In July 2021, Quebec City resident Jonathan Lafferier was working at home when he received a call from a bailiff.
She wanted to know how Laferrier would pay the $ 4,015.17 she owed after a verdict against him in court for small claims.
Lafferier was confused.
“My initial reaction was that it was a scam,” he told CBC in an interview last week.
“I have never been tried and I have never been in court, but while I was talking to her, the details she gave me made me sound quite anxious,” he said.
It was not a scam.
Laferriere learned that the case involved condominiums in Montreal, which he sold in 2018. A year later, the new owner discovered a problem with mice and sued Laferriere in the Small Claims Court, claiming the parasites were a hidden defect. known in French as vice cache.
But Laferrier was never informed that he was on trial.
This is the original request that Jonathan Laferrier received from a bailiff, ordering him to pay a little over $ 4,000 after losing a lawsuit in small claims that he did not know had been filed against him. (presented by Jonathan Laferrier)
“The buyer was unable to contact me and the court sent the notice of the case to an address I have never lived in,” Laferier said.
The lawsuit continued without Laferriere being informed that it was happening. The judge ruled in favor of the buyer in October 2020. In March 2021, the court authorized a bailiff to collect the money.
The bailiff finally tracked down Laferrier last July.
Now Laferriere was on the hook for $ 4,000, never having a chance to defend himself.
This was just the beginning of what Lafferier called a “Kafkaesque horror story” in which he did everything right, but still ultimately owed money for mistakes made by the court.
“I thought the courts were something you could count on, but I just lost all confidence in the system,” Laferier said.
“It simply came to my notice then. “I feel very insignificant, as if I’m at the mercy of this giant bureaucratic machine that just works on its own,” he said.
More failures
The Small Claims Court exists to settle minor monetary disputes estimated at $ 15,000 or less in Quebec, without the involvement of lawyers. It is supposed to be efficient and simple. But if something goes wrong, people are left to figure it out for themselves.
At first, Laferrier felt up to the task.
After hearing the bailiff, he went to the Quebec City Courthouse and explained how he had never been contacted about the case. He was told he could pay $ 300 to apply for the decision to be revoked.
This is when the decision is stopped and there is essentially a change. Lafferier believed that if he could spend his day in court, he might be able to reduce the amount he owed, or even cancel it.
He paid $ 300 and received the withdrawal. New court proceedings have been ordered.
But there were still bumps in the road.
Laferrier received a letter from the court asking him to prepare all the documents he would like to use as evidence and send them to the court in Montreal, where the trial will take place. But before he could do that, he had to see the evidence the buyer had presented against him.
“Because at this point, keep in mind that I still don’t know exactly why I was tried. I don’t have the details,” Laferier said. The letter says she will contact him soon. Weeks passed and nothing came.
He called the courtroom again and was told that he had to send an email, formally requesting evidence from the buyer. There was also a $ 200 fee.
“I feel this is the kind of information that would be great to have in the letter, but I digress,” he said.
He paid the fee, received the buyer’s documents, built his case and presented his evidence in court.
Then, another hiccup.
Apparently, there was a 15-day deadline to present their evidence, and that deadline has long expired. The deadline he received from the court did not mention the deadline.
He called the courtroom again and they explained that the correct forms had not been sent to him. He was told to take all his evidence, put it in an envelope with a handwritten note explaining the judge’s situation, and send him to the Montreal courthouse.
He did it and it worked. A new trial date has been set for last December.
After a few hiccups, Laferrier managed to get a new trial, but even after a partial victory in court, the issue still came back to haunt him. (Martin Thibault / Radio Canada)
Both Laferrier and the buyer presented their arguments to the judge. In the end, he was still ordered to pay the buyer, but that was much less than the original amount. Instead of $ 4,000, he was ordered to pay $ 1,500: a partial victory.
“I was ready to just leave it all behind. I sent a check in the mail to the woman who is suing me. I gave her the money. It’s delivered. It’s received in cash. And I think that’s the end,” Laferier said.
“Finally, thank God, I can go on with my life,” he said.
Not exactly.
Accrued interest on initial decision
Earlier this year, Laferier received a letter from his employer telling him that they had contacted a bailiff and that they would deduct money from his paycheck to pay the $ 4,000 he owed. (Court-appointed bailiffs have the power to seize people’s salaries, collect debts.)
Laferier called the bailiff again and he realized that a mistake had been made and said that his employer would contact and rectify the situation.
The bailiff then called Laferriere earlier this month and said he still owed $ 1,020. Lafferier was confused because the case had been settled and he had already paid the money to the buyer who was suing him.
The bailiff told him that $ 1,020 includes interest and administrative fees charged on the sum of the original decision of $ 4,015.17 – the initial amount imposed on him that Laferrier had already paid to withdraw.
Laferriere asked the bailiff why he had to pay interest on a decision that was no longer valid.
“They said, ‘That’s exactly how the system works,'” Laferier said.
He called the courtroom to confirm whether this was true and was told the same thing.
“They just shrug and say, ‘What are you going to do?'” He said.
Laferrier said he had been told he could pay $ 300 again and try to withdraw again or challenge the fine in court.
“I will not deal with the legal system. If you see the price of gas, I can not afford a lawyer at the moment,” he said.
ray of hope
Laferriere may have one remaining playing card.
Ani-Claude Bergeron, a spokesman for the Quebec court, which has jurisdiction over small claims courts in the province, told the CBC that the court could not comment on a specific case.
But Bergeron referred the CBC to Article 566 of the Quebec Civil Code.
“This article gives a debtor who wants to challenge the amount claimed the opportunity to submit a random application in a form that can be obtained from a court clerk,” Bergeron said.
Lafferier said that neither the bailiff nor the court had ever mentioned this option, but that he could consider it.
“Part of me wants it so badly because I just feel like I shouldn’t let it die,” he said.
“But at the same time, it’s just such a quarrel.”
“I really don’t want to go through all this again.”
Add Comment