The struggle for power

So Sandeep and Amina were finally confirmed as the two elected board members with full three-year terms.

Their names and signatures are given to BMO so they can sign cheques on the corporation's account. (Each cheque requires three signatures.)

New board gets to work
The new board passed a resolution terminating Makeka Property Management and signed a contract with Mark Cianfarani of Vista Property Management. One director was opposed.

Makeka's contract ended at the end of November while Mark Cianfarani started in the middle of November so he could become familiar with the corporation's requirements and have a smooth transfer of responsibilities.

This fulfilled the wishes of some long-term owner-residents who believe that Mark would improve the buildings' maintenance and increase the property values of their homes.

The new board terminated the existing security company and made plans to hire their own security along the lines of the existing practice at YCC #60.

Resistance
The split in the board between Anver Karim and Shah Jahan Khan on one side and Sandeep and Amina Gore on the other grew wider.

Anver Karim wanted to hire his brother as a management consultant and his nephew, A.J. Karim as the property manager while Sandeep and Amina wanted Mark Cianfarani from Vista Property Management.

Anver and Khan also clashed with Mark Cianfarani.

The heavy flooding that hit Toronto on 08 July 2013 caused extensive damage in the basement of 330 Dixon. The board fought over the insurance money. Mark, Sandeep and Amina wanting to have the insurance company remove the mould and repair the damaged equipment while Anver and Khan wanted a settlement and hire their own contractors to repair the damage.

The board disagreed on locking half of the $2 million Reserve Funds in long term investments. They also disagreed on security issues.

More than anything else, Khan and Karim wanted a new election to decide who would be the two new directors. Khan openly bragged that their community would give them sufficient proxies to elect the candidates of their choice.

On the other side, Sandeep and Amina were convinced that the next election would be marred by even more proxy fraud which would distort the true wishes of the owners.

Malick threatens court action
On 23 October 2013, a letter from Marcos Associates stating that their client Ataul Haq Malik wishes to challenge Mr Campbell's certification of the election held at the AGM.

That was all that the board heard from them.

Malik counts the proxies
In late November, without informing the board or Mark Cianfarani, Ataul Malick and the outgoing property manager, counted the proxies and sent a message to Michael Campbell saying that he made an error in his count. Mr. Campbell recounted the returned proxies and stated that his counts were correct.

An unexpected  bomb shell
On 25 November, 2013, two months after he made his decision on the results of the elections at the AGM, Mr. Campbell had second thoughts. He submits a new report saying that there was so much proxy fraud at that election, no one should be declared the winner and new elections to fill the two director positions need to be held by the end of 2013.

(That is exactly what Shah Jahan Khan had been screaming about since
the election.)

So why did Mr. Campbell think that one the directors and a candidate at YCC #42 participated in massive fraud? This new information come from Shah Jahan Khan in a form of an affidavit which states that he, and other named persons, saw the two persons makes changes to the proxies in their possession.

Accusatons of proxies fraud
Michael Campbell's report stated:
"To date, allegations to the effect that invalid proxy forms were counted at the Sept. 26 AGM have persisted. In this respect, I enclose with this letter a copy of the solemn declaration of Shah Jahan Khan dated November 25, 2013, a copy of which was delivered to this office today.

In the declaration, Mr. Khan alleges that, along with two other individuals, he witnessed: (1) Ms Gure altering the voting instructions contained in approximately 110 proxy forms that had already been signed; and (2) Mr. Malick altering the voting instructions contained in approximately 105 proxy forms that had already been signed.

These allegations, if true, are deeply troubling. Even if Ms Gure or Mr. Malick was orally authorized to alter the voting instruction provided in the form that an appointer had already signed, which would afford a valid defence to a charge of criminal forgery, the law requires every proxy form for the purpose of a meeting of condominium owners to be made "under the hand" of the appointer. This requirement means that a proxy form altered by any other person cannot be counted.

Assuming that Mr. Malick did not alter the proxy forms that were allegedly altered by Ms Gure and vice-versa, and that the same instruments were submitted for registration at the Sept. 26 AGM, the information provided by Mr. Khan leads to the inference that approximately 215 proxy forms submitted to the Sept. 26 AGM were improperly altered.

That number (215) greatly exceeds the number of proxy forms (75) that were discounted for the same reason; and I have received no information with respect to the exact proxy forms that were improperly altered, which might have enabled me to discount those instruments and count the others. However, as Mr. Gosal pointed out during the registration process before the Sept. 26 AGM, the inclusion of a single, adulterated proxy form will tend to spoil the entire batch, and I have little reason to doubt that at least one instrument of that nature was counted.

There is in fact a genuine possibility that multiple proxy forms were improperly altered and counted for the purpose of the election at the Sept. 26 AGM. The result, noted above, has thus been rendered unreliable."

Ataul Malick is the treasurer of a Liberal riding association, so an accusation of participating in a conspiracy to commit, what Derrick Fulton in Superior Court called massive proxy fraud may be embarrassing.

Of course it is also possible Khan's affidavit would not stand up in court. (In fact it did not.)



Push for a new election
Shah Jahan Khan and Anver Kasim called for an emergency board meeting for Wednesday 27 November 2013. They wanted an election for the two director positions to be held by the end of the year.

Khan wanted a closed meeting, no owners attending and he stated that he saw no need for Sandeep and Amina to attend. (They attended anyway.)

At this meeting, the majority of the board passed a resolution for Sandeep and Amina to get a legal opinion on whether the Chair could re-open the AGM.

They saw an independent lawyer who gave them a legal opinion that once Michael Campbell closed the AGM on 01 October 2013, only the courts could re-open the meeting.

The board also passed a motion for the corporation to get a legal opinion from a third law firm. That law firm also had the opinion that only a judge could overturn the election results.

Anver's e-mail to Campbell
On the morning of 29 November 2013, Anver sent an e-mail to Mr. Campbell part of which stated:
“Last  meeting on wednesday they decided to defy your Instuctions and directions and pass a resolution to retain another Lawyer at the expence of the corporation for an opnion

To-date I have not heard anything from the New manager  (mark) who also I find to be leaning towards them when I asked him about his opnion as an RCM he said he was just taking the instructions of the Board

Everybody Knows that CANADA plays a very fair role when it comes to elections in fact we have heardcso many times that canadians go to many countries where elections  are held to make sure that they are FAIR AND CLEAN. So I ask Myself as to why fraud can take place in an Election which are held in our backyard.

I do not want to associate myself with individuals who are unethical and morally bankrupt. Just like MOSES saved the children of Israel please be our MESSIAH and save YCC #42 after all they have sufferd enough under 6 years of an ADMINISTRATOR.

LET THE TRUTH PREVAIL LET JUSTICE BE SERVED.
ANVER KARIM”

Campbell's third decision
On 29 November 2013, Michael Campbell was informed that Sandeep and Amina obtained a legal opinion on the determinations he made four days earlier. In response Mr. Campbell stated the following:

“While I appreciate the desire of Mr. Gosal and Ms Gure to obtain a "second opinion," had I known that another director would support the move to obtain that opinion, notwithstanding the fact that doing so will further delay an AGM that was already delayed beyond the statutory deadline, I would have viewed these issues in a different light.

Continued effective immediately, I rescind the findings expressed in the Oct. 1 Report; decertify the result of the election held at the AGM convened September 26, 2013 (the "Sept. 26 AGM"); and declare invalid all proxy forms that were used for the purpose of the Sept. 26 AGM; effective immediately, Ms Gure and Mr. Gosal are not members of the board of directors of YCC 42. ...for the exclusive purpose of electing two (2) directors, the annual general meeting of owners must be re-convened by no later than January 3, 2014. Notice of the meeting must be accompanied by a form of proxy that has been substantially revised so as to be less vulnerable to alteration by persons who lack the authority of the appointer.”

Well, that will put gasoline on the fire won't it?


top  contents  chapter  previous  next