Private Sector Act dot Com

[yycparalegal]

Hey no worries, not exactly surprised by this turn of events.

[eric]

I read their Statement of Claim (cost me 12$). So, because you had the temerity to post court proceedings which are publicly available to anyone who can use Google and maybe pay a few bucks for a deep dive that is somehow defamatory and they want 500 K$ to compensate for their hurt feelings. I noted that they have lost at least one customer (victim) - too bad, so sad, etc. Since you're not a lawyer I'm not sure if the rest of their claim has any merit. Kevin at least has been vex-litted in Alberta, I'm not sure if that is applicable in BC is another factor. Final thought, dollars to doughnuts, their claim was AI generated from what I can see - the summary at the end is the tell.

[wserra]

Does Canada (or do any individual provinces) have the equivalent of what the US calls anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) statutes? They're quite useful in situations like this. In a nutshell, a frivolous suit brought to shut someone up (or punish them for speaking) is not only subject to immediate (pre-discovery) dismissal, but will result in the award of costs and lawyer's fees to defendants. Good stuff. Most US states now have them.

[stompinggrounds]

Not sure if BC has something similar, and it's not directly anti-SLAPP, but Alberta as Civil Practice Note 7 (CPN7) which is often used if a legal proceeding is utter trash. It's actually a decent threshold to get it to count as CPN7, but it does come into play when OPCA tactics are used, and is Alberta's way of tossing useless lawsuits, often involving standard freeman stuff like foisted unilateral agreements, money for nothing schemes, etc. Haven't read the pleading yet, so don't know if it's OPCA based or not

[yycparalegal]

Morning all. BC Does have a process under rule 9-5 of the Supreme Court Rules, it's not quit as aggressive as CPN 7 in Alberta but it should do the trick.

[eric]

Here's a link to the Kumars' Statement of Claim: (hope it works)

Just my thoughts - For ten plus years Kevin Kumar has striven to project a "no fail" method of beating the banks. Previously he was protected through artificial personae such as Ty Griffiths, or various middlemen employees. For example, it was Elliot or Manji as employees, or Ty Griffiths who lost court cases. He sort of gets upset when he has to take personal responsibility.

[wserra]

Thanks, eric.

The reaction of this US lawyer: Most of it is nonsense. The one part that isn't - assuming, of course, that the facts back it up, which in the case of these guys is a sizable assumption - consists of the allegations of professional malpractice / conflict of interest. If you engage someone to consult on a professional matter who then, after accepting the engagement, acts against you, the engaging party, in a related matter - well, that is arguably actionable. There are other issues, but it doesn't sound like a SLAPP.

Of course, I have no idea if that is in fact the case. In addition, I strongly suggest that anyone personally involved in the matter not elaborate on their position here. Except the Kumars, of course. They should feel free to shoot their scamming mouths off.