A British Columbia judge has ruled that conspiracy theories about the “New World Order” are not valid arguments in a recent foreclosure case involving a Vancouver home.
The case, which went to the Supreme Court in Vancouver last month, involved the Bank of Montreal and two defendants, one of whom did not contest the foreclosure.
Another, Karen Wai King Liu, tried to appeal an order made in April involving the sale of her property to a bank in May.
The court heard on July 12 that Lew owed more than $290,000 and a foreclosure order had been issued in the fall. The homeowner and his second mortgagee were given a period to redeem, but no payment was made. So she had to give up her house.
As to why no payment was made, Lew claimed no debt. Her arguments included the unsubstantiated belief that a secretive and powerful group was seeking to rule the world through a single world government, the so-called New World Order.
She said in court that her mortgage was actually in February under two laws that conspiracy theorists are calling the National Economic Security and Reform Act and the Global Economic Security and Reform Act (NESARA/GESARA). Proponents of the hoax say the first bill was secretly passed by the U.S. Congress and the second bill was accepted globally.
The law was never published and there is no evidence that it passed. Believers say it’s because the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center attacks destroyed all evidence.
In Lew’s case, she tried to argue that these acts meant a worldwide debt forgiveness, including the remainder of her mortgage.
The Vancouver lawsuit centers on whether the mortgage was waived, including Liu’s attempt to obtain a loan or reverse mortgage so he wouldn’t lose his home before launching the New World Order. was The court heard she tried to extend and said her sister would lend her the money. At that time, she never embarked on a conspiracy theory, the judge said.
At one point, Lew was given a month to come up with financing before an order to sell her house back to the bank went into effect.
She failed to do so and tried to appeal the order in July.
“She has developed it into a pending New World Order (NESARA) with roots in the United States, but a global movement (GESARA) to which many countries, including Canada, have signed.” Case summary.
“She argued that that would include the resignation of world leaders, new gold-backed currencies, and a more harmonious and peaceful world in which the enslaving nature of debt would be abolished.
Armed with this theory and documents from the GESARA website, she argued that “all credit card, mortgage, and other bank debt due to illegal banking and government activity will be cancelled.”
She said that under this new world order, all debts are forgiven. Because of this, Lew said he never had to pay the mortgage.
What she didn’t have was a document or law from Canada or British Columbia stating that NESARA/GESARA was implemented. Judge Matthews said Lou, who she represented herself, had no evidence that either act was incorporated into the foreclosure statute.
She also claims that the person who gave the order leading to the bank taking over her house was prejudiced, and that the pending New World Order is “well known to the bank,” so she also talks about it. He claimed he should have known. Part of a law firm that specializes in foreclosures.
Lew claimed that the person actually changed careers because she knew her company could not practice foreclosure laws because all mortgages and debts would be forgiven under the New World Order. did.
A judge upheld the bank and a second mortgagee when he told the court that NESARA/GESARA was not involved in Canada’s foreclosure law. Additionally, Lew’s appeal pointed out that she was two weeks after the sale order was placed, so she didn’t make it in time.
“I do not acknowledge that NESARA/GESARA is part of the legal situation in Canada. I do not acknowledge what Ms Lew has demonstrated: a career change to avoid impacting her legal practice,” Matthews wrote.
The judge also accepted BMO’s argument. The bias claim had no merit.
The appeal was dismissed and Lou was ordered to pay the legal costs of BMO and the second mortgagee.