To: Investigation and Enforcement Unit

1-888-772-9277 September 1 2007 “Dave Grech”

Fax: 416 585-6464
Compiled file of excerpts from the BLACK
From: Frank Gallagher BOOK
Landlord
Tribunal # TNL-67103 Also see file “Government correspondence”
compiled file dated September 1 2007
August 10, 2005

I have requested a copy of the records of the June 30 2005 and July 28 2005, Tribunal Hearing by fax
416-314-9567

I am trying to find out if charges are being laid upon the tenant Don Wilson who has deliberately and
blatantly filed a dispute composed of words contradicting a May 6 2005 agreement which he signed with
me.

This agreement is attached to my application to evict him.TNL-67103

Therein he agrees that he owes me past due money for rent and agrees to leave on May 31 2005.

At the hearing Nancy Fahlgren asked me to show Don Wilson a copy of this May 6 2005 agreement to
Don Wilson who stated that he had never ever seen it before even though he had signed it .

I then showed Don another agreement dated April 13 2005 which he had signed but he denied ever seeing
this.

I told Nancy that the witness who signed the agreement was here with me today and he confirmed that
Don Wilson did indeed sign it.

Both of these documents were signed by Don Wilson and both were witnessed, but he told the court that
he had never seen them. You will note that the signature which he used is a short form of his actual
signature and in fact this signature was fraudulent and intentional to argue the legitimacy and rights of my
friends and I who have invested with his company called Bio Safe.

I also provided a 14 page document to Nancy Fahlgren and Don Wilson at the June 30th hearing which
provides the facts and Don was asked by Nancy to read it and respond to it by July 21 2005 which he
never did.

I have all the documents to prove that he once again tried to swindle me and in fact if I was unable to
prove the truth I would have lost another $10,000 due to his criminal actions.

I hope the penalty for his crime is more than a $100 fine.

That 14 page document has now been expanded to 23 pages and climbing and everything I say is
documented.
I suggest that someone from your unit meet with me at your convenience of time and place so that I may
better explain the situation.

Thank you
Frank Gallagher

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Proverb

8
9
1

1. I have provided the evidence which proves beyond all doubt and I offered to meet to provide even more evidence
which proves that the dispute which Don (tenant) filed is false.
2. Now Dave clearly states the requirements pertaining to a false and… allegation Don has done so. See my 1 above
3. Now he is referring to May 6 2005 agreement which I filed. Don had signed it with a phony signature and denied
ever seeing it. That is fraud . Dave seems to be a whole lot messed up. Incompetent is the word I am looking for.
4. If you will look at the continuation of his letter (next page) you will see that reality has eluded Dave.
The facts were laid out as clear as could possibly be and all the evidence was supplied by me and he fires off this
crap. Not very impressive for the head of an Investigations unit. Does he find his way into work okay?
10
This letter by Dave is a good example of evidence that if left to stand on it’s own would indicate that Frank Gallagher (Me) is
incompetent to assess the value of evidence and would influence many in such matters being written by a person who has met the
requirements to head an investigations unit and this fact alone would, but shouldn’t influence follow up investigations. The fact that this
document is a pile of buffoon crap didn’t occur to others who were asked to investigate such as the YRP , RCMP ,OPP. Ombudsman….
When my evidence and writings are presented along side this writing of Dave’s, there can be no doubt that the contents are not
coincidental to a sane and reasonable report of the evidence which was presented and readily available. It behooves me to ponder how
Dave would go about an investigation if he had to piece the documentation together himself to make a presentation which would meet the
test of proof “beyond reasonable doubt.” If he was not satisfied to that affect wouldn’t a real honest to goodness Investigator take me up
on my offers to meet so that he could see all the evidence so as to make an honest and appropriate decision instead of one that diminishes
his work load. Perhaps he has got caught up in the spirit of things as this office was set up to alleviate the strain on real courts. Cont’d

Don Wilson signed the May 6 2005 agreement as did I.

These 2 agreements
I , Frank Gallagher filed this document with the ORHT Tell the same story
Don Wilson signed the April 13 2005 agreement as did I
I, Frank Gallagher filed this document with the ORHT
This document utters
Don Wilson signed the dispute June 10 2005. I did not False and misleading
Crapola.
Don Wilson filed the dispute with the ORHT
Don Wilson signed both stories and even though Don Wilson denied having ever
seen the 2 agreements which I, Frank Gallagher filed. The ORHT found for me
.That is because I filed evidence to prove the dispute was false and I also filed
evidence to prove the 2 agreements were true. SIMPLE, EH?
Don Wilson denied having ever seen the 2 agreements and he had signed both of these agreements with a false signature.These
are the documents accepted by the ORHT as true. Don Wilson is a fraud. I have a file 2” thick which further proves this.
BOOK HIM- Damn it BOOK HIM – Damn it. 2 separate occurrences. Just do your job and my job will be easier.
Deal with these at your level-I will deal with them at mine when apropos.
That involves a higher court and I sure don’t want you people handling my personal concerns.(Yellow added August 25 2006)

Just firing off crap to alleviate the load on his own plate can not be accepted and the most discerning matter is the perception that
this office has no right to align itself with entities established to administer justice in the Province of Ontario.

This office is represented as an office which regularly carries on duties to serve justice for the people and to the people fairly,
equally and according to the rules of the land and in this case the Constitution Act, 1982 which is the supreme law of Canada.
This is an institution which disregards the fundamental basic rights of the Charter and in fact discriminates against the moral
sector of society which the Constitution is intended to protect. I highly suspect that if your policies were laid down side by side
with the Act one by one they would be deemed of no force or effect.

52. (1) The Constitution of Canada is the supreme law of Canada, and any law that is inconsistent
with the provisions of the Constitution is, to the extent of the inconsistency, of no force or effect.

I have other concerns regarding the ransacking of victims for crimes perpetrated by the guilty.I am not referring to a person
who has not been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or maybe I am because I am talking about an order TNL-67103
made by the Tribunal which clearly confirms that Don Wilson was found guilty of the claims I made and that alone is evidence
that the dispute he filed was without credence. When I went to the Sherriff’s office to have him removed from my premises
because he refused to obey the order I was informed that they would not do so until I forked over $330. I do not know what
form of justice you call this and this is not the time to ask me but I will be looking for some answers. You can take that to the
bank instead of my $330

How low can you go? You have the audacity to charge the victim for a crime committed by the convicted.

It’s not like Don and I have entered into some kind of spousal arrangement and I have not co signed in any way for him nor have
I any bail bond arrangement to cover for him. I am as estranged from him as anyone could possibly be and yet I am held to cover
the costs for his disobeying of an order made directly to him by the O.R.H.T.

I agree that there can be no perjury charge if Don is not made to take an oath but I have to wonder what kind of justice are you
trying to acquire if truth is not a prerequisite? It takes little time to swear an oath.
11
To: Dave Grech
Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Investigations and Enforcement Unit
777 Bay Street, 12th Floor
Toronto On M5G 2ES
TEL (416) 585-7214
FAX (416) 585-6464

From: Frank Gallagher

34 Riverglen Drive
Keswick On.
L4P2P8
Tel/fax: 905-476-8959
E-mail: franklyone@hotmail.com

October 3 2005 This document includes a copy of September 13 2005(Pg 13-15)

Dave
On September 13 2005 I popped into your office without appointment to find that you were not available
to meet with me.
I asked for your superior and I was informed by a nice lady that you are the man.
I requested to see someone who may act on your behalf and Roel Pascual was introduced to me whom I
gave a copy of my September 13 2005 response to your letter dated September 6 2005..
He signed a copy of it to acknowledge that your office received it.
I provided Roel the relative evidence for you to comply with my request to make the proper charges
against Don Wilson.
He agreed to pass this information on to you.

I let Roel know that I was not happy with the way that you have dealt with my concerns and requested
that you be informed that I will be taking this issue to your superiors but in the mean time I expect you to
cooperate to the best of your ability to comply with my request.

Roel agreed that your office will keep me informed as to your progress and if issues are outside your
authority then simply pass it on to the proper authority and keep me up to speed.
I suggest that you get more familiar with the offices that radiate from yours and look for better ways to
deploy the staff to better serve the t.. p….

I’ll bet, momentarily you were right proud when you fired off that letter to me, cc to Cathy
Pagliaroli. Guess you showed her how to take care of things. Eh Dave ?
I believe that it is a reasonable assumption that your letter was composed from verbal inputs of all your
staff who communicated with me.

I have asked your staff to put things in writing so that there may be no misunderstanding and one of the
main reasons for this is that you can collect your thoughts and edit as the case may be.

Unfortunately ,you may not edit my writings, so they remain today as I intended them and your response
remains to show the world your ability to investigate after the fact.
I handed you the man on a platter with more evidence against him than was against Hitler and you didn’t
get it.

12
That alone is pathetic, but you did not even accept my offer to meet so that I may take you by the hand
and show you the way..

No, you had to show us that you are a big boy and do not need any help from the ignorant outside your
camp.

That brings me to this question three weeks later.

What the hell is happening ?

Have you or will you be filing charges against this man Don Wilson ?
I advise you to seek help from above and I strongly suggest that you get moving on it.

Time waits for nobody and I have a job to do that will get done before I sleep.

Don Wilson is going Down.

Please let me know immediately if you will be participating.

I have attempted to contact Nancy Fahlgren, the judicator of the Rental Housing Tribunal to determine if
she will be forwarding the evidence for investigation and will charges be made against Don Wilson.

I tried contacting her by telephone but a man answered who told me that I may not communicate with the
judicator, Nancy Fahlgren for my file (TNL-67103) and I would not be privy to any charges that may or
may not be laid.

I faxed Nancy on September 28th 2005 to determine if she has filed charges on Don Wilson and I wait for her
response.
I faxed Nancy on September 30th 2005 providing her with a short form option to respond.

Nancy Fahlgren
Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal
Toronto North Region 7th Floor,47 Sheppard Ave. E
Toronto On M2N 5x5
Fax 416-314-9567

I request that you keep me up to date and I hope Nancy is inclined to assist
I have provided you with a CD of the 1st day of the hearing June 30 2005 but there was no recorder for the
second day July 28 2005.
I wonder why?

I suggest that you get a copy of the notes that Nancy Fahlgren made for herself for the July 28 2005
hearing

When you get over trying to not deal with this matter and apply yourself to the job that needs doing
you will be doing your part for the well being of civilization.

If you are about to tell me that you have a lot on your plate, I suggest that it is because you nourish the
supply.
13
You can not hold back a flood with a finger in a dyke for eventually a million fingers will lose to the
force.
These fingers could be put to better use.

Do a thorough job on this one and get the maximum punishment to let the public know that you are in
business and B.S. will not be tolerated.

Will you proceed with the appropriate charges to Don Wilson ?

or
Will you forward this matter to your superiors ?
I highly recommend both .

I expect timely updates as you move towards his conviction.

A conviction and a fine for at least the $10,000 that I would have lost had I not proven his statements
were false would not be unreasonable.
He can not be allowed the option to fabricate a story to cause me to lose $10,000 without putting the
equivalent $10,000 on the table to deter his gamble.

He signed a document for the purpose of a $10,000 monetary gain which is criminal in my book.

He fabricates a story knowing that he could win and not have to pay the $10,000 +/- he owes me and he
has good reason to believe that he has nothing to lose and in fact he gained another 2 ½ months free rent
while the system goes through the motions.

Your actions attest to the fact that he had nothing to lose.

These falsifications by Don Wilson are “so in your face” (blatantly obvious) and your “pro crook attitude”
is also blatantly obvious and “so in our face” (Tax Payer)

It is my belief that your attempt to quash my charge against injustice will not be well received by your
superiors,
The last thing they need is attention focused on them.

Although the powers that Bureaucracy wield are well known to slice for themselves most of the pie and
they have their way with each of us individually by using the endless pot of public funds which we are
forced to provide by law.

They can and do stomp on your concerns with your tax contributions and when you question their
competency you must use your own resources , (that which remains after taxes) to attempt to fight
Goliath.

It appears that the system is fixed well beyond any David.

They have preachers to tell us all the wonderful things that they are doing with our money but as they say
“the proof is in the pudding”

For if they were actually open for business would they not competently staff the offices?

14
It seems to me now that the offices established under the system are just a front for
the money laundering of the establishment and these offices are designed for their
power structure and control of us peasants.

Any statement from your members that they pay taxes too is not admissible in my
book .
Goes to conflict of interest.
Even now when I have proven that Don Wilson has filed false statements and the Tribunal has ordered
that he leave my premises and pay me, they do not follow up on it..

Don did not move until August 23 2005, five days past his eviction date of August 18 2005 and actually
phoned me that day to see if he could stay longer.
I said “Definitely not, I want you out by midnight tonight as per the Tribunal Order; I will then go to the
Sheriff”
He laughed and said that I did not have a clue about how things work and that he would not be leaving for
a few days.

I went down to the Court Enforcement Office (Sheriff) at 50 Eagle Street W. on the 19th of September as
per paragraph 6 of the Order Under Section 69 Tenant Protection Act,1997 File Number:TNL-67103 so
that the eviction may be enforced.

Paragraph 7 states:
Upon receipt of this order, the Court Enforcement Office (Sheriff) is directed to give vacant possession of
the unit to the Landlord, on or after August 19 2005 .

The Sheriff’s office refused the order unless I cough up another $330 which I did not have because Don
Wilson had all my money.

Ha, Ha, Ha, Don beat them to it.

I enquired about getting the money back from Don Wilson that the Tribunal ordered and I was informed
that all I had to do now was pay to register to go to Civil Court and I was given a 27 page booklet on
procedures.

I never asked how much because I was broke and not thinking too clearly now.

When I got around to reading the booklet I saw that the maximum that I can claim in small claims court is
$10,000 but I am already over that.
If I may claim the charges for small claims court ,I may not because I am over $10,000.
For the same reason I can not claim the $330 to have had the Sheriff evict him . I may but I may not.

Aren’t I the lucky one (I think I see a break)

Don Wilson owes me for promissory notes and other debts totaling another $10,000 +/- which makes it
worth while going to a branch of the Superior Court of Justice.

While I am there I guess I can find out about my $66,500 and the $35,000+/- that my friends have
invested with him in BioSafe which Don says we will never see.
15
Probably true because a while back I visited a lawyer who said that he would be retiring in a year and
would not be able to deal with it. Sounds like a pretty expensive ordeal.

Seems that Don Wilson is right again because he said that he would tie me up in court for 10 years.
He sure knows the system doesn’t he?

I surely am out of his league as he says. Somehow he has the system in his pocket
I have had my suspicions for years now about this type of thing and now I have been able to
document it.

This is way over my head at the moment and it is getting a little scary. I have a few copies of my writings
distributed which I have seen done in the movies although I do not remember that helping too much but
maybe for a moment the passive Canadians may stir.

In any event, I shall be doing all that I can to return money that I convinced my friends to invest and
should proceedings go on without me and money becomes available to me I hereby direct that the money
be distributed proportionately to those who backed me until they are fully paid with reasonable interest..

Ha-Ha Ha ….I hope I am being over dramatic.

I know I am being facetious because what are the chances of it proceeding without me.

The Tribunal failed to deal with this matter properly which now requires more effort and money from me
to get the job done.
If your Tribunal has any authority the order should stand and Don Wilson should pay.
Logic or common sense, which has different meaning in the municipal, provincial and federal dictionary,
dictates this.

What gives you and your office, and the whole damn system the audacity to deny the tax payer a
fair shake.

You people are trained to operate in a manner that eludes logic and because you have learned it well and
the public doesn’t comprehend you presume that we are ignorant.

We are not and quite Frankly we have had enough of the B…S…

I have never had a face to face with a lemming before the drop but I suspect that they exude an aura of
confidence.

This is a horror story.

You people are paid to do a job by the tax payer for the tax payer, and you are trained at the tax payers
expense to be there for them if the occasion should arise.
At least that it was I like to think.

It is you who should have the experience, right? I mean this is what you do.

We do not come to you to learn the system and to find out how to do it.
It takes time to be proficient and we have our own careers.

16
After all, how long have you been doing your career and how much longer do you suppose it might take
you to be proficient?

It goes to reason that the roofer does the roofing, the dentist does the dentistry, and the Investigations and
Enforcement unit does the Investigation and Enforcement.

I do not come to you to find out how to do it. You do it

You have been prepaid by me and my fellow tax payers, most of whom will not need your service but
they do not mind helping me pay for they know that I am helping them pay for a service that they need
and I may never use and I am thankful for that blessing.

There is a scenario that can easily be related by using the police force as an example.

I may go through a whole lifetime with no need to call the police and I suppose some could say “I am
paying for a service which I did not need”

That of course could leave the door open to the pain in the asses protected by freedoms that go with
our nation.

But common sense is so in my face (blatantly obvious) that the reason I never had to call the police is that
they were doing their job.

Here is another one using the TTC and other public transportation as an example.

I personally am claustrophobic and do not much like buses .I much prefer to drive so it is highly unlikely
that I will use a bus, so some could say ”I am paying for a service which I do not need”
But common sense is so in my face (blatantly obvious) that the reason I can drive is because the Public
Transit is doing its job so that I am not sitting bumper to bumper in traffic.

Support them well enough to able a price that can not be refused and the riders will come.
The profits will be more for Public Transportation.
Pollution will be dramatically less
Health problems should lessen and less costs for health care
Traffic will flow
Ease the consumption of fuel as a whole
Lower maintenance cost for those who must use their vehicles as stop and go is the hardest on the car..
Auto Insurance will drop for public transit commuters
Car gas mileage will increase if they are moving instead of idling.
Less time wasted sitting in traffic.
Gas prices should decrease as less fuel is used and supplys grow.
More parking spots downtown
Better bus service
More buses

When the ridership increases let us decide what we want to do with the profits. It is our money that was
invested and our idea.
Better health care is a damn good one.
Better care for the elderly and needy.

DO NOT SELL THE DAMN THING WHEN IT IS FINALLY MAKING MONEY FOR US
17
That is a good thing.
Observations of past initiatives demands that these decisions should be made by the Tax Payer.
I highly doubt that you can leave the public service loose for any length of time without close
scrutinization.

That was fun eh?

Anyway,back to roofing

If I go to a roofer for help, I may choose the shingles but I do not tell him or her how to do it. They know
what is needed.
If I go to the dentist for help, I do not tell him or her how to do it .They know how to do it.

If I go to a ……
Go ahead, try one.
Think of a trade and see if it works for you.

These systems work because you get what you pay for.

Did you know that quality and prices vary and I have the option as to who I select for the job?
Competition aids the consumer.
They still have the attitude that the customer is right.

Now, unfortunately we have the intelligent ignorance and arrogance of the public employee.
They generally are formally well educated and most have at minimum the intelligence of a parrot and in
fact that is the model generally accepted for promotion.

This is the way we wash our hands, wash our hands……do it and if you get it , the job is yours.

Can you say “Polly wants a cracker”?

Polly wants a cracker?
The job is yours Polly, got any family we can use ?

Where is Robin Hood ?

Who will bring the people out of the forest?

Stop that. The Sheriff is notaham

It is Don Wilson (tenant) who should apply to the small claims or a higher one if he wants to overturn the
order.

The Tribunal office should have made the arrangements for him to pay just as they do in any court.

The worst part of this is the incompetency of staff including the judicator who gets to pass judgment.

This was a simple case which Nancy Fahlgren deemed to be the most bizarre case she ever dealt with.

She was not prepared and yet she sat to make judgment.

18
I asked if she had read my application to evict and the May 6 2005 agreement attached which the tenant
had signed and agreed that he owed me rent money at $800 a month since August 1 2004 and he also
agreed to leave my premises by the end of May 2005.
She said no.
I suggested that she read that and then look at Don Wilson’s dispute which was in contradiction to the
May 6 2005 agreement.
Don had signed both.

Something was obviously wrong here

Don Wilson then denied ever seeing the May 6 2005 so I introduced the April 13 2005 agreement which
was the original agreement that Don Wilson had signed to leave my premises on May 31 2005 and agreed
that he owed me rent money.
Don Wilson denied ever seeing this document so I introduced Dave Kirby who testified that he was
present when Don Wilson signed the April 13 2005 agreement and he witnessed the four pages after Don
had signed. He identified Don at the hearing.
I introduced evidence to the Tribunal to prove every word in Don Wilson’s dispute was fabricated and
eventually Nancy Fahlgren said that she had heard enough but she still had to determine if the rental part
of the case fell within her jurisdiction.

The conclusion was yes and Don was ordered to leave my premises and pay me back rent money.
This man owed me $10,000 +/_ for rent before we went to the Tribunal and he still owes me $10,000 after
the hearing.

Don has informed me that I will never see the money, nor anything from my investment in BioSafe which
he is the president and I a major shareholder.

I have attached an edited copy of my response to your September 6 2005 can’t do it letter. (pages 13-15)

Failure to deal with matters seems to run amuck throughout the municipal, provincial and federal offices.

The whole system stinks from the ground up.

Over and over again you hear complaints from the police who are hired to generally keep peace within a
community which always has its bad guys who steal, take illegally from others and those who feel that it
is okay to hurt people if they can.

The police put their lives on the line to round these orneries up and present them to the courts who just
release them with a spanking and generally tell them to be a little more careful next time because a bigger
spanking awaits them when they get caught again.

If the legal system can not fix the problem then the problem is the legal system.

I do not presume to have the answers, but one thing for sure, the knowledge and experience to deal with
reality is surely to be found within the public service ranks.

NCO’s so to speak. Those with the confidence that experience, knowledge and expertise bring.

They are the rare breed within who do the majority of the work and cover for the others.
They are easily identified in most offices and staff can easily point them out for you.
They have been around and they know what they are talking about.
They have only one interest and that is to do a better job tomorrow than the one that they did today.
19
They are the ones who stand up to management and dare to suggest better approaches.
They dare to steer them right, generally detrimental to their career but they can not just stand and watch
waste and ignorance without offering their two cents worth.

It is a shame that management do not have the experience of the rare breed, but how could they?
They do not fit the definition.

If they did have the experience of the rare breed then there would be no rare breed and the departments
would be performing properly.
Quite a conundrum, Eh?

This rare breed hopes that some day their efforts will be rewarded but they also know that their experience
is well above their peers and management and alas, they know it is for that very reason the rare breed go
unrewarded.

Oh, management are quite aware of the rare breeds abilities and they are called upon when jobs are rush,
special, different and difficult.
But management are striving to get ahead.
They are looking for promotions and monetary gains.

They recognize the concept and surely the credit and rewards are for management for they are responsible
for the quality and control of the project and they are the person who got the job done.

Wasn’t it he or she who was able to select the person who was capable of doing the job?
Surely he is deserving of a reward.

I mean it was not just once. Over and over and again he selected that person and over and over the project
was completed of high quality in a timely fashion.

Just for the record.

I understand that most of which I write is not the way that your office normally operates and a lot must
seem irrelevant to you and you are probably gnawing at the bit wondering just who the hell I am telling
you what to do.

You are the unlucky sample of public service in action.

Your staff are free to run off at the mouth on the telephone and they tell me that they do not communicate
by writing because it is policy.
Now look what happens when the senior writes.
What might we have if one of your staff wrote to me.

I think that I see the problem here. Your staff do not know what is happening but they are allowed to pass
on what ever crap that comes to their head over the phone to sick inquiries onto some other department.
Just do not put it in writing because there can be legal ramifications and it could be detrimental to your
pleasant way of life..

The poor unassuming enquirer has good reason to believe the person on the phone because after all they
did dial the listed number for the authority they wanted information from and the person answering
identified their office so it is a reasonable thought that they are getting expert information.
20
So naïve and trusting, the average tax payer. Eh Dave? Too easy

Any idea the needless troubles, anxiety, frustration, anguish…… the tax payer has seen due to seeking
help from an office he thought was there to help him.

I wonder how many stories there are of public service incompetence.

Do you suppose that I am the only person upset with the useless waste of our money and how upset do
you suppose one should get when they find out that they have been contributing to a department which
believes their mandate is to shake me off ?

Do you suppose that tax payers are not aware of the tremendous waste through out the system ?
Of course you know that they can not be that ignorant but you know that Canadians are passive.

I wonder if there is anyone who actually cares in the bureaucracy because after all they are getting
through life with a lot more for a lot less. Good pensions and sick plans, medical etc.

This seems to be the policy at municipal offices also.

At one office in particular I had occasion to request a statement in writing of exactly that which she told
me over the phone.

“I am sorry Sir”, she says. “You will have to ask your lawyer to fill out a letter of compliance”, something
like that and “it will take two weeks from the day that they receive it.”

That would be over a week too late I said.

A polite “Sorry Sir” and her troubles are over.
I believe that is a prerequisite for office staff.
Let me hear you say “Sorry Sir”

Here is another interesting point

It seems that there is always a couple of weeks or more to get a response from a public office.

It can not be that it takes that long to write “I am sorry sir, but it seems that we have lost the records”
Can it be that they demand so much from me, like paying a lawyer to fill out a form and then tell me how
long I will have to wait to discourage me from requesting them to do a little work.

It can not be that they do not understand my language so it simply must mean that they surely do not care
and do not need to.

It has been my experience that the average employee in the public service is there to put in a day which
lessens the time to their early retirement.

There is the rare breed who apply themselves miles beyond that which is expected of them and it is these
people who actually carry the rest.. They find better ways to do the job, pass it on to others and then run
on ahead to find something even better. They work and learn at home on their own time and guess what
their rewards are.

Yep, more work .

21
When something needs to be done quickly or a difficult job requires your experience, or a project far from
the norm comes up, management knows who to call and it ain’t “Ghost Busters”
When it comes time to hand out the rewards it ain’t “You Babe”

These are the people that need to be talked to if there is ever to be hope for an efficient system.
There would be a huge reduction in staff in a smart system, less building and parking space.

Less burden on the tax payer.

The people would be spending their own money aiding the economy thus creating a need for more jobs.

The present attitude is to never get the job done for fear of losing a way of life.
There are departments that are obsolete and many requiring complete change in direction which will save
huge funds and make excellent use of funds that eventually will see costs reducing instead of escalating.

Perhaps in the mean time we could find a way to remove that consistent two week waiting period to
service the public.

Too bad the rare breed needs a little sleep or they could clean up the overload.

Do not expect any help from the rest for they have unions and eventually that rare breed will earn the
person that has been employed the longest a promotion without any exertion on his or her part so why
would they help.

Not to worry though, because that rare breed will look after him or her and do his best to keep them and
the service out of trouble.

Now, back to the Tribunal and judicator Nancy Fahlgren .

July 28 2005 was the final hearing date for my case TNL-67103
It has been two months now since I requested that Nancy Fahlgren file the obvious charges of
falsification and misleading statements in Don’s document to dispute my application to evict him.
I suggest that you attempt to make contact with her for her input

Dave

I have just reread your letter dated September 6 2005 and it just brings tears to my eyes to think that you
are the top man there in Investigations and Enforcement.

The tears are for those poor souls who came to you for help before me .

Rampant, damn it.

They are everywhere.

People like you are sitting in top spots throughout the system.
It is a nightmare, please wake me up.

HEAVEN HELP US……. IT IS TRUE

22
Rethink, it will be a novel experience for many, cut the huge waste and get to the root of the evil.
Don’t just stand there, kill it

I received a letter today October 3, 2005 from the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal dated September
30,2005 signed by Rick Hennessy, Regional Manager.

I am faxing you a copy along with the two submissions that I had sent. ( pages 16-18)
Rick states that they are being returned because they were filed after the order for file # TNL-67103

I had some questions so I phoned 1-888-332-3234 to ask to speak with Rick but the girl answering said
that she could not transfer me to him but could she help.

I explained to her that I was attempting to find out if Nancy Fahlgren had filed false and misleading
information charges against Don Wilson which was proven at the hearing that his filed dispute was a
complete fabrication.

She told me that I should contact Investigations and Enforcement to see if a file has been opened already.

Dave

There is no mention of any file being already opened in your letter of September 6 2005 so I assume that
there was no file opened at the time that you wrote.

I would say that your response in fact was more to the contrary.

Please respond to this:

Has Nancy Fahlgren filed for charges to be laid to Don Wilson, causing a file to be opened at your office?
The intention of this query is to determine if Nancy Fahlgren, Member of the Rental Housing Tribunal
(Judicator of hearing # TNL-67103 and many others) has contacted your office, Dave Grech,
Investigations and Enforcement at any time ,in anyway, shape or form regarding file #TNL-67103.
If so, please bring me up to speed on this matter.
I hope that I am not too late to ask this because you have already issued your response September 6 2005.
It’s a joke, right?

I do not think that I can make it much clearer as to where I am headed with this for the Lord only knows
what lurks behind the next door that I knock on.

Fasten your seatbelts please.

I intend to keep on knocking until a reasonable conclusion is reached.

Somewhere, somehow I will get some help and……ha,ha,ha…No ,not psychiatric..ha,ha.

Good one.

Who said that ?

Dave Grech
23
Throughout my writings are many questions for your response.

I do hope and suggest highly that you consult with your uppers immediately and then spring into action
with all that you got.
Please note that the ambiguity as to the direction your action may take is premeditated and with good
reason.

Faxed October 3, 2005

________________ __________________
Frank Gallagher Date

PS

I am available to meet you, anytime, anywhere and will gladly walk you through the evidence to remove
any apprehensions that may still remain.

24
To: Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
Investigations and Enforcement Unit
777 Bay Street, 12th Floor
Toronto On M5G 2ES
TEL (416) 585-7214
FAX (416) 585-6464

From: Frank Gallagher Tel/fax: 905-476-8959

34 Riverglen Drive E-mail: franklyone@hotmail.com
Keswick On.
L4P 2P8

September 13 2005 (Edited September 24 2005)

Re: Charges for fabricating dispute (TNL-67103)

De ar De ar Da ve Grech

I thank you very much for your written response dated September 6 2005 to my inquiry dated August 25
2005 but faxed to your office August 31 2005

This is a rare commodity as I usually get the superfluous from your office by phone.

I am just one victim among many who you people have aided and abetted in the crime and you attest to
this by your refusal to press charges on your compatriots.

After all they got you this well paid job with excellent benefits. You can not go around hanging one of
them every once in a while or their masses will dwindle along with a need for many on staff.

I want you to pay attention as I do the rerun and I want you to completely forget your little cubby hole of
“why you can’ts”

In lieu reflect upon “ the little engine that could.”

Okay, ready…….. let’s go

You may want your supervisor to sit in on it, maybe theirs and so on.

Along with several phone calls I have provided you people with the following writings

Date To Pages
August 10 2005 Investigations and Enforcement 1
August 11 2005 Elizabeth Tan 3
August 12 2005 Elizabeth Tan 1
August 12 2005 Catherine Pagliaroli 4
August 25 2005 Catherine Pagliaroli Faxed August 31 2005 4
The August 11 2005 lists several pertinent documents 21

Please find enclosed a CD of the Tribunal hearing TNL-67103

These writings clearly indicate that I am knocking on your door holding a bag of evidence but there is
nobody Holmes
Have you read these writings now? Do you get it ?
25
Will you schedule a time and place for us to meet so that I may enlighten you further?
Please allow a couple of hours.
Will you communicate with Nancy Fahlgren, the Judicator for the Tribunal to see if she has filed charges?

Pay extra attention to this while I attempt to explain how I think the system is supposed to work.

I file an application in the Province of Ontario legal system (Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal) to evict a
tenant who owes me back rent for a year after I have given him 6 months free rent.
I also filed for his eviction because the tenant agreed to leave my premises May 31 2005

I paid $150.00 user fee up front to file by the way

The tenant filed a dispute with a fabrication that is so ridiculous and at the hearing he reiterated his
dispute and went on to say that he had documents to prove it.
He paid nothing, zero, nada to file his B..S

At the hearing I contested Don Wilson’s (tenant) dispute with documentation which proved him to be the
fabricator that I state that he is.

I filed a 14 page document with the Tribunal which chronologically related the truth.
Don Wilson was provided a copy of this document and given the opportunity to respond to it by July 21
2005 at which time the Tribunal and I would be provided a copy.

At the continuation of the hearing July 28 2005 it was so stated that Don Wilson had not responded to this
14 page document and rightly so because it is the truth and it is well documented to the fact.

His decision not to respond infers that he has no documentation to the contrary and I can swear that he has
no documentation to back his fabrication on his dispute.

Don Wilson (tenant) and I, Frank Gallagher (landlord) receive by mail “Order under Section 69 Tenant
Protection Act, 1997”

IF YOU WILL KINDLY LOOK AT

It is determined that:

1. The Tenant has not paid the total rent he was required to pay for the period from August 1 2004 to July
31 2005.Because of the arrears, the Landlord served a Notice of Termination effective May 31 2005.

2. The Tenant gave the Landlord a notice to terminate the tenancy as of May 31, 2005 and the Tenant did
not move out of the rental unit by the termination date set out in the notice.

Don Wilson refuses to pay me of course because he knows the system and he knows that it is a joke. He
has further advised me that I will never see the money nor any money from my investment with his
company BioSafe Technologies Inc.
He has also informed me that I am not in his league.
I wasn’t born yesterday but recent events have indeed exposed the fact that the system, operating under
the guise of the Tenant Protection Act is indeed one big scheme to extract money from innocent victim’s
who generally are identified as tax payers,

26
 This is a premeditated conspiracy to prey on those people who have been identified by the tax rolls and
the system itself which exists by the very nature of the human mind in that the system spells out all the
ways to steal from the innocent and although they will preach until they are blue in the face that they do
not condone or encourage such abuse, their actions prove differently.

I am an innocent tax payer who due to unfortunate circumstances has encountered one of the provinces
students of higher learning who exist by abusing the system.

The law abiding citizen who is easily identified as a tax payer is not and should not need the mind of a
lawyer to exist in the world I live in.

Politicians are elected by the people and are entrusted to do for the people.
If not, they can be removed by the following election.

I personally do not believe that those feeding off the public coffers as a way of life have the right to vote
as their vote simply says I want it all for nothing. I am referring now to the welfare system. Those who
pay their way should decide who is in need and who is in greed.

You must remember that this system is setup and paid for by the people and the people should have the
power to take it away.
If Not, Why Not?

Simple common sense should be the law of the land and when people like Don Wilson are so blatantly
obvious and identified by your legal system they should be made to do the time for it is quite clear that he
has done the crime.

You people must be responsible to the innocent tax payer or we the tax payer will need to know why we
finance your department.

The primary mandate of the Investigation and Enforcement unit is to serve the innocent victimized tax
payer first and foremost.
If Not, Why Not?

The office title of Investigation and Enforcement infers a Perry Mason type unit but I have experienced
your office asking the tax payer be proficient in the area that you have been acquired to address or nothing
happens.

I, for one tax payer fail to see the need to pay for a unit which does nothing for me.

I definitely am appalled that I am paying for a unit that is so far removed from reality and is in fact by the
very nature of their mandate aiding and abetting the thief.

I was going to send this by Registered Mail but I have now decided to drive to your office and hand you
or some facsimile of such a copy of this along with the afore mentioned CD

I ask that you or a co- representative sign along side my name with your title and please date as to
receiving this document. I am available now with all pertinent documents and request your or your
superior’s time now.
Roel Pascual met with
__________________ _____________________
me and signed a copy
Frank Gallagher Date
to acknowledge receipt
September 13 2005. 27
28