( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )List of documents – 56, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 742nd illegal N5 ( October 18, 2016 ) – Alto Property Manager Stella Reddy again deliberately does not tell the Applicantsthat the 2nd scheduled appointment for Ace Glass the next day was again cancelled for the second day in a row.Alto Properties Inc. owner still green light the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy to serve the Applicants with another 2nd illegal N5 for refusal of entry.It was proven by the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Member Kevin Lundy that this 2nd N5 given out by the3 Respondentswas given illegally as there was no 24 hour notice given and the Applicants had the right to refuse entrywhen Alto Properties Inc. owner and/or the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy appeared at their door requesting entry.The 3 Respondents knew the appointment being cancelled by Ace Glass that same day and the Applicants were not given proper 24 hour notice.In fact Manager Stella Reddy and all the time was having a conversation via emails with the Applicants when she received the cancellation by Ace Glass and still does not tell the Applicants.Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” this “ NONSENSE ”?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #6( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 71
The now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy forwards and email to Alto Properties Inc. owner on October 19, 2016 stating “They found the detector not working there, as the battery was missing.Was told by her partner that he removed it after battery was replaced in June 2016 as it was still beeping and said that they were told it would be replaced.
Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not find her behaviour and request a little extreme and unusual?
How could they not determine that Stella Reddy was unquestionably acting in retaliation manner against the Applicants for constantly call her out on her behaviour to her bosses?There can be no argument that Alto Properties Inc. owner were on notice about Stella Reddy past harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner and use of racially charged language and statements direct at the Applicants. At a bare minimum, they had to construe that Stella Reddy was acting outside of a normal behaviour and in bad faith by deliberately trying to kick the proverbial Hornets’ Nest.Alto Properties Inc. owner had to understand that her behaviour and request were “ nonsense ” and an attempt to retaliate against the Applicants for calling her out to her bosses?
Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” this “ NONSENSE ”? The only explanation is that the 3 Respondents were jointly trying to provoke responses out of the Applicants, like the 2 illegal N5’s.
PAST BEHAVIOUR #7( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 87It was not until the Applicants receive an email from Stella Reddy herself on September 26, 2017 at the LTB hearing where she presented it to the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Member Kevin Lundy as evidence against the Applicants for Refusal of Entry. That the Applicants gained some valuable insight and it begin to clarify what has behind Stella Reddy Obsessive Compulsive Behaviour or OCD to have the Applicants removed from the building.After reading this email, Alto Properties Inc. owner had to see and realize her Obsessive Compulsive behaviour or OCD and her immoral behaviour towards the Applicant was playing right out front of them.Stella Reddy in and email on August 24, 2017 stated “ Sorry I can’t take this lying down anymore and I filed a personal complaint with the Human Rights against them for their behaviour. It is already gone as it was the first thing I did when I got home. They need to learn that just because she is black, they can’t throw out these accusations of racism and bigotry against people who don’t give them what they want or do things the way they want. This is their fall back to intimidate me to do things their way and I can’t do it anymore. The fact that they made all these accusations last year and nothing was done about it, they think they can keep it up and get away with it and it needs to stop. ”It appears that after just over a year after Stella Reddy started working for Alto Properties Inc. owner. The truth has finally started to expose itself in this email between employers and their employee.This email proves that Stella Reddy had an axe to grind against the “ Black ” applicant and she wasn’t going to “ take this lying down anymore ”and get her pound of flesh.Stella Reddy stated “ they think they can keep it up and get away with it and it needs to stop.” The question is, how did the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy think she was going to make it stop?The only real option she had was to try and use her position with Alto Properties Inc. to get them removed from the building. Which in turn now explains her Obsessive Compulsive behaviour or OCD in her attempts to build a case against the Applicants to have them removed from the building.Alto Properties Inc. owner want the HRTO to believe that they did not at a minimum concluded that Stella Reddy was acting outside of a normal behaviour and not in bad faith?Does Alto Properties Inc. owner think that this type of harassment and racist motivated behaviour, racially charged language is normal and acceptable?Knowing the history of her behaviour towards the Applicants before she even started and her subsequent harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner since they first met in June 2016?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #8( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
LTB Transcripts
Note: there are portions of the written transcripts that are labelled inaudible to the transcriber, but are clear in the recording where Stella Reddy says her prejudice slurs against New Foundlanders.On September 26, 2017 at the LTB hearing filed by the 3 Respondents. Stella Reddy uses racially charged language and prejudice slurs about New Foundlanders , the Applicant and her children, her very own nieces and nephews during the public hearing. The whole time being steadfast in her claims to not be a racist.Her behaviour was so inappropriate that the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Member Kevin Lundy made sure to make a reference about it in his illegal evection order.Again, how could Alto Properties Inc. owner not at a minimum concluded that Stella Reddy was acting outside of a normal behaviour and in bad faith?Again, why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ”the situation even upon hearing Stella Reddy speak so inappropriately in a public forum and knowing her history of racist motivated behaviour and bad faith towards the Applicants?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #9( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 120On October 4, 2017 at 9:53 am, Alto Properties Inc. owner knocked on the Applicants unit door. The Applicants husband answered the door and invited Alto Properties Inc. owner and his fire inspector/contractor politely into the unit. The fire inspector walked in, tested the smoke detector and then left. It took approximately 25 seconds. Alto Properties Inc. owner remained in the doorway and the fire inspector/contractor left the unit and the Applicants husband turned and Stella Reddy standing in the hallway in front of the elevator with a clipboard.The Applicants husband figured Stella Reddy was now going to do her Annual Unit Inspection, but instead everyone walked away towards unit #304.The Applicants husband than closed the door and continued to wait unit 5:00 for the Annual Unit Inspection to take place that was scheduled for that same day.At 5:10, the Applicants sent an email to Alto Properties Inc. owner and the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy after waiting over 8 hours for someone to do the Annual Unit Inspection stating “ It is now 5:10 pm and you have not returned to do the yearly inspection. You were here this morning to test the fire alarm with your contractor and made absolutely no mention that you would not be returning. I do not appreciate you having me sit here all day waiting for you AGAIN, and you could not be bothered to inform Allison or me that you were not going to return. According to your entry form you were supposed to do fire alarms and yearly inspections today between 9 am and 5 pm. You only completed the fire alarms. ”On October 10, 2017 – 6 days later, Stella Reddy finally responds at 11:49 am to the email that was sent back on October 4, 2017 by the Applicants.Stella Reddy stated “ Good Afternoon Mr. R, Thank you for your email. Due to the hearing that was held on September 26, 2017, and we were waiting for the Hearing Order to come, it was prudent for staff not to attend the apartment to complete the annual inspection. Thank you for your time and if you have any questions please feel free to contact me. ”So it appearsthat again it was not “ prudent ” at 9:53 am for Alto Properties Inc. owner and Stella Reddy to inform the Applicants husband that they would not be returning to the Applicants unit to do the Annual Unit Inspection later that day while standing in the hallway.So not only this time was Stella Reddy who left the Applicants husband sitting around 8 hours waiting for an appointment that was deliberately cancelled because it wasn’t “ prudent ”and was deliberately again not notified for a 3rd time.Now Alto Properties Inc. owner who was in on it also. It had to be Alto Properties Inc. owner final call as to if the Annual Unit Inspection needed to be carried out or not.It appears that now it was the 2 Respondents found it funny and enjoyed the idea of not notifying the Applicants of the cancelation of the Annual Unit Inspection and acting in bad faith.It appears that now it was the 2 Respondents found it funny and enjoyed the idea of Applicants sitting around waiting for 8 hours for the Annual Unit Inspection and acting in bad faith.It appears that now it was the 2 Respondents that found it funny and enjoyed the idea of inconveniencing the Applicants and acting in bad faith.Again, did the 3 Respondents deliberately not tell the Applicants of the cancellation hoping to again provoke a response?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #10
On October 25, 2017 Alto Properties Inc. owner had a very friendly and polite conversation with the Applicants husband in the lobby of the building while Alto Properties Inc. owner was waiting for Stella Reddy to come down the stairs as the elevator was out of service.During their conversation, Alto Properties Inc. owner stated in his own words that the whole situation is “nonsense” and that “ it could have got fixed ” and that “I never had a bad relationship with you guys.”Alto Properties Inc. owner also went on to defend Stella Reddy previous racially charged language in mid–June 2016 by stating that she told him “ She says, she’s never been there. ”And yet Alto Properties Inc. owner still allow the appeal in Divisional Court to continue to go forward, despite the case in the LTB hearing being in Alto Properties Inc. owner own words “ Nonsense ” “ could have been fixed ” and “ never had a bad relationship ” with the Applicants.It has to make the HRTO wonder what was the real motivation behind Alto Properties Inc. owner trying to get the Applicants evicted?
At the time of the LTB hearing, getting the eviction of October 03, 2017 in the mail and at the time of Applicants filing the appeal.
Alto Properties Inc. owner in his own words stated that it was all “ Nonsense ” “ could have been fixed ” and he “ never had a bad relationship ” with the Applicants, but still he was okay with the idea of…– the Applicants having to move at the end of a cold October/beginning of November.he was okay with the idea of…– the Applicants 2 children ( Grades 3 and 9 )having to transfer to new school.he was okay with the idea of…– the Applicants 2 children having to start all over and try and make new friends in their new schools.he was okay with the idea of…– the elevator not being in service and the Applicants having to travel up and down 3 narrow flights of stairs, carrying everything they own. ( boxes, furniture, beds ect. )he was okay with the idea of…– the Applicants only having 3 weeks to find a place to move vs. a normal 2 months.he was okay with the idea of…– the Applicant and/or her husband have to take time off work to go see places during business hours, losing money that would have helped pay for moving and everyday living.he was okay with the idea of…– the Applicants having to move on the same day they were schedule to be heard at the LTB for their complaint against the 3 Respondents on October 31, 2017. for their harassment and racist motivated behaviour towards them.he was okay with the idea of…– the whole situation turning the Applicants world upside down based on his own words “ Nonsense ” that “ could have been fixed ” with the tenants that he has “ never had a bad relationship ” with.So the HRTO has to wonder, why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner decide not to do the morally right thing and just call an end to all this “ Nonsense ”?
Alto Properties Inc. owner stated that the whole situation was “ Nonsense ” that it “ could have been fixed ” and that he has “ never had a bad relationship ” with the Applicants.And still he chose to ignore all of his own words and feelings about the situation so they continue to fight to have the Applicants evicted from his building?It appears to the Applicants that there was something much larger holding Alto Properties Inc. owner back from doing what was morally right?You see Alto Properties Inc. owner also stated in his comments on October 25, 2017 to the Applicants husband that he was also upset that they had went to the Divisional Court and it “ affected ” him and “ you hit my business ” and they “ should know better ”There is no debate that he even at times becomes a willing participant alongside Stella Reddy, encouraging and enabling her behaviour.It appears that another new motivation is that of resentment because the Applicants again have enforced their rights under the law to file an appeal with Divisional Court.It appears to the Applicants that Alto Properties Inc. owner is irritated that all these legal proceedings are still ongoing and costing him and his business money.The HRTO has to wonder why a property owner who has “ never had a bad relationship ” with a tenants, would be so willing to spend more money to fight so hard to have them evicted, knowing it will “ affected ” him and hit his “ business ” over “ nonsense ”?So along with Alto Properties Inc. owner intentional lack of interest and motivation to correct Stella Reddy harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner towards the Applicant, in her quest to get them removed from the building.It appears that Alto Properties Inc. owner now is now also retaliating against the Applicants because they enforced their rights to appeal to Divisional Court and they “ should known better ”Despite the fact that Alto Properties Inc. owner saying after the LTB hearing on September 26, 2017 to the Applicants husband he “ never had a bad relationship “ with them. ( EXHIBIT # 109 ) Alto Properties Inc. owner again sat on their hands and allowed Stella Reddy to mislead the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Member Kevin Lundy into believing that “ The tenancy, which commenced in June, 2015 has been plagued by both hostility and profound lack of cooperation ”( EXHIBIT # 49 ) And because Alto Properties Inc. owner allowed her to obviously mislead the LTB and their lack of actions, condoning her.It then opened the door for Stella Reddy to later make such statements like the relationship between the Applicants and the owners is so “ broken ” that even if the Divisional Court was to rule in their favor. There is no way they could stay in the building because “ It is just not done. ”So now both these lies have been discredited by Alto Properties Inc. owner who admitted that he “ never had a bad relationship ” with the Applicants.It again appears that some of the answers to the Applicants questions of1. Why was Alto Properties Inc. owner encouraging her?2. Why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” this? are becoming clear.There can be no doubt that Alto Properties Inc. owner were in on it and knew what was going on!It is the Applicants position that as the owners, they are responsible for what goes on in their building with their tenants and staff.To think that 2 grown adults did not recognize what Stella Reddy was doing, would equate to them being some form of simpleton that lacked any common sense.Which is pretty obvious and inaccurate as they are more than capable of maintain their multiple properties in and around the Toronto area.Let us quickly touch on the previous Property Managers who worked for Alto Properties Inc. owner.These are the same Property Managers who threatened and tried to intimidate the Applicants back September 2015 into allow entry into their unit also without proper notice.According to Alto Properties Inc. owner they were fired because they were “ Bad News ”. The Applicants have to wonder what does Alto Properties Inc. owner mean by “ Bad News ”?Were they fired because they threatened and tried to intimidate one too many tenants?Were they fired because they tried to entry a tenants unit without giving proper notice?Was Stella Reddy also fired because she lied one tmany times or tried to entry into a tenants unit without giving proper notice?It was proven by the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario Member Kevin Lundy that the illegal N5’s given before and after September 26, 2017 to the Applicants by Stella Reddy were basically illegal and would have no standing in a Tribunal hearing.
( EXHIBIT # 97 )
( EXHIBIT # 110 )Despite giving the Applicant numerous illegal N5’s, Stella Reddy insist that she is “ rule driven person ” and swears she is a “ professional ” when dealing with tenants.She has went on to stated that she “ actually quotes the regulations, copy and paste directly from the written rules ” as that she “ prefer the rules and regulations of property management to speak ” for her.So being that Stella Reddy admits that she was so informed on the rules and regulations, it only confirms that she willingly knew the N5’s were illegal when creating them, and still she issued them to the Applicant knowing that they did not fall within the rules and regulations set out in the Residential Tenancies Act.
Which means that the only reason Stella Reddy issue these illegal N5’s was to intimidate and to retaliate against the Applicants for enforcing their rights under the Residential Tenancies Act and/or calling for her out on her continuous harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner to her bosses Alto Properties Inc. owner .
( EXHIBIT # 103 )It appears that Stella Reddy thought in her email on August 24, 2017 to Alto Properties Inc. owner resented that fact the this Applicant was “ Black ” and she even went so far as to convince herself by playing the race card against her. Stella Reddy did this to help her justify to herself, her own actions of harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner since she started towards the Applicants.This letter date August 24, 2017 is not the only time that Stella Reddy as referred to the Applicant as that “ Black ”.
( EXHIBIT # 111 ) On this same day, the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy continued on with her racist rants in an HRTO complaint she filed.( EXHIBIT # 112 ) page #9 The now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy stated on page # 9 of her HRTO complaint against the Applicants brother Darwin Charles “ Due to the fact that Ms. Read is Black, they are using the fact that I am not as a way to bully me and by making accusations against me as being a racist as a way to intimidate me. ”( EXHIBIT # 112 ) page # 18 Stella Reddy stated on page # 18 of her HRTO complaint against the Applicants brother Darwin Charles “ I am tying to do my job as building staff and when they don’t agree with how I do my job, nor the regulations I have to follow they say I am racist and a bigot and out to get them because she is black. ”So it appears that 3 times in the same day, the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy played the race card claiming that the “ Black ” Applicant is black and is trying to use her “ Black ” completion to “ Bully ” and “ intimidate ” her.Stella Reddy also states that the “ Black ” Applicant is “ using the fact that I am ” white.So not only does Stella Reddy played the race card claiming that the “ Black ” Applicant is black and is trying to use her “ Black ” complexion to “ Bully ” and “ intimidate ” her. She also says that the “ Black ” Applicant is only doing it because she is white.Let it be noted that the Applicants HAVE NEVER referred to Stella Reddy whiteness as being any source of her harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner against them.
It is clear by this point that Alto Properties Inc. owner could not give any less of a concern in regards to the harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner of their beloved now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella.It also appears that now Alto Properties Inc. owner have not only a racial motivations as proven by the Applicants throughout this reply. But they now appear to also have finical motivations.So upon reviewing the unprecedented powers given to Stella Reddy to go right ahead to harassing, threaten, intimidate, inconvenience, retaliate and provoke the Applicants in their combined effort to build a case on them to get them out for calling them all out on their behaviour.
The fact that Alto Properties Inc. owner have made absolutely reference or defence to any of the allegations against them or Stella Reddy.
They have chosen to stay utterly silence on the issues and have offered the HRTO nothing to consider in regards to their behaviour.Their only thing that one might be able to be considered as a defence is their there opening line in their response “ It is respectfully submitted that none of the actions of the Respondents were either discriminatory, nor did they constitute reprisal. ”
It is pretty obvious that the Applicants where the racially target by Stella Reddy for retaliating based on the family dynamics.
The HRTO cannot even say that she just didn’t like the Applicants, because she has strategically has taken every opportunity to refer to the Applicants complexion, and even accusing the Applicant of acting out towards her because she is white.
The only questions the HRTO has to figure out is what was it about the Applicants family Stella Reddy didn’t like?
Whether I liked these Tenants or not was NOT a consideration, as it was a job to me, not personal, no matter how hard they try to convince you otherwise.
Even now, I can’t say that I “didn’t like” them, as I don’t really know them on a personal level to say for sure anything about them.
All I know is what I see of their ACTIONS towards me with their websites and all the stuff done in the property with other Tenants, and even now with their new targets.
It is ONLY the actions with their many domains that I have an issue with and all the lies I found in their written documents I have received from them during the HRTO process.
All the backstabbing, false allegations, nasty speculations, and even outright lies, while trying to convince their readers that they know me so well to write what they do of me, my thoughts, and motives.
1. We know Stella Reddy own words ( twice ) used the word “ Mulatto ” and not bi – racial and that it is an acceptable term to use in public and in a public
form when referring to the Applicants children in their presence.
2. We know by Stella Reddy own words that she thinks that light complexion individuals are more “ beautiful ” than individuals with a dark complexion. As she referenced this about the Applicants children and her own nephew, who she deliberately lied about in the LTB as a defence as to show why she can’t be a racist and to down play her favoritism for light complexion individuals.
3. We know Stella Reddy own words in a public forum, that she is comfortable in refereeing to her own nieces and nephews “ AS BLACK AS YOU CAN GET ”
as a lie and as a defence as to show why she can’t be a racist.
4. We know Stella Reddy own words and actions in a public forum, pointing at the Applicant . She stated that here nephew was “ HE’S EVEN DARKER
THAN SHE ” as a defence as to why she can’t be a racist. Later being proven as a liar through her own family photographs that he was not.
5. We know Stella Reddy own words she thinks that “ no one will give a shit what I said ” in the LTB hearing because she thinks that her lie is a “ normal
reaction ”.
6. We know Stella Reddy own words she refers to the Applicant a some “ Black ” who she thinks is “ throw out these accusations of racism and bigotry ” in
an attempt “ to intimidate ” her “ to do things their way ”.
7. We know Stella Reddy own words stated that the “ Black ” Applicant was racist towards her she uttered “ Ms. Read is Black, they are using the fact
that I am not ”
8. We know Stella Reddy thinks it is okay to deliberately lie to the HRTO on numerous occasions when trying to make a point a deceptive point.
9. We know Stella Reddy own words that she thinks it is okay to ask non–whites “ Where are you from? ” based on their complexion, assuming they cannot
be born in Canada.
10. We know by Stella Reddy own words she thinks it is okay to say things like “ I am very familiar with the Ontario Residential Tenancies Act because I have been a superintendent for 16 years here in Canada ” to non–whites as if their previous work or educational experience does not equal to that of hers because it was not in Canada.
The Applicants and the HRTO may never know the real reason behind Stella Reddy racially charged language, prejudice slurs and her own racially motivated actions of harassment, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner, but we all do know in her own words she stated;
1.“just because she is black,”
2. “ because she is black, ”
3. “I called her children mullato, ”
4. “ I did say that my nephew in law was as black as black, ”
5.“I have very beautiful great nephews and nieces who are half black,”
6. “ my nephew is as black as you can get, ”
7.“He’s even darker than she,”
8. “Due tothe fact that Ms. R is BLACK. ”
( EXHIBIT # 126 ) And still Stella Reddy will still demand and claim that “ I see people as people. To me it don’t matter what they look like, ”
It appears that Stella Reddy has a very extraordinary way of not seeing people without seeing the complexion of their “ Black ” skin!
It appears that once again Stella Reddy has tried to represent herself as being something that he is clearly not to the HRTO again.
It appears that this is type racist behaviour is a requirement when applying for the position of Property Manager at 859 Kennedy Road. You must be willing to try and intimidate tenants with eviction if they stand up for their rights under the law to a proper 24 hour Notice of Entry.By this point a normal person would hear all the bells and whistles going off in their head. Alto Properties Inc. owner had to of known that all the N5’s were illegal as the Applicants pointed it out for them in their letters addressed to them.
But yet again they were okay with the idea of them just sitting on their hands during all this “ Nonsense ” that “ could have been fixed ” but in the end, it appears thattheir personal beliefs against the Applicants out weighted what was morally right and in good faith.
PAST BEHAVIOUR #10( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143 EXHIBIT # 113, #114, #115, #116, # 117, 118, # 119, #120Email date September 09, 2018 to the HRTO – YOn March 14, 2018 the Applicants asked for a parking space at the building for their new 2018 car. They were met with an email by Stella Reddy where she stated“ Dear Ms. R, We hope this letter finds you and your family well. We are writing to you in response tothe text message received today with the request for aparking spot on the property. First, thank you your request but please note text message is not an acceptable track able way of communication between tenants and building staff, as per the RentSafeTO Bylaw, as texts are not easily printable for tenant files and for review by City Officials upon their
request. Please submit all requests in writing by either our Tenant Request Form or by email in the future.At this time we do not have any parking spacesavailable on the property and if you wish to be added to the waiting list for a parking spot please submit the vehicle information with your name and apartment number and we will advise you when we have something available for you to rent. Due to the limited parking spaces available in Visitors Parking area we can’t allow tenant to temporarily park there as we do not have enough spaces for all whom are waiting. I am sorry but you will have to find a parking space off site as some others have had to do. ”This statement made by Stella Reddy was proven to be untrueas the new all white unit #306 was given a building parking space # 029, and they were also allowed to park their 2nd car in visitor parking with a pass given to them by Stella Reddy.
All the time the Applicants being told to park their ONLY car off site due to the parking rules that Stella Reddy was now breaking for the all-white #306.It needs to be noted that the 2 units referred as parking off site by Stella Reddy were units #302 and #305Unit # 302 – had been parking offsite for over a year and they too were an interracial couple like the Applicants. White male and Black female with 1 bi-racial child. They too also lived her years and where on the “ waiting list ” long before the new all-white unit #306 moved in.The other unit #305 – who also was here before the all-white unit #306 and parking offsite for about 6 months. What was unfortunately for them was they had a lot on non–white friends visiting on weekends and they too were on the alleged “ waiting list ” long before the all-white unit #306 moved in.Despite these two unit being a waiting list for a long period of time, Stella Reddy allowed the all-white unit # 306 to jump from the bottom of the “ waiting list ” to getting a 2nd parking spot for their vehicle over units # 302 and #305.So back to when the after the Applicants received the email about no parking. It appears that the 3 Respondents enjoyed the idea trying to inconvenience and harass the Applicant by forcing them to park their only car off site, subsequently having to pay someone or some place to park every day as Scarborough does not allow for overnight parking on the streets.It appears that now Alto Properties Inc. owner figures since the Applicant enforced their rights to file in Divisional Court and it “ affected ” him and “ you hit my business ”he was now going to return the favour by retaliating against them with parking.The Applicants had to try and find parking someplace overnight, knowing that they were not going to find a place for free. It was pretty obvious like units # 302 and # 305, they too would have to pay someone to use their driveway to park in every night to avoid getting tickets.This now begins to explain why Alto Properties Inc. owner did nothing about the “ nonsense ” and why he certainly had no desire to try and “ FIX ” the situation.You see the applicants are entitles to 1 free parking space according to their lease.It appears that the 3 Respondents wanted to make their money charging new tenants for parking verses giving the Applicants their free space.
PAST BEHAVIOUR #11( Please review Applicants Statement of Facts and documents for a more detailed explanation )
List of documents – 144, 145, 146, 147, 148On June 3, 2018 the 3 Respondents figured that this would be a great opportunity to try and kick the Applicants while they were down by acting in bad faith.The 3 Respondents after 8 months decided that now they wanted to request the last month’s deposit that was used in October 2017 while waiting for finding from the LTB hearing.It is amazing how on the 3 Respondents on June 2, 2018 noticed that the Applicants rent was short by $146.88 and they instantly thought and cheered among themselves thinking that Applicants were suddenly hurting financially and could not pay the rent in full.What they did not realize is that the Applicant had not yet forwarded them the receipt for the counter top toaster oven they purchased when sending out the e – transfer for the rent.
The 3 Respondents now thought they could seize the opportunity to try and build another case to have the Applicants removed from the building by not being able to paying their rent in full or give back the deposit.What is absolutely amazing about what transpired over these 3 days,is how bad minded and spiteful the3 Respondents are in their quest to have the Applicants removed from the building.It appears they thought it was just another opportunity for them to try and retaliate against the Applicants for all the perceived hassle they figured they have put them through well the Applicants enforced their rights.It appears that now as Alto Properties Inc. owner comments about him being upset that they had went tothe Divisional Court and it “ affected ” him and “ you hit my business ” is a continuous motivation for reprisal against the Applicants.This would explain why Alto Properties Inc. owner was willing to do nothing about the “ nonsense ” that was playing out, and why he certainly had no desire to try and “ FIX ” the situation.
PAST BEHAVIOUR #12
( EXHIBIT # 121 ) On July 4, 2018 the Applicants forwarded an email to Alto Properties Inc. owner in regards to Stella Reddy Obsessive Compulsive Behaviour or OCD.
The Applicants attached a series of emails by Stella Reddy to the Applicants where she goes off on long rants trying to plead her case.She goes on to try and convince the Applicants that they are wrong and that if they continue they will be exposed as liars. And that everything that has transpired between her and the Applicants was strictly brought upon by them and not by her harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner against them.After receiving this email, Alto Properties Inc. owner again did nothing but sit on their hands.Again, how could Alto Properties Inc. owner not at a minimum concluded that Stella Reddy was acting outside of a normal behaviour and in bad faith?Again, why didn’t Alto Properties Inc. owner not try and “ FIX ” the situation?Even upon seeing these emails from Stella Reddy,it appears thatAlto Properties Inc. owner still thought it was normal behaviour for her, knowing her history of racist behaviour and bad faith towards the Applicants.Instead, Stella Reddy decided that she was not doing it anymore and she alleged quit!It appears that it was Stella Reddy that fixed the situation and not Alto Properties Inc. owner by quitting and not getting fired for her behaviour.The question the Applicants and the HRTO need to know is how long did Alto Properties Inc. owner intend to allow Stella Reddy to have free range to do whatever she wanted against the Applicants before they eventually HAD TO INTERVENE?
PAST BEHAVIOUR #13
( EXHIBIT # 122 ) It has been 461 days since the LTB hearing and 486 days since the City of Toronto gave the 3 Respondents the Order to make the required repairs in the Applicants unit.Despite their false claims of trying to make the repairs since the subsequently order. They have in fact still done nothing and made not attempts to “ FIX ” the outstanding issues since 2015.Stella Reddy has been quoted as saying the city immediately withdrew their Order upon hearing about the LTB hearing and the potential eviction.
This is a factual lie. Upon the Applicants speaking with the city, they were notified that Stella Reddy was asked sometime in March of 2018 if they had complied with the work order sent back in September 2017.So it appears that once again Stella Reddy has grossly and deliberately lied to the HRTO in hopes of making the Applicants look bad.The Applicants would like to point out that 6 different people have been in and out of the Applicants unit over 20 times for the reasons on the City Order and still to this day the problems go on.
It appears that the 3 Respondents think that it is the Applicants job to chase them to get work done. The Applicants were more than cooperative in the beginning when everyone was showing up unannounced and wanted to view the issues over and over and over.But at some point the Applicants got tired of the rotary door approach to the fixing the problems that the 3 Respondents have taken.
Stella Reddy states that she has tried to work with tenants, but not once can she show anytime, where she has made any attempts to work with the Applicants schedule.
Stella Reddy approach to the Applicants has always been her way or the highway!Let us not forget about 3 times the 3 Respondents left the Applicants sitting in their unit waiting for someone to show up, who never did and they were not notified of the cancelation.The Applicants have shown how Stella Reddy has gone out of her way to accommodate the all-white unit # 306 for parking.It can also been shown how Stella Reddy has also gone out of her way to accommodate another all-white unit in regards to repairs in their unit.( EXHIBIT # 123 ) The all-white unit #402 were given a Notice of Entry for June 07, 2017 to have their balcony door handle fixed by Stella Reddy after putting in a Maintenance Request Form.( EXHIBIT # 124 ) Unit #402 email Stella Reddy on June 06, 2017 and stated “ Hi Stella, You would like to inspect our balcony door tomorrow from 1pm to 5pm. I would like to be there as well. My shift doesn’t end until 7:30pm, but I will try to leave work earlier so we can meet some wear in the middle. I will tell you not that it is missing just 1 screw for the face plate if you wanted to be prepared and have that on hand we can complete this inspection to 100% complete. Thank you and look forward to hearing from you soon. ”( EXHIBIT # 125 ) Stella Reddy emailed back on June 07, 2017 and stated “ Good morning K, We have no issue with you being home while we are there. Please let us know when you are at home and we will attend your apartment. Regards Stella Reddy ”So it appears that the interracial house hold of the Applicants is not, nor have they ever been afforded the privilege of being able to work cooperatively by Stella Reddy like the all-white unit #402.So now the Applicants have 2 scenarios where all-white units were given a privilege and they were not.It appears to the Applicants that there still WHITE PRIVALGE alive and well at 859 Kennedy Road. The only questions the Applicants have are,Does Stella Reddy not like
the fact that the Applicants are in an interracial marriage?
they have the 2 bi-racial children together?
they are married and living together verses the mother being single and rasing the kids on her own?
that the father is appears to be Canadian and the mother is appears to be born abroad?
the idea of their 2 “ Mullato ” children being born in Canada?There is absolutely no way to know, unless Stella Reddy decides to tell the HRTO. But it is definitely pretty obviously clear that if you are an all-white unit at 859 Kennedy Road, you have a far better chance of not receiving her harassing, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner used against you.Stella Reddy can NOT show HRTO at any time where she made any attempt to try accommodate the interracial house hold of the Applicants even when they requested it themselves.
It appears thatall-white units in 859 Kennedy Road get this privilege of being accommodated, whereas interracial units like the Applicants, #302 and #305 do not.
In regards to Alto Properties Inc. owner. It appears to the Applicants that they are just hoping the Applicants get tired of living with a bathroom that is falling apart and will move out, ending there legal problems in Divisional Court.It appears that Alto Properties Inc. owner are not willing to spend money to “ FIX ”anything inside the Applicants unit. But they are willing to continue to fight to remove Tenants they “ never had a bad relationship ” over “ nonsense ” that “ could have been fixed ”.It appears that since the Applicants appeal has affected Alto Properties Inc. owner bottom line through his business. He/they will now cause inconvenience for the Applicants by not getting their bathroom, stove and windows fixed after 3 years because they “ should known better! ”
PAST BEHAVIOUR #14 Such Frivlious Claim!!
So the Applicants 2 bedroom unit has gone up in rent value since January from $1400 to now $1750 in August. That is a 25% rent increase between January 2018 to August 2018.As yes, Alto Properties Inc. owner can charge whatever they want to new tenants moving for rent, but they are not able to use this as one of their forms of motivation to have them removed from the building.You see the Applicants pay $1106.64 monthly for their 2 bedroom unit, unlike the unit directly beside them unit #302 who now $1750.Now if the Applicants were to be evicted or leave, Alto Properties Inc. owner could raise the rent for the unit by 63%. That means an increase profit of $1750 a month and $7,728 a year.It is pretty obvious that Alto Properties Inc. owner were never concerned about the “ Nonsense ” that “ could have been fixed ” for the tenants they “ never had a bad relationship ” with.But it appears to the Applicants through Alto Properties Inc. owner actions that greed and profits reigns supreme over morally what’s right.It is pretty obvious from when Stella Reddy started using her racially charged language, prejudice slurs and her own racially motivated actions of harassment, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner against the Applicants.Alto Properties Inc. owner have done but sat on their hands and let Stella Reddy have free ranger of the building and subsequently been throwing money hand over fist at the situation to have the applicants removed from the building despite the whole situation being “ Nonsense ” that “ could have been fixed ” for the tenants they “ never had a bad relationship ” with.It also appears that now Alto Properties Inc. owner have not only a racial motivations as proven by the Applicants throughout this reply. But they now appear to also have finical motivations.So upon reviewing the unprecedented powers given to Stella Reddy to go right ahead to harassing, threaten, intimidate, inconvenience, retaliate and provoke the Applicants in their combined effort to build a case on them to get them out for calling them all out on their behaviour.The fact that Alto Properties Inc. owner have made absolutely reference or defence to any of the allegations against them or Stella Reddy.They have chosen to stay utterly silence on the issues and have offered the HRTO nothing to consider in regards to their behaviour.Their only thing that one might be able to be considered as a defence is their there opening line in their response “ It is respectfully submitted that none of the actions of the Respondents were either discriminatory, nor did they constitute reprisal. ”It is pretty obvious that the Applicants where the racially target by Stella Reddy for retaliating based on the family dynamics.The HRTO cannot even say that she just didn’t like the Applicants, because she has strategically has taken every opportunity to refer to the Applicants complexion, and even accusing the Applicant of acting out towards her because she is white.The only questions the HRTO has to figure out is what was it about the Applicants family Stella Reddy didn’t like?1. We know by Stella Reddy own words ( twice ) used the word “ Mulatto ” and not bi – racial and that it is an acceptable term to use in public and in a public
form when referring to the Applicants children in their presence.2. We know Stella Reddy own words that she thinks that light complexion individuals are more “ beautiful ” than individuals with a dark complexion. As she
referenced this about the Applicants children and her own nephew, who she deliberately lied about in the LTB as a defence as to show why she can’t be a racist and to down play her favoritism for light complexion individuals.3. We know by Stella Reddy own words in a public forum, that she is comfortable in refereeing to her own nieces and nephews “ AS BLACK AS YOU CAN GET ” as a lie and as a defence as to show why she can’t be a racist.4. We know by Stella Reddy own words and actions in a public forum, pointing at the Applicant . She stated that here nephew was “ HE’S EVEN DARKER
THAN SHE ” as a defence as to why she can’t be a racist. Later being proven as a liar through her own family photographs that he was not.5. We know by the now alleged former Alto Properties Inc. Property Manager Stella Reddy own words she thinks that “ no one will give a shit what I said ” in the LTB hearing because she thinks that her lie is a “ normal reaction ”.6. We know by Stella Reddy own words she refers to the Applicant a some “ Black ” who she thinks is “ throw out these accusations of racism and bigotry ” in
an attempt “ to intimidate ” her “ to do things their way ”.7. We know by Stella Reddy own words stated that the “ Black ” Applicant was racist towards her she uttered “ Ms. Read is Black, they are using the fact
that I am not ”8. We know by Stella Reddy thinks it is okay to deliberately lie to the HRTO on numerous occasions when trying to make a point a deceptive point.9. We know by Stella Reddy own words that she thinks it is okay to ask non–whites “ Where are you from? ” based on their complexion, assuming they cannot be born in Canada.10. We know by Stella Reddy own words she thinks it is okay to say things like “ I am very familiar with the Ontario Residential Tenancies Act because I have
been a superintendent for 16 years here in Canada ” to non–whites as if their previous work or educational experience does not equal to that of hers because it was not in Canada.
The Applicants and the HRTO may never know the real reason behind Stella Reddy racially charged language, prejudice slurs and her own racially motivated actions of harassment, discriminating and acting in a reprisal manner, but we all do know in her own words she stated;
1. “ just because she is black, ”
2. “ because she is black, ”
3. “I called her children mullato, ”
4. “ I did say that my nephew in law was as black as black, ”
5. “ I have very beautiful great nephews and nieces who are half black, ”
6. “ my nephew is as black as you can get, ”
7. “ He’s even darker than she, ”
8. “ Due to the fact that Ms. Read is BLACK. ”
( EXHIBIT # 126 ) And still Stella Reddy will still demand and claim that “ I see people as people. To me it don’t matter what they look like, ” It appears that Stella Reddy has a very extraordinary way of not seeing people without seeing the complexion of their “ Black ” skin!
It appears that once again Stella Reddy has tried to represent herself as being something that he is clearly not to the HRTO.
