Complaint Review: Braden Chase - Vancouver British Columbia

It is best to just stay away from him because he has proven he likes to sue people even over petty issues.

I would govern yourself accordinlgy. Mr Heywood has a very good case to pursue legal matters. 

To the individual responsible for writing these false and defamatory statements, I am putting you on notice that I will be filing a defamation lawsuit against you as I have done against past accussers who have written false and defamatory online reports  about me. You should also know that I have successfully tracked down the persons responsible for authoring those other false and defamatory statements despite their efforts to create fake profiles to hide their identity much like you have tried to do.  See you in court. 

you think you can manipulate people, things never chnage Mr Chase.

Merv

 Braden thinks he is a lawyer....but for some reason owes people money. Do not do business with Braden. His verbal diarrhea complemented with an MBA he has no experience with will leave you frustrated. I was informed of this website this evening and I can support he adds no value to an organization. I was involved with an auto dealership who contracted Mr Chase’s skills, bad mistake. Avoid. JK

Braden Chase is a loser bryond all contonrol Failed actor actor and has an MBA with no experince. Do not hire this idiot. He cons women to pay his idiotic ideas. Complete loser. He owes everyone he has been in business with money. He sued a small business for labour duties. Good grief, avoid him at all costs. Google his name....

 To the fellow who responded to the part-time hourly labourer Craig's list add, to the supremely gifted MBA thought leader you now hold yourself out to be. Good to see you moving on. Let's hope you have a more responsible and useful relationship with your future contractors and employers. If not, I guess there are other Craig's list labouring jobs you can look into. Goodbye Mr Chase

Greg,

In your profile on Roper Greyell's website, you claim to be 'responsible for marketing and business development', and yet the reason why someone would want to remain anonymous in their rebuttal on this site escapes you.  I think it is clearly evident why the persons who wrote the positive reviews about me would not want to post their names, business names, and other identifying information here as you suggested.  Since you don't seem to have the marketing experience or MBA education that I have let me give you a clue. It has to do with Search Engine Optimization (SEO).  

Now I am not going to use my valuable time to teach you about SEO.  You can do that own your own.  Consider it a homework assignment.  However, I will say that the rebuttals you are referring to were written by real people who wanted to come forward to clear my name, as they are disgusted with your behaviour.  And it was I who suggested they not include their full name or other identifying informating because I do not want you to drag their good names through the digital mud of the internet like you did to me.  The last thing they need is you publishing informating that is false, misleading, or damaging about them in retaliation for them trying to clarify the facts and clear my name.  

Just like your last post, you have made several futile attempts to reject any rebuttals or justify your pitiful excuse for what you did. The reality is Greg that by posting on this site you really are doing yourself, your profession, your client, and your firm a disservice.  What you are doing is known as Internet Trolling (look it up while you research SEO). Are you trying to garner a reputation as a Internet Troll?

As a designated business professional with marketing experience that I am confident far exceeds your own, I suggest you stop now before you make yourself look worse than you already do.  I can prove that you have lied in your posts.  And I can also prove that you have seriously distored the facts.  It's time to give it up.  

I've said all I needed to say.  Perhaps you have too much time on your hands, but I have more important things to do than carry on arguing with you here. We can take it up with the Court and the BC Law Society.  If you want to continue to make a fool of yourself on this site then that is your prerogative.  There is no doubt in my mind that you will. 

Braden

 Interesting to see posts supporting Braden with the authors not being identified. These posts could be from Braden, or perhaps friends of Braden's and complete works of fiction. If they are real, you should not hide, you should post your contact details, business website so that your identity can be verified. Otherwise it is like having a reference letter that nobody wants to sign. In the circumstances I suppose it is understandable.

I met Braden Chase last year while he was assisting Emilio with his business. Braden had submitted an application for the Director of Operations role with my Organic Farm. Upon reviewing his resume I immediately considered him to be one of the top prospects for the position.  I was very impressed by his education and work experiences.  It was readily apparent to me from his list of accomplishments that he has a passion and a talent for operations management as well as for developing businesses across a wide variety of business types and industries.  After meeting with him for the first time I was even more impressed.  He stood out as a true business professional with the knowledge, aptitude, confidence and technical understanding of business you might expect from someone twice his age.  This assured me straight away that Braden would be an asset for my operation or virtually any other business.

 At the time Braden had several business and job opportunities in front of him.  This didn't surprise me in the least given how much he stood out among the many applications I received. While I was hoping to secure him as a full-time employee he ended up accepting another offer in a different industry where I am told he is doing a remarkable job.  Thankfully, I was able to secure him this year as a part-time management consultant for my operation and his performance to date has exceeded all of my expectations.  While his hourly consulting rate is much higher than his salaried rate I still think Braden's services are a bargain.  I am getting the level of service and results I would expect from a much larger firm such as Deloitte or KPMG but at a fraction of the cost.  Further, he has been extremely generous with his time and his advice.  Braden has graciously donated tens of hours of his billable time for free because he truly cares about his clients and is committed to serving their success.  I would highly recommend Braden Chase to any employer or prospective client who is considering hiring him.  

 With that being said, I find Mr. Heywood's conduct on this site to be absolutely deplorable.  When I first read his posts I had a hard time believing a lawyer would publish such a report.  I previously worked for a law firm and I have had several different lawyers of varying backgrounds work for me over the years.  Never have I ever heard of a lawyer employing such tactics or stooping to such a low.  Mr. Heywood's attempt to diminish Braden's accomplishments and reduce him to that of $12-18/hr labourer is outrageous.  Further, suggesting Braden is an employee who cannot be trusted and warning the business community to refrain from hiring him is defamation in my opinion.  Mr. Heywood has clearly distorted the facts and he should be ashamed of himself.  This is type of conduct is unbecoming of any professional, especially a lawyer, and I think it reflects poorly on the legal profession. 

From my understanding, Mr. Heywood's client, Emilio, was afforded an amazing opportunity when Braden offered to assist him the way he did.  Despite what Mr. Heywood suggests, Braden is a valuable asset who generously offered his knowledge, expertise, and services to True North Landscaping at a discount Emilio could afford.  If Emilio couldn't really see the opportunity for what it's worth then it was his loss.  

Unfortunately, Braden lost out too because of his generosity.  He could have used that time to help someone else who truly appreciated his talents and was willing to pay him what he is actually worth.  In the alternative, Braden could have used that time he spent with Emilio to market his own businesses and execute his own contracts.  Either way I think Braden would have been further ahead.  For Mr. Heywood to suggest any different is just ludicrous in my opinion.

I have known Braden Chase personally for more than six years and I was with him on the day he first met Emilio. Braden and I were having lunch together prior to their meeting and he told me about a potential collaboration with True North Landscaping. Emilio was evidently looking for a part-time labourer to assist him. Braden was intrigued by this opportunity from a business development perspective, as he was looking to develop a partnership with a local landscaper who could refer him leads or contracts to supplement his side landscape business. It seems irrelevant that this was a Craigslist job at a reduced rate to what Braden made both before and after his time at True North. Braden saw this as an opportunity to provide significantly more value than Emilio was asking for and in return receive the referrals he was looking for. My experience having worked with Braden before and after his time with True North is that Braden has the business skills that would be expected from an MBA and he dedicates himself fully to the technical side of the business he is working in so he understands the front line of that specific business. 

 Listen to Braden, he sounds like a robin hood type business leader who uses his expansive business knowledge to help small companies. Ha, remember he applied to a Craigslist add for a part time labourer position. Work 7 weeks, part time and then wanted a huge and unrealistic sum of money to leave. Further he was a contractor not an employee. One thing that is commendable is Braden's impressive imagination. Seriously Braden let's have another rationalization for this. It makes interesting reading.

I think it is laughable for Greg J. Heywood to suggest that by reading his posts a propsective employer would, 'have all the information you need to figure out Braden would be an asset for your business', especially considering he hasn't disclosed ALL of the facts.  Nor has he been completely honest with the information he's stated.  

I have nothing to hide.  Feel free to do a background check and speak to my past and current employers.  I will happily provide references upon request.  

While it is true that my initial consultation with Emilio started with an ad for a part-time landscape labourer, this fact alone does not explain the true intent and structure of our business relationship. Greg wants people to believe that the extent of my relationship with Emilio was limited to that of a landscape labourer, however, this is simply not true.  While working with Emilio I was also offering him technical business advice pertaining to the operations, marketing, finance, estimating, and adminstration components of his business.  Further, I was helping to train his employees who were all relatively new to the trade and required some much needed guidance.  

Keep in mind, I wasn't looking for a job when I approached Emilio.  My aim was to establish a business partnership with him, which is why I put in a great deal of time and effort to help him get caught up with the work he was behind on, as well as try to improve his top and bottom lines with some sound business advice.  Advice that my consulting clients generally pay $100+/hr for but Emilio received for free (Pro Bono).

Unfortunately, my investment in Emilio and his business did not pay the returns I was hoping for. Rather than honor his stated intention to subcontract me entire landscaping projects or provide me with project leads, Emilio chose to cut me loose after I helped get him caught up with all the work he was behind on.  

I reiterate that my initial demand was NOT $110,000.  In fact, it wasn't even close to this number.  Nor was it $95,322 as Greg claims.  I'm curious to know why Greg J. Heywood won't disclose the real number?  

 To figure out whether Braden would be an asset for your business. Think carefully.

The lies and litany of spelling and grammatical errors from Greg J. Heywood continues.  Let's begin:

1)  The correct spelling for 'intitial' is 'initial'.

2)  The word 'alot' does not even exist.

3)  'Achive' is spelled 'achieve'.  

4)  My 'intitial [sic] demand' was NOT $95,332.  Greg, why do you keep quoting the wrong figure?

Greg appears to be one of those 'Rambo Lawyer' types who believes he's a hero whose mission is to save his client from evil villains by waging a one man war against their persecutor(s), as seen in the movies.  Greg, get a grip.  I suggest you familiarize yourself with 'Karpman's Drama Triangle'. It is a model of dysfunctional social interaction, created by psychotherapist Stephen Karpman. Note that each point on the triangle (Rescuer. Persecutor. Victim.) represents a common and ineffective response to conflict, one more likely to prolong disharmony than to end it.  And before you ask, yes this model does apply to work situations.  Based on my understanding of the model, I think Mr. Karpman would probably agree that Greg’s approach with me in this case was more harmful than helpful.  I wonder how Emilio feels about Greg’s posts. My understanding is he isn't happy about them.  

Greg J. Heywood certainly seems to favor an aggressive approach where intimidation is his primary tactic for defending his clients or waging attacks on the opposition.  From my experience, he lacks courtesy and professionalism in dealing with the other side. While he may be impressed by his 'aggressive style', as boasted in his bio on his firm's website, I am not at all impressed or intimidated by him.  Greg talks a tough line in emails but when face-to-face with me he hardly said a word.  To be honest, I wasn't surprised by this.  This tends to happen when someone who pretends to be tough meets with someone who actually is tough.

While Greg J. Heywood may want the reader to believe that he is the 'Rescuer', Emilio is the 'Victim', and I am the 'Persecutor' in this story let's remember this all started when Emilio terminated me 'without cause' and 'without notice', which, at law, puts him in the wrong.  That being said, I don't pretend to be or try to come off as a victim in this case, despite the expensive opportunity cost I incurred during the 7 weeks I worked for Emilio and the 4 weeks of unemployment that followed.  

One needs only to look at my current and past pay stubs to quickly realize that I am worth far more than Emilio paid me during my tenure with True North Landscaping.  No doubt I am probably worth a lot more than what Greg thinks I am worth.  The severance figures Greg posted are certainly more in line with a severance package that is commensurate with my current earnings, abilities, education, experience and expertise.  Greg may disagree but I could really care less.

The irony in this situation is Greg J. Heywood appears to feel justified in his aggressive approach and posting of Ripoff Reports because he thinks I was too aggressive in my demand letter to his client. 'Absurd' is the word he used to describe what he claims are my demands.  This despite the fact that after the Law Society of British Columbia reviewed my demand letter, his Ripoff Report, and his emails to me they told him his language in some communications was inflammatory.  Let's not forget how they felt compelled to remind Greg, a senior lawyer, that his time is better spent on legal matters opposed to writing unnecessary communications containing inflammatory language.  Could the Law Society have been referring to posting of Ripoff Reports too? 

I find it hypocritical of him to portray me as persecutor, his client as a victim, and himself as a hero, when it was his client's actions that triggered my civil claim in the first place. What's more interesting his how Greg continually fails to address the opportunity cost I incurred over those 11 weeks after relying on Emilio's repeated intention to my detriment. Greg seems fine with his client causing me damages; however, he isn't fine with me seeking compensation for said damages.  I wonder how he would have acted towards Emilio if I was his client.  My guess is Emilio would be the persecutor, I would be the victim and Greg would still be the hero.  Anyone else want to guess?

In closing, Greg if you want to compare resumes, education, talents, and professional accomplishments then by all means let's do it. I am supremely confident I am smarter than you, have more talent, and possess a much broader skill set than you can ever hope to accomplish.  And don't even get me started on physical prowess. We both know that's a battle you will lose. You and I can agree on one thing and that is you are right when you say, 'Before this case I did not know Braden, I can't say I know him now."  As such, I suggest you keep your comments to yourself.  The work I do builds businesses and keeps people employed.  What I believe you are attempting to do with your reports may potentially impair my ability to do my job by unjustly hurting my reputation, as my work relies heavily on my reputation.  If I lose a sizeable contract because someone reads your reports and buys your bullshit this means people may lose their jobs.  Grow up!  Nothing I did to Emilio was illegal, unethical, or immoral.  Certainly nothing I did devastated his operation; therefore, my actions do not warrant this type of treatment from you.  Fact is Emilio benefited from my work.  You are not a hero in this instance Greg, so stop pretending to be one.  

I have read Braden's latest attempt to explain his conduct.  I think you can tell alot about a person by their actions (as opposed to posts).  As Braden has said the small claims matter was settled for $1,500.  In his intitial demand letter, he demanded $95,332 and suggest reasonable notice for him - a contractor - not an employee - with 7 weeks service was 6 to 10 months.  In the alternative he stated he should be compensated at $150 per hour for 20 hours per week which after he awarded himself an arbitrary bonus would amount to $110,000.  He suggested that he would get double costs at trial and calculated those to be an additional $19,000 plus disbursements. He concluded by saying " In total, your liability will greatly exceed $100,000 and you have no defence". These were his absurd demands.

If you are thinking of hiring Braden, do what I would suggest all employers do - a reference check and make sure there are no holes in the resume.  In other words speak with all of the employers, including the one before my client.

Why Post?

I was appalled by the demands.  For a 7 week contractor to assert that he could achive a judgement in court of $110,000 plus another $19,000 in costs was simply incredulous.  He was making these assertions against a small business person who did not have endless resources to litigate these outrageous demands.  I was concerned for other business people in our community, I did not want them to have a similar experience with Braden.  Before this case I did not know Braden, I can't say I know him now.  I can however comment on his conduct with this business in North Vancouver.

Did I charge through the nose?

I did not charge for much of my time, the vast majority of the time I spent on this file was pro bono.  Why? This was a small business person who was faced with completely unreasonable demands from Braden.  Sometime you get involved simply because it is the right thing to do.  

Remember, this all started with an ad for a part-time landscape labourer (2 to 3 days) per week with an advertised wage rate of between $12-$18 per hour. An odd job for an accomplished businessman with an MBA.

It recently came to my attention that Greg J. Heywood decided to publish another report about me titled," So how did this end?"  The report was posted on February 26, 2016, the same day I settled my lawsuit against his client, Emilio Bottiglieri dba True North Lanscaping.  I would like to take this opportunity to set the record straight.

Gregory J. Heywood is deliberately misleading the public. Let me fill you in on what he has lied about as well as what he isn’t telling you.  If anyone is interested enough to care about Greg’s drivel, please note that most of the documents in question are in the public record and anyone can review them to draw their own conclusions.

First and foremost, I call the reader’s attention to the fact that in the proceeding, the Law Society of British Columbia told Mr. Heywood that the language he used with me in some communications was inflammatory.  I say this only because I know how endless fighting on the internet can be.  So my first point is that a neutral body, to which Mr. Heywood pays thousands of dollars a year to be a member, told him to consider avoiding unnecessary emails to a self-represented opposing party. Further, the Law Society of British Columbia reminded him it is better to focus on the legal matters and avoid inflammatory language in his communications. Mr. Heywood cannot say I was wrong about any of this.

To me, a good lawyer advances his client’s interests (in addition to taking the time to spell words correctly, which Mr. Heywood appears to think is overrated).  Mr. Heywood’s post is at best ill-advised, and at worst a backfire.  In posting this he drives more of a wedge between his client and me, leading to fighting.  I wonder who, if anyone might charge by the hour and thus benefit from continued fighting…?  I say this only because this public forum is supposed to be a place where parties post truthful reports.  I am conscious that this could just look like two people bickering, but it is not that.  I am a forthright businessperson and wish only to set out facts that would serve to clear my good name.

In brief, I tried to help an inexperienced entrepreneur in a field where I possess expertise (and, incidentally, a field in which Mr. Heywood has no expertise that I know of).  My version of the facts is as follows:

1)      My ‘initial demand’ was not $110,000.00. 

2)      In addition, the initial letter I sent to Emilio prior to him hiring Greg J. Heywood was a Without Prejudice communication.  Disclosing information from a Without Prejudice communication may be an actionable Breach of Confidence.  Lawyers should be well aware of this fact.  The best lawyers are aware of it.

3)      During our first meeting Emilio informed me he was falling behind in his work and as a result had to turn away projects.  Rather than turn away projects I proposed we work together on a referral basis.  Since I had several more years’ experience landscaping, more business management experience, and previously ran my own landscaping business, I saw an opportunity for us to mutually benefit by working together.  I generously offered to deeply discount my usual hourly rate on a few projects to help Emilio get caught up. In exchange for helping him complete a few projects he was behind on, Emilio was supposed to subcontract me entire projects once he was caught up.  For each contract I was awarded through Emilio I offered to pay him a referral fee.  Following a second meeting where we discussed my proposal further, and with some terms left to be decided, we proceeded on this basis. 

4)      The amount of time I spent helping Emilio get caught up on his work was far greater than I initially agreed to.  What was only supposed to be 2-3 weeks spanned roughly 7 weeks. This was due, in part, to the fact that a couple of the jobs required more work than Emilio initially estimated.  Further, it is my opinion that poor planning on some projects and a costly mistake made by Emilio on one project in North Vancouver caused even more delays.  

5)      During the 7 weeks I spent working with True North Landscaping, Emilio maintained it was still his intention to subcontract me entire jobs, as evidenced by text messages received from him.  On this basis I continued working with True North Landscaping.  My expectation was he would start subcontracting me entire projects the week of August 17, 2015 when he expected to finally be caught up.

6)      During my last week with True North Landscaping I spent the better part of it fixing a costly mistake that easily could have been avoided.  A patio laid by True North Landscaping was not properly squared to the house.  As a result, it looked crooked when viewing it from the deck or other parts of the yard.  I properly identified the reason for the deficiency and corrected it by lifting up the stones and relaying the patio, which was a very time consuming process.  This experience was very frustrating too since I was getting paid a fraction of my typical hourly rate to fix someone else’s mistakes.

7)      On August 16, 2015, after spending several of the best weeks of the season helping him get caught up on his projects; Emilio terminated my employment, by his own admission, Without Cause and informed me he would not be subcontracting me work.  Terminating an employee or contractor Without Cause is grounds for Wrongful Dismissal.  As such, at law, Emilio was in the wrong.

8)   My decision to pursue Emilio for lesser damages was based on economics opposed to the strength of my case.  I went for the minimum severance based on my actual earnings with True North Landscaping simply because I did not believe Emilio had the financial means to payout a large settlement even if I won.  Mr. Heywood, a lawyer for some 20 plus years should see the wisdom in extracting the most value possible out of a claim, which is what I did.   

9)    Following my release from True North Landscaping I was unemployed for approximately 4 weeks before I secured a new contract worth a lot more than Emilio was paying me.  This was arguably mitigation, something Mr. Heywood should have been alive to, but which he apparently was not.  But perhaps it takes more than 20 years of practicing employment law to learn the last of approximately five total defences that exist to a wrongful dismissal claim.

10)   Greg J. Heywood states in his last report that, ‘Ultimately he accepted $1,500 in nusuance [sic: nuisance] money to go away.’  The decision to settle was NOT motivated by Greg’s defense which I felt was very, very weak.   My decision to settle was based on the following:

i)  I felt bad for Emilio.  It appeared as though the lawsuit was putting a strain on him personally and financially, especially in the face of Greg’s presumably expensive bills and failure to take the care to spell some words correctly.

ii)  I made my point.  More important for me than the money was making it clear that I expect people to do right by me if I do right by them.  I am a man of principle.  Despite wanting to quit out of frustration several times during my tenure with True North Landscaping, I made good on my commitment to help Emilio get caught up.  When he did not honor his stated intention to subcontract me jobs this really frustrated me, especially when I thought about how much more I could have earned had I worked for myself or someone else during those 7 weeks and for the few weeks I was unemployed following my release.  Anyone who hires me in the future should also expect this reciprocal level of respect.

iii) $1,500.00 represented roughly 2.5 weeks of my weekly earnings at True North Landscaping based on my discounted hourly rate and average number of hours worked per week.  The hours I worked each week were generally not full-time.  Given that I found new employment approximately 4 weeks after being released from True North Landscaping the most I would probably get is 4 weeks’ severance at trial if I won my case.  To take time off work and continue fighting for potentially another week or two of severance at  this rate wasn’t worth my time, especially when you factor in my current daily, weekly and monthly earnings. 

11)   My final settlement was NOT ‘$108,500 short of my initial demand’ as Greg J. Heywood has stated.  Moreover, I, as a self-represented individual, took every penny of value out of a case against him.  It would appear that Greg Heywood, after twenty plus years’ practice, perhaps focuses too much attention on cases which in his view are nusunces [sic] rather than, say, cases where people pay him a lot of money to fight more important fights. 

12)   In his original report Greg J. Heywood claims:

Chase worked as a contractor for approximately 7 weeks.  His contract was terminated and then he filed a dermand [sic: demand] letter claiming he was an employee, was owed severance of $110,000 plus legal costs. He then threatened to sue in BC Supreme Court for this amount.  When his claim was rejected, he filed a suit in Provincial Court seeking $9,836 which he claims is 3 months notice.

Some people have interpreted the above to mean that I actually filed a claim for $110,000, plus legal costs in BC Supreme Court and the court rejected my claim.  This is not at all true.  I never filed a claim for $110,000, plus legal costs.  Nor was any such claim rejected by the BC Supreme Court.  The only claim I filed against Greg J. Heywood’s client was for $9, 836 in BC small claims court. 

13)   Greg J. Heywood stated in his last report that ‘Chase was ordered to pay $150 in Court costs as he failed to attend for an application.’  The application he is referring to is for an application I wanted to make to a judge to have him removed as counsel for his conduct.  I found his language to be very unprofessional in a few emails he sent to me where he used inflammatory language.  Language he was advised to refrain from using by the Law Society.  I missed the application, which I admit.  At least he is right about that.  This is unfortunate because I would like to have heard what a judge had to say about his conduct.  Further, if my application succeeded I was looking forward to dealing with more reasonable counsel. 

I’m a designated business professional with an MBA and a great breadth of business experience.  And I conduct myself in an ethical and professional manner.  When Emilio terminated me I didn’t immediately go on the internet and start posting negative comments and reviews about him on Ripoff Report or any other sites.  Why?  Because it wouldn’t help matters any.  When it comes to civil disputes this is what the court is for.  Why Greg J. Heywood, a litigation attorney, couldn’t leave his fight in the courts is beyond me.  Emilio claims he never told Greg J. Heywood to publish the reports and insists he has nothing to do with him.  So if Emilio, his client, doesn’t see value in publishing these reports why would Greg J. Heywood do such a thing?  Questionable behaviour if you ask me.  I know if any of my lawyers did such a thing I would be furious. In my view, lawyers are supposed to engage in tactics that yield fair and equitable results for the money their clients pay them.  As such, I fail to see how Mr. Heywood’s reports on this site do any such thing. If I were Emilio, I wouldn’t be happy with Greg’s result, especially if he charged a pretty penny for doing so.

In summary, these reports just demonstrate that you cannot believe everything you read, especially if it is on the internet.  Even if the reports were published by a designated professional such as a lawyer. Recall that Mr. Heywood is:

1. Not neutral;
2. Advancing so-called ‘nusunce’ claim defences as senior counsel;
3. Not careful enough to spell some words correctly; and,
4. Angry enough, for whatever reason, to broadcast his grievances to the world.

As a designated professional, who is required to conduct research as part of their living, I know the internet contains a lot of misinformation. Further, as I was taught in school, to be truly objective one is required to examine ALL of the evidence that is available before passing a judgement.  This means collecting and examining the facts from each perspective that is a party to a dispute or witness to an event. Withholding information to mislead someone is therefore dishonest and passing judgements without having critically examined all of the evidence is irresponsible.  

Greg J. Heywood's conduct during and immediately following my action against his client is not the type of behaviour I would expect from my attorneys.  If I discovered my counsel posted reports of this nature on any website or spoke to the opposing side the way he did then I would have fired them immediately.  And I certainly would not recommend their services to anyone.  Grow up Greg J. Heywood.  I suggest you use your time more wisely, especially if your clients are paying you for it.   

As a lawyer I have no doubt that you charge a retainer fee prior to taking on a case, what work have you done to receive this? If a client dismisses you, do you not go after them for costs or do you just forgrt about any work done until that time? Do you feel your profession is the only one to receive funds up front, but those who put out contractual work or other work upon being dismissed, should receive nothing?

Do you go around publicly posting outcomes of your cases and trying to humiliate and embarrass others, if so. why? Is ther money in it for you or do you not have enough client's? I see you do not have any reviews on - line, why is that? Ther are many lawyers with excellent reviews on - line, but none that were noticeable bearing your name.

I find it very questionable that a lawyer would go on - line and make the absolute ridiculous comments and statements that you have. I certainly would never hire someone like you!!! I would be embarrased to collect monies from client's and not feel that people in other occupations should have the same entitlement for services rendered. This is what you call Labour Law, seriously. One law for you but a different one for others. I guess some people have no shame nor a conscience and perhaps to much time on your hands. Thank, God we live in a country that allows us to freely express our opinions.

Is this the type of lawyer one would really like to hire?

Chase did file a Law Society complaint against Heywood, it was dismissed. Chase did not make an application to have Heywood removed as counsel. Chase was ordered to pay $150 in Court costs as he failed to attend for an application. Ultimately he accepted $1,500 in nusuance money to go away.

That was only $108,500 short of his initial demand.  You draw your own conclusions.

Greg Heywood (see attached photo) is the opposing counsel for an employment litigation I have against his client, Emilio Bottiglieri, operating as True North Landscaping in North Vancouver, BC.  In my view, Greg Heywood is one of the most unprofessional lawyers I have ever dealt with. He prides himself on his 'aggressive style' as noted in his bio on Roper Greyell's website: www.ropergreyell.com.  

In the same bio he feels the need to point out that he 'loves to ski, travel, support the Canucks as well as spend time teasing his colleagues, his wife and three daughters as well as any collateral boyfriends.'  This just sounds pathetic to me. I would expect this type of content in a bully's bio.  It is not something I would expect to read in the bio of a professional lawyer.  

True to his word, Greg, is aggressive in his style.  Unfortunatley, he has acted so aggressively towards me since he took on the file that I reported him to the BC Law Society for inappropriate behaviour.  Without ever having met me, or examined all of the evidence from both sides, he immediately started bashing me in emails and using language the Law Society asked him to refrain from using as they too felt it wasn't appropriate.   More troubling is the fact that his version of the facts of this case as reported on this site have subjected himself and his client to a potential defamation lawsuit.  What sensible lawyer would risk opening himself and his client(s) up to a defamation suit?  Seems like a very stupid risk to me.  Would you want to hire a lawyer who puts you, your case and himself at risk unecessarily?

I've had a few defammation lawyers review this report and most were surprised that another lawyer would publish such a report, as they all generally felt it was an inappropriate thing for a lawyer to do. Some of them couldn't believe a lawyer would ever do such a thing. A few asked me if I was sure it wasn't his client who posted it and was only pretending to be Greg.  Luckily for me, Greg admitted to posting the report in an email to me.  I was surprised myself when he admitted to it.

It seems Greg has lost his professional objective as evidenced by his report and the inappropriate language he used in some of his emails to me.  Instead of keeping the battle in the courts, which is the appropriate venue for my action against his client, he has stooped to a sad low for a professional.  For his actions, I have filed an application to a judge to have Greg dismissed from this case for his behaviour.  I look forward to hearing what a judge has to say about this report and Greg's language in some of his emails to me. My guess is the judge will be the opposite of impressed with Mr. Heywood.  

I'm also contemplating a defamation suit against Greg and his client for this silly report as I believe they have misrepresented the facts of my case in an effort to discredit my reputation by leveraging 3 false reports about me on this site.  What a pathetic tactic.  I would expect this low blow from someone who is either desperate, stupid or poorly educated (or any combination of the three). Judging by the poor spelling and grammar in Greg's report I'm inclined to think Mr. Heywood may fit in all three categories.  

Personally, I would NEVER hire or recommend Greg Heywood's services to anyone.  I think he's an idiot.  

×

1 / 0

❮ ❯