With respect to this thigh-sucking stupidity, let me explain why Lloydminster's Patrick "Vexatious Litigant" Ross does not have a prayer of having that silliness taken seriously, and why Mr. Hayward should absolutely agree to see Patrick in court.
As one can read, there is in fact a law against misrepresenting oneself as an official collections agent or collections agency (as there should be), but what that has to do with Mr. Hayward is a complete mystery, as he did nothing of the sort.
Briefly, after I invited all and sundry to volunteer to show up at Casa Twatrick for the sole purpose of loading his valueless life's acquisitions into a Ford Econoline van, a number of people -- including Mr. Hayward -- squealed with glee and made it clear they were totally up for a road trip. And here's why Patrick's filing is completely screwed.
At no time did Mr. Hayward, or anyone else, suggest they would be representing themselves as having the power of collection authorities, so Patrick's case is already on shaky ground. And the reason it is completely toast is that it would be utterly absurd for me to be asking for anyone to falsely act as collection agents for me since, as I have mentioned on numerous occasions on this very blog, I have already retained the services of Saskatchewan sheriffs to do that for me.
I will say that again so that even someone as intellectually crippled as Patrick Ross will understand it -- no one is asking or offering for anyone to misrepresent themselves as collection agents since I have, openly and publicly on this very blog, made it clear that a collections enforcement order has already been filed with the appropriate authorities, meaning Patrick's filing is dead in the water.
To this end, I will be providing Mr. Hayward with a copy of the filing of that collections order and its subsequent confirmation, along with the case file number that he can present to the court, proving beyond any doubt that there are already official collection authorities on the case. And the fact that I have made all of this abundantly clear so publicly that even Patrick is aware of it will guarantee that his filing will be kicked to the curb in a heartbeat, should result in even more costs against him, and will be even further evidence that Patrick should be branded a vexatious litigant by the Court.
I predict that Patrick will now find an excuse to quietly drop this application. Let's watch.
THAT DIDN'T TAKE LONG: I just noticed that what I predicted above has already happened, as you can see:
That would be Jesse calling Patrick's bluff, and Patrick already back-pedaling furiously.
Quelle surprise.
THE BACKPEDALING: As I mentioned above, here's Patrick, realizing his bluff has been called, and backpedaling frantically:
I predict nothing will come of this. Let's watch.
NONE DARE CALL IT "EXTORTION":
The definition of "extortion" according to the Criminal Code of Canada:
Patrick Ross: "Pay me $7,500 or I'll report you for what everyone knows is an utterly bogus charge."
Hmmmmmm ... personally, if I was Mr. Hayward, I would be on the phone to the RCMP right fucking now, telling them that someone was threatening to file an utterly bogus criminal complaint against me unless I paid him $7,500.
18 comments:
At some point, Patrick is going to cross the line into actual criminal behaviour (identity fraud?), and run the risk of ending up with a criminal record. Based on his current behaviour, I don't think that day is far off.
Escalation.
Intervention is needed but unfortunately he doesn't seem to have anyone in his life with the care or the brains.
If misrepresenting yourself as a collections agent is a *criminal* offense, then Patrick is really playing with fire here if he plans on filing charges again Jesse for that, since knowingly filing false criminal charges against someone is a whole new level of dangerous, as the defendant can then counter-sue for malicious prosecution. If Patrick goes through with this, and the court throws out the case, Patrick is in a whole new world of hurt legally.
@Anonymous @ 10:13:
The laughable part there is Patrick _cannot_ file charges under the Act in question - and it has nothing to do with his bankruptcy status. The most he can do is file a complaint with the Sheriffs or Police claiming that such has happened. They investigate and with the Crown, decide if charges of any sort will be laid.
Literally the most he can do is file a complaint. That's it.
He is, however subject to being accused of using the legal system to harass others. Even if he hasn't actually filed suit per se (and we have no evidence that he's actually filed these papers with a court), other parties can certainly present them to the courts as evidence of harassment.
I don't think Patrick appreciates the most important thing about all of this and that's that, given that everyone knows his history, no one is taking him seriously anymore.
If you'd never heard of Patrick, and you got one of his threatening letters, you might be worried since, at first glance, he seems like he knows what he's talking about, with all his "heretofore" and "mens rea" and "co-defendant" and references to the criminal code and all that.
But with everything CC and Peter Skinner have posted, absolutely everyone understands that Patrick is totally incompetent, and nobody is worried about any of his stupid letters. So he's lost the only weapon he ever really had, the ability to intimidate people by using big words.
It's even worse for him now that everyone is co-operating and sharing info and Patrick's letters and working together to kick his ass. His history with CC is enough to destroy any chance he might have had in court, and it will be worse when he's found to be a vexatious litigant.
Patrick doesn't understand any of this, does he? He's a laughingstock, and he doesn't even know it.
MgS: Quite so, I'd forgotten that the most Twatsy can do in this case is file a complaint, at which point the RCMP and Crown would read it, laugh until they peed themselves, and trash it. In short, he's got nothing.
Does anyone else see the real issue within this letter? The "I'll have you charged with an offence if you don't pay me $7500.00".
That's extortion. Jesse should head to a police station with letter in hand and talk to someone there about it.'
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/section-346.html
"Extortion
346 (1) Every one commits extortion who, without reasonable justification or excuse and with intent to obtain anything, by threats, accusations, menaces or violence induces or attempts to induce any person, whether or not he is the person threatened, accused or menaced or to whom violence is shown, to do anything or cause anything to be done."
Again, "If you don't pay me $7500 I'll have you charged"
Patrick knows full well no one misrepresented themselves as a collections agency or a Sheriff themselves. Saying on here like I did, that I would be there with fucking bells on to help, is not criminal. Weird how Jesse got the letter and I didn't. Patrick knows I would tell him to pound sand. Patrick was relying on attempting to scare Jesse into complying.
I dunno. This isn't an argument Patrick would make himself, but a lawyer if he became self-aware enough to retain one might argue that he didn't know anything much full well--that he is in a state of delusion so strong as to merit a fancy mental-illness name, such that he really talks himself round to believing only those things that make him feel good about a situation, and so can't be held responsible for knowingly committing extortion--rather than realizing he was making baseless threats, he had persuaded himself that he was making a perfectly reasonable offer.
Of course making that stick would presumably entail a requirement of, at least, a whole bunch of counselling and generally talking to shrinks. Which from the impression I'm getting, might do him a world of good anyway.
Mr. Hayward:
Unsurprisingly, I would encourage you to do this. That Patrick's letter to you so obviously represents extortion under the Criminal Code of Canada suggests that you, at the very least, can file a complaint and force the RCMP to investigate. Also, at the very least, you have an entire community that will be happy to give you sane legal advice.
Go for it.
Jesse: Do it. CC is right. At least have a conversation with the Edmonton police. Patrick Ross needs to experience consequences for his actions. He should not get away with picking on an autistic man, just because he thought he could intimidate them into paying $7500.
Given Patrick's oh-so-delightful history of attempting (and failing) in the courts to move any of his cases forward, would the courts even consider this anything other than harassment? Granted, incompetence in committing criminal offences hardly reduces the severity of the offence.
(Yes, I know it reeks of extortion - and I agree with that assessment)
Fact: I tried to file a police report but I was told to get Jesse to walk into the RCMP because he was the direct recipient of the letter. Also, the letter was mailed from Grande Prairie and that's where the offence took place.
Officer I spoke to said it's suspicious I didn't the letter, when I was the first to say I would be there to help if needed. Hell I begged to be included just so I could see his face when I walk out with his belts. I was 100% transparent with them and they told me to get Jesse to make a complaint.
I also emailed it to Cst. Moss of the GP RCMP, hoping he might reach out to Jesse to make a complaint. If Patrick thinks that letter is above board, there's a possibility he's sent others.
Patrick also believes he can scare me into changing my Statement of Defense because he doesn't like the contents stating his history of impersonating people. He says he doesn't have a history of criminal behavior, yet absolutely does. He's in tweets ADMITTING his impersonation of people was so good it fooled his victim's friends.
Thanks to Patrick always willing to pat himself on the back, his verbiage lead me to him, and that's all I'll say for now. History repeating itself should be Patrick's tagline.
What I find curious about this latest idiocy by Patrick is that, typically, when he screws up and ends up in court, he pleads ignorance and insists he had no idea what he did wrong and throws himself on the mercy of the court as a self-rep'ed litigant and so on and so on and so pathetically on.
This, however, seems different and it's where Patrick might have finally crossed a line, since regardless of what Patrick claims to know about the law, there is absolutely no question that he is telling Jesse, "Pay me $7500, or I will file a meritless and contrived criminal complaint against you."
I don't think there's any way Patrick can walk that one back.
@CC: Personally, I think this is Patrick breaking from the stress of the oncoming garnishment of his wages and property seized. He is trying anything to get some scratch together for a payment to you.
This letter was an astounding error on Patrick's part because he is not requesting payment for lawyer fees or administrative costs, but to stop him from doing something. That is where this goes from a legal demand letter to an extortion attempt.
He wants $7500 to NOT file a complaint. If Jesse offered $7500 to stop Patrick from filing a complaint it would be viewed as a bribe. RCMP in Sherwood Park, EPS from North division (I was in the north part of Edmonton this weekend), and a retired RCMP officer I know all told me to get Jesse to file a complaint.
Everyone I spoke to thought it was odd Patrick never issued me the same letter because Jesse simply tagged on to my request to be involved in seizing Patrick's property. Patrick knows I'd never pay him a cent and wouldn't waste piss on him if he were on fire let alone give in to any of his pathetic demands.
The best thing out of this, Patrick responded to my Statement of Defense by saying he's never had a reputation of criminal behavior, yet impersonated Greg Burton, harassed me years ago via text message that were traced back to his cell phone, and now this.
A criminal charge would be devastating to what he has left of a life.
@RNO: Patrick making even a sizable payment to me would in no way affect the collection enforcement action against him. The only way for Patrick to put a stop to the current collection action is to pay me what he owes me *in full*. If he thinks tossing a few thousand dollars in my direction will get him off the hook even temporarily, he seriously needs to consult a lawyer.
Just so there's no confusion, Patrick making any sort of "down-payment" on what he owes would make no difference to the enforcement of the collection proceedings. So if Patrick suddenly handed over, say, $7,500, there would no benefit to him other than, of course, he would owe me $7,500 less. In other words, collection will proceed against Patrick Ross until such time as he pays off the entire amount he owes me -- an amount that is over $110,000 and increasing at a rate of 5 per cent per year.
The other typical possibility is that the parties reach some sort of settlement, but since both Patrick and his deranged father have made it absolutely, abundantly, unequivocally clear that they have no intention of ever handing over any money voluntarily, that possibility is not on the table.
It's quite possible that I never collect the full amount owed me from Patrick, but that just means he will be an undischarged bankrupt for the rest of his life. And given his recent behaviour, one with a criminal record as well.
As long as Patrick owes you money, there's no way he can inherit anything since you can just seize it if he does. So if his father kicks off before he's out of debt, there's no way Patrick can inherit the house. Where's he going to live? On top of everything else, he might end up as a 50-year-old, homeless, undischarged bankrupt with a criminal record. But I'm sure Patrick can find a way to make it worse.
Post a Comment