John Zam Denies Rape Survivor Safe Parking Assignment Among Other Issues

There was no response to the email pasted below from any of Briarlane’s management team, though they did have a paralegal David Ciobotaru tell me I wasn’t permitted to engage with management without threat of eviction. David did not follow-through on his baseless attempt at intimidation.

Andrus,

In the past two days, John Zam has made a series of troubling statements on camera, which severely damage the landlord’s and Briarlane’s legal position by clearly confirming discriminatory and retaliatory conduct:

Specifically, John stated on recorded audio:

  • That I am required to direct all maintenance and human rights requests through David, your paralegal, while openly acknowledging that other tenants are not required to follow this procedure—confirming discriminatory treatment.
  • That he has not visited my unit even once in a month to investigate persistent humming, whirling, rattling, and banging because he has been “busy,” despite my repeated and documented requests. Video evidence confirms the noise disturbance, and I have a witness statement. If it’s your position that the ‘elevator tech’ didn’t notice anything, then you need to enlist other professionals until the issue is resolved. 
  • John openly alleged that David has authority over maintenance decisions affecting my unit, confirming a serious conflict of interest—David cannot impartially address my maintenance and accommodation concerns in good faith while simultaneously protecting the landlord’s interests, given the pending litigation and the ongoing violations of my human rights. David’s abrupt refusal to communicate since March—precisely when identical noise disturbances this winter were resolved elsewhere—implies he’s aware of the risks to both the landlord and himself, as does his failure to submit any evidence whatsoever for our upcoming LTB hearing.
    • While this conflict does not absolve the landlord’s ongoing maintenance obligations, it absolutely disqualifies David from having any authority over my maintenance requests. David’s only response since March – sent on June 26 -made repeated false representations about Ontario law and my tenant rights—further demonstrating that his sole priority is limiting Briarlane’s liability. Again, his email is blocked and I will not communicate with him outside of formal legal proceedings. If he needs to contact me, he can do so in hard copy. I do not accept email communication from David for any reason unless ordered by the tribunal. 
  • John stated that he directs me to communicate through David because of my pending LTB filing, directly linking the lack of maintenance and accommodation to my exercise of protected legal rights. When I asked if this refusal was because of my filing, he immediately backtracked, implying he realizes the retaliatory implication of his statement.
  • John said he was “not refusing” to reassign my parking spot, yet immediately thereafter stated he “can’t reassign anything,” directly contradicting himself. He also used the fact that I initially tolerated the parking spot as a reason to deny my request for a move later. That I was able to temporarily manage the fear does not mean I am required to do so indefinitely- especially in light of the documented security breaches in the building this spring.
    • This is also a human rights issue. I have sexual trauma. I am fearful of parking in a dark, secluded area with blind spots. I require immediate reassignment. To refuse a zero-cost option and instead insist that I fear rape or eviction is not only unlawful, it is egregiously cruel and creates a toxic living environment. You are all directly complicit in this and individually financially liable at the HRTO. 

The New Noise: 

This new noise situation is escalating daily and is no longer tolerable. I require immediate action to resolve this issue, whether it be the elevator or some other cause.

Again, I am a person living with two noise-sensitive disabilities, both of which significantly worsened due to the prolonged noise disruption this past winter. The current noise—constant banging, whirling, and rattling—occurs every few minutes until well after midnight, and continues multiple times each hour between 2:00 and 6:00 am. This is a new and escalating situation. The disturbance is clearly captured on video, which I have already submitted to the LTB and directly to you. I have already provided you with extensive medical documentation verifying my conditions. If you require a note from my doctor stating directly that I require a quiet environment, I am happy to provide that at your expense. 

Even without my disabilities, I have a right to quiet enjoyment. I expect it to be restored immediately, and if there are repairs that will take time, I require temporary accommodation or a rent abatement so I can secure my own quiet environment. This is essential with my medical needs. 

Again, your maintenance failures are harming my health and my ability to earn a living. I can already demonstrate significant financial business losses as a direct result of the health impacts of nearly seven months of persistent noise – first the HVAC issue and now the banging, whirling and clanking. This needs to stop. 

Communication Preferences: 

If you don’t want me to communicate with John in person —recorded for everyone’s safety —then you can respond to my emails. Legally, you cannot cut off my communication routes for ongoing maintenance concerns, nor can you require me to communicate solely through David, who is unresponsive, is unqualified to address building management issues, and is in an undeniable conflict of interest. If you continue to ignore my emails, I will continue to address my ongoing maintenance and accommodation needs with John face-to-face until they are resolved. 

I am simply asking for a quiet home. You have no valid reason to deny this to me, and any further delays only add credibility (and financial penalty) to my discrimination claims. Constructive eviction attempts will not work – I am not moving. Resolve this now or resolve it later and face significant financial and reputational harm. Those are the only two options.

Regards,