Housing Hell: Toronto Community added false amout of Court Cost order into my rental account and sent a notice that forced me to pay them

 Please read this comment and sign the petition. The nation needs to know that being involved with these rogue groups are dangerous & insult to our democracy. http://chn.ge/2p8KIMF  via @CdnChange
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC)sought cost $500.00 and the Honourable Judge approved cost $ 500.00. Later the TCHC submitted the bill $ 500.00 for taxation. The Registry Officer amended it by increased to $ 800.00. Is it for penalty? Need help.

 The Ontario Court of Appeal dismiss my leave to appeal against the Toronto Community Housing Corporation (TCHC) and Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario (IPCO), On June 03, 2017 and "Cost to the Respondents of $1000 all in".# http://bit.ly/2CQaTN1.

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismiss the leave to appeal without hearing where the IPCO did not seek for Cost. The TCHC seek cost, not mentioned any amount. But they usually seek cost $ 500.00 in the Courts even before the Supreme Court of Canada they sought cost $500.00.

Moreover the Ontario Court of Appeal  cost order "Cost to the Respondents of $1000 all in" that means both of the Respondents (TCHC + IPCO). So, it is clear that there is an error in the Cost order.

In the meantime, after dismissing the application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court date on November 23, 2017# http://bit.ly/2D6Hja8 . The applicant submitted for a motion to the Supreme Court of Canada for reconsideration of the application for leave to Appeal where the applicant argued including the  error in the cost order of the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The request for a motion was not accepted for a hearing that may cause that they mentioned in the statement, cost was not paid that the Supreme Court order# http://bit.ly/2CVqr26 . Because the TCHC took a trick and forwarded an unpaid bill to the Supreme Court of Canada before. But the applicant's arranged schedule of payment with the TCHC which the applicant did not mention in his submission, because it was not known to him as he is depriving in the legal help. The applicant believe, it is the responsibility of  the lawyer of the TCHC to bring it to the attention of the Supreme Court of Canada once the payment arrangement was done as she took it earlier to the attention of the Court .  The cost order of the Ontario Court of Appeal was an absolute error,  where order "Cost to the Respondents of $1000 all in". So, "Respondents" mean not only the TCHC, it mean both the IPCO + TCHC. Because in this case there are two respondents. Anyway, I wrote an email to the Honourable Register,  the Supreme Court of Canada and described the payment arrangement Schedule and I already paid the 1st installment at the beginning of January 2018. I'm waiting for a response from the Supreme Court of Canada.  

The TCHC added this full cost $1000.00 all in their account along with the cost $500.00 (Supreme Court of Canada and Cost $500 from Ontario Superior Court with the applicant's rental account and gave a notice to the applicant to pay immediately# http://bit.ly/2AS84sX

In the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Court File No. CV-14-518926, on May 26, 2015, the applicant’s law suit, the Honourable Justice order cost in different amount cost for several parties based on the applicant’s financial position that the TCHC awarded cost $ 500.00.

In the applicant’s appeal to the Court of Appeal for Ontario, the Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal , file#C60609 on December 04, 2015, no parties requested for cost and the Court did not give any cost order.

The applicant’s financial position has changed during this time and he gave an email on December 16, 2015 addressing all parties including the TCHC; 

"I would like to bring a motion for seeking direction based on my financial situation. Because my financial situation has changed during this period, after the cost order of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. I will appreciate if you kindly let me know your opinion. I am also looking for kind opinion from the all defendants regarding the issue".

No party response the applicant’s email. Even the applicant’s spoke personally with the lawyer, Orna Raubfogel of the TCHC, she never told the applicant that the applicant need to pay this cost until this current case before the Court of Appeal.

But without pursuing bill and/or ask to pay, Jillian Rorabec of the TCHC gave the affidavit dated on May 09, 2017 to the Court of Appeal and next re- Sworn it August 11, 2017 and provided to the Supreme Court of Canada , in the paragraph 13 that “ Mr. Chowdhury has not paid the cost $500.00 in cost ordered against him.

In the Factum of the TCHC of this case before to the Court of appeal for Ontario file# M47668, paragraph- c, Order sought;

“Baring Mr. Chowdhury from instating further litigation against Toronto Community Housing until all costs awards against Mr. Chowdhury have been paid in full”.

In the face, the applicant’s believe, the TCHC is playing a game in bad faith for getting him disqualified in his cases upon the reality of his financial hardship and deprivation in the legal help.

Right now the applicant does not know regarding the legal burden to pay the cost for the applicant as considering the matter pending before the Supreme Court of Canada. However, the applicant arranged for payment by installment monthly $ 50,00 and the lawyer of the TCHC agreed upon the amount of the installment and already paid 1st installment in the beginning of January 2018 and based on total outstanding (Cost $ 500 by the Ontario Superior Court + Cost $ 500.00 Ontario Court of Appeal + Cost $ 500.00 the Supreme Court of Canada).

The applicant question ;  Can the TCHC added these cost  (although they added wrong amount) into the applicant rent account and give him a notice (forced to pay) considering above situations?

How the Supreme Court of Canada dismiss the application for leave to appeal? and what is the logic behind? 

Where the case is both way criminal; 1st the applicant's convicted " Regulatory offense" (Criminal) by the secret Court of City Municipal Board and secondly the applicant is victim in crimes. This case stands on public interest clearly and, other than the direct evidences, the TCHC itself acknowledged the applicant's victimization in their submission. 

All are mystery! 

        ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------