2013 QCCQ 5647, 2013 QCCQ 5647

Andrews c. Leacock 2013 QCCQ 5647 COURT OF QUEBEC Small Claims Division CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC DISTRICT OF MONTREAL TOWN OF MONTREAL Civil Division No: 500-32-126037-102 DATE: May 15, 2013 ______________________________________________________________________ BY THE HONOURABLE SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. ______________________________________________________________________ DIANA ANDREWS […] , Montréal (QC) […] Plaintiff v.

KEAN LEACOCK […] , Montréal (QC) […] Defendant ______________________________________________________________________ JUDGMENT ______________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] Diana Andrews is claiming the amended amount of $6,015 from Kean Leacock, alleging he failed to reimburse the amounts he owed for his use of her Telus phone and her credit cards. Mr. Leacock denies the claim. The evidence: [ 2 ] Ms. Andrews and Mr. Leacock cohabited from 1997 until September 2001, when they separated. According to Ms. Andrews, she provided Mr.

Leacock with the use of a Telus phone and her Visa and BMO credit cards and he would pay the bills. [ 3 ] Debt accumulated on all her accounts. On March 22, 2010, Mr. Leacock gave Ms. Andrews a promissory note, undertaking to repay all bills by the end of December 2010. Until June 2010, he paid the phone bill and provided monthly payments of $40 per month for the credit cards and then stopped all payments. [ 4 ] On June 22, 2010, Ms. Andrews sent Mr. Leacock a demand letter, claiming $3,800 for outstanding bills.

On October 19, 2010, she sent another demand letter claiming $2,215.38 for her BMO card, $1,800 for her Visa Card and $1,276 for her Telus phone for a total of $5,301.38. At trial, she claimed $6,015. [ 5 ] Ms. Andrews testified that she ended her BMO account at the end of July 2010, her Visa account in August 2010 and her Telus account sometime in 2010. She maintains that M. Leacock reactivated her Telus account until she finally terminated that account, by paying a penalty. Ms. Andrews obtained a line of credit in August 2010 to pay her creditors and seeks all the sums she paid. [ 6 ] Mr.

Leacock claims he gave Ms. Andrews $100 every Thursday until he had completely repaid his $700 Telus bill. He maintains he did not have the physical possession of the credit cards and only used them in Mrs. Andrew’s presence. According to Mr. Leacock, she agreed she would not ask to be repaid. Analysis:

[ 7 ] Mr. Leacock wrote the following note on March 22, 2010: “To Diana Andrews in the presents (sic) of Kevin Leacock (my son). I Kean on this 22 of March 20210 (sic) here by (sic) promise to repay Diana Andrews any outstanding money owed on the phone and credit card bills before the end of 20210 (sic). I don’t comply then she takes me to court.” [ 8 ] In his promissory note, Mr. Leacock acknowledged the existence of outstanding accounts for which he was responsible. Unfortunately, no amount is specified. It also is not clear whether Mr. Leacock would continue to use Mrs.

Andrew’s phone and credit cards and continue to make payments. [ 9 ] In the absence of more concrete evidence, the Court concludes that Mr. Leacock undertook to pay whatever amount he owed, as of March 22, 2010, from his use of Mrs. Andrew’s credit cards and Telus phone. [ 10 ] While he contends that his debt at the time of his promissory note only amounted to $700 for the use of the Telus phone and while he maintains that he has already repaid this amount, he has no evidence regarding the amount owed nor as to his payments. [ 11 ] Mrs. Andrews presented various bills from BMO, Visa and her Telus account.

She also presented receipts for payments she made at the Bank of Montreal from 2008 to 2011. Given the presentation of her exhibits, the Court is unable to correlate all her invoices with her list of payments made. [ 12 ] However, it is clear that Mr. Leacock recognized his indebtedness to Mrs. Andrews on March 22, 2010. The Court therefore establishes that date as the cut off to determine his debt. [ 13 ] Considering that the bills paid by Mrs.

Andrews until the end of March 2010 amount to $2,781.83 [1] and in the absence of any further proof on the part of either party to support their respective positions, the Court concludes that this sum was owed by Mr. Leacock at the end of March 2010 and has not been paid. FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT: GRANTS , in part, the action; CONDEMNS Kean Leacock to pay Diana Andrews $2,781.83 plus interest at the legal rate and the additional indemnity foreseen by

section 1619 of the Civil code of Quebec since June 22, 2010 and judicial fees of $159. __________________________________ SUZANNE HANDMAN, J.C.Q. Date of hearing: February 26, 2013