well, this is unusual.

i have a letter in my box, but the online tool claims that the case has not yet been adjudicated. i'll have to call in the morning.

it's dated to monday, which is when it should have been finished. there is a good possibility that there's a database error. there's a good possibility that it's a forgery, given that these people are persistent frauds and liars.

the ruling is ordering me to vacate by december 1st.

however, it didn't address my legal concern under 83 (3)(c):

(c) the reason for the application being brought is that the tenant has attempted to secure or enforce his or her legal rights;

this is supposed to be an automatic stop. and, it doesn't rely upon the question of good faith - even if the applicant is found to be in good faith (as they were, and as they may be), this is supposed to halt the proceedings in their tracks.

she did a balancing under 83(2) and she did it correctly. but she seems to be in error in not in contemplating 83(3) at all.

that said, she did state that the ruling of good faith is with no ulterior motive, and that would make it difficult for me to appeal - despite it obviously being wrong, and my case being quite well presented. she seems to have simply discarded the evidence i provided to her. that's why you don't want to put things in front of judges if you don't have to, they can decide what they want to accept and what they don't want to accept.

i might get lucky on finding a failing student that needs out for december 1st.

i disagree with this ruling - i think it was obvious that they're retaliating, and i made my case as best as was possible. i will be vigilant in suing them when i find out that their mother is not moving in - and she isn't. but, outside of verifying that this is the real case in the morning, i don't see a further course of action.

should i have carried on with the previous suit? it wouldn't have mattered much. they would have done this, anyways - it's why they were harassing me for months, because they wanted me out. and, if she was going to discard the evidence i gave her, she was going to discard the evidence i didn't give her - it wouldn't have made the case stronger than it already was. i gave her eight eviction attempts, and she just said the landlord has the right to hand out the notices - that's indescribable except through wilful blindness, when the ninth is an n12 on the same day as a previous case ended. if i had won the harassment suit, she'd just have said it doesn't matter because it's a different suit. and, how do you prove this beyond circumstantially, short of a recording? you have to rely on the judge to draw obvious inferences, and this one refused to do that. also, i wouldn't have been able to keep the money, remember - i'd have to give it back to odsp. it was about trying to stop the persistent harassment by standing up for myself, not about turning a profit. the other option was to keep getting harassed, which is a non-choice. and, while it failed, it provided me with the documentation i required for the case. i think i made the right choice in hoping it would blow over - if i had won, i'd have gained nothing of value because they were too fucking stubborn to listen (that was the sad realization i had to grapple with.). and, of course, i couldn't let the situation fester, i couldn't let them keep harassing me to try and push me out until they succeeded, i had to react in some sense.

this is a part of the law that shouldn't exist. but, it does exist. and, i got a shitty judge that either didn't want to see the obvious or didn't care what the obvious was. the next step has to be for me to find somewhere else to stay, and then sue them for damages and dishonesty once i get there - and that's going to be expensive on their behalf, you can be sure.

i'm also going to have to start from square one with the air quality. ugh.

jagmeet singh must cut his beard.