A Canadian’s 4-year legal ordeal in Taiwan
Dear International News Media,
Important note: This post summarizes my personal account and my interpretation of a documented dispute and related proceedings. It is shared for journalistic review and public-interest discussion, not as a campaign against Taiwan or its people. I respect Taiwan’s society and democratic development, and I am not asking anyone to accept my conclusions without examining the underlying record. Where I describe events as “frightening,” “hostile,” “unclear,” or “unfair,” I am describing my experience and perspective. If any party believes a statement is inaccurate, I welcome a right of reply and correction based on verifiable documentation.
I hope this message finds you well. I am reaching out to share a serious, time-sensitive story involving questions of procedural fairness in a case that affected my ability to remain in Taiwan. I lived in Taiwan since 2009 and built my life there. Over the last several years, I have been involved in an escalating legal process that, in my view, may illustrate how foreign residents can feel vulnerable when a private dispute becomes adversarial and consequences become severe.
Background of My Case
In 2019, I became entangled in a landlord dispute that followed a safety incident and unresolved security concerns. I received a phone call that I experienced as frightening, and I experienced encounters that I perceived as hostile and intimidating. At the time, I believed I did not have a reliably secure locking entry and that my safety concerns were not being addressed.
In fear and urgency, I briefly published a rental agreement online to document what I understood the agreement to be regarding repairs and maintenance. That decision was not made to harass, defame, or target anyone; it was made to document my understanding while I was attempting to restore safety and accountability. When I was told to remove it, I removed it.
Key point: My position has consistently been that context matters — including fear, duress, and necessity — and that these factors should be considered when evaluating actions taken in an attempt to protect basic safety. I am not alleging misconduct by “Taiwan” as a whole; I am asking for careful review of a specific record, on its own facts.
The Legal Process
Over the past several years, I have faced multiple legal actions, financial penalties, and the risk of imprisonment. I maintain that evidence and context that would typically matter — including witness accounts and extensive documentation — have not, in my view, been weighed in a manner that feels proportionate and even-handed. I recognize that others may disagree with my interpretation; that is precisely why I am requesting independent scrutiny of the underlying record and outcomes.
Concerns About Equal Treatment
What has been particularly concerning to me is how the process felt as a foreign resident — not as an abstract accusation, but as an experience I am documenting: procedures that were difficult to navigate, communication that felt inconsistent, and a sense that safeguards can feel weaker when you are an outsider and the stakes rise. I am asking media to review and test the record, including the proportionality of outcomes.
Request for Media Review
Taiwan is widely recognized for democratic values and civic openness, and I am mindful of that context. My purpose is not to attack Taiwan or to encourage hostility toward its institutions or people. Rather, I am requesting that journalists examine whether this particular sequence of events and decisions reflects a gap between stated protections and lived experience for some foreign residents when disputes become adversarial.
Sincerely,
Ross Cline 柯受恩
rosscline.com
iLearn.tw
English video (personal account & request for independent review)
Chinese voiceover (same topic, for Chinese-speaking viewers)
Context (applies to both videos)
These videos present my personal account and request independent public review of documented events and legal proceedings. I welcome examination of the full record.
Spoken Text from Video — Edited for Clarity and Context
Edited for readability and tone; intended to preserve the meaning while avoiding inflammatory phrasing.
Can you see me clearly? Thank you for watching.
I arrived in Taiwan in 2009 and established a language school. For many years my work and life there were stable. Over time, however, a series of disputes and disruptions — including severe construction noise next door that significantly affected my living and working conditions — led to ongoing conflict and legal proceedings.
This video is a request for public-interest review and independent media attention. My intention is not publicity for commercial gain, but to seek careful examination of a situation that I experienced as deeply distressing and difficult to resolve through normal channels.
For several years I have been involved in legal proceedings arising from a landlord dispute. At the time, I believed there were serious safety concerns at the property, including issues with security and access. In that context, and under significant stress, I briefly published a copy of my rental agreement online in order to document what I understood to be contractual obligations regarding repairs and maintenance. When asked to remove the document, I did so.
Since that time, the legal process has involved financial penalties and the risk of imprisonment. I have experienced significant difficulty obtaining legal assistance or affordable representation, and the procedures have at times been challenging for me to understand as a foreign resident navigating a complex legal system in a language not my own.
During this period, I also experienced communications and interactions that I perceived as threatening or intimidating. These events contributed to my sense of fear and urgency at the time decisions were made. I provide documentation, recordings, and timelines so that these matters may be independently evaluated.
The situation had serious personal and professional consequences. I invested substantial resources into my school, including renovations and operational costs during the COVID period, when new enrollment was extremely limited. The dispute ultimately affected my livelihood, my stability, and my ability to remain in Taiwan, where I had built my life for more than a decade.
I share this account respectfully and in good faith. I do not claim to have all answers, nor do I ask anyone to accept my conclusions without review. I ask only that the full record — including context, proportionality, and the human impact of the proceedings — be examined carefully and transparently.
I remain available to provide documentation, clarify details, or participate in interviews. My hope is that independent scrutiny may help ensure fair consideration of the facts and appropriate resolution.
Ross Cline 柯受恩
rosscline.com
iLearn.tw
📄 Full Interview Transcript (tidy, expandable)
Formatted for readability. This is a cleaned presentation of your provided transcript text.
Benoit F. Massé: Hello everyone, and welcome. Today we're going to talk about something quite serious — legal issues in Taiwan. I think it's important for people to understand, before coming to Taiwan, what they can expect, what the culture is like, and also the risks involved with legal disputes. It's a tough subject, but I hope today will be useful. Ross, I’ll let you introduce yourself briefly.
Ross Cline: Hi, my name is Ross Cline. I’m from Canada — New Brunswick, on the East Coast, near Maine, USA. I moved to Taiwan in 2009 and opened a school near City Hall in Taichung.
Benoit F. Massé: Okay, so that was in 2009, right?
Ross Cline: Yes.
Benoit F. Massé: You were an English teacher. You also have a website for teaching English, is that correct?
Ross Cline: Yes — rosscline.com, C-L-I-N-E. And also iLearn.tw, which was the name of the company in Taiwan. It was based right beside City Hall in 2009. It was fully legal and legitimate. I was running my own small school. After living there for 15 years, I never expected my life could be disrupted so dramatically by a legal process.
Benoit F. Massé: How did you first come to Taiwan? Did you have friends there? What brought you here?
Ross Cline: I first came at 18 for the summer to teach English — back when the High-Speed Rail was still being built. Later, I lived in Toronto for five years, then in Germany for a year and a half. Eventually, I decided to open a school in late 2009 in Taichung — and that’s what I did.
Benoit F. Massé: So you started your school, it’s going well — and then you signed a rental contract. Is that where things began to go wrong?
Ross Cline: Yes. After many good years at the City Hall location, a cram school opened next door and began heavy construction noise during class times. It severely affected my ability to teach and live normally. In hindsight, I wish I had known then what I know now about how to handle such disputes.
Benoit F. Massé: Is that common? Have you heard of similar situations?
Ross Cline: Landlord disputes can be difficult anywhere. My advice to people is to understand that dynamics can be different than what you might expect, and if enforcement is needed, you may have to pursue formal channels carefully.
Benoit F. Massé: Let’s get into the substance. What actually led you to leave Taiwan?
Ross Cline: I moved in a hurry and found a place that felt like the school of my dreams. But it became a serious dispute. I believed the structure of the situation made it difficult for a tenant — especially a foreign tenant — to protect themselves if things went wrong. I documented the broader record at rosscline.com/scam and ilearn.tw/scam.
Benoit F. Massé: You shared the contract online, and she sued you for exposing private information. What private info was even in the contract?
Ross Cline: The address. And in Taiwan, that can become criminal exposure under the Personal Data Protection Act. If you’re new to these issues, you wouldn’t expect a brief posting of a rental contract, in the context of a dispute, to become years of criminal litigation. My position is that context — including fear, duress, and the underlying dispute — should matter in evaluating intent and proportionality.
Ross Cline: This became devastating personally. I built a life in Taiwan and formed deep connections there, including family-like ties. So it wasn’t “just a legal problem” — it forced me to leave a place I considered home.
Benoit F. Massé: For people unfamiliar with Taiwan, we should say this isn’t going to happen to everyone, right?
Ross Cline: It’s rare, but it’s life-altering. I built a business in Taiwan for 15 years. If I had understood I could be this exposed, I would have made different decisions earlier.
Benoit F. Massé: You went to trial and received your sentence — but you still had the opportunity to leave Taiwan?
Ross Cline: My Taiwanese lawyer advised me to leave, and I did. Shortly afterward, I learned the authorities were looking for me. I left to avoid incarceration while continuing to seek review through lawful channels.
Benoit F. Massé: So all of this… just because you shared a rental contract?
Ross Cline: That was the trigger — a brief posting in the context of a dispute and fear for safety, followed by removal and apologies. And yet the consequences escalated far beyond what a reasonable person would expect.
Benoit F. Massé: Is there anything you want to add?
Ross Cline: I hope this helps people understand how high the stakes can be. My goal is careful scrutiny of the record and a fair resolution. I’m not here to dox anyone or stir hostility. I’m here to publish documents, tell my experience, and request an independent review. Stay updated at ilearn.tw/scam and rosscline.com/scam.
Benoit F. Massé: Thank you.
Ross Cline: Thank you.
Video Evidence
Additional Context (phone call & mediation recording):
Later, I learned it was the landlord’s husband who made the phone call that I experienced as frightening, after I was informed that his wife identified him in a police report. There is additional context. During what I call “the farcical mediation event” video I recorded in Hsinchu, after I said, “That’s the man,” he responded in a way that appeared to treat my statement as a reference to that phone call. He then placed several mobile phones on the table and asserted that he was not the person who called and screamed profanities at me. I considered it notable that he interpreted my remark in that specific way.
I was further spooked when he asked me to call the number from which I had received this call, suggesting that doing so would demonstrate that he was not the caller. In my view, that request did not logically establish the point being asserted.
I am describing these events as I perceived them and as they appear in the recording. I offer this as context for why I experienced the situation as unsettling, and why I believe the record merits careful, independent review. I am not presenting this as a definitive conclusion about anyone’s intentions, and I welcome correction if any portion is shown to be inaccurate by verifiable evidence.
