On May 19, 2016 someone authorized a transfer of $442K from my mother’s Nesbitt-Burns to BMO EnCircle Kingston.
At the time BMO was not the property guardian as there was no entered order declaring Mom incapable. As they were not the property guardian they did not have the authority to authorize the transfer.
Section 3 (per  of April Order) lost that authority on Feb 25, 2016 when she was released from her role as Section 3 by Judge Feldman of the Ontario Court of Appeal.
The transfer occurred because either BMO mis-stated that they were guardian’s or Section 3 neglected to tell Nesbitt Burns that she was no longer Section 3. Either way misrepresentation may have occurred.
BMO accepted the transfer. They will be allowed to bill $26,520.00 as a result of the transfer under tariff. They did not report to Nesbitt-Burns that whoever instructed Nesbitt-Burns to carry out the transfer had no legal authority to do that. They did not seek a court Order to approve the transfer.
This Section has been modified due to claim of defemation. A response to the allegations is here.
On June 1, 2016 2016 The litigation guardian asserted that “I am willing to undertake an informal detailed accounting well before the two year deadline, and to share all such information with family members. I will do so when there exists an approved management plan” Suggesting that he had powers and access that he now claims he does not have.
The litigation guardian may have known for some time about the transfer. He should know BMO could not be the guardian without an entered order of incapacity & knew none was in place. He knew that Section 3 lost the authority under the April Order as a result of the Feb 25, 2016 decision releasing her and in an email stated her tenure ended in December, 2015. The first bill paid after the transfer is the litigation guardians lawyer bill. He benefited.
I have asked who authorized the transfer. Neither BMO or the litigation guardain have not disclosed that information. Both should know that there was no authority for the transfer. There is an appearance of protecting whoever carried out the transfer.
Both have independent fiduciary oversight duties of each others actions.
Given their fudiciary and oversight duties when neither will provide information on who authorized a transfer of $442K there was no authority to carry out there is the appearance the lack of response is coordinated and designed to to stifle reporting to the proper authorities.
This post was modified on October 9, 2017 as I have recieved an email from (copied below) suggesting I have defamed him. The only parties he copied were Section 3 and BMO’s counsel again suggesting some degree of co-ordination. All changes are highlighted in bold italics. A response to the allegations is here.
This is a formal notice to you that the passage copied below, which appears on your website https://dignified-dementia.com/is-this-conspiracy/ is without any factual basis whatsoever in regard to:
– – its statements about what I knew and when I knew it
– – its statements about what I approved of
– – its statement about “refusing” to disclose information that I do not possess
– – its statements about the authority I possessed during the period under question
– – its implied conspiracy between BMO and myself “working together … while disregarding the laws, and orders, designed to protect an incapable person.”
What you write is a disgusting allegation which is not moderated by the cowardly care you take to imply rather than clearly state that a conspiracy exists. It is not moderated because the facts that you do assert as true are groundless. You have behaved in a recklessly defamatory manner, and as of the moment you read this, you will continue to do so knowingly. Change your website immediately to include a correction of these statements and a retraction.
PS If you persist in these fantasies, at least spell my name correctly you idiot, so that it is perfectly clear to everyone who it is you are libeling.
“Micheal Childs the litigation guardian must have known for some time about the transfer. He knows BMO could not be the guardian without an entered order of incapacity & knew none was in place. He knew that Wendy Greisdorf lost the authority under the April Order as a result of the Feb 25, 2016 decision releasing her. The first bill paid after the transfer is Micheal Childs lawyer bill. He benefited.
I have asked who authorized the transfer. Both BMO and Michael Childs have refused to disclose that information. Both know that there was no authority for the transfer. Both appear to be, either individually or in concert, protecting whoever carried out the transfer. Both benefited.
This has the appearance of a conspiracy between people with independent fiduciary oversight duties of each others actions working together for their benefit while disregarding the laws, and orders, designed to protect an incapable person.”