Monthly Archives: July 2010

A Brief Note on Dealing with Harassing Phone Calls

A friend of mine had been receiving harassing phone calls demanding his personal information two or three times a day for the past few weeks. He suggested that I write a blog about combating harassing phone calls. Here are a few tips to help you deal with these calls effectively.

First, identify the nature of the calls. Are they traceable to a particular source? Perhaps an individual or a call centre?

Once you have identified who has been calling you, you can take actions against them. You may report the incidents to the police or Crime Stopper. While it’s unlikely that your single incident report will lead to a major investigation, if a great number of individuals complain against the same callers, perhaps something will be done by the authorities.

Depending on you perceive the calls as threatening, you may want to consult a lawyer. If you decide to retain one, you should stop dealing with the caller immediately and refer the caller to your lawyer.

In my experience, once you’ve referred the calls to your lawyer, they stop calling you promptly. If the callers have legitimate reasons for calling you, your lawyer will be able to deal with it more effectively.

Potential remedies against harassing phone calls include criminal prosecution and civil action. Hiring a lawyer will assist you in deciding whether to pursue the matter further.

Because many seemingly innocent questions are in fact used as security features for online or telephone transactions, unless there’s a legitimate reason for it, you should never give out your personal information. This information may include: your full name, address, email address, date of birth, your mother’s maiden name, social insurance number, credit card numbers, and so on.

Do not give in to the caller’s pressing demands. They can’t hurt you over the phone.

Tagged , , , ,

A Brief Note on Family Arbitration Agreements in Ontario

Today I’d like to discuss the pertinent points of family arbitration agreement in Ontario.

Family arbitration is an alternative dispute resolution process involving a private third-party arbitrator to decide on the disputes between the parties under their consent. There may be more than one arbitrator in a proceeding.

The Ontario Family Law Act* expressly defines family arbitrations, agreements and awards. The decision and any award rendered by the arbitrator under a family arbitration agreement are binding and enforceable under the laws in Ontario, subject to certain limitations.

First and foremost, the agreement must be in writing and meet the formal requirements of the Arbitration Act# and its regulations. Failure to observe these conditions will render the agreement and any subsequent decision and award unenforceable.

Second, a family arbitration agreement is unenforceable unless the agreement is entered into after the dispute in question has arisen. In other words, parties are unable to agree to family arbitration in advance of the dispute in question.

Further, the family arbitration must be conducted exclusively in accordance with the laws of Ontario or of another Canadian jurisdiction. If it is not, then the process is not recognized as family arbitration and the decision is not a family arbitration award and has not legal effect.

The parties are not allowed to vary or exclude the restrictions imposed by law.

Any award made under the family arbitration may be enforced or set aside in the same way as a domestic contract. For example, if the parties did not receive independent legal advice, the award will become unenforceable and be set aside.

Note: Please keep in mind that this article is provided for information and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be regarded as such. The law may have changed since the publication of the article.

*R.S.O. 1990, c. F.3.

#S.O. 1997, c. 17

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Collaborative Family Law Scam Hits Italy

Earlier I posted a few blogs on the collaborative family law scam (see e.g., “Collaborative Family Law Agreement Fraud Becomes More Convincing,” June 29, 2010.). It appears that this type of fraud has spread beyond North America and reached continental Europe.

I was contacted by a lawyer in Italy who told me in an email that she has recently received several inquiries to recover substantial sums of money from collaborative family law agreements executed in the U.S.

She became suspicious about the timing and the similarity among the inquiries and decided to investigate. She stumbled upon my postings and inquired into the frauds reported in Ontario.

I was able to refer her to LAWPro’s online resources. She is now convinced that the inquiries were bogus and is in the process of reporting the schemes to the local governing body.

Power to the internet!

Tagged , , , ,

August Long Weekend Office Closure

Please note that our office will be closed from 12:00 noon, Thursday, July 29 to 12:00 noon Tuesday, August 3, 2010 for the August long weekend.

You are welcome to leave a voicemail or email message. All messages will be returned promptly.

Be Wary of SEO “Guarantees”

Recently I have received several calls from search engine optimization (“SEO”) companies. They all claimed that for a small fee, they could guarantee that my website would show up on the first search-result page, or even within the top 5 positions.

Don’t be fooled. There are no SEO guarantees.

Google and other search engines utilize a complex set of rules and factors to determine the ranking of the sites shown on the result page. The factors and rules, while they can be approximated by industry experts, are jealously guarded as trade secrets.

Under these rules, different input keywords will lead to different results. For example, using the keywords “Toronto Family Law” and “Family Law Lawyer Toronto” will generate considerably different results. While it’s true that sites with high traffic volumes may appear under both inquiries, the rankings will likely differ.

The IP address of your computer may also be a factor. Local results are usually shown more prominently than foreign ones.

Most search engine companies like Google and Yahoo! know that the SEO industry is perpetually deducing its rules and factors. Therefore, the engines constantly change their factors and rules, perhaps by assigning different weight to different factors by introducing new ones and retiring old ones.

Hence, anyone who can “guarantee” that your site will rank within the first search-results page is unlikely to be able to keep their promises for long.

What are you going to do when they can no longer keep their promises? If the companies are located outside Ontario and have few or no assets here, you are likely left without any meaningful recourse.

Be wary of anyone who offers you SEO “guarantees.”

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Ontario’s controversial “Eco Fee” Scrapped

A week after my blog on the “eco fee” in Ontario (see “Ontario’s ‘Eco Fee’ Woes,” July 13, 2010), the Ontario government announced yesterday  that the “eco fees” are coming to a halt.

The day before the Environment Minister’s announcement, retail giant Canadian Tire declared that it would stop charging the eco fees on some 8,700 items, saying the structure was too confusing.

The Minister said that the province is halting the program, and will take three months to re-evaluate it. It’s unclear whether consumers will end up paying the eco fees under another name down the road.

The Minister suggested that the government expected producers to bear the responsibility of diverting hazardous materials. For the moment, Ontario taxpayers will foot the $5-million bill to keep the program running.

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

Argentina Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

In a historical vote, the upper house of the Congress of Argentina passed a bill to grant same-sex couples all the legal rights, responsibilities and protections that marriage brings opposite-sex couples after more than 14 hours of debate yesterday, July 15, 2010.

Argentina is now the first Latin American country where same-sex marriage is legal.

The lower house approved the bill in May, and President Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner is a strong supporter of same-sex marriage on human right grounds. It’s anticipated that the bill will be signed into law upon the president’s return from a state visit shortly.

Currently, same-sex marriage is legally recognized countrywide in the Netherlands, Belgium, Canada, Spain, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, and of course, Argentina.

I wonder if Argentina will divert some of the same-sex couple tourists who have been coming to Canada to get married?

Ontario’s “Eco Fee” Woes

July 1, 2010, marked the introduction of the Harmonized Sales Tax in Ontario. At the same time, Ontario consumers were slapped with another, less-publicized, charge, the new “eco fee.” Diligent consumers noticed an additional charge on their bill after purchasing certain goods, including batteries, soap, and shower cleaners.

The Ontario government insists that the new “eco fee” is neither a tax nor a mandatory charge. The additional amount appearing on the bill actually comes from the fees charged by Stewardship Ontario, an industry organization mandated by the government and regulated under the Waste Diversion Act, 2002* to safely recycle hazardous materials and divert waste from the landfill.

Under the law, Stewardship Ontario is entitled to charge fees to cover the cost of developing, implementing, and operating the waste diversion program and no more. In fact, Stewardship Ontario published the fees on their website <http://www.stewardshipontario.ca/sites/default/files/StewardFees.pdf>.

For example, Stewardship Ontario charges $0.06 to recycle or dispose of an aerosol can, while one litre of insect repellent costs $0.23 to recycle.

However, some retailers are evidently overcharging consumers. According to the Toronto Star, a consumer paid some $4.03 for her $10.00 one-litre drive way cleaner. Surely the cost of recycling or disposing can’t account over 40% of the product retail price?

After checking her receipt, the shopper went back to the store and asked about the fee. She was rewarded with an apology and a refund.

Although the eco fee is not calculated as a percentage of the retail price, nor there is a standard fee for specific products, amidst the confusion evidently some retailers are overcharging their customers. CTV reported that at least one retailer charged $0.13 on a bottle of supposedly environmental friendly cleaner, greatly exceeding what Stewardship Ontario charges the retailer.

There’s definitely a lack of clarity in the program.

Today the provincial government sent out a stern message to Stewardship Ontario. Environment Minister John Gerretsen expressed his “serious concerns” with the overcharging of fees and the availability of accurate information related to the program. The minister also threatened to eliminate Stewardship Ontario’s ability to charge eco fees all together.

Let’s hope that further confusion will be limited during this transition period.

If you have questions regarding the eco fees payable on certain products, inquire with your retailers or contact Stewardship Ontario at 416-323-0101 or toll-free at 1-888-288-3360 during business hours.

*S.O. 2002, c. 6

Note: Please keep in mind that this article is provided for information and educational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be regarded as such. The law may have changed since the publication of the article.

Tagged , , , ,

The Tax Man Is Hiring

The tax man is hiring lawyers. While it’s hard to imagine a more socially awkward position, this job will probably help you avoid small talk on an airplane.

The federal Department of Justice has three vacancies open for crown tax litigation lawyer.

The salary ranges from $59,845 to $85,381. The suitable candidate must have successfully completed a LL.B., an LL.L., or a J.D. from a recognized university with at least one Canadian income tax course, and he or she must be entitled to practise law in Canada.

A written exam is required.

If you are interested in working for the tax man, you better hurry up! The position closes tonight at midnight.

For more information, go to jobs.gc.ca. The reference number is JUS10J-010588-000010.