Email :rajanvaira.broker75
Skype :rajanvaira.broker
password :Rasaq123

Dear Sir/Ma,

We have direct providers of Fresh Cut BG, SBLC and MTN which are specifically for lease. Our bank instrument can be engaged in PPP Trading, Discounting, Signature Project(s) such as Aviation, Agriculture, Petroleum, Telecommunication, Construction of Dams, Bridges, Real Estate and all kind of projects. We do not have any broker chain in our offer neither do we get involved in chauffer driven offers. We deliver with time and precision as set forth in our agreement. Our terms and Conditions are reasonable, below is our instrument description.

DESCRIPTION OF INSTRUMENTS:
1. Instrument: Bank Guarantee (BG/SBLC)
2. Total Face Value: Min of 1M Euro/USD (One Million Euro/USD) to Max of 5B Euro/USD (Five Billion Euro/USD).
3. Issuing Bank: HSBC, London or Deutsche Bank Frankfurt or any Top 25 WEB
4. Age: One Year, One Day
5. Leasing Price: 5.0% of Face Value plus (0.5+X)% commission fees to brokers.
6. Delivery: Bank to Bank SWIFT.
7. Payment: MT-103.
8. Hard Copy: Bonded Courier within 7 banking days.

All relevant business information will be provided upon request.

If Interested kindly contact me via Email:~rajanvaira.broker75@gmail.com
Skype ID :rajanvaira.broker
rajan vairawanathan

One Further Point:

The 3 criteria to set aside a default judgment are shown in the link below.

All 3 must be satisfied. The 3'rd one regarding having an arguable defense is dependent on upon the 2 year limitation period being applicable. It probably is in the absence of a previous legal ruling that says it wasn't with respect to negative option Highway 407 billing procedures.

If you click the link below, you can see from the quoted case, page 1, "as soon as possible" might mean 30 to 45 days, but it's important that you act quickly to preserve your right.

Also, Superior Court Simplified Procedures which applies to your case are simple compared to complex civil cases, but they are still pretty complicated compared to Small Claims Court. You'd almost surely need a lawyer. You certainly do for appeals anyway.

http://www.magyarlaw.com/blog_496.htm

http://www.collection-calls.ca/

I'm sure he still handles this stuff. He's highly regarded among collection lawyers so you might want to spend a few minutes running it by him - if you don't already know someone.

One thing is certain, ignoring a judgment this large (that never goes away) is not something you want hanging over your head.

To heck I will be paying that bill now. THNAK YOU so much for letting me know this and wising me up on this. How do I get in touch with Mark Silverthorn?

I never did get any papers served to me to appear in Court, so I might just be able to fight this afterall.

:)

Yes, I thought it had to be Superior Court because the limit in Small Claims was only $10,000 before Jan., 2010, and your case was from Nov., 2009.

I forgot to include the link below. Please read it first so my previous post will make more sense.

http://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/the_fixer/2009/11/30/407_bills_can_hound_drivers_for_15_years.html

As you can see, the 407 ETR is trying to circumvent the Ontario Limitations Act which became effective on Jan. 1, 2004. This Act created a 2 year limitation period for launching legal actions on business debts. It also allows the 2 year limitation period to be set aside if both sides agree to it on the business contract. However, the way the Highway 407 works is that a contract is created or renewed each time a driver trips the transponder or toll video camera. The contract, they maintain, is written on the the back of each invoice where it clearly states the consumer of their services is liable for collection activity for 15 years, not 2 years. The reason for that is there is an ultimate limitation period of 15 years under Section 15(2).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SECTION 15: The following exceptions apply only in respect of business agreements:

1. A limitation period under this Act, other than one established by section 15, may be varied or excluded by an agreement made on or after October 19, 2006.

2. A limitation period established by section 15 may be varied by an agreement made on or after October 19, 2006, except that it may be suspended or extended only in accordance with subsection (4). 2006, c. 21, Sched. D, s. 2; 2008, c. 19, Sched. L, s. 4 (1).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The start date of Oct. 19, 2006 may be of interest to you if your usage stopped before that time.

The problem is that motorists do not sign an agreement in any true sense of the word when they drive onto the highway. The 407 utilizes a negative option which is forbidden in all other contracts in Ontario, and tries to get away with it. I've seen write ups by other lawyers on this issue with regard to the 407 ETR bills, and even they are unsure what the courts will decide. It definitely needs a precedent setting case to determine whether it will be allowed. Since it's quite probable the courts will reject it, the 407 ETR is in no hurry to press the matter if they can avoid doing so. Better to get their collection agents and lawyers to bluff people like you and work the numbers that way.

That's likely why the lawyer was willing to accept a paltry $25 a month.

Another point: It was entirely likely that Christensen sneaked through a default judgment banking on the fact you wouldn't appear and offer the the 2 year limitation period as a defense.. and he was right. You still can get the judgment overturned if you present evidence the limitation period would have been a perfect defense had you been there. That would be a very interesting case indeed, but you have to do it as soon as possible after you learn of it. You just can't wait 5 years. REMEMBER, the clock will start ticking on this period as soon as they notified you of the lien, and certainly after you make your first payment. So don't make any payments until you find out your options. Anyhow, the $25 a month will be pointless almost since the post judgment interest, if awarded, will come to over $6210 a year or $520 per month. Things will soon be out of control, if you don't act.

Therefore you need to get a copy of the judgment as soon as possible so you can see what dates and limitation periods apply. It should be free.You'll also need an explanation why you didn't show up in court the first time. Try to make it sound good.

After that, you should contact a lawyer who will need a copy of the judgment. You can possibly do it yourself, but it will require a good bit of reading. I mentioned Mark Silverthorn because he is excellent, however, if you get someone else, make sure they are very familiar with consumer laws.

Hi Sir

I am replying to your questions, in regard to this issue.

1. According to the Law Firm, Ontario Superior Court of Justice is the Court that they got the order from

2. I last used the 407 in 2006. And I never once provided any signed written acknowledgements between 2006 and 2009.

3. November 10, 2009

4. Judgement amount excluding costs. $23,640.36 HOWEVER, I notice on the form her, the word Excluding is spelled incorrectly if that helps. I doubt it, but you never know.

Now I am thinking maybe I shouldnt make any payments, BUT you tell me what you think?

Leslie

It has nothing to do with any potential letter your parents-in-law will get. Indeed, the collection agency lawyer would already have done a title search on the property with Polaris, or perhaps the Registry office -depending on how old the house is.

I assume the title transfer was a conveyance of convenience. However, there's going to be a permanent encumbrance against the title that will need to be discharged before the house is ever sold again or even has its title transferred.

What I wanted to know was whether the claim was obtained in Small Claims Court which has a $25K limit or under the Superior Court of Justice's "Simplified Claims" Procedure which is mandatory for all claims between $25K and $100K. HOWEVER, that stipulation only came in during 2010 and so did the $25K limit for the Small Claims Court which was only $10K during 2009. Therefore if the 2009 judgment was for $23K, they must have obtained the default judgment in Superior Court which uses a Form 14A as its Statement of Claim. In contrast, Small Claims Court uses Form 7A's. Also their real property writs have different numbers (Form 60A vs. Form 20D).

If the judgment is authentic, you would be foolish to arrange monthly payments without a settlement agreement in your hands first. Because the meager amount you are paying won't even cover the 26.8% annual interest which will continue to balloon. Even if you don't plan on getting another car solely under your own name, the debt will balloon to an astronomical amount and be levied against your will.

In any event, I was interested in 3 things:

1) Which court was the judgment was obtained in? (Note: there is both a Small Claims Court as well as a Superior Court at 85 Frederick Street in Kitchener. And that Small Claims Court is also a branch of the Superior Court of Justice.)

2) What was the date you last used the 407, and did you provide any signed written acknowledgements of the debt to the 407 between 2006 and 2009?

3) What was the date the action was on? (That's not the date of the judgment, which will be later.) That date will be on the Form 14A - if it went through Superior Court, Simplified Procedure.

3) You stated you owed $$86,000. Where did the $23,000 come from?

The lady at the Law firm/Collection Office, said I can offer to make voluntary payments, which I told her I will. Even if it is all of $25.00 a month. The reason for me wanting to do this is because I do not care about Plate Denial, since I do not have a car and do not plan to get one. But because the house is in my Inlaws name 48% and mine and my husbands 2 %, and we do not need want his parents to get a letter regarding the debt. I hope you all understand what I am saying here.

I would like to have seen further information from rockybudgboa because I have been unable to find any cases where the Highway 407 ETR took individuals to court, only the Ontario Ministry of Transportation over its right to exercise plate denial. Unfortunately, trying to get any useful information out of her was impossible. Perhaps others may know something. It's important because if there had been a successful lawsuit against her it would, in effect, have removed the current 2 year limitation period for all credit card and loans debt.

Lenders could sue credit card holders for 100 years and force them into bankruptcy simply by attaching a negative option acceptance clause onto the back of every credit application as the 407 ETR has. Reading the Toronto Star link below, it's easy to see why I was so incredulous at her assertion that a judgment had been granted at what would have been well beyond the 2 year limitation period for filing.

http://www.thestar.com/yourtoronto/the_fixer/2009/11/30/407_bills_can_hound_drivers_for_15_years.html

She said she already settled it with the lawyers. I have no idea how though if she has no money and owes $86,000.