ZANETTI v. BONNIEHON
Page 1 of 3
This is a story of two women, who have stood the test of adversity coming from their landlord.
It is a story of courage, especially because Vancouver, British Columbia Canada,
is a provincial town that favours landlords, amongst other powerful groups.
It is also a province wherein white collar crime
thrives more in British Columbia than anywhere else in the country, as the likes of Martin Chambers
and James Blair Down
, to name a few, have been supported in Canada by the authorities, all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Thus it is no wonder as to why PAUL H. CODY
came to live in Vancouver, British Columbia.
& Gina Zanetti,
living at 1395 Beach Avenue
, in the WEST END
of City of Vancouver, where they resided since year 1986 up to 2009, fought fervently for their home since year 2000, when Paul H. Cody, a slum landlord,
who posed as a resident manager of the Surfside Apartments
at 1395 Beach Avenue
, worth in excess of 20 million dollars or more, went after them, by concocting false allegations, and by vilifying them, for the purpose of eviction.
The allegation, amongst others, was the sisters were on the roof deck of 1395 Beach Avenue, allegedly throwing rocks
at Paul H. Cody
and his assistant Andrew James Baillargeon
, also known as Andrew James
, while both men were allegedly sitting on their chaise lounge
around the outside swimming pool.
The matter was brought before the rentals board and after both sides were heard, the sisters resisted eviction.
The following includes Codys outrageous conduct towards both the sisters on a continuous basis, which falls under criminal harassment
* Ease dropping at the sisters door and slipping letters under their door;
* Trying to come in the apartment without giving the sisters a 24 hour notice;
* Bullying both the sisters separately;
* Stalking the sisters on a continuous basis by following them around the community;
* In year 2001, closure of the roof deck permanently only for the sisters, but allowing a few other tenants to utilize the facility;
* Locking the sisters in the pool area on Easter Sunday in year 2001, which resulted in an injury for one of the sisters;
* Getting tenants at the property to sign a petition against the sisters in order to reduce damages at arbitration;
The cause of the petition was due to the sisters second action against Cody at the rentalsboard asking for an order to reinstate the roof as an essential service and for damages. The gist of the petition was that
the sisters were undemocratic and unfair for wanting the facility of the roof reinstated for all tenants at the property. Cody wrote on the petition that the sisters were imposing their will and demands on the overwhelming majority of residents resulting in undue stress and a general unhappy feeling in the building
90 out of 115
in residence allegedly signed the landlords petition. (80% of the tenants who found out about the nature of the petition, later moved out)
Many tenants claimed they were misled by Cody in signing the Petition, running away however, as most tenants did, does not solve the problem, as sooner or later the same problem, different people, different time and place, arises again and sooner or later each one of us must face up to what we would prefer to ignore.
A STORY UNFOLDING LIKE A GRISHAM NOVEL
Sisters Sues for Libel