Hundley v.Garnier 2011 BCSC . Real Estate, Contracts, Fraud, Corruption. We have listed and attached the material and documented which prove that judge Bruce Greyell altered, distorted and covered up the evidence before the Court.
We hope that by sharing our experience about the real estate fraud, legal and judicial corruption others will come forward and share theirs. Together we all can help expose and weed out corruption to make our society a better place.
Our story is based on material and documented evidence which was altered and covered up by Judge Greyell. If there is any justice in Canada we should get back the $369,000+ legal fees($150,000+) that was extorted from us.
The Garniers are not sophisticated in real estate, Mrs.Garnier has never bought or sold any real estate. Mr.Garnier whose first language is French always retained the services of a Realtor when he bought or sold his personal residence.
Raymond Hunter entered our property pretending to be a realtor in our area canvasing for property listings. Mr.Hunter was a very crafty, cunning and clever Salesman. We had no idea that Mr. Hunter was in our home with the intention to scam us, we were unsuspecting victims.
Mr.Hunter asked us to try his services for 45 days, He advised us the real estate market was dropping and promised to get us the highest price possible if we start with a low listing price of $900,000 to attract multiple buyers(multiple offers). He promised to get us a newer property for $900,000 in Kerrisdale. He promised to advertise our property on his webpage and the MLS. We were unaware that Mr. Hunter and Ms.Hundley were secretly working together to acquire our property for a low price through a private business deal. The Exclusive Listing Contract is evidence that Mr.Hunter never disclosed to us he was working as a Limited Dual Agent.
After inducing us into trying his services, Mr.Hunter provided us with a photocopy of the front portion of a Working with a Realtor Brochure which list the three types of Agency Relationships, out of the three, we selected to have an Agency Relationship Agreement with Prudential United Realty and Mr.Hunter and then signed the Exclusive Listing Contract provided by Mr.Hunter on February 8, 2007. None of the other listed Agency Relationships were discussed or provided to us, by Mr. Hunter. [Documents & transcripts attached]
Mr. Hunter never informed us he had a buyer or anything about his long term business associate Lucy Hundley. Mr. Hunter also failed to disclosed to Prudential United Realty that he entered the our property as the agent for Ms.Hundley. Stephen Tidder, managing broker for Prudential United Realty testified that Mr.Hunter had a written obligation with us and was only our agent and NOT the agent for Ms.Hundley[transcripts attached].
On February 11, 2007, Mr.Hunter did an open house, Mr.Hunter informed us he would take care of it. We relied on him and Prudential United Realty to look after our best interest and abide by the terms of the Exclusive Listing Contract.
On February 13, 2007, Mr.Hunter presented us with an OFFER(“Purchase Contract”) from Ms.Hundley. Ms.Hundley testified she DID NOT make an Offer to purchase our property but that it was Mr.Hunter who brought her an Offer.
Ms.Hundley’s Examination for Discovery transcripts. Page 22
1 173 Q Did you make an offer to purchase the property?
2 A No.
3 174 Q Did Mr. Hunter bring you an offer for sale of the
4 property?
5 A Yes.
11 177 Q And did Mr. Hunter bring that to you on an offer
12 sheet or the contract of purchase and sale, or just
13 verbally?
14 A I believe it was a contract.
25 182 Q Okay. And was that on a contract?
Page 23
1 A That was written on the contract.
We did not accept Ms.Hundley’s OFFER, we COUNTER OFFERED the same day it was presented to us by Mr.Hunter( February 13, 2007). Our Purchase Contract is material evidence and Lucy Hundley’s transcripts are documented evidence that she did not accept our Counter Offer.
Raymond Hunter Examination for Discovery transcripts(April 13, 2010) Garniers Counter Offer.
Page 136
5 761 Q And as far as — so it appears on page 4 that this
6 was accepted by the Garniers on the 13th, but you’re 7 saying that’s not the case?
8 A Again, this is standard procedure. If you’re
9 countering the offer, they’ll sign the document and
10 initial any changes, which at that point has to go
11 back to the other side.
Page 156
3 859 Q Okay. So they didn’t actually accept it then. They
4 added this in there and it was for Ms. Hundley to
5 accept?
6 A If that had not gone in there that obviously would
7 have constituted an uncountered acceptance.
Lucy Hundley’s trial transcripts Vol. 1
16 Lucy Hundley (the Plaintiff)In chief by Mr. McKendrick
39 contract was — I mean, the Garniers didn’t
40 counter when it was first presented to them.
81 Lucy Hundley (the Plaintiff) (Recalled)Cross-exam by Mr. Davison
10 Q So it’s — it’s your position that by April 11th
11 you had no idea why the Garniers were not going to
12 complete?
13 A No. Not really, no.
14 Q Okay.
15 A ‘Cause they — initially, when I put the offer in
16 they accepted that offer of 912 right away. There
17 was no counteroffer.
In his attempts to cover up his lies Mr.Hunter continued to stumble. He testified at his Examination for Discovery that he presented the Garniers with Hundley’s Offer around 6:30 pm on February 13, 2007. At Trial he altered his testimony and testified he told the Garniers on February 13, 2007 afternoon that their Counter Offer was accepted. It was impossible for him to accept our Counter Offer before even presenting us with the Offer.
Raymond Hunter Examination for Discovery(April 13, 2010, Page 130).
14 27 Q Okay. And then on the 13th — the morning of the
15 13th, you called the Garniers?
16 A Yes, as my recollection.
17 728 Q Do you remember who you spoke to?
18 A Susan.
19 729 Q And do you remember what you told her?
20 A Just that I had an offer from Mrs. Hundley and it was
21 very, very brief. She suggested that I bring it over
22 and show it to them that evening.
23 730 Q And is that what you did?
24 A Yes.
25 731 Q So after work type of hours, 5:00, 6 o’clock?
Page 131
1 A I think it was closer to 6:30.
549 Raymond Hunter (a Third Party)In chief by Mr. Blanchard
20 Q Okay. Prior to making that arrangement did you
21 have any contact with the Garniers in respect to
22 the counteroffer?
23 A Well, I had — on the 13th, I had advised the
24 Garniers that the counteroffer had been accepted.
25 Q Okay. Did you provide the Garniers with any
26 copies of the —
27 A Yes, —
28 Q — counteroffer?
29 A — I did. As I recall, I took copies to their
30 house later that day. It would have been late
31 afternoon, I believe. And I can’t recall exactly,
32 but memory seems to indicate that there was nobody
33 home at that time. I left copies in the — the
34 mailbox, and I believe it was later that evening I
35 called and spoke with Mrs. Garnier to — to be
36 sure that she had in fact found them in the
37 letterbox, and she said she had.
On February 18, 2007, Mr.Hunter did an oil tank inspection of our property and found no traces of oil tanks but refused to remove his oil tank clauses from Hundley’s OFFER. We then sought the advise of Mindy Jong who advised us that Mr.Hunter lied to us about the oil tank clauses. Ms.Jong also suggested that Mr.Hunter most likely was using Ms.Hundley as a shell since she was an elderly woman in her mid 70’s. Ms.Jong did an addendum removing the oil tank clauses.
We then found out that Mr.Hunter never advertised our property on the MLS or his webpage as promised and according to the terms of the EXCLUSIVE LISTING CONTRACT.
By way of Mr.Hunter actions it seemed he was acquiring our property for himself. Mr.Hunter did the oil tank inspection, the measurements of our property, went to city hall to check on the building ratio and permits to develop our property, brought architects, trades people, contractors onto our property without notice when he found Mr.Garnier’s truck was not parked outside. Documented evidence before the court proved Mr.Hunter secretly manipulated the entire deal by himself from his home.
DEPOSITS [evidence attached in OUR STORY under DOCUMENTS].
We were advised that the deposits would show who made them. We asked Mr.Hunter to provide us with proof that the deposits were made according to the terms of the Purchase Contract(The “OFFER”). Mr.Hunter continued to ignore all request to provide proof. Francis contacted Prudential United Realty and was advised by Mr.Pahud that Prudential United realty had not received our file, he promised to call back when he gets the file, Mr.Pahud never called back. Francis called Prudential again and asked for the deposits Mr.Tidder advised the same thing that he never received our file. Francis requested Mr.Tidder to tell Mr.Hunter not to come back onto our property again.
We wrote to Mr.Hunter and Ms.Hundley to provide us with proof of the Deposits, Ms.Jong advised us that she tried three times to get proof of the deposits but Prudential United was not forthcoming.
TERMINATION: [Evidence attached in DOCUMENTS]:
As Ms.Jong was going on vacation to Toronto for her brother’s wedding, she asked if we were comfortable going ahead with the deal without proof of the deposits, I informed her we were not and upon advise from Ms.Jong we exercised our rights under the Purchase Contract(Hundley’s OFFER) and terminated it. Susan called Mr.Hunter on April 9, 2007, and informed him we were canceling the Purchase Contract and requested him to relay the message to Ms.Hundley.
The email dated April 11, 2007 from Ms.Hundley’s conveyancer, Cindy Cooper, her notary’s notes-April 11, 2007, Mindy Jong Statement of Account April 17, 2007] and transcripts are evidence that Ms.Hundley received our termination notice. Further evidence was an internal note from Ms.Morin dated April 11, 2007 about Ms.Hundley seeking legal advise from Todd McKendrick to enforce the Purchase Contract.
In June 2007 Ms.Hundley sued us, we retained MacKenzie Fujisawa LLP., to defend us. MacKenzie Fujisawa LLP., advised us, prepared and filed our Statement of Defence. Ms.Hundley received our Statement of Defence [attached] which clearly stated the Deposits being one of the main issues the Garniers terminated the Purchase Contract But Ms.Hundley still would not disclose proof that the deposits were paid according to the terms of her “OFFER”(Purchase and Sales Contract).
In 2008 Madam Justice Kerr rejected Todd McKendrick’s Rule 18A Summary application, ordered a full trial and ordered proof of the requested deposits be sent to our lawyer. Ms.Hundley and her lawyer still would not provide proof of the deposits.
Two years after Hundley sued us, during her Examination for Discovery when she was questioned about the deposits, she causally took out a joint personal cheque from her handbag and showed it to our lawyer. This confirmed what we suspected, that Hundley had breached the terms of her OFFER to us. Hundley paid her Deposit 12 day after the time for acceptance expired, we did not extend the time for acceptance.
From the evidence before the Court it was discovered; that Ms.Hundley did not have the money to pay for our property when she made her Offer. She did not get the money until April 27, 2007 through the help of Mr.Hunter. Mr.Hunter had direct contact with the loans officer at HSBC where Ms.Hundley had applied for financing. Mr.Hunter had direct contact with Ms.Hundley’s Notary and provided her with instructions. Internal notes from Ms.Hundley’s Notary was evidence that Ms.Hundley was going to incorporate before taking title of our property.
Through the Court documents we found out; Mr.Hunter did a Pro Forma dated February 12, 2007 and letter to Ms.Hundley dated March 19,2007[attached under DOCUMENTS] at which time he had an Exclusive Listing Agreement to work only for us. Mr.Hunter testified he did his pro forma and March 19, 2007 letter for Ms.Hundley to take to the Bank to assist her get financing for our property. In Mr.Hunter’s letter to Ms.Hundley he gives false extremely high appraisals of her jointly owned properties, some of which were $300,000 to $400,000 more than the BC Assessment Authority, this was the same assessment authority that Mr.Hunter advised us had over assessed our property by 47%. In his letter to Ms.Hundley he advises of high sales in our area, cost of building, profits to be made from investing in our property, the arrival of the Canada Line further increasing the value of our property. Mr.Hunter deceived a financial institution by providing false information, Mr.Hunter is not a licensed or trained appraiser. Ms.Hundley testified she gave this letter to the Bank [copies of these letters are attached].
THROUGH investigations, documents before the Court, discoveries and trial it confirmed that we were CONNED by our Realtor Mr.Hunter.
1. Starting from Mr. Hunter and Ms. Hundley’s long term business relationship;
From the evidence in court it was discovered that; Mr. Hunter and Ms. Hundley had a business relationship for over 20 years, Hunter was directly involved with all of Ms.Hundleys real estate transactions. Hunter was involved with finding; financing, investment properties, negotiations with the sale-redevelopment and resale of Hundley’s point Grey Road project. Mr.Hunter was in the real estate development business.
Ms. Hundley’s Trial Transcript Vol.1
7 Lucy Hundley (the Plaintiff) In chief by Mr. McKendrick
25 Q Okay. Now, would you tell the court what dealings
26 you’d had with Mr. Hunter prior to having a look
27 at 334 West 12th?
28 A Well, I’ve known Ray for a long time, over 20
29 years, and he has — I’ve purchased property
30 through him and I’ve sold property through him.
31 And he even helped my mother sell — there was a
32 property that my mother had that he helped sell
33 for her.
34 Q So how would you describe your relationship with
35 Mr. Hunter?
36 A Very close. Very good. I’m — it was a
37 professional business deal that we did that I had
38 confidence in him.