Unhappy with the Allegations Contained in My Legal Procedure against the PGT, Anonkumar Oogur Refuses the Usual Obligation to Sign, File and Serve the Document as My Agent.
“ASK” AND YE SHALL NOT RECEIVE
1. By email dated Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 4:20 p.m., Pageot canvassed the availability of ASK Process Serving to file and serve documents later in the week. By email on Tuesday, August 23rd, 2022 at 4:41 PM, ASK replied, “Yes we can help“.
2. By email on On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 14:27:21 -0700, Pageot tries to arrange standard prepayment. By email on Tuesday, August 23rd, 2022 at 5:34 PM, “Anon” for ASK says: pay after service.
24 August 2022
3. By email on On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 16:47:23 -0700 , Pageot sends “Form 7“, “Notice of Change of Hearing Date” for ASK to sign, file & serve as her agent, affidavit of service to follow; while pleading inherent jurisdiction to waive defects. It should be noted that the Honourable Jasvinder S. (Bill) Basran, as Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, who will hear the case, has inherent jurisdiction. On Wednesday, August 24th, 2022 at 7:47 PM, Pageot sends REVISED procedure; and on Thursday, August 25th, 2022 at 11:10 AM ASK confirms receipt, recites Pageot’s instructions.
4. By email to ASK on Thursday, August 25th, 2022 at 12:59 PM, Pageot confirms and clarifies her instructions:
5. By email on Thursday, August 25th, 2022 at 1h16 PM, Pageot further clarifies who is to be served, with precedent attached.
RE THE PROCEDURE (BELOW)
Notice in paragraph 1 that the procedure opposed by Pageot does not mention her, and was not served upon her;
Notice in paragraph 11 that Pageot needs to be present personally in BC to carry out legal research; and cites the PGT for instituting probate ex parte, without grounds, while hijacking and destroying the deceased’s Last Will and the property thereunder of the sole heir, Pageot.
Notice paragraphs 13, 14 and 16, where Pageot cites misconduct of the PGT.
“EXHIBIT 1“, in the Federal Court of Canada, T-145-22, T-247-22, T-168-22, T-1991-21, Order dated June 28, 2022 by Associate Judge Mireille Tabib, postponing the hearing in the Peckford case to 31 October 2022.
26 August 2022
Oogur Blames the “Court”
By email on Friday, August 26th, 2022 at 3:15 PM “Anon” Oogur of ASK Process Serving Springs a Big Surprise: Blames the “Court” for “NOT” Filing Pageot’s Procedure
In the next sequence of emails, “Anon Oogur” of “ASK Process Serving” blames three unnamed clerks at the Smithe Street probate registry of the Vancouver Law Courts for refusing to file my procedure.
According to “Anon“, these clerks would not let him sign over my name as my agent, they required my original signature. (It will be clear that “Anon” was, himself, refusing to act as my agent by the usual procedure. Blaming the clerks was a face-saving ploy.)
“Anon” demanded that I now produce the procedure in print, sign an original, and ship it to him by XPresspost, because only then will the “court” file it. The hearing I need to postpone is on 31 August 2022.
The outcome will be: I have no printer, I have no way to locate a printing service on the weekend, the post office closes early on Sunday.
In desperation, I revised my procedure and faxed a copy online to Laura Hill, Supervisor at that time of the probate registry, demanding that the clerks be identified who had refused to let Oogur sign as my agent. Hill responded that the clerks had not refused, and presuming that I was trying to fax-file my attached procedure, Hill also declined to file it. (Vancouver is not an officical fax-filing registry.)
After a long struggle, I finally discovered how to file my own procedures online, in BCeID under my name with my Visa debit card, where the procedure was, indeed, ultimately refused by the “court”.
At the same time, the “court” “generously” alleged that the procedure they had declined (which could have been accepted by Justice Basran by inherent jurisdiction) would be placed in the file for him to see. It seems that in British Columbia, the probate clerks in fact have the “inherent jurisdiction”.
Obviously, nobody wanted to file my procedure. Not Oogur, not Laura Hill, and not “the Court”.
Oogur had obviously read my procedure. Was Oogur’s demurrer personal, professional, or both? Did Oogur “share” my procedure with the PGT or with the AG for instructions in favor of the erstwhile respondent?
READ MORE ….
But why read descriptions when you can read the real procedure. Please proceed to: “Mine Eyes Smell Onions, I Shall Weep Anon …“.