May the water carry away my tears….and rain them down on our enemies
The wind disperse my indignation across the land
May the tree preserve my energy and keep it close to the roots
As the fires rage across the land sparked by the lightening, strikes appease my anger
May the soil and the plants guide me to higher places and sustain my integrity
May the birds sing my words to those who will listen and rob peace from those who do not
May the sun, moon, and stars withhold their light causing the enemy to stumble
May the sun enhance the temperature on those who caused such pain.
©
Showing posts with label aronevans. Show all posts
Showing posts with label aronevans. Show all posts
Wednesday, 14 September 2011
Sunday, 28 June 2009
Something is Amiss
We received the rent cheques you left at City Hall today. On the
bottom of each cheque is written "paid in full (refused)".
Please provide this office with your written permission (email is
fine) to strike the word "refused". Your cheques cannot be deposited
until such time as you provide either this permission or replacement
cheques. We do not understand what "refused" means. No cheques were
presented to this office and no payment was refused by us.
As you know, pursuant to the minutes of settlement, you agreed to pay
rent for April and May by May 6th. In a deliberate action by you to
either delay payment or cause as much inconvenience as possible, you
delivered the cheques to the City, who is not the landlord.
It is now May 12th, You are in violation of the minutes of
settlement. Kindly govern yourself in accordance with the terms
agreed to by you. Your signature is on that document, Ms. .
Please live up to it.
To ensure you receive the message, you have also been contacted by
voice mail today regarding this matter.
Donna Clarke
Administrator
Jun 26 2009 11:36 am
BEFORE THE HEARING ..SHE JUST CAN`T LEAVE IT ALONE
If they are the Landlords as she suggests than why did they claim the city is responsible for repairs?
something is not right.
If you paid rent in June than you cannot be evicted and did they get the permits and they cannot interfere with a vital service.
My understanding is in order to get the permit to demolish the house one has to show this prior hence the issue with the gas supplier.
One more point one must show proof and one cannot withold information or mislead at a hearing
Hope this helps
Cheers
bottom of each cheque is written "paid in full (refused)".
Please provide this office with your written permission (email is
fine) to strike the word "refused". Your cheques cannot be deposited
until such time as you provide either this permission or replacement
cheques. We do not understand what "refused" means. No cheques were
presented to this office and no payment was refused by us.
As you know, pursuant to the minutes of settlement, you agreed to pay
rent for April and May by May 6th. In a deliberate action by you to
either delay payment or cause as much inconvenience as possible, you
delivered the cheques to the City, who is not the landlord.
It is now May 12th, You are in violation of the minutes of
settlement. Kindly govern yourself in accordance with the terms
agreed to by you. Your signature is on that document, Ms. .
Please live up to it.
To ensure you receive the message, you have also been contacted by
voice mail today regarding this matter.
Donna Clarke
Administrator
Jun 26 2009 11:36 am
BEFORE THE HEARING ..SHE JUST CAN`T LEAVE IT ALONE
If they are the Landlords as she suggests than why did they claim the city is responsible for repairs?
something is not right.
If you paid rent in June than you cannot be evicted and did they get the permits and they cannot interfere with a vital service.
My understanding is in order to get the permit to demolish the house one has to show this prior hence the issue with the gas supplier.
One more point one must show proof and one cannot withold information or mislead at a hearing
Hope this helps
Cheers
Saturday, 15 November 2008
Responsible journalism
Responsible journalism should be based on facts, accuracy and truthful reporting and the source should be considered for accuracy, reliability and credibility.
1120 Water Street never experienced a problem with flooding but sewer back -up did occur due to an outdated system that was clogged with tree roots.
The province paid the cost to upgrade the aging infrastructure not the City of Peterborough.
The foundation is not leaking and there is no old and new part of the basement as stated.
How much did the City of Peterborough invest in repairs?
The tenant in 9 years has paid almost fifty thousand dollars….
The taxpayers are charged for repairs or replacements billed as new but in reality were used.
How about the paint accounts that the city passes off to taxpayers and how much has been charged for paint?
Color your world may have the answer to this question...
The tenant did not clean or remove the mould from 1122 water street as stated cuz the tenant was not in the City of Peterborough @ the time.
So who is misleading who?
An elected member of council voted in by the people should always make well informed decisions before voting on a matter that will cost the taxpayers more money
No letter was received on February 2007 and the tenant was not kept informed.
A basement apartment at 1122 shhh it is an illegal duplex..that was offered but the replacement of the old kitchen cupboards which were falling apart and the removal of the mould was not completed as per the agreement.
A basement bedroom at 1122 water lacked an egress window which is required in each bedroom.
Housing informed tenant that a bedroom in the basement of 1120 Water Street was not permitted for insurance purposes and safety reasons in the event of a fire.
The entire duct work is not covered in asbestos only a small vent left over from an old heating system.
This should have been noted after the sewer-back up when the ceiling tiles were removed by contractors hired by the city of Peterborough.
Lost in all this mix is the concern for the safety of this family?
The findings from the mould report have never been discussed and only a preliminary report was communicated.
A breakdown in effective communication and timely responses may leave a family homeless.
The unnecessary high expenditures of a demolition will be passed onto the taxpayers of Peterborough.
Can a report from Brian Horton who has not entered the residence of 1120 Water be considered a valid report?
1120 Water Street never experienced a problem with flooding but sewer back -up did occur due to an outdated system that was clogged with tree roots.
The province paid the cost to upgrade the aging infrastructure not the City of Peterborough.
The foundation is not leaking and there is no old and new part of the basement as stated.
How much did the City of Peterborough invest in repairs?
The tenant in 9 years has paid almost fifty thousand dollars….
The taxpayers are charged for repairs or replacements billed as new but in reality were used.
How about the paint accounts that the city passes off to taxpayers and how much has been charged for paint?
Color your world may have the answer to this question...
The tenant did not clean or remove the mould from 1122 water street as stated cuz the tenant was not in the City of Peterborough @ the time.
So who is misleading who?
An elected member of council voted in by the people should always make well informed decisions before voting on a matter that will cost the taxpayers more money
No letter was received on February 2007 and the tenant was not kept informed.
A basement apartment at 1122 shhh it is an illegal duplex..that was offered but the replacement of the old kitchen cupboards which were falling apart and the removal of the mould was not completed as per the agreement.
A basement bedroom at 1122 water lacked an egress window which is required in each bedroom.
Housing informed tenant that a bedroom in the basement of 1120 Water Street was not permitted for insurance purposes and safety reasons in the event of a fire.
The entire duct work is not covered in asbestos only a small vent left over from an old heating system.
This should have been noted after the sewer-back up when the ceiling tiles were removed by contractors hired by the city of Peterborough.
Lost in all this mix is the concern for the safety of this family?
The findings from the mould report have never been discussed and only a preliminary report was communicated.
A breakdown in effective communication and timely responses may leave a family homeless.
The unnecessary high expenditures of a demolition will be passed onto the taxpayers of Peterborough.
Can a report from Brian Horton who has not entered the residence of 1120 Water be considered a valid report?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
