How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Tom B. Your Own Question
Tom B.
Tom B., Barrister & Solicitor
Category: Canada Law
Satisfied Customers: 2263
Experience:  25 years in practice
Type Your Canada Law Question Here...
Tom B. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Does this action pertain to all law, that self

Customer Question

does this action pertain to all law,that self representation is held lawfully committed to tell the whole truth if a third part has interests in an agreement,, and in order to renege on an agreement, chooses to exclude any dealings of the third party to the second party in order to quickly close the sale of a private property sale and remove any chance of the third parties rights to claim to reimbursements of unjust enrichments,,, would this nullify any sale or overturn the sale between two parties as a private side deal was made causing the third party to be out of pocket 257k .. parties two and the self represented individual both gain 100% of profit to be split how ever they choose behind closed doors between each other excluding any contact of what was going on until it was too late and title transfer was complete. while the third party paid 100% of the entire 5 years expenses and not a nickle came from party 2 nor party one,, but part two had abandoned the deal of property 5 years previous and party three saved party one from foreclosure in lieu of saving party one from having foreclosure as part of permanent record, that party one had no interest in the house to stay, but couldn't sell as house was 50K below market and foreclosure wasn't an answer, and as well party three saw profit, profit in the years to come by market increases and repairs and betterments added to the said home or agreement removable of part two from title.
if a ordinary citizen was making claim against spouse and represented ones self as SELF REPRESENTATION without council, as that person walked away from their council , a highly acclaimed effective family lawyer, prepaid at costs from division of family assets through to finalization of a divorce, a very expensive lawyer, If she walks away for assets and debts and share of a property. And one abandoned the home, claimed bankruptcy, never so much as communicated to any parties revolved around his abandoning moving out from the house ,away from his spouse and slapping a personal bankruptcy judgement against himself and family debt and against his split mortgage 50/50 with Vancity, the one abandoning the home was the husband. vancity moves to foreclose unless the spouse can get approved for a mortgage on her own. the current mortgage was sitting at payout amount of 501K with a market value of 440K. The Husband which I will refer to as the ex going forward, didn't look back to communicate, other than through a appointed bailiffs trusty. CMHC WOULD NOT QUALIFY HER AND THE BANK WOULD NOT RENEW AS THEY NEEDED THE EX TO SIGN OFF ON THIS CHANGE. SO LOOKS LIKE ITS DONE, SHE IS 3800 BEHIND AND SINKING. THE SPOUSE WAS EMOTIONALLY CRIPPLED HER WORK AT JEOPARDY AND ANXIETY SO HIGH THAT PHISHER COULD NOT KEEP UP WITH THE SUPPLY OF ANTI DEPRESSANTS .... does the CMHC have to be notified if the mortgage can not be qualified ????? and does the bank have to report such changes if the bank or institution is to keep a mortgage insured under the title or moneys lent out. if the mortgage was not foreclosed and either party could not qualify for CMHC as one with out the other crippled trhe others chance to maintain a mortgage approval rating... would the bank be in breach of ant law if the bank carried forward pretending the reality isnt so.. would the mortgage contact be nullified under circumstances that the bank carried a falsehood of impression that both parties are still qualifiers ? there has to be some law that enforces that should a individual claim bankruptcy on a spouse or a partner then the person who for forfeited his percentage of ownership, lose entitlement and be removed from title since said the person in bankruptcy placed the asset of his home.... I dont see how if you gave up financial assets of a lawnmower to be sold to cover your debts and if a percentage of a property is yours, why you should retain rights to it. even though someone else has 50% entitles well. ?The institution in allows honest hard working people who can just get by making mortgage paying bills,, these people can't afford a lawyer,, and the bankruptcy partner comes in and get s 50% so 5 years later if you so much as didn't even cut the grass to show you had a interest. you are as the bankruptcy individual now worth 250K for doing nothing,, read below ,, Im the third party now out 257K and I was never disclosed as having a real honest interest in the home I have lived in for 5 years,, ,, I received a 60 day notice of eviction,, im referred to as the tenant,, from saviour to sister to tenant,, i never believed such could unjustly enrich a bankrupt individual, the law has to cover this. bankruptcy
Submitted: 5 days ago.
Category: Canada Law
Expert:  Legal Ease replied 5 days ago.

Hello! My name is***** you for your question. I'm reviewing it now, and will post back again shortly.

Expert:  Legal Ease replied 5 days ago.

Your post is very long and confusing and to put it bluntly I cannot follow it.

In a few sentences tell me the facts and then your provinces and then let me know what you are specifically needing in terms of legal information. I have to be given a clear question so I know how to answer.

Related Canada Law Questions