McKee v RBC Insurance, 2021 ABQB 499

Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta Citation: McKee v RBC Insurance, 2021 ABQB 499 Date: 20210629 Docket: 2103 07002 Registry: Edmonton Between: Glen W. McKee Plaintiff - and - R.B.C. Insurance and Royal Bank of Canada Defendants _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of Associate Chief Justice K.G. Nielsen _______________________________________________________ I. Introduction [ 1 ] On May 31, 2021, Glen W. McKee (Mr. McKee) filed a two-page handwritten Statement of Claim that names R.B.C. Insurance and the Royal Bank of Canada as Defendants. Mr.

McKee’s Statement of Claim was referred to me by the Clerk of the Court as an Apparently Vexatious Application or Proceeding (AVAP) pursuant to Civil Practice Note No. 7 (CPN7), paragraph 5. I am the

judge assigned to review the AVAPs filed in Edmonton at the Court of Queen’s Bench. [ 2 ] The body of Mr. McKee’s Statement of Claim reads as follows: Statement of facts relied on: R.B.C. INSURANCE TAKING FUNDS FROM MY PERSONAL CHEQUING ACCOUNT, WITHOUT MY AUTHORITY, OR SIGNATURE (3rd PARTY) TOTALLY ILLEGAL! NO SIGNED AGREEMENT WITH THE INSURANCE COMPANY! PLUS, NO COVERAGE FOR 6 YEARS; PREMIUMS WERE “N.B.” TAKEN FROM AGE: 69-75 YEARS OF AGE; WITHOUT * COVERAGE! (HAVE STATEMENTS TOO PROVE THIS). $36,000.00 ALSO, TAKING FROM MY PERSONAL CHEQING ACCOUNT TO PAY FOR MY CRIDIT LINE; IS TWO

(2) DIFFERENT ACCOUNTS! (NOT LEGAL). “ OLD ADDAGE ”: ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL! IS THAT LEGAL?? (SAME THING)! Remedy sought: RESTITUTION, OF: $357,000.00 WOULD BE A FAIR AMOUNT; CONSIDERING THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS ISSUE! WHICH ARE VERY SERIOUS OFFENCES! CAUSING STRESS, LACK OF AVAILABLE FUNDS, + A TOTAL LACK OF LOYALITY TOO A 30 YR.+ CUSTOMER; +LACK OF RESPECT TOO A SENIOR CITIZEN OF CANADIAN ORIGINALITY!!! ORIGINALLY, I ONLY ASKED FOR A REPLACEMENT OF THE “ PRINCIPLE ”; WHICH THEY TOOK ILLEGALLY! ASKING THE ROYAL BANK TO DO THE HONOURABLE THING; WHICH THEY REFUSED, TO DO!!!

NOW, WE WILL BE AFTER “ ALL ” THE DETAILS OF THIS MATTER, UNTIL IT IS RESOLVED ; TOO MY SATISFACTION!!! (ENDING WITH: THE ROYAL BANK & THEIR INSURANCE). THIS BEING A TOTAL “DISGRACE” TO ME, AS AN INDIVIDUAL; BUT, TOO “ ALL ” OF CANADA AS A WHOLE!! I DO HOLD “ ALL ” THE DOCUMENTS, OR FACTS OF THIS MATTER; AS PROOF , IF NEED BE!!! (Sic.) [ 3 ] In a decision reported as McKee v RBC Insurance , 2021 ABQB 447 ( McKee #1 ) I concluded that Mr. McKee’s Statement of Claim is an AVAP, and should be subject to a CPN7 show-cause document-based review under r 3.68 of the Alberta Rules of Court , AR 124/2010 . Mr.

McKee was asked to provide an up to ten-page Written Submission that responded to two questions: 1. How does the Statement of Claim provide an adequate basis for the Court and Defendants to make a meaningful response? 2. How are the remedies sought in the Statement of Claim not excessive or impossible? ( McKee #1 at para 20 .) [ 4 ] On June 16, 2021 I received a handwritten document from Mr. McKee, addressed to me, and in reference to Mr. McKee’s lawsuit. The body of that document reads, in full: IT WOULD INDICATE TO ME, THERE IS ALL KINDS OF BIAS, + PREJUDICE, ASSOCIATED WITH THIS CASE!

NOT ANSWERING ANY OF MY QUESTIONS, WHICH IS TIPICAL! THE SO-CALLED GENIUSES OF THIS PLANET CAN’T EVADE, OR HIDE FROM: THE TRUTH, FACTS, REALITY, OR FATE IN THE VERY “ END ”!!! EVERY ALBERTA TAXPAYER SHOULD READ THE BOOK: “BANKSTERS, AND PRAIRIE BOYS”! I WOULD GET THE “INDICATION” FROM YOU; NOT HAVING THE RIGHT TO PRESENT THIS CASE; AS ANALYSIS III A. INADEQUATE PLEADINGS!!! YOU BETTER READ, OR KNOW: “THE CANADIAN BILL OF RIGHTS” (CHAPTER 44, ASSENTED TO 10 th , AUGUST, 1960) WHEN FUNDS ARE TAKEN FROM A PERSONAL CHEQUING ACCOUNT TO ACCOMMODATE A DIFFERENT ACCOUNT, WITHOUT MY SIGNATURE, OR AUTHORITY!

WHAT WOULD YOU CALL THAT??? ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL; IS THAT LEGAL??? PLUS, 3 rd PARTY (INSURANCE), NO CONTRACT WITH THEM!!! FRAUD-THEFT-OR EMBEZZLEMENT; HOWEVER, YOU WANT IT CALLED!!! THIS IS A “ BIG DISSAPPOINTMENT ” OF: REPECT, HONOURABILITY, + LACK OF HUMAN MORELS!!! OF “ ALL ” PARTYS!!! I WOULD ONLY HOPE FOR AN HONOURABLE OUTCOME!!! SINCERELY [signature]

(Sic, emphasis in original.) [ 5 ] Three pages of highlighted and annotated bank documents are attached to Mr. McKee’s handwritten document. [ 6 ] The deadline for Mr. McKee to make a Written Submission has now passed without any further communication from Mr. McKee. I am treating the June 16, 2021 document as Mr. McKee’s Written Submission. [ 7 ] I am not permitted to put any weight on Mr. McKee’s statements in his June 16, 2021 document as to the merit of his Statement of Claim, or on the bank documents he attached. Rule 3.68(3) of the Alberta Rules of Court prohibits submitting evidence for why Mr.

McKee’s Statement of Claim discloses a reasonable claim during a process pursuant to r 3.68 of the Alberta Rules of Court . [ 8 ] I conclude that Mr. McKee’s June 16, 2021 document is non-responsive to the two questions set out in McKee #1 at para 20 .

On that basis I order that the Statement of Claim in Court of Queen’s Bench Action No. 2103 07002 is struck out entirely, pursuant to r 3.68 of the Alberta Rules of Court , and CPN7, para 3(c). [ 9 ] No costs flow from this outcome since this Court does not usually order costs when the Clerk of the Court refers an AVAP pursuant to CPN7 paragraph 5: Peets v Alberta (Justice and Solicitor General) , 2019 ABQB 565 at para 6 . [ 10 ] The Court will prepare and serve the Order giving effect to this decision. Mr. McKee’s approval of that Order is not required, pursuant to r 9.4(2)(

c) of the Alberta Rules of Court . Dated at the City of Edmonton, Alberta thi s 29 th day of June, 2021. K.G. Nielsen A.C.J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances: Glen W. McKee Self-represented Litigant