colinnew
A conspiracy theory about “new world order” is not a valid argument in a recent foreclosure case involving a home in Vancouver, a judge in British Columbia ruled.
The case before the provincial Supreme Court was heard last month in Vancouver, and involved the Bank of Montreal and two respondents, one of whom did not fight the foreclosure.
The other, Karen Wai King Lew, tried to appeal the order made in April involving the sale of her property to the bank in May.
The court heard on July 12 that Lew owed more than $290,000, and a foreclosure order had been made in the fall. The homeowner and a second mortgagee were given a redemption period, but made no payments, meaning she’d have to give up her home.
As for why no payments were made, Lew claimed there was no debt owed. Her argument involved an unsubstantiated belief that a secretive, powerful group is attempting to rule the world through a single global government – the so-called new world order.
She told the court that her mortgage had actually been forgiven in February under two supposed laws referred to by conspiracy theorists as the National Economic Security and Reformation Act and the Global Economic Security and Reformation Act (NESARA/GESARA). Believers of this hoax say the first act was secretly passed by U.S. congress, and the second was accepted on a global scale.
The laws were never announced, and there’s no evidence they were ever passed. Believers say that’s because all evidence was destroyed in the World Trade Center attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.
In Lew’s case, she tried to argue that these acts meant a global debt forgiveness that included the amount remaining on her mortgage.
The Vancouver case centred around whether the mortgage was forgiven, and included that Lew had tried to get a loan or a reverse mortgage so that she would not lose her home, prior to bringing up new world order. The court heard she’d tried to get an extension and that she’d said her sister would loan her the money. At that time, she didn’t get into the conspiracy theory at all, the judge said.
Lew was, at one point, given a month to come up with the financing before the order to sell her house back to the bank came into effect.
She failed to do so, and attempted to appeal the order in July. It was at that point that she mentioned the theory that included debt forgiveness through the aforementioned acts.
“She described it as a pending new world order that has its roots in the United States (NESARA), but has evolved to a global movement (GESARA), to which many countries are signatories, including Canada,” Justice Sharon Matthews wrote in a summary of the case.
“She asserted that it involves resignation of world leaders, new currencies that will be backed by gold, and a more harmonious and peaceful world where the enslavement qualities of debt will be abolished.”
Armed with this theory and a document from a GESARA website, she argued “all credit card, mortgage, and other bank debt due to illegal banking and government activities will be cancelled.”
She said under this new world order, all debit will be forgiven. Because of this, Lew said, she did not need to pay her mortgage.
What she did not have is any documentation or legislation from Canada or British Columbia showing that NESARA/GESARA had been implemented. Lew, who represented herself, had no evidence that either of the acts had been incorporated into foreclosure law either, Justice Matthews said.
She also argued the person who granted the order that would lead to the bank taking over her home was biased, claiming that the pending new world order “is well-known to the banks” and so she too would have known about it, as a part of a law firm specializing in foreclosures.
Lew claimed that person actually changed careers, knowing that her firm would not be able to practice foreclosure law because all mortgages and debts will be forgiven under the new world order.
The arguments were shot down by the judge, who sided with the bank and the second mortgagee when they told the court NESARA/GESARA don’t have any part in Canadian foreclosure law. Additionally, they pointed out Lew’s appeal was two weeks after the sale order was made, so she was out of time.
” I have not accepted that NESARA/GESARA is part of the Canadian legal landscape. I do not accept that Ms. Lew has proven there is a new world order pending that will end foreclosure proceedings, let alone that Master Robertson knew of this and made a career change to avoid its consequences on her law practice,” Matthews wrote.
The judge also accepted BMO’s side of things – there was no merit to the bias claim.
The appeal failed, and Lew was ordered to cover the legal costs of BMO and the second mortgagee.
