ontario superior court of justice (commercial list) … · court file no. cv-19-627802-00cl ontario...

Court File No. CV-19-627802-00CL

ONTARIOSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

(COMMERCIAL LIST)

BETWEEN:

ROYAL BANK OF CANADA

- and -

Plaintiff

1120044 ONTARIO INC.

Defendant

SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT OF MSI SPERGEL INC. IN ITS CAPACITY AS THE COURT-APPOINTED RECEIVER OF

THE REAL PROPERTY MUNICIPALLY KNOWN AS 160 CIDERMILL AVENUE, UNITS 23 AND 24,

CONCORD ONTARIO

March 16, 2020

APPENDICES

Email exchanges with Mr, Groscki since service of the First Supplement to the

Receiver’s First Report

,1

1.0.1

1.0.2

1.0.3

1.0.4

Unless otherwise stated, all capitalized terms are defined as in the First Report of

the Receiver dated February 11, 2020 (the "First Report”) and the Supplement

thereto dated March 10, 2020 (the “First Supplement’’). The disclaimers set out

in the First Report and the First Supplement also apply herein.

This supplemental report (this "Second Supplement" and, together with the First

Supplement, the “Supplements”) is filed by the Receiver to supplement the First

Supplement. The purpose of this Second Supplement is to bring to the Court’s

attention those communications received by the Receiver and/or its counsel from

Mr. Groscki since the First Supplement was served on March 10, 2020, up to and

including the most recent communications from Mr. Groscki on Sunday, March 15,

2020, together with the lone response by the Receiver’s counsel on March 10,

2020. Copies of these communications are attached collectively (without

attachments), in chronological order, as Appendix “1” hereto.

The First Supplement advised that the Receiver would bring a copy of the

Excluded Email to the March 17 attendance. In light of the content of, and serious

and unfounded allegations made in, some of Mr. Groscki’s communications that

comprise Appendix “1” to this Second Supplement, the Receiver believes it is

appropriate to enter into evidence those relevant components of the Excluded

Email that are clearly not “without prejudice" based on their content. A copy of this

redacted Excluded Email is therefore attached as Appendix “2” hereto.

This Second Supplement is filed in support of the Receiver’s motion for the relief

set out in section 2.0.1 of the First Report and for the approval of the Supplements

and the Receiver’s activities set out in the Supplements.

1.0.1

1.0.2

1.0.3

1.0.4

msi Spergei inc.,solely in its capacity as the court-appointed Receiver of the Property, and not in its personal

Mukul Manchanda, CPA, CIRP, LIT Principal

1

From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject

CAUTION -- EXTERNAL E-MAIL - Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]> March-10-20 12:03 PM Mukul ManchandaJeremy Nemers; Philip Gennis; Sanj MitraRe: Fw:RESENDING AGAIN COPY of SPERGEL REPORT - SECOND REQUEST

For the record the files from Aird Berlis were easy to convert etc

without any issuesWhich is exactly my point

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K 4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text//Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

On Tuesday, March 10, 2020, 11:04:53 a.m. EDT, Mukul Manchanda <[email protected]> wrote:

Mr. Groscki,

The materials that the Receiver served on you are the same quality and format as those that were filed with the court and served on other stakeholders (and the same quality and format as those regularly served and filed in proceedings such as these). The Receiver has reviewed its materials to confirm that there is no legibility issue and the Receiver notes that you yourself have commented on the Receiver's dockets in one of your emails. In addition it appears to the Receiver that the materials are accessible through a generic pdf reader software. In short, there does not appear to be any issue with the legibility of the Receiver's materials.

Regards,

Mukul Manchanda, CPA, cirp, LIT | Partnermsi Spergel inc. | Licensed Insolvency Trustees 505 Consumers Road, Suite 200, North York, M2J 4V8

mailto:[email protected]



T: 416-498-4314 | C: 416-454-4246 | F: 416-498-4314 mmanchanda@,spergel.ca | www.spergelcorporate.caInsolvency • Restructuring • Consulting

-9 *-*•■9 9*0#* m

This email may contain privileged information and is intended only for the named recipient. Distribution, disclosure or copying of this email by anyone other than the named recipient prohibited. If you are not the named recipient, please notify us immediately by return email and permanently destroy this email and all copies.

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Sent: March 9, 2020 10:47 PMTo: Mukul Manchanda <[email protected]>Subject: Fw.RESENDING AGAIN COPY of SPERGEL REPORT - SECOND REQUEST

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K 4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303

Text//Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

— Forwarded Message —

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>

To: Mukul Manchanda <[email protected]>

Sent: Monday, March 9, 2020, 12:23:58 p.m. EDT

Subject: Re: COPY of SPERGEL REPORT - SECOND REQUEST

Mukul

Can you please respond to the email that was sent?

The document is not proper quality and cannot be read by an adobe program or any other Microsoft program as a result.

http://www.spergelcorporate.ca






I asked for the document in proper format such as an original file saved in a PDF format

This is a very poor photocopy that has then been saved in a PDF format.

This would not be an acceptable document for public accounting or legal documents that you would provide to a client

So why should I be receiving documents that I cannot even read?

There is no excuse for this poor level of quality in 2020 when you should be sending digital copies.

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303

Text//Cell-Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

3


On Monday, March 9, 2020, 12:14:00 p.m. EDI, Mukul Manchanda <[email protected]> wrote:

5

Thank you for your email Mr. Groscki.

The Receiver has no record of a request from you to obtain a copy of the first report (beyond the copy that was served on you on February 11, 2020, and the further copy that was served on you on February 18, 2020 as part of the Receiver’s motion record). Please note that the motion record returnable March 17, 2020 is available on the Receiver’s website at https://www.speraelcorporate.ca/enqaaements/1120044-ontario-inc/.

Best Regards,

Mukul Manchanda, CPA, cirp, lit | Partnermsi Spergel inc. | Licensed Insolvency Trustees 505 Consumers Road, Suite 200, North York, M2J 4V8 T: 416-498-4314 | C: 416-454-4246 | F: 416-498-4314 [email protected] | www.spergelcorporate.caInsolvency • Restructuring • Consulting

‘CBBea■ iioosea

This email may contain privileged information and is intended only for the named recipient. Distribution, disclosure or copying of this email by anyone other than the named recipient is prohibited. If you are not the named recipient, please notify us immediately by return email and permanently destroy this email and all copies.

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Sent: March 9, 2020 10:52 AMTo: Mukul Manchanda <[email protected]>Subject: COPY of SPERGEL REPORT - SECOND REQUEST

COPY of SPERGEL REPORT - SECOND REQUEST

Hello Mukul

Realize this is very risky sending any communication to you, and l will be greatly prejudiced financially by doing this.

A


https://www.speraelcorporate.ca/enqaaements/1120044-ontario-inc/





0

I sent you an email some time ago requesting a proper copy of your docket billing report submitted for the March 17 appearance as my copy was very poor quality as provided in your materials.

Can I please have your cooperation and your response?

John Groscki CA CPA


Text II Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

5


?

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 [mailto:igrosckkavahoo.ca1Sent: March-10-20 12:17 PMTo: Susy Moniz <smoniz(5)airdberlis.com>Subject: Re: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc.

CAUTION -- EXTERNAL E-MAIL - Do not cliek links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Please do not forget to include the last email

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text//Cell-Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

On Tuesday, March 10, 2020, 12:06:26 p.m. EDT, Susy Moniz <[email protected]> wrote:

SENT ON BEHALF OF SANJEEV MITRA

Attached please find the Supplemental Report to the First Report of the Receiver, msi Spergel inc., in its capacity as the Court-appointed receiver of the real property municipally known as 160 Cidermill Avenue, Units 23 and 24, Concord, Ontario, dated March 10, 2020, which is hereby served upon you pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Susy MonizAssistant to Ian Aversa & Jeremy Nemers

T 416.863.1500 x3140 F 416.863.1515 E [email protected]

Aird & Berlis LLP I Lawyers Brookfield Place, 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, Canada M5J 2T9 | airdberlis.com

This email is intended only for the individual or entity named in the message. Please let us know if you have received this email in error. If you did receive this email in error, the information in this email may be confidential and must not be disclosed to anyone.

1

mailto:igrosckkavahoo.ca1




8

From: Eunice Baltkois Sent: February-19-20 1:32 PMTo: Christine Doyle <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: Sanj Mitra <[email protected]>: Jeremy Nemers <[email protected]>: '[email protected] <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>Subject: RE: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc.Importance: High

SENT ON BEHALF OF SANJEEV MITRA

Attached please find the Motion Record of msi Spergel inc., in its capacity as the Court-appointed receiver of the real property municipally known as 160 Cidermill Avenue, Units 23 and 24, Concord, Ontario, returnable March 17, 2020, which is hereby served upon you pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Eunice BaltkoisAssistant to Ian Aversa & Jeremy Nemers

T 416.863.1500 x4505 F 416.863.1515 E ebaltkois@,airdberlis.com

Aird & Berlis LLP I Lawyers Brookfield Place, 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, Canada M5.12T9 I airdberlis.com

AIRD BERUS I


From: Christine Doyle Sent: February-11-20 11:44 AMTo: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; Sanj Mitra <[email protected]>: Jeremy Nemers <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>: '[email protected]' [email protected]>: '[email protected]' <[email protected]>Subject: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc.Importance: High

2






















SENT ON BEHALF OF SANJ MURA

Q

Dear Service List,

Please see the attached First Report of the Receiver dated February 11, 2020, which is hereby served upon you pursuant to the Rules.

The Receiver intends to bring a motion to Court to seek the relief specified at paragraph 2.0.1 of the First Report. At this time, the Receiver has provisionally booked time with the Court on March 17, 2020 for the hearing of the Receiver's motion. In the event that you intend on responding to the Receiver’s motion but are not available on March 17, 2020, please advise as soon as possible (and, in any event, by no later than February 18, 2020) so that the Receiver can attempt to arrange an alternative March hearing date with the Court and file the Receiver’s motion record.

Thank you,

Sanjeev Mitra, B.Sc., ll.b.

T 416.865.3085 F 416.863.1515 E [email protected]

Aird & Berlis LLP j Lawyers Brookfield Place, 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800 Toronto, Canada M5.1 2T9 | airdberlis.com

AIRD BERLIS


3


From:Sent:To:

Subject:Attachments:

John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>March-10-20 4:16 PMEunice Baltkois; Christine Doyle; 'rmosesOmindengross.conY; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; Sanj Mitra; Jeremy Nemers; '[email protected]'; Susy MonizRe: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc, Making Documents Readable for Seniors Common Courtesy Making Your Printed Health Materials Senior Friendly.pdf; AgeFriendlyDC-Effective_Print-2.3.17-v2-PRINT.pdf

CAUTION - EXTERNAL E-MAIL - Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Making Documents Readable for Seniors - Common Courtesy

Please see the attached articles

The court documents provided by Spergel are in poor quality, 7 pt photocopy of a copy and blurry.

For the record the files from Aird Berlis were easy to convert, clear and crisp etc

without any issues.

Which is exactly my point unlike the Spergel documents.

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K 4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text // Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]



From:Sent:To:Subject:

John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>March-12-20 4:03 PM Jeremy NemersRe: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc. Making Documents Readable for Seniors Common Courtesy


Will file materials shortly

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K 4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text//Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

On Thursday, March 12, 2020, 03:50:52 p.m. EDI, Jeremy Nemers <[email protected]> wrote:

Good afternoon Mr. Groscki,

The Receiver has forwarded your below email to its legal counsel for response.

The Receiver has made every reasonable effort to assist you. The Receiver understands from your earlier correspondence that you have already reviewed the dockets and are prepared to challenge them. As noted in the Receiver’s supplemental report that was served on you earlier this week, the Receiver intends to bring this earlier correspondence to Court on Tuesday (and rely on same as circumstances may warrant).

Thank you,

Jeremy NemersAird & Berlis LLP

1




T 416.865.7724 f [email protected]

| 9

This ernaii is intended only for the individual or entity named in the message. Please let us know if you have received this email In error. If you did receive this email in error, the information in this email may be confidential and must not be disclosed to anyone.

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Ceil/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Date: March 12, 2020 at 9:49:45 AM EDITo: Mukul Manchanda <[email protected]>Subject: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc. Making Documents Readable for Seniors Common Courtesy

Hello Mukul??

Have you a chance to reconsider ?

I am attaching my Adobe attempt to convert your dockets, and the Aird Berlis dockets, for your review.

Perhaps you can see the problem with your files and Adobe Acrobat DC program?

I do this for a living and use this program everyday.

Please note that I am 68years old and my eyes are not what they used to be..... working long hours on top

The problem is the quality of your files are not original files. They are a Photocopy of a document that is then PDF'd

It is a poor quality original document. If it is a clear original document that is PDF'd , I can easily convert the file and enlarge the data to make it readable for my purposes.

Will be filing these materials shortly with the court. Kindly advise

2




Thought this was the purpose of March 17 motion ?

Your presentation and passing of the accounts?

Thanks

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K 4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303

Text//Cell-Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

3


Subject:Attachments:

From:Sent:To:

John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>March-12-20 4:58 PMChristine Doyle; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; 'pgenn^spergel.ca'; '[email protected]'; Sanj Mitra; Jeremy Nemers; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected] Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc. DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO RECEIVERS MOTION MATERIAL MARCH 17 2020 AFFIDAVIT John Groscki Mar 10 2020.pdf; Michael Wright Affidavit and exhibits signed.pdf; Pattis affidavit and exhibits c Num.pdf; Synchronies Cheques re RBC Court Case Colour M Wright.pdf; Affidavit Jan Oros.pdf; AgeFriendlyDC- Effective_Print-2.3.17-v2-PRINT.pdf; Aird Berlis re Diermer 2014 ONCA 851.pdf; Making Your Printed Health Materials Senior Friendly.pdf; MOTION Response to Receiver Motion 4 CONSOLIDATED.pdf


Dear Mr. Nemers:

Will send you notarized, indexed and numbered copies in due course.

Just wanted to get copy off to you for now

Not 100 % complete but gets you started.

Since you intend to sling mud, I will respond in kind.

Have brought transcripts for your review and will be filing complaints in due course.

These are serious matters as you are aware.

This has been going on for some time now.

You were not there at either motion.

Perhaps you should get your facts straight before you start making allegations and relying on third party statements.

I rely on transcripts and direct evidence.

John Groscki CA CPA


On Thursday, March 12, 2020, 03:50:52 p.m. EDT, Jeremy Nemers <[email protected]> wrote:

1





Good afternoon Mr. Groscki


The Receiver has made every reasonable effort to assist you. The Receiver understands from your earlier correspondence that you have already reviewed the dockets and are prepared to challenge them. As noted in the Receiver's supplemental report that was served on you earlier this week, the Receiver intends to bring this earlier correspondence to Court on Tuesday (and rely on same as circumstances may warrant).

Thank you,

Jeremy Nemers Aird & Berlis LLP

' [email protected]



From:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:

John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Ceil/Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>March-13-20 8:20 AM Jeremy NemersSanj Mitra; Mukul Manchanda; Philip GennisRe: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc. Making Documents Readable for Seniors - Common Courtesy

CAUTION -- EXTERNAL E-MAIL - Do not elick links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Hello Jeremy:

You continue to file emails that are not easy to read for most of your older clients. You are not saving paper with this smaller font.

I have to re-size them. You are the only firm that I receive emails like this.

We can sit down and resolve this matter at any time.

Not holding my breath on that one happening.

You have no idea where I have been.

This simply a matter of coming to terms and allowing me to close this transaction.

It is the three parties reaching an agreement and it is as simple as that.

We did it in December 2018 concerning a ten million dollar facility on a much more complex matter.

The bank paid all of the Receiver's fees for approximately $1 M.

We paid the bank $8.

Expect to file my materials with the court this morning.

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text // Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

On Thursday, March 12, 2020, 03:50:52 p.m. EDT, Jeremy Nemers <[email protected]> wrote:

Good afternoon Mr. Groscki




The Receiver has forwarded your below email to its legal counsel for response. i 7i- %


Thank you,


* 416.865.7724 : [email protected]


From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Date: March 12, 2020 at 9:49:45 AM EDTTo: Mukul Manchanda <[email protected]>Subject: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc. Making Documents Readable for Seniors Common Courtesy

Hello Mukul??

Have you a chance to reconsider ?

I am attaching my Adobe attempt to convert your dockets, and the Aird Berlis dockets, for your review.

Perhaps you can see the problem with your files and Adobe Acrobat DC program?

I do this for a living and use this program everyday.




Please note that I am 68 years old and my eyes are not what they used to be.....working long hours on topQU

The problem is the quality of your files are not original files. They are a Photocopy of a document that is then PDF'd

It is a poor quality original document. If it is a clear original document that is PDF'd , I can easily convert the file and enlarge the data to make it readable for my purposes.

Will be filing these materials shortly with the court. Kindly advise

Thought this was the purpose of March 17 motion ?

Your presentation and passing of the accounts?

Thanks

John Groscki CA CPA


Text//Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

3

I >1 L <j

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Sent: March-13-20 4:09 PMTo: Christine Doyle; '[email protected]; '[email protected]; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]';

'[email protected]'; Sanj Mitra; Jeremy Nemers; '[email protected]; ,[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; [email protected]

Subject: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc. DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO RECEIVERS MOTION MATERIAL MARCH 17 2020Attachments: MOTION Response to Receiver Motion AMENDED CONSOLIDATED NUM.pdf; BIA HEARINGMar 17 2020 Appearance to

Pay out RBC RECEIVER etc.pdf


AMENDED MATERIALS

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text//Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

1






L* U

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Sent: March-13-20 4:30 PMTo: [email protected]; Christine Doyle; Rachel Moses; Philip Gennis; Mukul Manchanda; Sanj Mitra;

[email protected]; kevin.ohara@6ntario,ca; Jeremy Nemers; [email protected]; Servan Yavuz; John Groscki

Subject: Royal Bank of Canada v. 1120044 Ontario Inc. DEFENDANT'S REPLY TO RECEIVERS MOTION MATERIAL MARCH 17 2020Attachments: Motion Response EXHIBITS and ATTACHMENTS MAR 17 2020 NUM.pdf

CAUTION -- EXTERNAL E-MAIL - Do not click links or oRfn attachments unless you recognize the sender.

ADDITIONAL MATERIALS

John Groscki CA CPA


1






O ;( : .1

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Sent: March-14-20 12:40 PMTo: Jeremy NemersSubject: Additional Materials


Hello Mr. Nemers:

Just to keep you informed.

I will be filing additional materials and asking for very substantial costs of these proceedings.

Estimated at this time to likely exceed $100,000.

You have have refused all requests for proper legible copies of the receiver accounts, and you have refused to meet or discuss these accounts.

I remain available to discuss all matters and to avoid unnecessary costs to both parties.

Will also be filing damage reports and estimated future anticipated damage claims, if the Receiver is allowed to continue in this role.

I remain available to resolve these matters expediently, to avoid future costs and economic losses that I am incurring daily.

You might also want to consider the very substantial interest costs that are being added to this matter due to the slander of title and the Receiver's conduct in this matter.

We are talking hundreds of thousands of dollars.

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text//Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

1



From:Sent:To:Subject


John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]> March-15-20 3:30 PM Jeremy Nemers WHEN??

Mr. Nemers

Your comment:

"The Receiver has made every reasonable effort to assist you,"

brought something to my mind:

WHEN??Your comment is rather laughable in context of your complete lack of cooperation.

It is also infuriating given what you have done to me.....


Based upon your emails and your statement, having reviewed every document for the Receiver, please tell me what the specific information (efforts) the Receiver has provided (information that I would have required from the Receiver)?

How has that assistance been provided from my perspective....not yours?

Please tell me what I needed from my perspective?

and not how you (Receiver) were not able to comply?

or why you were not able to comply or cooperate?

Not how you could not communicate with me because I am not a lawyer!

Where is that in the dockets? Where are the financial reports? Where are they delayed?

Where is that in the Dockets? Why do we not have up to date dockets? Why is the accounting so far behind given the amounts that you are billing and the serious delays this is causing?

Why is the date to review the accounts so delayed?

When was the date booked? When is the next date booked? Why did you refuse to discuss any dates with me?

If you were in my position is this what you would expect of the Trustee?

How does your conduct benefit me?

How does your timing and conduct make sense, from my perspective?

Do you think you could have done anything better to date or different? Given the current circumstances? Crisis?

Why not work with me now??

Why would you discourage Mr. Groscki's financing? or not accept it??

John Groscki CA CPA

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text // Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]


From:Sent:To:Subject:Attachments:

John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]> March-15-20 4:29 PM Jeremy NemersFound this Article for your Reference Threatening.pdf

CAUTION -- EXTERNAL E-MAIL - Do not click links or ORgn attachments unless you recognize the sender.

Mr. Nemers:

Please find attached article regarding threats.

This is to dispute your email concerning the receivers alleged cooperation, and your refusal to provide a legible docket.

You have continually refused to communicate with me, and pretended to be, or communicated "as if to be, "Mukul Machanda".

This might also be referred to as "impersonation", or "false pretenses".

You have refused to communicate with me directly, under the guise, that I am not a lawyer.

There is no professional reason to support this conduct. In fact it is the exact opposite in this situation, where I am a property owner and Licensed Professional Accountant.

This conduct has caused considerable damage, and under the circumstances, is not properly billable time.

Further I took your email of last week, as a "direct threat" concerning any challenge to the "docket charges", would result in further attempts at defamation against me. Your supplemental brief was incomplete and inaccurate. As such I object to the improper nature of your documents and their intention.

You should have explained the situation properly and completely. You did not have all the facts.

You are taking extracts from another proceeding, that you have already improperly "assisted" your client and docketed this account, in breach of your Fiduciary duty acting for the Receiver. I object to your unethical and improper conduct.

You do not have knowledge of the proceedings, as such you have misrepresented the facts.

This is nothing more than harassment in any other circumstance.

Your message was crystal clear as you intended it to be.

It is not unlike any of your previous emails to date.

John Groscki CA CPA1


o.i't

160 Cidermill Avenue Suite 24 Vaughan Ontario Canada L4K4K5 Telephone 416 663 9300 Fax 416 663 9303 Text// Ceil -Direct 416 540 1988 Email [email protected]

On Thursday, March 12, 2020, 03:50:52 p.m. EOT, Jeremy Nemers <[email protected]> wrote:

Good afternoon Mr. Groscki,



Thank you,


[email protected]

This email is intended only for the individual or entity named in the message, Please iet us know if you have received this email in error. If you did receive this email in error, the information in this email may be confidential and must not be disclosed to anyone.

2

cn




ThreateningRules of Professional Conduct Transactions with Persons Other Than

Clients

(a) A lawyer shall not threaten criminal, administrative or disciplinary

charges to obtain an advantage in a civil matter nor shall a lawyer present

or participate in presenting criminal, administrative or disciplinary

charges solely to obtain an advantage in a civil matter.

(b) It shall not be a violation of Rules of Professional Conduct for a lawyer to

notify another person in a civil matter that the lawyer reasonably believes that

the other's conduct may violate criminal, administrative or disciplinary rules or

statutes.

COMMENT

[1] The civil adjudicative process is primarily designed for the settlement of disputes

between parties, while the criminal, disciplinary and some administrative processes

are designed for the protection of society as a whole. For purposes of this Rule, a

civil matter is a controversy or potential controversy over rights and duties of two

or more persons under the law whether or not an action has been commenced.

[2] Threatening to use, or using the criminal, administrative or disciplinary process

to coerce adjustment of private civil matters is a subversion of that process; further,

the person against whom the criminal, administrative or disciplinary process is so

misused may be deterred from asserting valid legal rights and thus the usefulness of

the civil process in settling private disputes is impaired. As in all cases of abuse of

judicial process, the improper use of criminal, administrative or disciplinary process

tends to diminish public confidence in our legal system.

[3] The Rule distinguishes between threats to bring criminal, administrative or

disciplinary charges and the actual filing or presentation of such charges. Threats to

file such charges are prohibited if a purpose is to obtain any advantage in a civil

matter while the actual presentation of such charges is proscribed by this Rule only

if the sole purpose for presenting the charges is to obtain an advantage in a civil

matter.

[4] This distinction is appropriate because the abuse of the judicial process is at its

greatest when a threat of filing charges is used as a lever to obtain an advantage in a

collateral, civil proceeding. This leverage is either eliminated or greatly reduced

when the charge actually is presented.

[5] Moreover, this Rule does not prohibit a lawyer from notifying another person

involved in a civil matter that such person's conduct may violate criminal,

administrative or disciplinary rules or statutes where the notifying lawyer

reasonably believes that such a violation has taken place.

[6] While it may be difficult in certain circumstances to distinguish between a

notification and a threat, public policy is served by allowing a lawyer to notify

another person of a perceived violation without subjecting the notifying lawyer to

discipline. Many minor violations can be eliminated, rectified or minimized if there

is frank dialogue among participants to a dispute.

[7] Rules provide a safe harbor for notifications of this type. Other factors that

should be considered to differentiate threats from notifications in difficult cases

include (a) an absence of any suggestion by the notifying lawyer that he or she could

exert any improper influence over the criminal, administrative or disciplinary

process, (b) consideration of whether any monetary recovery or other relief sought

by the notifying lawyer is reasonably related to the harm suffered by the lawyer's

clients. Where no such reasonable relation exists, the communication likely

constitutes a proscribed threat. For example, a lawyer violates the Rules if the

lawyer threatens to file a charge or complaint of tax fraud against another party

where issues of tax fraud have nothing to do with the dispute. It is not a violation of

the Rules for a lawyer to notify another party that the other person's writing of an

insufficient funds check may have criminal as well as civil ramifications in a civil

action for collection of the bad check.

8

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>Date: March 1, 2020 at 5:03:25 PMESTTo: Mulcul Manchanda <[email protected]>Subject: Re: Communication // SettlementReply-To: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Cell/ Text 416 540-1988 <[email protected]>

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PRIVATE AND CONFIDENTIAL

if you are docketing me ...then do not read this email!!

Mukul given that each email means at least another $5,000 to $10,000 invoice from Spergel and Aird Berlis, for matters that have nothing to do with the administration, or allowing me to pay out the liens on this property, I fail to see how any communication is practical.

was going tolayerm^rHn^nvoices^mcmna^ronsider

To be cTseHourt'Isagreement with the administration of a simple building file that was ready to close.

Prepared to I ns I have always been from the beginning.

Suggest you have some discussions to see if anyone is interested in settling this at your own expense and not docketing on my account.

Suggest some people have a very hard look inward. This is not an authorization to docket me. I have reviewed the dockets and I am prepared to challenge them aggressively.

Having trouble with the Fiduciary part etc etc.

Otherwise I see a very serious problem here.

Please let me know how you would like to proceed,

Prepared to

Will have counsel at any settlement meetings,

These are intended to include RBC and all parties to this matter,

RBC could have allowed the financing to close. The fact they chose not to, is their account. The papers were signed December 16, 2019.

1




John Groscki CA CPA


On Friday, February 28, 2020, 09:36:51 a.m. EST, Mukul Manchanda <mmanchanda@sperael,ca> wrote:

Thank you for your email Mr, Groscki

I was out of the country from January 17, 2020 to February 3, 2020 due to an illness in my family, however, during that period Mr, Gennis took over active management of the file, You were advised of my absence by Mr, Gennis and all of your inquiries addressed to Mr, Gennis and majority of your inquiries only addressed to me, if not all, during my absence were responded to by Mr, Gennis,

If you have any further inquiries for which you are seeking a response, please forward to me and we will respond to same.

Best Regards,

Mukul Manchanda, CPA, CIRP, LIT | Partner msi Spergel Inc. | Licensed Insolvency Trustees 505 Consumers Road, Suite 200, North York, M2J 4V8 T: 416-498-4314 | C: 416-454-4246 | F: 416-498-4314 [email protected] | www.spergelcorporate.ca Insolvency • Restructuring • Consulting

.'uOaiftO

This email may contain privileged information and is intended only for the named recipient, Distribution, disclosure or copying of this email by anyone other than the named re prohibited. If you are not the named recipient, please notify us immediately by return email and permanently destroy this email and all copies,

From: John Groscki CA CPA Office 416 663 9302 Ceil/ Text 416 540-1988 fmaiito:iqroscki@vahoo,ca1 Sent: February 26, 2020 9:00 AM To: Mukul Manchanda Subject: Communication

Dear Mr. Manchanda




Have attempted to communicate with you on several occasions.

It was my understanding that you were a member of CPA Ontario?

You have not responded to any emails since January 16, 2020.

Can you please confirm if you are engaged in this matter?

John Groscki CACPA


Text//Cell -Direct 416 540 1988 Email iqroscki@vahoo,ca

•■jQiooaa

ROYAL BANK OF CANADA -and- 1120044 ONTARIO INC.

Plaintiff DefendantCourt File No. CV-19-627802-00CL

ONTARIOSUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

COMMERCIAL LIST

Proceedings commenced at Toronto

SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT TO THE FIRST REPORT OF MSI SPERGEL INC. IN ITS

CAPACITY AS THE COURT-APPOINTED RECEIVER OF THE REAL PROPERTY

MUNICIPALLY KNOW AS 160 CIDERMILL AVENUE, UNITES 23 AND 24, CONCORD,

ONTARIO

AIRD & BERLIS LLPBarristers and Solicitors

Brookfield Place 181 Bay Street, Suite 1800

Toronto, ON M5J 2T9

Sanjeev P.R. Mitra (LSO # 37934U)Tel: (416) 865-3085 Fax:(416) 863-1515 Email: [email protected]

Jeremy Nemers (LSO # 66410Q)Tel: (416) 865-7724 Fax: (416) 863-1515 Email: [email protected]

Lawyers for the Receiver
