Bertrand c. Lindsey 2017 QCCQ 13775 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUÉBEC DISTRICT OF MONTRÉAL Civil Division No: 500-32-152677-169 DATE: October 27, 2017 ______________________________________________________________________ BEFORE THE HONOURABLE ÉRIC DUFOUR, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ WILLIAM H. BERTRAND Plaintiff v. CUNNINGHAM LINDSEY and CRAWFORD & COMPANY CANADA INC.

Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ TRANSCRIPT OF A JUDGMENT [1] RENDERED ON THE BENCH ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Mr. William H. Bertrand claims $ 900.16 from the Defendants Cunningham Lindsey (Lindsey) and Crawford Company Canada Inc. [ 2 ] The basis of his claim is interests he paid to the Sear’s Company following a stop payments to his credit card for roofing work he was unsatisfied with. [ 3 ] Petitioner says that a certain Stéphane Chapdelaine told him that the Lindsey Company would take care of the interests. Mr.

Chapdelaine is a damage expert working for Lindsey, which is not an insurance company. Mr. Chapdelaine was the adjustor taking care of the files conveyed to Lindsey by Sears. [ 4 ] Plaintiff’s submission is that Mr. Chapdelaine told him that Lindsey would pay the interests if he accept the offer he was then making regarding the repairs of the roof and the compensation for the damages done. [ 5 ] No contract has been drafted establishing this agreement allegedly made. [ 6 ] No evidence whatsoever is made before the Court establishing this agreement. [ 7 ] The Court cannot accept the testimony of Mr.

Bertrand on that for it is hearsay, forbidden by sect. 2843 C.c.Q. [ 8 ] The Court underlines that it is the burden of Plaintiff to establish his cause of action (sect. 2803 C.c.Q. ).

He must do so on the balance of probabilities (sect. 2804). [ 9 ] Nothing in the evidence can lead the Court to conclude that the agreement referred to by Plaintiff has been reached by him and Lindsey Company. [ 10 ] C oncerning Crawford & Company Canada Inc., that company has simply nothing to do with this case. [ 11 ] C onsidering the evidence adduced at hearings, the Court: [ 12 ] DismissES Plaintiff’s action, with the costs of $ 150 representing the fees of Cunningham Lindsey only. ________________________________

ÉRIC DUFOUR, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: October 27, 2017