If you rent, or are seeking to rent, an apartment in Ontario, BEWARE of Homestead Land Holdings Limited (I shall refer to them as Homestead). They are a very, large corporation (in 2002 net worth over $2,000,000,000, that's right $2 billion), which is probably why they get away with anything and everything. The corporation was founded by a lawyer (Britton Smith), so if you wish to file a civil law suit or criminal charges against them, good luck. Mr. Smith retired, but his son Britton (another lawyer) is "running the show", so to speak. It is impossible to find a lawyer who would oppose them. If anyone has found a lawyer or politician who would dare to oppose them, please let me know, especially if you won! They are supporters of many politicians, so you won't get help there. I filed a complaint against them with the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal, the Ministry of Housing, the local MPP (Member of Provincial Parliament), The Ombudsman's office, DAWN (Disabled Women's Network - they help disabled women, like me, but refused help), the Kingston Legal Aid Clinic said they were too busy to help, and even two Premieres of Ontario from two political parties (I'll get into that later), to no avail. They have many holdings in Ontario, with offices in Kingston, Ottawa, Toronto, London, Hamilton (with buildings in Brantford, Guelph, Kitchener and St. Catharines being administered by the Hamilton office). They also have holdings in Sarnia, and maybe an office there as well. As of today, 2004, they have almost 50 buildings in Kingston alone, with plans for more.

There is a government organization in Ontario, which is supposed to protect the rights of the tenants. It is called the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal (ORHT). They do little, if anything at all, to protect the rights of the tenants of this province, especially from large corporations. If you do a search on the website, you will find many complaints against the ORHT for showing favouritism for the landlord(s). Check it out. Groups have filed class-action complaints against ORHT.

In Ontario, it is illegal for a landlord to enter a unit or apartment, without a 24 hour written notice, unless there is an emergency (e.g. a fire or a water leak). In my personal experience, this is not what actually happens.

On December 19, 2000, I filed a complaint against Homestead Land Holdings with the ORHT (File Number EAT-02346). There were three separate occasions, on which the superintendent (Elsie Davis) attempted to enter my apartment without my prior knowledge or consent. How do I know this, you may ask? Well, I was at home each time AND I caught her red-handed. There could have been even many more times that she entered the apartment when I was not home, but I have no way of finding out that information. On one of these occasions, her boss was with her. There was another occasion when she and her boss Cheryl Lambert did enter my apartment, without my prior knowledge or consent, while I was out.

THE FIRST OCCURRENCE was in the late summer or early autumn of 2000. Elsie left a note on my door, asking me to call her. When I did, we made arrangements for her to come to the apartment. Shortly after that, she arrived with a workman, who inspected the area for signs of water damage around my living room windows, finding none or not telling me he had found some. They told me there had been a leak near the living room windows in the apartment below mine. I was advised that external repairs to the building's siding were to be performed early the following week. After that, someone may need to caulk above the living room windows. This was on a Thursday or Friday afternoon, and the work was to be done the following Monday or Tuesday. I told Elsie, okay, let me know.

Approximately three weeks later, I was in bed when I heard someone using a key to open my deadbolt lock. Except for the superintendent, no one else had a key to my apartment. A previous tenant had installed a keyless sliding bolt, instead of a chain lock, that could only be locked from the inside. If this lock had not been engaged, immediate access would have been gained to my apartment. I grabbed a robe and ran to the door. Standing before me were Elsie, a Homestead property manager (her boss) Cheryl Lambert, and a workman. I asked what the hell (not the exact word I used) they were doing. I was extremely upset, livid, and felt totally violated. Cheryl pulled me aside. She said that Elsie told her I have given her permission to enter the apartment when she was here three weeks earlier. I advised Cheryl that, in no uncertain terms would I give anyone permission to enter my apartment at an unspecified future date, especially for a speculative reason (she had stated on the previous visit that someone may have to return to caulk around the windows). I added that, since I had not received a note or a phone call from Homestead or it's representatives, and the siding work had been completed three weeks earlier, I had assumed that no one had to enter my apartment. I reminded them that they were supposed to provide me with a legally-required 24 hour written notice for non-emergent repairs. What a joke, they know that the ORHT will let them get away with anything! It helps to have political allies, like an MPP. All they have to do is verbally perjure themselves, make sure the tenant cannot obtain a copy of the audiotape(s) of the hearing, and (above all) ensure that none of their testimony is written and legally submitted (no paper trace or tangible proof).

THE SECOND OCCURRENCE was on Friday, Dec. 8/00 at approximately 9 - 9:30 a.m. Again, I was startled to be awakened by someone repeatedly opening the deadbolt lock and pushing against the door. Entry was not gained, because the sliding lock was engaged. When I got to the door, no one was there (but I did see Elsie entering the elevator).

THE THIRD OCCURRENCE was on Thursday, Dec. 14/00. I was again awakened by the sound of someone repeatedly unlocking the deadbolt and pushing against the door. As before, I grabbed a robe and ran to the door. This time, when I opened it, I was confronted by Elsie. She said that she was planning to tape a note to the "outside" of my door. NOW WHY WOULD SHE HAVE TO UNLOCK AND OPEN MY DOOR IN ORDER TO LEAVE A NOTE FOR ME ON THE OUTSIDE OF MY DOOR??? She indicated a piece of paper that she was holding, but did not present it to me. It could have been a grocery list, for all I know. Also, she did not have any tape, which she would need to affix the note to the door.

WHEN I ASKED HER IF SHE HAD BEEN THE ONE WHO HAD TRIED TO ENTER MY APARTMENT ON DECEMBER 8, 2000, SHE CONFESSED THAT SHE HAD. She said that a repair had been made to the heating system on December 8 and she was there to check the radiator. Bear in mind that, it was SIX (6) days before this that the alleged repair had been made. I told her that, at any time in interim, if there had been no heat in the apartment, I would have contacted her. Also, at any time during that period, she could have telephoned me (she had my phone number - my telephone call display showed that she called me on Sept. 23/00), left a note on (or under) my door, knocked on my door to see me (I had been home all week - day and night), left a note in my mailbox, or even left a note on my car. When she became superintendent, I filled out an information form, which included my telephone number and details about my car. She said the previous superintendent had destroyed tenant records. If she had misplaced the number or other information, Homestead's office had all the information on file as well. No excuse.....

As I stated, I filed the complaint with ORHT on Dec. 19/00. As instructed by the ORHT, I attempted to present the superintendent with the Notice of Hearing. I had to personally deliver it to the Landlord or its representative. She refused to accept it. I telephoned Cheryl Lambert to advise her what had transpired. Not only did Elsie refuse to accept the documents, she also became impertinent and argumentative. At first, she vehemently denied unlocking my deadbolt lock and trying to enter the apartment without my knowledge/consent. Then, in the next breath, she shouted that she had to use her key. Elsie threatened to report me to the Kingston Humane Society, because I have cats, stating that there was no heat in the building and that I endangered them because there was no heat in the apartment. I replied that my heat had never been off! I did not even know there had been heating problems! The windows are very drafty, warped, and should have been replaced years ago (my first complaint about a window, in the second bedroom which "flapped" in the wind until I installed a stick across it diagonally, was 10 years ago). In winter they frost up (cannot see through them - and I am the 5th floor, on the top floor, which should be the warmest because heat rises - but windows on lower floors do not frost up like mine) and freeze shut, so I cannot open them to look outside unless the weather is mild for a few days. If the heat was off in my apartment, I would definitely have noticed. Each superintendent I reported it to said it would be repaired soon, when all the windows were replaced. They replaced some at the front of building in the Spring of 2004 and were to replace the rest in the Fall. The current super told me it will now take 2 to 3 years to replace the rest of the windows. A few months ago they built a new building on Portsmouth Ave. (between 523 and 533 Portsmouth Ave. - their buildings), and have a project for four new buildings on Kingston downtown's waterfront for hundreds of millions of dollars in the works, but won't replace windows in an existing building. Also, it is a 64 unit building. Theoretically, she would have to report the landlord for not providing heat in a building where the owner controls the heat. I reminded her that, during the infamous ice storm of 1998 (which affected Ontario and Quebec), the whole building had been without heat and electricity for days (almost 3 days) and the pipes did not freeze!!!!! As follow-up to the conversation, I sent a letter to Cheryl, cc to the ORHT.

THE FOURTH OCCURRENCE was on Dec. 20/00. Cheryl Lambert and Elsie Davis entered my apartment while I was out. I telephoned Cheryl at 11:30 a.m. Cheryl asked me numerous times what it would take to make me happy. She asked if I would cancel the hearing if she provided a letter to me, promising that no one would ever again enter my apartment illegally. My interpretation of that statement was that it was an admission that the superintendent had tried to enter by apartment illegally. That was a mute point - it is illegal for a landlord to enter an apartment without the knowledge or consent of the tenant. Just try to get the ORHT to enforce that law or any law in favour of the tenant! I said I would accept the letter, but not cancel the hearing. She never sent the letter or mentioned it to me again.

Cheryl said that she had a meeting in the building at 2:30 p.m. and could pick up the papers from me. She had also instructed Elsie that she had to accept the documents if I saw her first. She asked if I had a (personal) problem with Elsie or her husband, Arnold Davis. I said I did not like being threatened by Elsie and that the threat was a separate issue from entering the apartment illegally. Also, I added that I may not be a nuclear phycist, but I would have noticed if there were no heat in the apartment.

When I refused her attempts to coerce me into canceling the hearing, she got nasty (her whole demeanor changed - like Jeckyl and Hyde) and said that she would have a whole bunch of professionals testify on her behalf, that I did not stand a chance at the hearing. She said she would get the furnace repairman to say the pipes would freeze and burst, if Elsie had not entered my apartment. I told her that it sounded like she was pulling together the equivalent of the "O. J. Simpson Dream Team", but I refused to submit to hear threats and cancel the hearing.

I told Cheryl that I had to run a couple of errands that afternoon and make a photocopy of my Dec.19 letter to her. She advised me to leave the papers with Elsie if I went out.

At 12:45 p.m. I phoned Cheryl's office. I left a message with the receptionist and on Cheryl's voice mail that I was going out and that I was leaving the papers with Elsie. I also taped a note for Cheryl, to my door, telling her that I had given the papers to Elsie and that I would try to return home before 3:00 pm. (her meeting with Elsie was at 2:30). Cheryl had told me that if I was not back before she left the building, she would not wait to speak with me.

At 4:00 p.m., I returned home. The note had been removed from my door, indicating that Cheryl had taken it. WHEN I PUT THE KEY IN THE LOCK TO OPEN IT, I REALIZED IN HORROR THAT IT WAS ALREADY UNLOCKED. I entered my apartment cautiously. Upon inspection, the only thing I noticed "out of the ordinary" was that my toilet seat was up. When I leave the apartment, I ALWAYS close the lid on the toilet seat. Why do I do that? Well, it is just a habit, just like making sure lights etc. are turned off and water is turned off.

At 4:07 p.m., I spoke with my neighbour, who was exiting his apartment. His apartment door is only a couple of inches away from my door. Our apartments share a common wall. The walls in this building are "paper thin". I told him that I had gone out at 1:00 p.m. and returned at 4:00, and asked if he had heard anyone in my apartment. He said that he heard me leave and that he heard me check the door, to ensure that it was locked. He heard me return home. During my absence, he heard my door open and close a couple of times shortly before I arrived home. He did not open his door to see who it was, because he was getting ready for work. As I was entering the driveway to the building, Cheryl was leaving in her car, so she had been at my apartment not long before I arrived. He also stated that on a previous occasion, he had seen Elsie trying to use her key to open my door, and that she had advised him that she had my prior consent to enter the apartment. He had mentioned this to me on a previous occasion, as well. ALSO OF NOTE, AT NO TIME DURING HER TENURE IN THIS BUILDING HAD I EVER GIVEN HER PERMISSION TO ENTER MY APARTMENT WHEN I WAS NOT THERE. He told me that if I called the police, he would act as my witness. He was going to work, but they could see him when he returned home later that evening.

I called the police twice, but they did not arrive until more than five hours later. They said that it was not a police matter, if the landlord entered the apartment without my knowledge/consent, that I would have to complain to the ORHT. They also said that a previous tenant could have a key. I advised them that I moved here in August, 1994 and that this was the first break-in and the first time I arrived home to find my door unlocked. I was out for three hours. How would a previous tenant know I was out at all? I added that a previous superintendent had changed my lock in 1998 and that only the superintendent had a key. I have never had roommate(s) and had never given the key or a copy to anyone else. As of today, I only have one copy of the key myself, never having made any duplicates. The officers said that maybe the neighbour heard another door opening down the hallway, but the closest door is 30 feet or more away from my door). There is no mistaking that my door, which is only a couple of inches from the neighbour's door, was opened. They refused to get involved.

The next day at 10:30 a.m. (Dec. 21/00), I telephoned Cheryl. I advised her that I had called the police and that they went to see Elsie afterwards (they did not report to me after seeing Elsie). When I told her I found the door unlocked, she said I must have left it unlocked. I have never left my home unlocked in my life. At 40+ I have locked my door many times, when going out! I advised her that I had a witness who heard me double-check (turn the knob and shake the door - the neighbour has a habit of doing that to his door too) that I had locked the deadbolt. Cheryl admitted that she had taken the note I left taped to the door. She tried to say that she knocked on my door and that must have been misinterpreted as opening/closing the door. Remember, the neighbour said the door was opened/closed a couple of times. Knocking would have only taken a few seconds. Also, the neighbour did not hear someone knocking at my door.

Cheryl demanded that I tell her who had reported hearing someone open/close my apartment door. I refused to give her that information. He had only given permission to divulge his identity to the police.

The ORHT Hearing was held on the morning of January 2, 2001. Cheryl was in France, but she sent an Affidavit. She lied in her affidavit by stating that I had given Elsie permission to enter the apartment to repair a water leak (1st occurrence). She said she advised me that I would be given 24 hours notice for entry in the future unless there is an emergency (this is required by law anyway, so she was doing me no favour). She also lied by stating that entry had to be gained to my apartment on December 7th and 14th (it was actually the 8th and 14th) to bleed the radiator system of air after repairs had been made. Elsie told me on the 14th she only needed to check the radiator to see if there was heat, and did not even mention or look for air intake valves. She only touched the radiator to see if it was warm. I was personally advised, by the Property Standards Officer (the building inspector) for the City of Kingston, Ontario, that there are no air intake valves in any of the 64 apartments (which are located from the basement to the 5th floor - over 6 levels) in this building. If the heating system pipes had to be bled of air, it had to be done from the roof, where the valves are located.

The heating contractor (Maurice Theirran) lied, under sworn testimony, that the pipes would have burst if he had been unable to enter the apartment to bleed the valves. He said that he was the contractor who had been maintaining the system, at that time, for the previous 15 years. Do you think he should have known the air intake valves were on the roof , if he self-admittedly was the professional contractor who personally maintained the heating system? He was not with the super when she unlocked my door those two times in December.

Elsie lied under sworn testimony. She said that was looking for air intake valves in my apartment, and the other three corner units. I know she did not enter my immediate neighbour's unit. She said she did not enter a unit at the opposite end of the building, because she was afraid of their big German Shepherd (they only had a tiny puppy, a small breed of dog, which she did not fear and used to pet). She said she went back there when they got home from work. She said she did not have my telephone number. (Even if she misplaced it, she could not left a note or gotten my number from head office.)

Cheryl's boss, Jim Minnes attended, but did not provide testimony.

The mediator of the hearing was Ian MacInnis, Member of the ORHT. Because of the perjured testimony, he awarded judgement to the Landlord. He also ordered me to pay for their legal costs, but only 50% was allowed by law. Knowing this, Homestead submitted a padded bill for $150 per hour times 5.5 hours. The were granted $75 per hour times 5.5 hours. I contacted the office of their legal beagle, a Bailiff named Paul J. Fudge. His office advised me that the only worked for landlords in such cases (ORHT Hearings and Tenant/Landlord disputes) and that his rate was only $75 per hour. At many points in the hearing, I felt that the mediator was working for the landlord. At one point, he said, "If you have been living there since 1994, then why are you making trouble for the landlord now?" Does that sound like something an impartial mediator should say? I replied that this was the first time I had caught a superintendent trying to enter my apartment legally.

I left the hearing as soon as it ended and went to the ORHT office, to appeal the decision. I was advised that I could not appeal until I received the written Order from the ORHT. The morning's hearing had been taped, onto 3 one hour audiocassettes. The ORHT tried to force me to buy all three tapes ($15 each), because they said my hearing could be on any of the tapes. I advised them that my hearing was the last of the day and that it was on tapes 2 and 3. I filled out an order form and paid the money. On the OHRT purchase order form, I indicated that I needed the tapes, because I needed the verbal proof that the superintendent and the heating contractor had perjured themselves. I also expressed this verbally to the staff.

When I finally received the tapes on Jan. 24/01, they were the wrong tapes. I ordered tapes 2 and 3, but received tapes 1 and 2. I immediately mailed a letter the ORHT demanding the send the tape # 3 and an explanation in writing as to why they sent the wrong tape. They never replied and I never got the tapes. Several times after that, they phoned, but I would not take their calls. They only accepted written evidence and now I would only accept written evidence.

I contacted the Investigations Unit of the Ministry of Housing for Ontario. I was advised that they could only act on written testimony, that had been received and officially stamped with the ORHT seal. No evidence provided by Homestead, except Cheryl Lambert's affidavit, was in writing. All of the perjured statements were oral. I explained that the OHRT refused to provide me with the oral evidence I had paid for. Because my copy of the affidavit was unsigned and not stamped by ORHT, they would not do anything, even though there was false testimony on it. THE ALLEGEDLY IMPARTIAL MEDIATOR, IAN MACINNIS, HAD KNOWINGLY AND DELIBERATELY ACCEPTED AN AFFIDAVIT FROM CHERYL LAMBERT INTO EVIDENCE ILLEGALLY, BECAUSE IT WAS NOT STAMPED WITH THE SEAL OF THE ORHT.

I contacted my local Minister of the Provincial Parliament, John Gerretsen. On Jan. 4, Chris his assistant told me to photocopy my documents, write a detailed summary, and forward them to him. I copied everything and provided a 20 page hand-written synopsis, and a covering letter, which I sent by Registered Mail to his office on Jan. 17/00. I sent another letter on Jan. 24 about the ORHT's refusal to send the correct audiotapes. They would not do anything to help. The following month, my documents were returned, with only a hand-written note on a pink post-it note from the assistant, Chris. The note read: "John asked me to return these papers to you. He has kept photo copies of everything. Unfortunately, there really isn't anything more he can suggest at this time.". John had never made suggestions or done anything to help. GUESS WHAT: Gerretsen had been the Mayor of Kingston for years. Then he became MPP directly from that position and this was his second term as MPP. One of his major political contributors/supporters is, you may have guessed it, HOMESTEAD LAND HOLDINGS LIMITED. DURING EVERY ELECTION, ON THE PROPERTY OF EACH OF THEIR NEARLY 50 APARTMENT BUILDINGS IN KINGSTON, THEY DISPLAY GERRETSEN'S CAMPAIGN SIGNS. THE POLLS IN MY DISTRICT ARE HELD EACH TIME AT ONE OF THEIR APARTMENT BUILDINGS. IN THE LAST PROVINCIAL ELECTION, I DROVE AROUND TOWN AND SAW THAT GERRETSEN'S CAMPAIGN SIGNS WERE AGAIN DISPLAYED ON ALL HOMESTEAD'S PROPERTIES. GERRETSEN ALSO USED TO BE A LAWYER, BEFORE ENTERING MUNICIPAL AND PROVINCIAL POLITICS, AND I UNDERSTAND IS A FRIEND OF THE SMITHS.

Since then, I have filed complaints (about the ORHT and the MPP) with the Premiere of Ontario, Ernie Eaves. His name and address was listed on the ORHT website as a person to contact with complaints about the ORHT. He wrote me on Jan. 23/03, refusing to help, stating that ORHT was a self-governing agency. THAT'S GOOD - A SELF-GOVERNING GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO OFFICE. I contacted Premiere Dalton McGuinty. He wrote back on Feb. 24/04, and also refused to help, for the same reasons. He directed me to the Ombudsman's office. I wrote to the Ombudsman's office at the address provided by McGuinty. They contacted me and told me they could not help. If they performed an investigation, they could only make suggestions, and nothing else, sort of like a mediator. They also said too much time had passed and the audiocassette evidence would have been destroyed a long time ago.

For her part, by perjuring herself at the ORHT Hearing in January/01, Elsie and husband Arnold Davis, very soon afterwards got promoted by Homestead, to be superintendents at a larger apartment building with a juicy raise. They are still there. Arnold filed some sort of bogus Worker's Comp. claim, saying he injured his foot. As soon as his claim was approved, he stopped limping. What a miracle. John Gerretsen, MPP, with the support of Homestead Land Holdings Limited, was elected to a third term of office as Member of Provincial Parliament.