TammyFlores

Did you know that the Freedom of Information and Privacy Act is very helpful when you are trying to get information that you are entitled to? After 5 very long years... I just received all kinds of documentation. Things are about to get interesting.

And here in lies the reason why the problem exists.

One thing I have learned in all of this ordeal is how to be patient. Trust me... I have not wavered for 5 years and don't plan to any time soon. It's like the ripples in a pond. It takes one rock to start it, but that one initial splash spreads to encompass the entire area. Invoice supression is just the tip of the iceburg and is very relavant to what is happening. That's why there is many of complaints of people not receiving a bill for years after so called charges incurred. I don't believe it to be a lawful practice if you are expecting to be able to collect interest and other fees. As for the police laying charges re:extortion. If I have enough people with a solid case like my own, the police have a responsibility under law to press charges. So far, I have about 6 other cases gathered. I need more before I can do anything. There are already things in place people have to start using. Charging the 407 ETR with extortion is just one avenue. There's also the "amicable agreement" the Province made with the 407 in March of 2006. Schedule B of the agreement says that the plate denial process is enforceable if the charges are lawful. When the 407 ETR can not bill correctly and make billing errors. Many charges are not lawful, therefore there is a responsibilty for the Ministry of Transportation to recognize that and refuse plate denial until the 407 supplies full disclosure and lawful justification for the charges. Anything less is unacceptable. People are not aware of this because the Ministry and the 407 simply try tossing you back and forth with muddied, convoluted reasoning. It's not acceptable and people need to speak up. I don't care how big the 407 appears. They don't have the right to stamp all over people's rights. I am not intimidated by them. They are a foreign company on our soil. They are here because the government showed how we needed congestion relief. The government decided on a market solution, which I have no problem with. My problem is that now that there are issues, they are turning a blind eye it. That must absolutely stop! This is an abuse of power by a private, foreign enterprise. The government absolutely, already has within their power, measures to take for these issues, but are refusing to do it. More people need to speak up and let them know we aren't in the dark anymore. Don't take no for an answer when the answer is yes.

This is an update re: 407 ETR issues. After 5, very long, years, of squabbling back and forth, the 407 ETR has finally reprinted invoices for the account they gave me, that was someone elses, and sent them to me. It still remains only a partial accounting. The 407 ETR has maintained that since I owned the license plate, then I own the charges, however, the problem is that I opened an account with that license plate and was never informed that there were outstanding amounts owed on that plate. They still have not explained that, nor have they given me the justification of giving me someone elses account. Their claim is that I owned the plate from October 2000, however, they only went back to March 18th, 2005 with the reprinted invoices, of an account that belonged to someone else. For a company that can go after you for 15 years... timing should not be an issue. To ascertain weather the charges they are claiming against me are lawful, I need full disclosure. What is wrong with this company? Do they speak english? What part of full disclosure is not understood to these people? For those interested, I'll keep you posted. It seems taking my plight online has opened some ears. Thanks to all those that gave me good advice.

It's not even about paying the toll. It's about them being able to charge you what ever they want, without justification, just a number on an invoice and taking away your driver's permit. Schedule B of the agreement the Ministry signed with the Province says the plate denial process is enforceable unless the charges are not lawful. Because the Province wants the relationship with their private partner to work, they turn a blind eye to what this company is doing to the people in the Province of Ontario. This absolutely must change.

Here's what everyone is missing. Better planning is required than the status quo. The 407 was built for "Congestion Relief", not to shorten our commute times. Problem has always been improper planning for the Province's growth plan. The 407 merely takes the growth portion of the 905er's. It does little for the existing congestion. With the "Places to Grow" initative there has been more intensification in all ready developed areas. That growth does not work within their communities. They commute. 407 was not sold. It was leased for a private company to operate. Province owns the highway. They can not sell our infrastructure. I say they should start collecting the congestion relief charges from the 407 because their costs, customer services and billing issues do not encourage anyone to take that highway. I commute on the 401 everyday and I do not see any congestion relief. Private/public relationships require more accountability than what there is currently. To bring more Toll Roads without fixing the current problem is a mistake.

The whole problem with practicing "Invoice Suppression" is that mistakes that are made and are not being dealt with. The public is being extorted money that lawfully is not the 407 ETR's to extort. The Ministry of Transportation has been turning a blind eye to it. I say enough is enough. The Ministry of Transportation absolutely has a responsibility to the public with regards to the 407 ETR's business practices because it is a collection agency for this private company. The Ministry has a responsibility to make sure the charges are lawful. Schedule B of the "Amicable Settlement" signed March 31, 2006 between the Ministry and the 407 says that the process of plate denail is enforceable unless the charges are not lawful. If the 407 ETR is not billing people correctly, charges are not lawful and so the Ministry of Transportation has a responsibility to deny the 407 ETR's claim for plate denial, however, when you bring it to their attention, they double talk you and try to brush you off saying it's a billing issue between you and the 407. I'm sorry, but as long as the Ministry isn't giving you a sticker because the 407 ETR has you in plate denial, without proof of lawful charges, it's the Ministry's responsibility to do something about it!!!

I have to agree that when a block of land comes up for development, more should be done re: Transportation, however, every Municipality/Region can C.Y.A. by using the live/work designs and other Transit initiatives, ect... Get smart enough engineers on the case and anything will look good on paper. The Provincial Policy Statement, due to be re looked at needs to absolutely address this. Check this out. https://www.placestogrow.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9&Itemid=14 "Places to Grow" is a 25 year initative. Some highlights are to revitalize downtowns to become vibrant and convenient centres. Create complete communities that offer more options for living, working, learning, shopping and playing. Provide housing options to meet the needs of people at any age. Curb sprawl and protect farmland and green spaces. Reduce traffic gridlock by improving access to a greater range of transportation options. Looks like it's a great initiative, but needs serious tweeking because of the intensification in already developed areas, these people are not working where they live, hence the traffic jams that we experience every single day. The 407 ETR, in my opinion, without looking at the numbers basically took the growth from the 905 area off the 401, not much "Congestion Relief" for the already existing congestion. The talk of more Toll Roads makes the hair on my arms stand up because questions come up like will it be another Public/Private adventure? If so, will the public continue to be extorted because the government refuses to hold the private partner accountable for shaby business practices, wrong billing and the worse customer service on the face of the planet? Because they are small amounts being extorted, does that make it easier to turn a blind eye? The current Private/Public relationship between the Ministry of Transportation and the 407 ETR is so convuluted and muddied that they just double talk and try to brush you off when you have a serious problem. THIS IS NOT IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC!!!

I hope we have learned enough from the 407 ETR experience. Here you have a road that was built for congestion relief. The public was sold on it's benefit. Legislation was changed in order to have it privately run. Then under the spirit of public/private co-operation, market driven solutions for our needs (which by the way I don't have a problem with as long as the public actually benefits from it)... we have a privately run highway, with public co-operation in that the Ministry of Transportation has become it's collection agency. Although on paper and through many public announcements, the 407 ETR has put it's best foot forward as saying it has spent $50,000,000.00 to improve it's billing system and customer service. The fact that people are still experiencing billing issues and the 407 ETR instead of dealing with the issues in a lawful manner, will put you in plate denial, is unacceptable. In 2003, there was a class action lawsuit against them where section 347 of the criminal code was sited (extortion) among many other things for the way it was charging late fees and interest. The 407 was quick to deny any wrong doing under the criminal code and amicably settled reimbursing 100% of late fees and interest charges collected due to billing errors and little more than 1/2 for the exorbatant $30.00 fee. In 2006, there was what the 407 ETR claimed an "Amicable Settlement of all Disputes" with the Ministry of Transportation. In that settlement under Schedule "B" re: Process for Plate Denial, it was agreed that the Ministry of Transportation would collect unless the charge of the 407 was not lawful. However, still to this day, in 2010, there are many cases where the 407 ETR does not prove that charges were lawful and yet the Ministry of Transportation will collect on their behalf. I think the 407 ETR can still be challenge with extortion under the criminal code and the Ministry of Transportation may be unknowningly participating in the crime. Why do I bring all of this up? Because we still have serious problems with the current Toll Road and to start talking about another one is irresponsible. The current condition of the 407 ETR is such that they are abusing the power the government gave them and the govenment is turning a blind eye to it. Maybe it's time for all the people that have billing issues with the 407 ETR, that has been put in plate denial to band together, go to a Justice of the Peace and inquire about having criminal charges laid against the 407 ETR, under the criminal code for extortion because until they fix their billing issues, in a lawful manner, bringing another Toll Road in spells disaster for the public.

Well I was doing some reasearch and I stumbled accross this document from the 407 ETR in 2005. Presented by Enrique Diaz-Rato, President and Chief Executive Officer of the 407 ETR http://www.macquarie.com.au/au/mig/news/attachments/2005_05_10_407_Presentation.pdf Under reducing return mail and improving payments on Page 36 it speaks of "invoice suppression". What is that? I have never heard of that practice before. I know that dictionary.com defines surpress as follows: Word Origin & History suppress late 14c., "to put down by force or authority," from L. suppressus, pp. of supprimere "press down, stop, check, stifle," from sub "down, under" + premere "push against" (see press (v.1)). Sense of "prevent or prohibit the circulation of" is from 1560. sup·press (sə-prěs') tr.v. sup·pressed, sup·press·ing, sup·press·es 1) To put an end to forcibly; subdue. 2) To curtail or prohibit the activities of. 3) To keep from being revealed, published, or circulated. 4) To deliberately exclude (unacceptable desires or thoughts) from the mind. 5) To inhibit the expression of (an impulse, for example); check: suppress a smile. 6) To reduce the incidence or severity of (a hemorrhage or cough, for example); arrest. It just opened a hole can of worms for me because when I google "invoice suppression" I come up with cases involving fraud which lead me to wonder if this is a legal business practice and if so weather or not there are any perameters it is practiced in, ect... So I am just wondering if anyone has ever heard of it, or know of any cases of fraud using it, ect... Just curious I guess you could say and since there's a lot of smart people on this forum I thought I ask if you know what it is or if anyone has ever heard of it.

Hi again. I am still going with the theme Business in the Province of Ontario, however, this thread is dedicated to a practice called "Invoice Suppression". Is this legal in the Province of Ontario? Is there parameters that this is allowed to be practiced? Does anyone know of Fraud cases where they were tried re: "Invoice Suppression"? It's an interesting concept that I discovered is being practiced here in the Province of Ontario.

I have contacted his office in 2006 with no response. He's the MPP I was referring to that did the report. I put a call into Frank Klee's office. I will put another call intp Mike Colle's office today. Thanks

@Wild Bill this has been very helpful... I got to about page 4 or 5 in my google search and that's how I found Frank Klees comments and I then realized he was the transportation critic. That was only a few days ago and I immediately fired off an email because I want to tackle this as an organized effort. Do you know of any other off the top of your head? That would be very helpful. I am determined to see this to the end because I have a very hard time believing that MTO does not require the burden of proof from the 407 before they deny a plate.

Yes he is Liberal. I did contact Frank Klees office, but I never heard back yet. Everything you are saying may be true, but that does not mean that we just roll over and take it. The government is acting like a private collection agency for one company. That in itself I think can be challenged if a lawyer wanted to. I tell you, if a lawyer wanted to put together a class action lawsuit for millions... I would do everything in my power to help gather all the information. As a matter of fact I have already started gather information. I started a facebook group "Stop the 407 ETR's Abuse of Power!" The horror stories people are messaging me. I told them to get their paper work in order and we are going to meet and discuss them and then try to find someone that will take it on for a percentage of the winnings. This may be the only way to fix this problem.

Maybe this is a better way to ask my question for any legal begals out there. In the Province of Ontario do charges exists if the company can not provide you with documentation that proves their claim that you owe?

But I came to this forum to ask about Business in general in the Province of Ontario. Can a company charge you for just anything or do you have to know in advance what you are being charged for? If they provide you with a service, don't they have to justify the charges before they say pay up or can they just say you owe this amount and provide absolutely no documentation behind what they are claiming you owe? If a business in Ontario makes a billing error, is it the customers fault?

There is a reporter I have been keeping in the loop that is as frustrated as I am over the 407's abuse of power that the government gave them.

Ministry for Consumers refuses to do anything re: 407 ETR... hense my quest to find an answer to the question. If a company makes a claim that you owe them, but does not provide you with the documentation/proof behind their claim, do the charges exist?

My MPP's office has been involved for years and so is Jake Irwin from MTO but everyone is passing the buck on this one.

The invoices/account belonged to another person. 5 years after the fact they said... you are responsible for charges from Oct 19, 2000 onward. They say from Oct. 19, 2000 to sometime in 2005 I should have been responsible for the charges that they were billing to someone else. They took the invoices/account that they billed and belonged to another person, reprinted only from August 2002 to 2005... charge a bunch of interest/late fees and said pay up. First of all, can they do that? I had an account with them, in my name... always paid my bill, can they just give you someone elses account? Then my next question is if there are charges and I am responsible(which I still do not know what went on in that account)... but if there are charges I am responsible for, would I be responsible for interest and late fees because of their billing error?

The company is making a claim, but providing no details or proof of what they are claiming.

I don't want to get into all the details, but in a nutshell, the 407 ETR, gave me someone else's account, 5 years after they say I should have been responsible for charges that they were billing someone else, however never provided the details/documentation behind what they are claiming. For 5 years I have requested the documentation, however, for 5 years they never fully disclosed their claim. If they don't provide you with proof that the charges actually exist, do they exist? And if they do exist, do they not have a responsibility to provide you with the documentation that shows what the charges they are trying to claim is for?

But how do you know if you owe them if they don't provide you with any documentation?