June 8, 2017
Madam Justice Beverly McLaughlin
Supreme Court of Canada
301 Wellington St,
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0J1
Dear Justice Beverly McLaughlin,
I write to you out of fear that our systems of justice are being blemished in Canada with a reputation for being soft (or intentionally two-tiered) on systemic financial crime.
What will become of our country as we:
“Exempt” banks and investment dealers from thousands of our laws, without a single warning to the public of their newly acquired ability to be free from those laws.
Let our most well-organized financial entities hire private “rental-cops” to oversee and to police their activities, which allows them to ignore laws at will.
Remove ‘erase’ or ‘delete’ laws which call for jail terms for our biggest financial criminals (Hiding this fact in plain sight, within a bill which suggests just the opposite is taking place to protect the public.)
(4) Remove Canada’s best investigators of banking and investment abuses, and FORBID them to ever again investigate issues of a systemic nature. (issues which may affect millions of clients)
I enclose specific examples of (3) and (4) above, where systems of financial regulation have been captured and altered to the detriment of our society. I also have examples of the other two which I will gladly share if requested. I beg your consideration of this matter in the interests of social justice.
Certain of our systems or rules, regulations or laws, appear to be intentionally designed so that one class of citizens can place themselves ‘above’ or ‘outside’ of the law, while the rest of Canadians must operate ‘beneath’ or ‘within’.
Throughout history this has occurred much to the detriment of social justice, and I am saddened to witness it occurring repeatedly here in Canada.
To bring about financial and social injustice, all that is required are systems of regulation, policing, justice etc, that enable financial acts which are against the public interest, to receive preferential, if not ‘zero’ consequences for their harms to society.
Enclosed are two examples out of a dozen others that I will spare you at this time.
In 2009, I testified to a Parliamentary Committee on Justice and Human Rights. This Committee was formed to look into tighter criminal sanctions for financial industry criminals after the sub-prime mortgage collapse of 2008. This collapse (or systemic robbery) removed on billion dollars, from the PPSP, (the pension plan for Judges and RCMP officers etc), and in total $32 billion overall from Canadians with these financial instruments. The result of the Committee process was the creation of Bill C- 52, (Minimum sentences for white-collar crime).
The only documented result that occurred from this bill, in my eyes, was that in the writing of Bill C-52 the criminal code section 380, and more specifically subsection 2, which applied to bankers, investment persons, or those who dealt in the “public markets” instruments, was simply eliminated. Eliminated as if it does not even exist in the Criminal Code of Canada, but yet it does. It just does not exist in this Bill C-52.
It was as if bankers in Canada were granted a free “do not go to jail” card in the most clever way imaginable. By simply erasing, deleting or forgetting to include subsection 2, in this Bill. This caused the intended jail provisions for financial fraud, to specifically not apply to public markets fraudsters, or to those who caused and profited from the financial collapse of 2008.
I witnessed this in a room in the East Block where the hearing was held, while bells were ringing and hearings were interrupted to prorogue Parliament during my speaking time. I could not believe what I was seeing and to this day I marvel at how easy it was to rig a Justice Bill, whilst pretending to improve justice. The rigging of the system was hidden…in plain sight.
Fast forward to June 7, 2017. I was once again invited to speak to the Parliamentary committee, this time a finance committee, established after CBC news investigators revealed that Canadian bank employees, were being abused by the banks, and being bullied, intimidated or forced to do financial harm to bank customers.
Over 3000 bank employees contacted CBC Go Public, and told of how they were being abused and bullied in the workplace, to push the employees to abuse Canadians financially, so banks could earn more money.
I was asked very good questions by almost every member of this FINA Committee, and it was in the answering of one of those questions that I found myself becoming quite emotional, almost upset.
I cannot remember the question I was asked, but by way of answering I explained that the majority of financial regulators in Canada are established and paid for by the investment industry itself, the very people that the regulators are supposed to police.
This has always struck me as incredibly unskillful design, until I came to the understanding that it is quite likely the intentional design. I have come to the realization that regulators are not always there to insulate the public from financial abusers, but may exist more often to protect and insulate our highest level financial abusers from Justice and accountability.
Approximately 100 various industry paid bodies helps to keep the police and crown prosecutors from looking at financial matters. It seems that they never look at systemic financial matters, leaving the ‘inner workings’ of the system to others. This no matter how many billions in harm may be done to Canada.
In one example the official Canadian Banking Ombudsman, which goes by the acronym OBSI, was in the last few years prohibited, limited, or forbidden from investigating, studying, preventing or even reporting upon matters which involve systemic financial crime or abuse, by those who were under its mandate.
I knew this was the case all along, but it was not until June 7, 2017, that it hit me: Canada's official banking ombudsman, charged with investigation and protection of Canadian banking and financial customers, is now prevented by decree, rule, or perhaps by limited mandate** from its ability to investigate financial crimes of a systemic nature. ** (see OBSI altered terms of reference with “systemic” struck out seven times
https://www.obsi.ca/download/fm/149)
They are still allowed to act as banking ombudsman on a case-by-case basis, if my understanding is correct, but if the matter is systemic and able to affect millions of Canadians, they are no longer allowed to proceed.
Thus one of the only remaining, effective, bodies in the country has been told, and if you will forgive my layperson understanding, that it is no longer allowable for our official banking ombudsman to investigate systemic financial illegalities. They have been neutered.
Thus I write to you Madam Justice out my complete lack of understanding of how to inform, protect and make Canadians aware of, how their economic freedoms are being manipulated, in hidden behind the scenes manners. This is approaching financial injustice, to a level sufficient to cause social injustice in our country. Can we afford to sell out any one of these trusted systems? What will become of our society if we stand by and watch this occur?
My speaking to Finance Committee on the question of OBSI can be found in this1 minute and 20 second video at 16:33:00 to 16:34:20 on Wednesday June 7, 2017:
http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/Pow ... %2010_11_6)%20AppleWebKit/603.2.5%20(KHTML,%20like%20Gecko)%20Version/10.1.1%20Safari/603.2.5
The emotion I felt in Committee is for my grandchildren, perhaps yours, and those of every other Canadian.
It is for this reason, that I will continue to ask Parliamentary committees, to please prevent the rampant criminality of Canadian banks and financial players, and speak out against the immunity that these players have when harming society.
Millions of Canadians have been financially, morally and mentally injured by the injustices that are allowed to benefit only a few (3?) sectors of the economy.
I thank you for the courageous stands that you have taken in the past, on behalf of Canadians, even when your comments were not entirely flattering to your own legal profession. I applaud that moral courage in you.
I thank you for perhaps pondering and considering some of this note. I expect no immediate answer and will not bother you again. I will, however, be at your service if I am requested.
Kind regards,
Larry Elford
103 - 7 Ave South
Lethbridge, AB T1J 1N3
*40th Parliament, 2nd Session
Legislative Summary of Bill C-52: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (sentencing for fraud)
** (see OBSI altered terms of reference (draft) with “systemic” struck out seven times
https://www.obsi.ca/download/fm/149)
===========
In October 2008: Following an extensive consultation that began last year, OBSI’s board of directors has approved a revised Terms of Reference to guide our dispute resolution service. The target implementation date of the revised Terms is April 1, 2009
Two of the more notable changes are in systemic issues and new complaint-handling procedures.
On systemic issues, the Terms now have a provision under which OBSI will be following up on potential systemic issues that arise out of individual complaint files by contacting the firm and asking it to undertake an investigation.
https://www.obsi.ca/en/download/file/589/503430102008enp-1426707907-504e2.pdf========
4 days after OBSI's mandate was expanded to include systemic issues RBC pulls out and opts to go solo. Unilaterally firing the only Canadian Bank Ombudsman which they are obliged to utilize as per the terms of OBSI and Canadian Banking System rules. RBC hires its own independent arbitration services ADR Chambers, comprised of privately hired arbitrators, many of whom are retired judges looking to augment their retirement earnings.
"RBC didn't respond to my question about OBSI's board adopting new terms of reference on Oct. 27 – four days before its pullout.” Ellen Roseman, Toronto Star Sat., Nov. 8, 2008
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/columni ... aints.html===============================
The new terms allow OBSI to identify systemic shortcomings and recommend compensation for all affected customers – not just for the person who complained. Too broad to some banks who wish to restrain the Ombudsman to investigating EACH customer victimization or violation at a time. This would mean that if millions of bank clients were harmed, the Ombudsman would have to investigate one million times, rather than do one investigation that covers identical harm done to one million victims.
RBC's move to another dispute resolution service, coming so soon after a major expansion of the independent ombudsman's powers, may indicate its displeasure.
To me, it shows that Canada's largest bank prefers to be held accountable only for problems that affect one customer at a time.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/columni ... aints.htmlUnlike banks, investment dealers are required to participate in OBSI but in recent years, a number of the bank-owned brokerages have been aggressively agitating to opt out because they want to use other complaint resolution providers, such as ADR Chambers.
“OBSI has already been irreparably damaged by the public disagreement,” investor protection groups wrote in a letter to industry regulators. “Because of all the negative publicity and hostility, OBSI will never the same again.”
http://business.financialpost.com/news/ ... rs-on-obsi Theresa Tedesco | May 30, 2011
In 2011, TD Waterhouse, RBC Capital Markets Ltd., Investors Group Securities Inc., Macquarrie Group and Manulife Financial Corp. filed an application with IIROC and the MFDA to be exempt from using OBSI to resolve disputes with disgruntled customers. That request was rejected by the regulators and since then there have been a series of meetings and discussions to try to resolve the matter.
In 2012 an unnamed bank refused to correct a systemic issue that was pointed out by OBSI to them and then in 2013 ‘presto’, OBSI can no longer investigate systemic issues!
Feb 24, 2012
If consumers have unresolved complaints about a bank or investment firm, they can appeal to the Ombudsman for Banking Services and Investments.
OBSI, a non-profit agency supported by member funding, has been around for 16 years. Yet it’s under siege by member firms that criticize the way it handles complaints.
Last October, TD Bank Financial Group decided to withdraw all banking complaints from OBSI. RBC did the same in 2008.
https://www.thestar.com/business/person ... aints.html( 2013) their terms of reference are changed and OBSI is no longer allowed to investigate SYSTEMIC issues at all?
https://www.obsi.ca/download/fm/147====
When I testified to FINA in 2017 I realized that the decree: ‘you shall not touch systemic crime’, was put into place, intentionally to prevent or bar investigation of Canada's largest crimes, typically those between 100 million and $100 billion. (Larry Elford)