Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc.

PENSIONS IN BANKRUPTCY: FEDERAL CONSERVATIVE PARTY PROMISE MASSIVE CANADIAN WORKER PENSION PROTECT1ON

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 2, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Pension & Bankruptcy in Canada

Underfunding is a major concern for traditional, defined-benefit pension plans. In other words, do they have enough pension assets and therefore enough money to meet their projected future pension obligations? Inadequate actuarial assumptions, poor investment returns, and mismanagement can lead to pension plan underfunding. In the case of corporate insolvency of a large employer with a defined-benefit pension plan, this issue always arises. Underfunded pensions in bankruptcy wind up hurting retirees.

The Sears Canada court-supervised liquidation forced us to again focus on the treatment of pensioners in corporate bankruptcies under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) or restructurings and liquidations under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). It was widely reported that representative for 17,000 Sears Canada retirees says insolvency laws are unjust when it comes to underfunded pensions.

PM Justin Trudeau is the only person who wants this election right now. Erin O’Toole, leader of the Conservative Party, promised to prioritize pensioners ahead of companies and creditors during bankruptcy and restructuring proceedings if he were elected.

This Brandon Blog discusses the issue of pensions in bankruptcy and how the Liberals had several opportunities to fix it but did not.

Pensions in bankruptcy: Pension and benefits issues in bankruptcy and restructuring

Pensioners suffer pension losses and ultimately pension income losses when a company is insolvent and its defined benefit pension fund plan is underfunded. In practice, the pensioners’ rights are weak and highly inadequate, especially when pension plans are underfunded. Although provincial and federal government pension legislation purports to offer some protection for amounts owing to an underfunded pension plan, insolvency legislation does not preserve that protection for the majority of those amounts. The insolvency protection of pensioners and pensions in bankruptcy is thus largely illusory.

Founder and Director of the National Centre for Business Law, Dr. Janis Sarra teaches law at Peter A. Allard School of Law. Canadian pensioners and employees, she believes, are among the worst protected pensions in bankruptcy and/or in insolvency among 60 countries.

In every Canadian province and territory, pensioners are protected by law in connection with pension deficits and pension payments. Specifically, every jurisdiction grants a deemed trust to protect employee pensions earned on employer assets owed to pension plans. The Pension Benefits Standards Act, which governs federally regulated pension plans, specifies the amounts that must be held separately from the employer’s funds, for example. Funds held in trust for active and retired pension plan members are not considered a part of the employer’s estate in liquidation or bankruptcy.

Under the Pension Benefits Act in Ontario, employers are required to hold all amounts owing to the pension plan in trust on behalf of their employees. According to the Supreme Court of Canada, the Ontario Pension Benefits Act creates a deemed trust over the entire wind-up deficit, subject only to the doctrine of paramountcy. Therefore, Ontario’s pension legislation expressly recognizes that the deemed trust is covered by all amounts of the employer owing to the pension plan.

The pension legislation in Quebec confers a deemed trust on special payments due in the year of insolvency. The special payments already due are deemed to be in trust, and the amount owing to the pension plan for unpaid special payments is deemed to be in trust based on Quebec’s pension law.

Due to other judicial decisions not giving effect to these deemed trusts in BIA and CCAA proceedings, the federal and provincial pension legislation has been hindered. In the meantime, to the extent that the BIA and CCAA protect pensions, the protection is negligible in practice. In Ontario (and every other province), provincial law protections are subject to the doctrine of paramountcy.

Paramountcy says that in the conflict between federal and provincial laws, federal law takes precedence. Both the BIA and CCAA are federal laws. The Supreme Court of Canada has held that provincial deemed trusts are not applicable to bankruptcy cases unless the BIA expressly permits them. There have even been successful attacks on federal pension law.

In accordance with existing regulations, the secured creditors may receive funds that would otherwise go to employees’ pension plans. Therefore, there really isn’t much protection for pensions in bankruptcy.

Pensions in bankruptcy: PM Justin Trudeau had his chance to fix this problem

Erin O’Toole doesn’t seem to be bringing up a new subject. The Liberal federal government had at least three chances to fix this pension issue for Canadian workers whose employers become financially troubled and have to liquidate or file for bankruptcy. A brief look at the recent history follows.

Let’s look at some history of attempts to protect pensions in bankruptcy. The Canadian Association for Retired Persons, a nationwide not-for-profit group, lobbied politicians on Parliament Hill about legislation changes. According to Wanda Morris, vice-president of CARP, the unfunded pension liability should be given priority so that it is handled first.

There is no priority for retirees when it comes to dividing up assets in bankruptcy, and Morris wants to protect underfunded defined benefit pensions when the company goes through restructuring or bankruptcy.

CARP estimates that roughly 1.3 million Canadians, aside from the retired Sears employees, may be at risk due to defined benefit pension plans. The closure of Sears Canada stores made the plight of retirees a top priority for CARP.

Marilène Gill, Bloc Québécois MP, introduced a member’s BILL C-372, on Oct. 17, 2017. It was intended to change the BIA and the CCAA. The change seeks to correct the injustice faced by retired workers whose pension and insurance policy benefits are not secured when their company declares bankruptcy or undergoes restructuring. As a result of Sears Canada closing locations, the changes were related to the employees’ and retirees’ treatment.

On October 17, 2017, Bill C-372 passed First Reading. The House rarely passes private member’s bills like this one. The Liberal Party did not support taking it further and allowed it to die.

Hamilton Mountain NDP MP Scott Duvall asked for leave to introduce Bill C-384 in the House of Commons on November 6, 2017. He proposed amending Canada’s insolvency laws so that companies must bring any pension fund to 100% before paying any other secured creditors. Additionally, it requires companies to pay termination or severance pay owing before paying secured creditors. Similarly, this bill passed first reading and then died.

Lastly, Senator Art Eggleton, P.C., proposed BILL S-253 shortly before his retirement to amend the insolvency legislation in Canada. After First Reading passed on September 18, 2018, Second Reading followed on September 25. By introducing this bill, the BIA and CCAA would be amended. The plan proposed to give priority to claims for unfunded obligations or solvency deficiencies of pensions. This is applicable to both solvent companies as well as companies that might become insolvent if certain shareholder payments were made.

The proposed legislation would also amend the Pension Benefits Standards Act as well as the Pension Benefits Standards Regulations in order to enable the Superintendent of Financial Institutions to identify when a pension plan’s funding is impaired and to recommend to the employer the necessary steps to fix it. It is not surprising that the Liberal federal government did not carry forward this bill.

Pensions in bankruptcy: Erin O’Toole vows to force bankrupt firms to pay pensions over executive bonuses

The Hon. Erin O’Toole announced on August 24, 2021, that if he wins the election he plans to protect workers’ pensions. In bankruptcy and restructuring proceedings, he pledges to give priority to pensioners over the corporations and most other creditors.

According to him, as part of Canada’s Recovery Plan, a Conservative government will change the law to ensure that workers come first in cases of bankruptcy and reorganization.

The Conservative Party of Canada will also improve pension security by:

Preventing executives from receiving bonuses during a time of restructuring unless the pension plan is fully funded.
Unlike in the past, underfunded pension plans will no longer be forced to convert to annuities, a practice that involves financial assets being disposed of and replaced with an insurance contract to reduce risks, as well as offer pensioners, fixed payments. The practice of companies failing during a recession when markets are depressed usually locks in losses and means workers receive less money.
By mandating that companies report the funding status of their pension plans to their employees, they can provide their employees with greater transparency.

No further details were given. At least the Conservative Party is focused on this issue of when an employer is insolvent and there are pensions in bankruptcy.

Pensions in bankruptcy: Summary

We will have to wait to see the results of this election to know if anything might change when it comes to pensions in bankruptcy of the employer.

I hope that you found this pensions in bankruptcy Brandon Blog informative. An unexpected situation, such as your employer having financial trouble and entering liquidation or bankruptcy proceedings, by their very nature, are not pleasant and could have the effect of making your debt load now impossible to service. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt. You may not need to file for bankruptcy.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

The Ira Smith Team utilizes new modern-day ways to get you out of your debt difficulties with debt relief options as an alternative to bankruptcy. We can get you the relief you need and so deserve. Our professional advice will create for you a personalized debt-free plan for you or your company during our no-cost initial consultation.

The tension put upon you is big. We know your discomfort factors. We will check out your entire situation and design a new approach that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. We will take the weight off of your shoulders and blow away the dark cloud hanging over you. We will design a debt settlement strategy for you. We know that we can help you now.

We understand that people with credit cards maxed out and businesses facing financial issues need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” method with the Ira Smith Team. Not everyone has to file bankruptcy in Canada. The majority of our clients never do as we know the alternatives to bankruptcy. We help many people and companies stay clear of filing an assignment in bankruptcy.

That is why we can establish a new restructuring procedure for paying down debt that will be built just for you. It will be as one-of-a-kind as the economic issues and discomfort you are encountering. If any one of these seems familiar to you and you are serious about getting the solution you need to become debt-free, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. group today.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

pensions in bankruptcy

Brandon Blog Post

SAVING FOR AN EMERGENCY FUND: HEALTHY SIMPLE STEPS TO MAKE SURE YOU HAVE MONEY TO DEAL W1TH AN EMERGENCY EXPENSE

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 30, 2021

saving for an emergency fund

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

If you would prefer to listen to an audio version of this Brandon Blog, please scroll to the very bottom and click play on the podcast.

Do I really need to be saving for an emergency fund?

Saving for an emergency fund is important for safeguarding your family’s financial future. When an emergency occurs, what happens if you haven’t saved some money in advance? Should you use all your money to pay down debts or should something be set aside for a rainy day? With the COVID-19 pandemic, we have learned that you never know when and how you might be affected by a health issue.

There are times when people need to tap into their rainy day fund because of a financial emergency. There are always unexpected expenses. The idea of “emergency savings” is easy to understand. Rainy day funds: what are they and how do they work? In this Brandon Blog, I explain the importance of having an emergency fund and how you should go about saving for an emergency fund.

What are examples of emergency expenses?

Emergency savings are intended for emergencies, as its name implies. Life is full of unexpected events:

breakdown of the car or repairs because of that fender bender;
there’s a problem with the fridge;
in a recession or when the economy shuts down you lose your job, with the resulting loss of income, as we have seen;
emergency medical expenses.

In the absence of emergency fund money to cover such expenses, you could end up paying your bills with a credit card, relying on payday loans, or heavily utilizing your secured or unsecured line of credit. These are very expensive ways to meet your urgent expenses. Saving for an emergency fund so that you have funds on hand is a much better strategy.

How do I start saving for an emergency fund?

Planning your personal finances begins with a monthly budget to be able to track monthly income and monthly expenses. It can be as simple as looking at your bank accounts and credit card statements to get a handle on what your monthly income and expenses are and writing it down on a piece of paper. Or, you can get fancier and use electronic budgeting worksheets, budget apps or an online budget calculator.

You should follow three main steps when building an emergency fund.

Keep a daily record of your household expenses and categorize them as discretionary or non-discretionary.
Take an average of all your expenses over several months to get a feel for a true average monthly amount.
In addition to taking stock of your expenses, this exercise should be used to weed out all unnecessary expenditures. You can begin to save money by redirecting those unnecessary expenses into savings.

An emergency can last for any number of months, so plan ahead by setting aside enough money to last at least six months. Individuals, couples, or families have different requirements. Is it a single-income family or a double-income family? The length of time it takes to save an emergency fund, as well as the amount needed, will be determined by this.

How much savings should I have when saving for an emergency fund?

There are some rules of thumb that a financial expert would recommend when deciding how to go about creating financial plans and saving for an emergency fund. You can use the 6 months of expenses calculated in your current budget as a general rule of thumb to set up a six-month emergency fund.

A six-month benchmark for emergency funds is a good place to start, but it’s not foolproof. COVID-19 has shown that even a six-months emergency fund cannot cover your household expenses if your income is dropped for an extended period of time. Depending on your financial goals, this can be extended. Harvard University found that 46% of households in the United States that lost their jobs as a result of the pandemic spent all or most of their emergency savings.

If you are saving for an emergency fund, consider things like:

your household’s number of people;
income of the household members;
the minimum amount needed to cover your monthly household expenses; and
How stable is each income source is and is there any additional income source that can be created or you may have just not thought about, such as a side gig to create business income or income tax refunds.

Ideally, your emergency fund should be proportionate to your earning potential and reflect how much you can save. It should also represent an amount that feels comfortable for you. A very important thing not to overlook is that you need to consider your income on an after-tax basis, not gross so that you have accounted for paying your income tax on time.

5 normal questions about saving for an emergency fund during the COVID-19 pandemic

Two of the five questions we have already dealt with: (i) how do I start saving for an emergency fund?; and (ii) how much savings should I have when saving for an emergency fund?

The next 3 standard questions and answers, I list below.

Where is the best place to put your emergency fund?

An emergency fund serves as a safeguard when you are faced with a true emergency. You will feel more at ease if you can fund your expenses from your emergency account in case of unforeseen circumstances. Make sure the emergency fund is separate from the other accounts. Keeping your emergency fund liquid is essential. Avoid investments that require a long-term commitment.

I recommend that you keep a certain portion liquid in an interest-bearing savings account (is there such a thing anymore as a high-yield savings account?). Right now interest rates are low, but something is better than nothing. As I already stated, keep it separate from your other funds.

To be able to automatically save without thinking about it, set up an automatic payment each pay period from your chequing account into this saving for an emergency fund savings account. Finally, put the balance of your emergency funds into a short-term GIC that can be cashable on demand. That way, it will earn something but is also liquid if needed.

**I have a line of credit – should I still be saving for an emergency fund?**

Keeping an emergency fund is always a good idea, as mentioned above. It’s good to have a line of credit, especially if it has a low-interest rate. However, I wouldn’t use it as my first line of defence. If you don’t have enough money in your emergency fund to cover the immediate needs, you can always use your line of credit to supplement your emergency fund. In the event that you borrow to meet those expenses, you should aim to repay the borrowed funds as soon as possible.

Should I use my emergency fund to pay off debt? Should I pay down debt before saving for an emergency fund?

Yes, it is true for some people. You might want to start paying down debt before saving for an emergency fund if you have a large amount of debt and no way to repay it. When an emergency comes up, however, you will have less money on hand if you do that.

Isn’t it better to repay your debt before you start an emergency fund if you’re in debt? Yes, the answer is yes! It does not have to be done at once. It is important to pay off the smallest balance first so that you can spend more on essentials and cut back on unnecessary expenses. This strategy only works if you are disciplined enough to stick with it.

It also depends on what kind of debt. High-interest credit card or payday loan debt should definitely be paid down first. As I previously wrote in a recent Brandon Blog, those with a poor credit score have been able to pay down massive amounts of their credit card debt. However, in order to not run that credit card statement back up, the next step should be saving for an emergency fund.

Saving for an emergency fund summary

I hope that you found this saving for an emergency fund Brandon Blog informative. Unexpected emergencies, by their very nature, are not pleasant and could have the effect of adding significantly to your debt load. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt. You may not need to file for bankruptcy.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Tags 5 normal questions about saving for an emergency fund during the COVID-19 pandemic, additional income, budget apps, budget calculator, business income, covid-19 pandemic, credit card, Do I really need to be saving for an emergency fund, electronic budgeting worksheets, emergency fund, emergency fund money, emergency savings, fender bender, financial emergency, financial expert, financial plans, high-yield savings account, household expenses, How do I start saving for an emergency fund, How much savings should I have when saving for an emergency fund, I have a line of credit - should I still be saving for an emergency fund, income tax refunds, Ira Smith Trustee, loss of income, medical expenses, monthly budget, payday loans, personal finances, rainy day fund, Save Money, saving for an emergency fund, Should I use my emergency fund to pay off debt? Should I pay down debt before saving for an emergency fund, six-month emergency fund, unexpected expenses, What are examples of emergency expenses, Where is the best place to put your emergency fund

Brandon Blog Post

LOWEST CREDIT SCORES RATING: THESE CANAD1ANS LED GIGANTIC CREDIT CARD DEBT REPAYMENT

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 25, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Canadians with the lowest credit scores rating led a wave of pandemic credit card debt repayment

Statistics Canada reported on August 23, 2021, that Canadians with the lowest credit scores rating repaid the most credit card debt in the first year of the pandemic. Over the period of the pandemic to January 2021, the mortgage debt of Canadian households increased by a record amount of $99.6 billion, driven by rising home prices, especially for single-family houses. Over the same period, non-mortgage debt fell by a record $20.6 billion, mainly due to a $16.6 billion decline in credit card debt.

In this Brandon Blog, I look at the area of people with credit scores rating and discuss how and why these lowest credit scores rating Canadians were able to pay down their high-interest debt.

Credit scores rating: Credit report and score basics

Credit scores are three-digit numbers derived from your credit report. An individual’s credit report summarizes their Canadian credit history. The Canadian credit reporting bureaus are Equifax Canada and TransUnion Canada. These private companies are credit reporting agencies that collect, store, and share information about how you use credit. As your credit report changes over time, your credit score will change as well. The more responsibly you manage your credit, the more points you get. According to a review of Borrowell Canada members, even a single missed payment can lower credit scores by 150 points.

Your credit score calculation is based on information in your credit report. A credit score between 660 and 900 is generally considered good, very good, or excellent credit scores.

The credit score model has credit score ranges from 300 to 900 that is used to determine creditworthiness. People always ask if there is a “magic number” to obtain better loan rates. This is an age-old question. Different lenders may focus on different aspects of your credit history. So, I cannot give you one number that unlocks the door to the best loan rates.

Credit scores rating: How to check your credit report

Getting a credit card, getting a car loan, or applying for any loan will result in a credit file being opened up on you. The report keeps getting updated over time. Your borrowing history and borrowing experience are all taken into account.

The report contains information about every loan you have taken out in the last six years and whether you pay on time or not, how much you owe, what your credit limit is on each, as well as a list of creditors who are authorized to access your record.

You can get a free credit report on yourself yearly from each credit bureau. You need to submit your ID and background details to prove you are the person entitled to make the request. You can make sure that your credit history report is error-free. Any errors will be corrected by each credit bureau based on the evidence you provide.

A credit rating of R1 is the best. That means you pay within 30 days of receiving your bill, or “as agreed.”

Anyone who wants to grant you credit or provide you with a service that involves you receiving something before you pay for it (such as a rental apartment or phone service) can get a copy of your credit report so they can make a credit decision about you.

R9 is the lowest credit rating.

Average Canadian credit scores rating improved during the pandemic, Borrowell study finds

With Borrowell, a fintech company, you can get your credit score every week for free. From Q1 2020 to Q1 2021, they analyzed credit scores and credit reports of 1,015,369 Canadians, including those in 20 of Canada’s largest cities, to investigate changes in credit scores and missed payment trends across the country.

The Borrowell study came up with several very interesting findings:

Government relief measures, lifestyle changes, and financial shifts have impacted credit scores and bill payments over the past year – sometimes revealing the divergence in how COVID-19 affected different segments of society’s financial future.
In spite of the coronavirus pandemic, credit scores for Canadians actually improved.
The average number of people with missed payments decreased from 3 out of every 10 consumers to 2 out of every 10 people between the first quarter of 2020 and the first quarter of 2021.
From Q1 2020 to Q1 2021, Borrowell members’ average credit scores increased by 18 points, rising from 649 (under the average) in Q1 2020 to 667 (fair).
The risk of missing paying bills on time is 432 times higher for consumers with low credit scores rating.
credit scores rating

The Statistics Canada study: Canadians with the lowest credit scores rating led the wave of pandemic credit card debt repayment

The new StatsCan study, “Trends in household non-mortgage loans: The evolution of Canadian household debt before and during COVID-19“, examines how Canadians reduced non-mortgage debt and debt levels during the pandemic.

During the pandemic, households began to see their disposable income rise, partly due to the limited spending opportunities during lockdowns, as well as the government’s monetary assistance, such as CERB or enhanced Employment Insurance. This was an opportunity for many households to pay down their expensive non-mortgage debt, with unsecured credit lines and credit card balances being paid down at record levels.

Prior to the pandemic, the outstanding balance on credit cards was $90.6 billion in February 2020, compared with $74 billion just a year later. During the two decades prior to the pandemic, the outstanding balance carried on credit cards had increased on average by 20.7% per year.

Debt reductions were greatest among Canadians with the lowest credit ratings, suggesting that those most vulnerable to financial hardship used savings prudently during the pandemic. Home prices increased, especially for single-family houses, as I indicated at the outset, driving a record increase in mortgage debt for Canadian households of $99.6 billion.

For me, this is a mixed blessing. You may be pleased to hear that many Canadians with low credit scores have been able to save money and reduce their household debt. In my opinion, mortgage debt is highly unlikely to have been accumulated by the same people.

People with low credit scores were not the ones filling out mortgage applications. It was rather people with good and excellent credit who either moved up and/or refinanced in order to do renovations, improvements and/or to pay off debt with a high-interest rate. Furthermore, it shows that people with low credit scores can earn more money staying home and receiving government COVID-19 assistance than they could make at their normal job. That is a very sad comment.

Minimum credit scores rating for mortgages in Canada

You can either be approved or declined for a mortgage based on your credit score. It can affect your mortgage interest rate, the type of mortgage available, as well as the mortgage lenders that you can choose from.

A mortgage requires a minimum credit score of:

in the case of major banks, 600;
for B lenders, 550;
private lenders have no minimum requirements; and
for CMHC mortgage default insurance mortgages, 600 points are required.

For a mortgage with bad credit, your only options are B lenders and private lenders, and they may require a large down payment or equity in your home. A lower credit score is generally associated with a higher mortgage interest rate. Low mortgage rates require a credit score of at least 680.

Having a credit score above 600 is good for getting a mortgage in Canada, as it opens up more options. In most cases, CMHC mortgage default insurance is not available to people with credit scores below 600. When you have a low credit score, your mortgage loan application may be denied, your mortgage rate may be higher, or you may be limited in the amount of money you can borrow.

A credit scores rating must be 680+ to qualify for the low-interest rates advertised in the media. CMHC mortgage default insurance is another issue some borrowers need to be concerned about. As long as you have sufficient income and property value to service the mortgage, a low score may suffice, however, the private lender will charge you higher fees and interest rates.

Credit scores rating summary

I hope that you found this credit scores rating Brandon Blog. Credit scores do not always properly reflect people who have problems because they are cash-starved and in debt. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt. You may not need to file for bankruptcy.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Tags Average Canadian credit scores rating improved during the pandemic, average credit scores, bill payments, bills on time, borrowell Canada, Borrowell study finds, borrowing experience, borrowing history, Canadians with the lowest credit scores rating led wave of pandemic credit card debt repayment, Credit, credit card, credit card debt, credit cards, credit decision, credit file, credit history, credit rating, credit report, credit reporting agencies, credit reporting bureaus, credit reports, credit score calculation, credit score model, credit score ranges, credit scores rating, Equifax Canada, excellent credit scores, fintech, free credit report, high interest debt, household debt, How to check your credit report, loan rates, Minimum credit scores rating for mortgages in Canada, mnortgage default insurance, mortgage debt, mortgage with bad credit, non-mortgage debt, Statistics Canada, transunion canada

Brandon Blog Post

A BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGED IS THE KEY TO HEARTWARMING DEBT ELIMINAT1ON

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 23, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

If you would like to listen to the audio version of this Brandon Blog, please scroll to the very bottom and click play on the podcast.

**Your Bankruptcy Discharged – But Wait**

Well, that took no time at all. Last week I told you about a bankruptcy discharge hearing I attended where the bankrupt person had his bankruptcy discharged by the Master in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice In Bankruptcy and Insolvency.

The Master’s decision was released on August 13, 2021. On August 20, 2021, we received the Notice of Motion of the opposing creditor appealing the Master’s decision to give this person his discharge from bankruptcy. That is their right.

In this Brandon Blog, I want to discuss the reasons for the opposition to the fact that this bankrupt had his bankruptcy discharged and my thoughts on one scenario of how this may play out. First, I just want to refresh your memory about the bankruptcy process and specifically how the discharge under bankruptcy law in Canada process works. Then I will get into this real-life story.

Bankruptcy is a roughly 9-month legal process to eliminate debt for the simplest of cases

Canada’s Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) gives people the option of filing a debt management plan restructuring consumer proposal if they are unable to pay back all unsecured debt owing to their unsecured creditors. This option offers the consumer a way to maybe keep their home and car that is heavily financed, as long as they can maintain the payments to the secured creditors such as the financial institution who financed the purchase of the home by way of the mortgage, or the auto loan, and it makes sense in their budget.

A successful consumer proposal is also the way to avoid bankruptcy. Like bankruptcy, the process starts with a no-cost consultation for financial advice with a licensed insolvency trustee. A licensed trustee is the only party able to administer a consumer proposal in Canada (or a bankruptcy). The Trustee can help you lose your debt load.

A first-time bankrupt who fulfills all of their obligations, including attending 2 mandatory credit counselling sessions, is entitled to a discharge after 9 months from the date of bankruptcy.

A bankruptcy discharged: First and second bankruptcy (or more)

When an insolvent debtor files for bankruptcy for a second time, you cannot be discharged after a nine months bankruptcy period. When you don’t need to pay the Trustee any surplus income payments, a second bankruptcy lasts for a minimum of 24 months. A second-time bankruptcy filer with surplus income must make those payments for 36 months to qualify to get their bankruptcy discharged.

A third or subsequent bankruptcy follows the same timeline as a second bankruptcy. There is, however, a high probability that the Trustee or creditors will oppose the discharge. Where there is opposition, there must be a court bankruptcy discharge hearing and the court can impose any conditions it deems appropriate.

What does bankruptcy discharged mean in Canada?

It is a Canadian legal term used to describe the release of a consumer debtor or business proprietorship from their obligations, responsibilities, debts, and legal claims. “Bankruptcy” is a legal proceeding to protect the estate of a person or company. “Discharge” fulfills the requirement that a person is released from their obligations, responsibilities, debts, and legal claims through the bankruptcy process. There is no equivalent requirement for a company.

The insolvent debtor filing for bankruptcy merely invokes the legal protection to the person and puts a bankruptcy trustee in place to realize upon any available assets in the bankruptcy estate for the benefit of the creditors. Bankruptcy filings do not relieve the person of their debts. It is when the person is bankruptcy discharged, that they are released from their debts (other than for a select list of exceptions).

Bankruptcy discharged: Types of bankruptcy discharge

The licensed insolvency trustee can usually issue an automatic discharge when there is no trustee in bankruptcy opposition or creditor opposition to a bankrupt’s application for discharge, and the bankrupt has fulfilled all of their duties during bankruptcy.

In case of opposition or if the bankrupt meets one of the criteria that prevents automatic discharge (for example, the bankruptcy process finds the bankrupt to have a high tax debt situation), a discharge hearing in court is held, which is conducted by the Master of the Bankruptcy Court. There are four types of the bankruptcy discharge and a fifth outcome is also possible. Here they are:

Absolute discharge – An absolute discharge means that the bankrupt may obtain a discharge immediately. If the bankrupt has fulfilled all of their duties and there is no insolvency trustee or creditor opposition, this can be provided by the licensed insolvency trustee of the bankruptcy estate handling the bankruptcy administration;
Conditional discharge – can get discharged if certain conditions are met. Typically, to get bankruptcy discharged this way, conditions include payment to the licensed insolvency trustee;
Suspended – the bankruptcy discharge will be granted at a later date and may very well be combined with an absolute bankruptcy discharge or conditional bankruptcy discharge;
Refused– because the debtor has not made full disclosure or done other bankruptcy duties; or
“No order” – the insolvency trustee informs the court that the bankrupt has not fulfilled all of his or her obligations and has failed to respond to the Trustee’s demands for information despite the passing of time. The licensed insolvency trustee is at liberty to seek its discharge when the “no order” order is provided. When the bankrupt has actually complied with the court’s requirements, he or she may apply for a hearing for discharge. When the Trustee gets its discharge, the stay of proceedings preventing collection actions against the bankrupt disappears.

A bankruptcy discharged: The appeal just served upon us – a true story

To refresh your memory about the discharge hearing itself you can CLICK HERE. The appeal just served upon us seeks an Order setting aside the decision of the Master made on August 13, 2021. The grounds for the appeal can be described as throwing everything including the kitchen sink! The stated grounds are that the Learned Registrar erred:

by granting the bankrupt an absolute discharge from bankruptcy;
in holding that the Receiver’s interest in the discharge application is not firmly established and by not recognizing that should the Receiver be paid an amount in excess of the debt owed to the secured creditor, any surplus funds would be available for the other creditors of the
corporate bankruptcy estate;
in holding that the discharge hearing is not the proper forum in which to make determinations as to the propriety of the various transactions that the Receiver has raised;
in finding that the bankrupt has generally cooperated with me as his Trustee;
in declining to consider the bankrupt’s conduct in the corporate bankruptcy because that the trustee in the corporate bankruptcy had remedies available to it;
in finding that the failure of the company’s business was due to the loss of its 1 customer and pricing related to that arrangement;
in relying on her finding that the corporate trustee may be the only truly interested party on the discharge or would benefit most from the conditional order sought if the secured debt is otherwise repaid;
in exercising her discretion in finding that an order of discharge requiring payment of the significant amount proposed by the Receiver is not reasonable;
in finding that the bankrupt has no ability to pay and that his future prospects to pay are unknown;
in finding that an order for a conditional discharge of the magnitude sought would be tantamount to a refusal;
by omitting to consider relevant evidence or the absence thereof, in relying on irrelevant considerations, and/or giving improper weight to the evidence before the Court; and
anything else the lawyers may want to say.
bankruptcy discharged

Standard of review to getting a personal bankruptcy discharged

Such an appeal from a bankruptcy discharge hearing has a standard of review. According to BIA S. 192(1), the bankruptcy registrar can, among other things, grant orders of discharge. S. 192(4) of the BIA permits a party dissatisfied with a registrar’s order or decision to appeal it to a judge.

Registrars are exercising judicial discretion when granting discharges in bankruptcy cases. As long as the registrar acted reasonably, the judge should not set it aside or ignore it. Furthermore, if an appeal from a bankruptcy discharge order is based on alleged errors in factual findings, the court will not intervene if the findings of fact can be justified based on credible evidence. If the registrar has materially misinterpreted the law or made an error in respect of the facts underpinning his or her discretion, discretionary decisions can, of course, be overturned.

If the registrar decides that in order for the person to get their bankruptcy discharged, the court imposes conditions, those conditions must be realistic to allow the bankrupt to meet the requirements in a reasonable amount of time. If an amount ordered in order for the person to get their bankruptcy discharged is unrealistic and the discharge is conditional on making additional payments, the appellate court in such cases previously held that results in an error of law. The appellate judge can either substitute other conditions or refer the matter back to the registrar for reconsideration.

A bankruptcy discharged: What my gut is telling me

I normally am not in the prediction business. However, having been the insolvency trustee responsible for administering the consumer bankruptcy, having written the reports to the court on the bankrupt’s application for discharge, having attended the discharge hearing and having heard all the evidence, having read the Registrar’s decision and the Appeal documentation, I believe that the appeal should be dismissed.

You might recall that opposing the bankrupt getting bankruptcy discharged was the Receiver of the company previously operated by the bankrupt. As a result of complaints regarding the bankrupt and his family in relation to the company’s operations, the Receiver has filed lawsuits against several parties. The proceedings are still pending. According to previous court rulings, the court should not consider the issues raised in other proceedings when deciding whether to discharge the bankrupt. A discharge hearing is a summary proceeding. It is important to see how the debtor behaved during HIS bankruptcy.

As for the judge’s decision, only time will tell. I’ll keep you up to date as always.

Bankruptcy discharged summary

I hope that you found this bankruptcy discharged Brandon Blog helpful in telling this real-life story of an appeal to a person getting their bankruptcy discharged. Problems will arise when you are cash-starved and in debt. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt. You may not need to file for bankruptcy.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Brandon Blog Post

WHAT DOES RECEIVERSHIP MEAN FOR 1 BETTER GUARANTOR BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 18, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

what does receivership mean

What does receivership mean: Receivership is for secured claims

What does receivership mean? A receivership is an enforcement proceeding that helps secured creditors recover secured debts on debtor defaults on loan payments from troubled companies. There are two types of receivers and receiverships: Privately-appointed receivers and court-appointed receivers.

As you can tell from the title of this Brandon Blog, I am not going to be writing about receiverships. You can take a look at my April 14, 2021, Brandon Blog titled “WHAT IS A RECEIVERSHIP? OUR COMPLETE GUIDE TO RECEIVERSHIP SOLUTIONS” to read all about what receiverships are.

What does receivership mean? It is a remedy for secured creditors.

I want to go through two more concepts quickly, and then I will get to what I really want to talk to you about today.

What does receivership mean: Bankruptcy vs. receivership

Despite the fact that receivership and bankruptcy sometimes get used interchangeably, they are not the same thing. A bankruptcy proceeding and a receivership proceeding are both legal actions conducted under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) and governed by the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (OSB). According to the BIA, either a receiver or a bankruptcy trustee in Canada needs to be a licensed insolvency trustee, whose license is granted and whose actions are supervised by the federal government’s OSB.

Here is where the similarities end. In a receivership, a secured creditor would either hire a receiver privately or ask a court to place a company into receivership and appoint one to liquidate the collateral they have against the debtor. According to the Canadian bankruptcy process, either the person or company voluntary files for bankruptcy with a licensed insolvency practitioner, or one or more unsecured creditors apply to the Court for the appointment of an insolvency trustee to administer the bankruptcy Estate.

Licensed insolvency trustees are needed in both cases. The receivership procedure is a secured creditor’s remedy and bankruptcy is an unsecured creditor‘s remedy. To read up more on the bankruptcy process, look at my September 30, 2020, Brandon Blog “DECLARE BANKRUPTCY: A COMPLETE GUIDE ON WHAT IS IT LIKE TO DECLARE BANKRUPTCY“.

What does receivership mean? Not the same as bankruptcy.

Employee Rights in Bankruptcy Protection and Bankruptcy⁄Receivership

Bankruptcy protection can be gained to try to make a troubled company stable and then return the company to profitability by filing pursuant to either the BIA or the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), employees retain their right to unpaid wages, vacation pay, and severance or termination pay. There is no difference between filing and not filing. They are unsecured creditors of a troubled company, and the company directors are personally responsible for amounts owed to employees.

For the company in receivership or bankruptcy, the employees do have greater rights. The receiver of a company in receivership must register with Service Canada under the Wage Earner Protection Program Act (WEPPA) for the Wage Earner Protection Program. This program provides some compensation to eligible employees who are owed money by a bankrupt or receivership company.

To read more about WEPPA, take a look at my February 10, 2020 Brandon Blog, “SEVERANCE PAY ONTARIO & BANKRUPTCY-BARRYMORE FURNITURE UNPAID WORKERS ANGRY“.

So what does receivership mean to an employee with unpaid wages? It means they can claim a priority and get paid by Service Canada.

***What does receivership mean: Receivership – a typical appointment***

Now I will get to what this Brandon Blog is actually about. In Canada, it is the norm for secured creditors advancing loans secured against company assets, to also take a personal guarantee on the same debt from the principals of the company. In all entrepreneurial companies in Canada, that is at least the president running company affairs. If the lender-secured creditor suffers a shortfall from the liquidation of the company assets, the lender then looks to the guarantor(s) of the company debt to make good on the lender’s loss. Many times the company president/guarantor has no choice but to file consumer bankruptcy.

I was involved in a bankruptcy discharge hearing for one of our personal bankrupts in April 2021. He caused his company, being its sole Director, to file for bankruptcy with another Trustee. That same Trustee was also appointed as the company’s private receiver by the secured creditor. The company president provided the secured creditor with a personal guarantee.

Realizing that they would suffer a shortfall from the company situation, rather than suing on their personal guarantee, they approached us to consent to act as the Trustee in a Bankruptcy Application against the company president. We consented and the company president ultimately consented to a Bankruptcy Order being made to put him into bankruptcy with my Firm as the Trustee.

What does receivership mean: The bankruptcy of the guarantor

We administered the consumer bankruptcy. There were some assets to realize upon which we did. One realization required court approval as we were selling seat licenses and the right to purchase tickets for the Toronto Maple Leafs to a related party. The bankrupt person’s largest single consumer creditor was Canada Revenue Agency for unpaid income tax. The company in receivership was also a creditor as the president owed the company money. The secured creditor of the company was also an unsecured creditor of his in his personal bankruptcy for the personal guarantee on the shortfall.

The known creditors each filed their respective proof of claim in his bankruptcy, including the company by its privately-appointed receiver. We believed that the company by its receiver was a creditor for the amount of the shareholder loan owing to the company. The proof of claim they filed was for a much larger amount. As Trustee, we neither admitted nor disallowed any proofs of claim filed in this bankruptcy estate. The Trustee would have to take a cold hard look at the receiver’s proof of claim at some future date it is determined that a dividend will be paid to the creditors in this bankruptcy estate, which is highly unlikely.

What does receivership mean: The receiver opposes a bankruptcy discharge

Only one unsecured creditor opposed the bankrupt’s discharge. That was the receiver, or more correctly, the company in receivership by its privately-appointed receiver. The Trustee had not opposed. The lender, as an unsecured creditor, did not oppose either along with the other consumer creditors.

As I mentioned, in April 2021, the discharge hearing was held before the Master sitting as Registrar in Bankruptcy Court. The court raised a novel issue. Does the receiver have the standing to oppose the bankrupt’s discharge? The court allowed the hearing to be completed and allowed the parties to file further submissions, subsequent to the hearing, on this issue. Submissions were received from us, the
Trustee and from the Receiver in mid-May, 2021. The bankrupt took no position on the issue.

Does the Receiver have standing to oppose the bankrupt’s discharge?

Here is what I wrote to the court.

The security documents under which a privately-appointed receiver is appointed will determine if an unsecured amount owing by a bankrupt debtor is an asset secured by security held by a creditor over the assets of another party. If so, then the privately-appointed receiver has the right to file a proof of claim in the debtor’s bankruptcy as part of attempting to realize upon that asset forming part of the secured creditor’s collateral.

In doing so, the privately-appointed receiver is acting as Agent for the secured creditor. If the privately-appointed receiver files a proof of claim in the bankruptcy that is not disallowed by the licensed insolvency trustee administering the bankruptcy estate, then, in order to oppose the discharge of the bankrupt, the privately-appointed receiver must also be able to be the Agent for the debtor in receivership.

If the security under which the privately-appointed receiver is appointed allows for that receiver to operate the business of the debtor in receivership, then that receiver has the ability to be an Agent of the debtor in receivership and bring a claim in the name of that debtor.

In this matter, of the various pieces of security held by the secured creditor, only the General Security Agreement (the “GSA”), allows a receiver appointed in writing under it to operate the business of the debtor company. Under the GSA, the privately-appointed receiver has the ability to act as both Agent of the secured creditor and Agent of the company. The appointment letter appointing the receiver confirms that the appointment is under all security held, including the GSA.

Therefore, my opinion was that although we have concerns about the amount being claimed, the receiver has the ability to both file a proof of claim in this bankruptcy and oppose the discharge of the bankrupt as an Agent of the company. I believed it aided the administration of this bankruptcy to allow the receiver to oppose because it is able to draw the attention of the court to conduct of the bankrupt of which the court otherwise might not be aware of.

Finally, I advised the court that if there still was concern that it is formal defect or irregularity section 187(9) of the BIA, the court can determine that such formal defect or irregularity will not invalidate the opposition to the discharge of the bankrupt.

What the bankruptcy court decided

The court accepted our submission and agreed with it. The court continued to be skeptical of the amount of the company’s proof of claim filed by the receiver. The court noted that as Trustee, I reported that the bankrupt has fulfilled all statutory duties. Income and expense statements were provided and there was no surplus income payable.

On a general perusal of the Trustee’s s. 170 report, the Trustee does not report any significant misconduct or concerns but reserved its rights as to its position on the discharge pending the hearing and matters disclosed therein. In the court’s view, the Trustee’s non-opposition to discharge is a factor favouring the bankrupt’s discharge. After considering all facts, the court gave the bankrupt an absolute discharge from bankruptcy.

What does receivership mean summary

I hope that you found this what does receivership mean Brandon Blog helpful in describing the role of a privately appointed receiver especially in opposing the discharge of the bankrupt guarantor of the company’s secured debt. Problems will arise when you are cash-starved and in debt. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt. You may not need to file for bankruptcy.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Tags Bankruptcy, bankruptcy and insolvency act canada, bankruptcy proceeding, bankruptcy protection, Bankruptcy vs. receivership, BIA, Canada Revenue Agency, Canadian bankruptcy process, CCAA, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, company directors, company into receivership, company voluntary files for bankruptcy, Court-appointed receivership, debtor, defaults on loan payments, Employee Rights in Bankruptcy Protection and Bankruptcy⁄Receivership, licensed insovency trustee, Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, OSB, personal guarantee, Privately-appointed receivers, receivership, Receivership - a typical appointment, Receivership is for secured claims, receivership proceeding, secured creditor, secured debts, troubled company, troubled company stable, trustee, unpaid income tax, unsecured creditors, Wage Earner Protection Program, Wage Earner Protection Program Act, WEPPA, What does receivership mean

Brandon Blog Post

WHAT ARE EXEMPT ASSETS IN BANKRUPTCY?: ARE THEY REV1EWED UPON THE SAD DEATH OF THE BANKRUPT?

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 16, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

If you would like to listen to the audio version of this Brandon Blog, please scroll to the very bottom and click play on the podcast.

What are exempt assets in bankruptcy?: Bankruptcy exemptions – how what assets you can keep are determined

An assignment in bankruptcy does not require you to give up all of your assets. In bankruptcy law, there are rules for bankruptcy exemptions. Furthermore, every province/territory has regulations that mandate what assets can be kept and how much equity can be retained. Assets of this type are called exempt assets.

Assets that you are allowed to keep that are not accessible to your creditors are exempt assets in a bankruptcy. There are some that fall under federal law and some that fall under provincial law.

So what are exempt assets in bankruptcy in Ontario? To answer the question, we need to look at two statutes: one federal and one provincial. For federal, we look at the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). Section 67(1) of the BIA deals specifically with the bankruptcy exemption issue. It states what property of the bankrupt available to creditors does and does not comprise. Property that is not included is:

Property held in trust by the bankrupt for any third party.
Under provincial law, the property cannot be seized.
Payments to the bankrupt are paid under a program that I will describe as social assistance provided by the federal or provincial government.
Retirement Savings Plans – The bankrupt’s RRSP or RRIF, except for contributions made in the 12 months before the bankruptcy.

When we discuss the property of a bankrupt, we are referring to the bankrupt’s equity in those assets.

Ontario bankruptcy exemptions: Assets you can keep

As indicated above, one of the asset exemptions in bankruptcy is any property that cannot be seized under provincial law. So what are exempt assets in bankruptcy in Ontario that cannot be seized? For that, we need to go to the Ontario Execution Act. In Ontario, the prescribed amounts for exemptions are:

Household furnishings and household appliances – $14,180.
Tools and other personal property used to generate income:
- Exemptions for farmers, being a debtor engaged exclusively in cultivating the soil or farming (and therefore it is that farmer’s principal source of primary income), $31,379 for livestock, fowl, bees, books, tools and implements, and other chattels ordinarily used by the debtor;
- $14,405 for any other case.
$7,117 for a motor vehicle.
$10, 783 for a principal residence.

As I have written before, there is an exemption in Ontario for equity in one’s home of not more than $10,783. It is not an exemption for the first $10K, but rather if the total equity is below that amount. Therefore, we can consider the equity in a bankrupt person’s ownership interest in their home to belong to the bankruptcy trustee for all practical purposes.

So this seems pretty straightforward. But what if the bankrupt person dies before the end of the bankruptcy proceedings and the bankruptcy estate administration? A recent decision from the Alberta bankruptcy court, which for reasons I will explain I believe would be instructive for Ontario, answers that question.

What are exempt assets in bankruptcy even in death?

In addition to the above statutory exemptions, since we are always dealing with the bankrupt’s equity in assets, there is another class of assets that form exempt property in a bankruptcy. If any of the bankrupt’s assets are pledged as security to the point where the amount owing to the secured creditor on the secured debt is the same or more than the value of the asset, then a bankruptcy trustee will not attempt to seize it.

So what may have started out as non-exempt property can become property that will not be seized. Two obvious examples are one of the motor vehicles owned by a person worth more than $7,117 that is heavily financed or a principal residence that has mortgages against it that essentially soaks up all the value.

Another type of asset that may be exempt is life insurance policies. If the beneficiary under the policy listed is the spouse, child, parent or grandparent of the deceased, then the funds flow directly to the beneficiary and avoid probate. The bankruptcy of the deceased does not change that.

Although not an asset per se, and only available while the person is living, are wages salary from employment. A bankrupt person is allowed to keep all of their income. However, all Trustees are required to perform an evaluation to see if the bankrupt must contribute by making surplus income payments. The concept of bankruptcy surplus income has been the subject of certain of my prior Brandon Blogs.

Now, what are exempt assets in bankruptcy if the bankrupt person dies before receiving a bankruptcy discharge? On August 3, 2021, the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta, Registrar in Bankruptcy L.R. Birkett released Reasons for Decision in Perry (Re), 2021 ABQB 609 (CanLII). In this case, the Trustee sought advice and directions with respect to whether the principal residence exemption continues or is no longer available on the death of the bankrupt. Keep in mind that the principal residence exemption is much different in Alberta than in Ontario. In Alberta, under the Civil Enforcement Act, an Albertan can claim a principal residence exemption up to $40,000.

However, the fact that the issue was over equity in a principal residence is somewhat irrelevant. The real issue is exempt assets in general. So I would frame it as whether any asset exemption continues or is no longer available upon the death of the bankrupt.

Mr. and Mrs. Perry each filed an assignment in bankruptcy on December 19, 2012 (date of bankruptcy) and both remain undischarged bankrupts. At the date of bankruptcy, the bankrupt husband was the only registered owner of the couple’s principal residence. The bankrupt husband died on January 28, 2018.

He did not have any dependents at the time of his death. The bankrupt wife is the only beneficiary under his Will. The widowed bankrupt wife moved from the home and the Trustee sold it.

As a first observation, this is a perfect example of why a bankrupt should not allow the bankruptcy proceedings to drag on. Future events are impossible to predict. Winning a lottery or acquiring an inheritance are the two best reasons to avoid letting the bankruptcy process linger for a very long time. If such a windfall occurs, the bankruptcy trustee administering the bankruptcy estate can claim it.

Types of assets commonly exempt from bankruptcy across Canada: The Registrar’s analysis

The question is does the personal exemption of an undischarged bankrupt remain after his death? In Alberta, the applicable laws under which property is exempt from execution or seizure are set out in the Civil Enforcement Act (CEA) and the Civil Enforcement Regulation(CER). The combined effect of s.88(g) CEA and s 37(1)(e) CER allows an enforcement debtor to claim up to $40,000 of the equity in the debtor’s principal residence as being exempt from execution or seizure. The Registrar noted that the personal exemption is personal to the individual, in this case, the deceased bankrupt husband.

Section 92(1) of the CEA specifically provides that where the enforcement debtor is deceased, the property of the debtor that would be exempt if the debtor were alive remains exempt from writ proceedings against the debtor’s estate for the period of time that the property is required for the maintenance and support of the deceased debtor’s dependents. This allows the dependents of a deceased enforcement debtor the opportunity to access up to $40,000 of exempt equity in the debtor’s principal residence for their needs.

In this case, the widowed bankrupt wife moved out of the house and the Trustee sold it. The exempt equity was no longer necessary for her needs. Therefore the Registrar decided that the deceased bankrupt husband’s exemption was lost on his death. Since the exempt equity was not required to support the bankrupt wife’s needs, the Trustee of the dead bankrupt husband can keep the $40,000 amount as property not covered by the provincial exemption and it is available for the benefit of creditors through the bankruptcy debtor‘s unsecured creditors.

There is a strong argument that if the personal exemption resulted in the bankrupt wife being entitled to her deceased husband’s exemption amount, it would not have been paid to her anyway. Rather, it would have been property available to her Trustee for her unsecured creditors and possibly even a dividend to creditors!

What are exempt assets in bankruptcy and what would happen in Ontario?

What would happen in Ontario with exempt assets (up to their prescribed maximum exempt amount)? Under s.5(1) of the Execution Act, if an execution debtor dies before the seizure and sale of his or her personal property, then whatever personal property the deceased already elected for exemption before death remains valid after death and may not be changed by an executor, administrator or heir of the debtor. s.5(2) of the Execution Act says that If no such election was made prior to death, then, in this order, a surviving spouse, a dependent or a family member has the right to make such an election.

S.5(3) of the Execution Act states:

“(3) The total quantity and total value of personal property of an execution debtor that may be claimed as exempt by a person mentioned in subsection (2) and by the execution debtor before death must not exceed the quantity and value of property that would have been exempt property to just the execution debtor. 2010, c. 16, Sched. 2, s. 3 (9).”

The wording of sections 5(1) and (2) of the Execution Act is very different from that of the relevant Alberta legislation referenced above. So, in my view, it appears that the personal exemption in Ontario would survive and not constitute property available for the Trustee to realize upon, but this is only up to the exemption limit of each class of exempt asset.

However, under a bankruptcy process, along with the bankruptcy protection from unsecured creditors, the bankrupt actually hands over all property to the Trustee. The Trustee either overtly or it is implied, hands back to the bankruptcy debtor any property that is exempt from seizure, either from a provincial statute or because it is a fully encumbered asset because of it being pledged for a secured loan and there is no equity.

In Ontario, since the Execution Act allows for selecting exempt assets after death for the benefit of the deceased Estate, it does not appear to me that bankruptcy would change things for the reasons I have stated. The provincial exemptions, up to their maximum limits, would continue to protect certain property from seizure in bankruptcy.

What are exempt assets in bankruptcy summary

I hope that you found this what are exempt assets in bankruptcy Brandon Blog helpful in describing the personal exemptions in Ontario and whether bankruptcy and death can change that. Problems will arise when you are cash-starved and in debt. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt. You may not need to file for bankruptcy.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

what are exempt assets in bankruptcy

Tags assignment in bankruptcy, bankruptcy and insolvency act canada, bankruptcy debtor, bankruptcy discharge, bankruptcy estate, bankruptcy proceedings, bankruptcy surplus income, bankruptcy trustee, Civil Enforcement Act, Civil Enforcement Regulation, dividend to creditors, enforcement debtor, Execution Act, exempt assets, exempt property, exemptions for farmers, household appliances, household furnishings, Ira Smith Trustee, motor vehicles, non-exempt assets, nonexempt property, Ontario bankruptcy exemptions: Assets you can keep, personal property, primary income, principal source, property of the debtor, provincial exemption, retirement savings plans, secured creditor, secured debt, surplus income payments, Types of assets commonly exempt from bankruptcy across Canada, unsecured creditors, what are exempt assets in bankruptcy, What are exempt assets in bankruptcy?: Bankruptcy exemptions - how what assets you can keep are determined

Brandon Blog Post

LICENSED INSOLVENCY TRUSTEE VAUGHAN: THE COMPLETE GUIDE FOR YOUR HAPPY DEBT FREE L1FE

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 11, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. Through the use of video meetings, we can help you even if you do not live close to our office in the Jane Street Hwy. 7 area. It is just like we are coming to you!

The bankruptcy trustee in Vaughan: We transformed into a licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan

The bankruptcy trustee in Vaughan went through a metamorphosis similar to a caterpillar becoming a butterfly. The term “bankruptcy trustee” turned into a “licensed insolvency trustee“. The licensed insolvency trustee designation was mandated to all licensed trustees by the Industry Canada Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (OSB). The OSB licenses and supervises the activities of all licensed insolvency trustees across Canada. This includes us as a licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan, Ontario.

The purpose of this Brandon blog is to offer an overview of our role in the Greater Toronto Area with our licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan insolvency trustee firm head office.

Role of a Licensed Insolvency Trustee Vaughan (formerly called Trustee in Bankruptcy Vaughan)

A licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan can fulfill various roles. It all starts with providing a no-cost consultation for a person or company that finds themselves in a troubling financial situation that worries them about their prospects for a bright financial future.

Due to the various roles, a licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan can play, we are also known as “receivers”, “trustee in bankruptcy” or “financial restructuring professionals”. We are appointed when a company or person is financially distressed and either has no other options to get out of financial difficulty and is unable to pay its bills. A licensed insolvency trustee is the only party licensed by the Government of Canada to perform a federal government-approved debt settlement plan, being a consumer proposal consolidation.

As a licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan firm, there are different roles we can play.

Find the right option with the help of a Licensed Insolvency Trustee Vaughan

Personal situation insolvency

For individuals who are insolvent, we can provide and act in the following:

A no-cost initial consultation to provide advice about debt relief.
Credit counselling. to help with your household budget and determine if you really need one of the available debt relief options.
Consumer Proposal – Toronto and GTA – Act as Consumer Proposal Administrator to conduct a Consumer Proposal Process for people who owe $250,000 or less in unsecured debts (not including any debts registered against their home) who wish to eliminate their debt and wish an alternative to bankruptcy so that they can avoid filing bankruptcy. This is a government-approved interest-free debt settlement plan that can be paid over as much as five years.
Division I Proposal – Toronto and GTA – This process is not quite as streamlined as a consumer proposal, but it is for people who wish to eliminate their debt while avoiding personal bankruptcy.
These 2 proposal remedies are the only accredited government debt relief programs in Canada.
Personal bankruptcy – Toronto and GTA – As a licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan, we can of course assist anyone who wishes filing for bankruptcy. In your no-cost consultation with us, we first get to know you and your financial situation in order to determine if you qualify for one of the bankruptcy alternatives. If not, we will discuss the entire bankruptcy process with you, including the cost of bankruptcy. If you wish to proceed, we will accept your assignment in bankruptcy.

All collection activities against you cease when you make an assignment in bankruptcy, or file a debt settlement restructuring proposal. Legal action against you may include wage garnishment, collection calls, or a legal action against you. You get legal protection as a result of the stay of proceedings afforded by an insolvency filing.

The two most common types of debt we encounter in our personal insolvency practice are credit card debt and income tax debt. We have successfully handled for clients serious negotiations with Canada Revenue Agency in order to achieve debt settlement for people with a financial history of income tax debt.

Corporate insolvency

For companies, and especially entrepreneurial family businesses that are insolvent, we can provide and act in the following:

A no-cost initial consultation to provide advice about debt restructuring options.
Restructuring & Turnarounds.
Business analysis, business review and monitoring.
Receivership – Toronto and GTA – Only a licensed insolvency trustee can act as a receiver on behalf of a secured creditor. As a licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan, we act as a privately-appointed receiver on behalf of a secured creditor. We also act as a court-appointed receiver upon the application to a court by a secured creditor or other stakeholders.
Winding-Up and Liquidator – Toronto and GTA – For solvent companies that wish to wind up operations through a legal process, we act as either privately appointed or court-appointed Liquidator.
licensed insolvency trustee vaughan

Selecting The Right Licensed Insolvency Trustee in Vaughan

Experience and professionalism

You might not find the expertise to solve your financial difficulties with someone just around the corner. You can start your search for the right Trustee by visiting the website of the Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professionals. Both Ira Smith and Brandon Smith are members of the Canadian Insolvency and Restructuring Professional Association. It shows an individual’s commitment to staying up to date with all the latest industry advancements by belonging to this organization. Check the website of the OSB to ensure that the Trustees you are considering are not suspended or under file management by the regulator.

Interacting with them on many levels is essential

As a beginning, they must be able to quickly understand your needs and desires, as well as provide you with a realistic plan that can be followed. If you have issues or concerns, they also need to be available to you. Look for their interest in you. How enthusiastic are they about their industry? Do you really feel their compassion for you? Do you feel you are going to get along on an inter-personal basis with this person?

That’s exactly how you measure enthusiasm. The most effective solutions and suggestions will be offered by a knowledgeable insolvency trustee. You may not find this type of person within walking distance of your home or workplace.

Licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan: Are you able to agree on the same concepts?

It is not a totally free service to engage a professional trustee. The complexity of your situation could affect the bankruptcy cost. Your trust in a bankruptcy trustee is diminished if you feel they view you as just another dollar sign. Look for those who seem to have similar values to you. It may not be the closest to your home to find such a licensed insolvency trustee.

Websites for licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan

Searching for “bankruptcy trustee near me” or “licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan” on a search engine today will bring up various websites to visit. How does the website make you feel? What bankruptcy FAQs do they provide? Can you see pictures of the people you would deal with? From their blog, do they demonstrate that they have a deep knowledge base?

You can meet with more than one Trustee

Unless you sit across the table from him or her, you won’t know which one is the right fit for you. Comparing two bankruptcy trustees is a good idea. You want to be able to compare two or more for your own validation purposes. The one you feel best about is the one to go with. Trust your gut!

3 Best Licensed Insolvency Trustees in Vaughan, ON

Throughout the years my firm has been inspected for 50 points, including reviews, ratings, reputation, history, complaints, satisfaction, trust, cost, and general excellence. The results have allowed us to rank consistently among the top 3 Best Licensed Insolvency Trustees in Vaughan, ON.

Licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan summary

I hope that you found this licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan Brandon Blog helpful in describing our role as debt professionals and my thoughts on how to go about choosing the one you think is the best fit for anyone in a financial crisis. Problems will arise when you are cash-starved and in debt. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

The Ira Smith Team utilizes new modern-day ways to get you out of your debt difficulties with debt relief options as alternatives to bankruptcy. We can get you the relief you need and so deserve. Our professional advice will create for you a personalized debt-free plan for you or your company during our no-cost initial consultation.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Tags 3 Best Licensed Insolvency Trustees in Vaughan, accredited government debt relief, advice about debt relief, alternative to bankruptcy, assignment in bankruptcy, bankruptcy alternatives, bankruptcy process, bankruptcy trustee, bankruptcy trustee in vaughan, collection calls, Consumer Proposal, consumer proposal administrator, consumer proposal consolidation, consumer proposal process, corporate insolvency, cost of bankruptcy, credit card debt, credit counselling, debt relief options, debt restructuring options, Division I Proposal, federal government-approved debt settlement plan, filing for bankruptcy, financial difficulty, financial future, financial situation, financially distressed, Find the right option with the help of a Licensed Insolvency Trustee Vaughan, government-approved interest-free debt settlement plan, household budget, income tax debt, Industry Canada, insolvency filing, insolvency trustee firm, insolvent, Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc., jane street, legal action, legal process, licensed insolvency trustee, licensed insolvency trustee Vaughan, licensed insolvency trustees, licensed trustees, liquidator, no-cost consultation, no-cost initial consultation, Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, ON, OSB, personal bankruptcy, personal situation, receivers, receivership, Role of a Licensed Insolvency Trustee Vaughan (formerly called Trustee in Bankruptcy Vaughan), Selecting The Right Licensed Insolvency Trustee in Vaughan, trustee in bankruptcy, unsecured debts, wage garnishment, Winding-Up

Brandon Blog Post

ESTATE TRUSTEE DURING LITIGATION: THE GOOD AND PRACTICAL WAY TO SAFEGUARD ASSETS DURING ESTATE LITIGAT1ON

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 9, 2021

estate trustee during litigation We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this Brandon Blog, please scroll to the very bottom and click play on the podcast.

Estate Trustee During Litigation: What is it?

All of us with business or family assets and/or debts can be subject to litigation or worry about it. Whatever the reason, the reality is that no one can remove themselves from the litigation process…not at the beginning, not at the end, and not even in death. Perhaps it is an employee or partner, a spouse or ex-spouse, your children or grandchildren, or even your parents.

Many times a person’s death creates Estate litigation between family members; either over a Will or because there is no Will! Sometimes it is necessary for the appointment of a neutral, independent court officer to control the Estate assets and deal with Estate issues while the beneficiaries and other potential stakeholders are involved in Estate litigation.

In our sister business, Smith Estate Trustee Ontario, we accept the appointment of Estate Trustee and we can also act as the independent court officer Estate Trustee During Litigation. This Brandon Blog is about why it may be necessary for the court to appoint an Estate Trustee During Litigation and why it may turn out to be a necessity.

The role of an Estate Trustee During Litigation

An Estate Trustee During Litigation is tasked with protecting the Estate while the litigation is ongoing and gathering information and, sometimes, helping to resolve the litigation.

The duties include, in particular:

Calculating the fair market value of the estate’s assets and liabilities.
Keeping its assets safe and secure.
Retaining and, if necessary, tracing anything discovered to be missing.
Keeping separate trust accounts.
Reviewing and handling protective and other expenditures.
Establishing, defending, settling and paying any debts.
The filing of income tax returns and if the situation allows for it, whatever tax planning to reduce income taxes can take place.
Investing estate funds to maximize yields until the Estate Trustee During Litigation is discharged of its obligations and funds.

Because of their experience, resources, objectivity, and integrity are sometimes viewed as the best option. As a matter of common law, responsibilities of the Estate Trustee During Litigation cease upon the termination of the litigation, and they are required to transfer assets without having to be ordered to do so separately.

Appointing an Estate Trustee During Litigation

A court appoints an Estate Trustee During Litigation to handle the deceased estate. Section 28 of the Ontario Estates Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.21 provides the statutory authority. The Ontario Superior Court of Justice grants administration in the case of either intestacy (when there is no Will) or pending a valid challenge to the validity of the Will, or some other action involving the Will and the deceased estate.

While the ongoing litigation continues, the Estate Trustee During Litigation has all the powers and rights of a general administrator, except for the right to distribute the residue of the property. Administrators of such estates are subject to the immediate control and direction of the court, and the court may order that the administrator receive reasonable remuneration from the estate of the decedent.

Court Appoints Estate Trustee During Litigation

The court appoints the Estate Trustee During Litigation and can set its remuneration. Therefore, the court must have some guiding principles it follows to determine when it is appropriate to make such an appointment. Well, it does. It comes from a situation I previously wrote about in my July 24, 2019, Brandon Blog DYING WITHOUT A WILL IN ONTARIO: DISTRIBUTION TO HEIRS NOT EASY. In that Brandon Blog, I wrote about Toller James Montague Cranston, deceased.

Toller Cranston was a popular Canadian figure skater and artist. He passed away on January 23, 2015, in Mexico where he lived for some 23 years. He passed away without leaving a Will. His sister, Phillipa Baran, was appointed Estate Trustee of the Estate of Toller Cranston by the Mexican court on September 3, 2015, on the consent of Phillipa and her two brothers, Guy Francis Cranston and Hugh Goldie Cranston. These three siblings were the only beneficiaries. In December 2016, her appointment as Estate Trustee of the Estate of Toller Cranston was confirmed by the Ontario court, also on consent. Phillipa Baran, therefore, had sole authority for Estate administration.

Estate litigation ensued and the court-appointed an Estate Trustee During Litigation. A rift between the three beneficiaries developed. The brothers filed a motion to remove their sister as Estate Trustee. One of the points of contention between the siblings was the manner ins which Phillippa Baran was handling the sale of Estate Assets, namely, the artwork of Toller Cranston. While that Estate litigation was pending, in 2019, the Master in the Estates court appointed an Estate Trustee During Litigation to take charge of trust property remaining in the meantime until the issue could be resolved.

During the litigation involving the Estate of Toller James Montague Cranston, the Master ordered the Estate Trustee During Litigation to act without posting an Administration Bond. The Master also ordered that all assets of the Estate shall be immediately turned over to the Estate Trustee Under Litigation who shall also file a Consent with the court. Phillipa Baran was ordered to fully cooperate in the transfer of the Estate assets and the production of records, including all financial records.

Philipa Baran appeals the appointment of the Estate Trustee During Litigation

Philippa Baran sought to set aside the Master’s decision and order appointing an Estate Trustee During Litigation. Her appeal was heard by the Divisional Court. According to the court, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has statutory authority to appoint an Estate Trustee During Litigation.

On this appeal, the Divisional Court Judge felt the appeal boiled down to two points. Specifically, whether the decision of the Master should be set aside and whether the order issued exceeded the Master’s jurisdiction.

The Divisional Court determined that the Master did not err in either law or fact based on its review of the relevant statutory provisions and jurisprudence. The Judge found nothing wrong with the Master’s Order.

To be fair to Ms. Baran, the Judge noted that there is evidence that she has worked very hard to manage the estate’s assets and debts since Toller Cranston died. It has been a challenging task. It appears, however, that the parties have reached a deadlock.

The Judge also thought Ms. Baran’s handling of the remaining artwork, including either selling the art over her brothers’ objections or planning future rights to the artwork without consulting Guy Cranston or Goldie Cranston, was unreasonable and contrary to her obligations as Estate Trustee.

Ms. Baran was, in the court’s view, in a conflict of interest in this litigation. Ms. Baran’s appeal was therefore dismissed, the appointment of the Estate Trustee During Litigation stands and Ms. Baran must temporarily return her Certificate of Appointment to the court.

Estate Trustee During Litigation: A Primer for Accountants and Lawyers

In addition, the Divisional Court noted some of the factors that will be considered by the court in determining whether or not it should exercise its discretion to appoint an Estate Trustee During Litigation. Accounting firms, lawyers, and anyone advising in the Estates area should be aware of these factors.

In terms of the court’s jurisdiction to appoint an Estate Trustee During Litigation, the following points were confirmed:

When necessary, the court can draw upon its inherent jurisdiction to protect parties and ensure justice in the proceeding by supervising the management of estates and controlling its own processes.
It is in the court’s inherent jurisdiction to appoint an officer to preserve and protect the assets of an Estate that may be at risk during litigation.
A level playing field must be ensured and the assets of the estate protected from the tactics used by litigating parties. No one should be able to use their control over the Estate to benefit themselves or to hurt the other beneficiaries.
It is crucial to administer an Estate’s assets to the maximum advantage of its beneficiaries. When an Estate Trustee faces an adversarial position towards his/her co-trustees or beneficiary, it is prudent to replace that trustee temporarily;’simple prudence demands it.
A court should only refuse the appointment of an Estate Trustee During Litigation in the clearest of cases since it is not an extraordinary measure. In most conflicts between the trustee and beneficiaries, the court will favour the appointment, unless it is not one of those very challenging Estates thereby making the estate administration straightforward.

According to the Divisional Court:

Whether an Estate Trustee During Litigation should be appointed is a discretionary decision. In determining whether the discretion to appoint an Estate Trustee During Litigation should be exercised, the following factors should be considered:

An Estate Trustee may be a witness in litigation.
Conflicts of interest are possible.
Conflict of interests between the Estate Trustee and/or beneficiaries.
There is hostility between the Estate Trustee and/or beneficiaries.
There is a lack of communication between the parties.
There is evidence that some parties were excluded from settlement discussions.

Estate Trustee During Litigation summary

I hope you have found this Estate Trustee During Litigation Brandon Blog informative. The death of a loved one is probably the most traumatic life event you will encounter. It is doubly so if your loved one dies intestate and family members tie up the Estate with costly litigation.

Are you a stakeholder in Estate litigation where the appointment of an independent, neutral court officer can at least unlock the jamming up of assets so that the assets can be preserved and their value maximized for the beneficiaries? If so, Smith Estate Trustee Ontario can help you. Contact us so that we can provide a no-cost consultation to see how we can help you and the other beneficiaries.

Do you have way too much financial debt? Prior to you getting to the phase where you can’t make ends meet reach out to me. I am a licensed insolvency trustee (previously called a bankruptcy trustee). In fact, if you understand that you can’t pay your financial debts heading into or in your retired life, contact us.

We understand the pain and stress excessive financial debt can trigger. We can aid you to get rid of that discomfort as well as address your financial problems by offering prompt action and the ideal plan.

Call Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. today. Make an appointment with one of the Ira Smith Team for a free, no-obligation consultation and you can be on your way to enjoying a carefree retirement Starting Over, Starting Now. Give us a call today so that we can help you get back to stress and pain-free life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Brandon Blog Post

TENANTS IN COMMON VS JOINT TENANCY IN ONTARIO: THE MODERN RULES OF A 1 CO-OWNER UNHAPPY BANKRUPTCY

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 4, 2021

tenants in common vs joint tenancy

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Tenants in common vs joint tenancy in Ontario: Shared ownership of property

There are two different types of property joint ownership: tenants in common vs joint tenancy. Whether you’re married or not, you still face the same problems. Having a co-owned home raises the issue of how the title should be held; tenants in common vs joint tenancy. Both are equally good. The answer really depends on the relationship between the co-owners and their estate planning needs.

A bankruptcy filing by one of the co-owners complicates matters further. A recent bankruptcy case decision in Ontario where only one of the joint owners filed for bankruptcy, highlights the problem, especially for non-bankrupt co-owner. This Brandon Blog discusses the recent bankruptcy case and what it means for both the bankrupt co-owner and the non-bankrupt co-owner regardless of the ownership choices between tenants in common vs joint tenancy.

Home ownership in Ontario: tenants in common vs joint tenants as co-owners

The word “tenants” is normally thought of with property rental. But both joint tenancy and tenants in common reference to a type of shared property ownership. As tenants in common, the ownership rights and all areas of an entire property are owned equally by all members of the group.

When one of the joint tenants dies, the deceased owner‘s share of the property passes to the surviving owner without going through the probate process. With tenants in common, in the event of death, this is not the case.. For asset protection and estate planning purposes, many married couples who want to hold title to the real property in a co-ownership structure, do so as joint tenants to avoid the probate process. Each joint tenant owns a 50% share ownership stake in the property.

Tenants in common may freely decide what ownership percentage of the property each owns. Each tenant in common does not need to own an equal percentage of the property; unequal ownership is fine as long as all co-owners agree on the ownership arrangements of unequal shares. The tenants in common can also transfer their share of the property through a Will, a real estate transfer, or even an arm’s length sale. Tenants in common are well advised to have a signed co-ownership agreement that spells everything out.

This is the primary difference between tenants in common vs joint tenancy in Ontario for the joint ownership of real property.

Property ownership part 2: tenants in common vs joint tenants in Ontario and the bankruptcy of 1 co-owner

When a co-owner becomes bankrupt, what happens? The Brandon Blog faithful knows that I have previously explained that upon bankruptcy of a person, the non-exempt assets of the bankrupt should be vested in the licensed insolvency trustee, subject to secured creditors‘ rights. For real estate ownership, the answer does not change whether title is held in tenants in common vs joint tenancy.

There is an exemption in Ontario for equity in one’s home of not more than $10,783. It is not an exemption for the first $10K, but rather if the total equity is below that amount. Therefore, we can consider the equity in a bankrupt person’s ownership interest in their home to belong to the Trustee for all practical purposes.

If the bankrupt has a 50% ownership stake due to a joint tenancy agreement, then it is the bankrupt’s equity in half the home. If the bankrupt’s ownership stake is under a tenants in common co-ownership agreement, then it is the equity in only the bankrupt’s co-ownership share. In either scenario, the ownership interest of the non-bankrupt owners are not directly affected. However, the other co-owners’ are affected one way or the other by the bankruptcy of a co-owner. The legal case I am about to tell you about is no exception.

Land Owner Transparency Registry: A Public Database

Upon the person’s bankruptcy, the bankrupt must disclose all assets to the Trustee. With computerization and the internet, it is easy for a Trustee to determine if the bankrupt has an ownership interest in the real estate where they reside. This is whether or not the bankrupt has disclosed such ownership interest.

The decision of the Honourable Justice Pattillo of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Bankruptcy and Insolvency dated July 28, 2021, in Re Johansen Bankruptcy, 2021 ONSC 5241 (CanLII) highlights the issues in the bankruptcy of a co-owner of real estate. In December 2016, Mr. Johansen filed a voluntary bankruptcy assignment. In his sworn statement of affairs, he listed no realizable assets and liabilities of $73,968 (unsecured) and $14,950 (secured). No mention is made of any ownership in real estate.

The Trustee learned of the bankrupt’s interest in the home he lived in with his mother in March 2017. In the period from April 2017 to October 2020, the Trustee wrote to the bankrupt and Mrs. Johansen as well as spoke to the bankrupt several times about his interest in the home and why it hadn’t been disclosed. The bankrupt did not provide any information other than denying interest in the property, and his mother did not respond.

A FedEx courier envelope containing a one-page statutory declaration purportedly signed by Mrs. Johansen on October 18, 2018, arrived at the Trustee on October 16, 2020. Her declaration stated, in part, that putting the 20% in the bankrupt’s name was intended to provide her son with an interest in her Estate over and above any other entitlements under her Will. According to her, the 20% was a gift to be realized only after her death.

In the Trustee’s view, the bankrupt and his mother are playing games with each other. The Trustee applied to the court for a declaration that the bankrupt held a 20% interest in the home at the time of bankruptcy, and that he could partition and sell it. Despite the Trustee having a lawyer, the bankrupt represented himself. It would have been better if he had gotten legal advice and been represented in court.

Tenants In Common vs Joint Tenancy: Can your 90-year-old mother be thrown out of her house?

The Judge determined that the bankrupt owned a 20% interest in the property based on the legal title, and hence, that 20% interest vested in the Trustee pursuant to s. 71 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA).

Mrs. Johansen’s statutory declaration to the effect that the bankrupt did not own the real estate and that the 20% was a gift that only passes to him on her death was not accepted by the Judge. The declaration was signed some two years after the bankruptcy when the Trustee’s ownership interest was well known. Despite repeated requests from the Trustee for information, it was not produced for another two years. In addition to what was noted by the Judge, his main concern was the way she characterized the bankrupt’s interest, given the evidence concerning the property they owned before this home, which Mrs. Johansen failed to mention.

Mrs. Johansen and the former marriage of the bankrupt’s wife, as well as the bankrupt, were the three parties on title to the home they purchased on January 30, 2007. They obtained a mortgage from TD Bank on January 30, 2007, which was discharged on February 21, 2007. Due to a marital split, the bankrupt’s wife was removed from the legal title on October 17, 2008, leaving just his mother Mrs. Johansen and himself as parties on the legal title. The bankrupt admitted that his ex-wife was paid for her interest in that home. On June 28, 2012, the bankrupt and his mother sold that home for $567,000, and the same day purchased the current home for $450,000.

The home was purchased in 2012. The title documents recorded at the time, its ownership is divided between 20% owned by the bankrupt and 80% owned by Mrs. Johansen. Mrs. Johansen and the bankrupt both signed the Land Transfer Tax affidavit showing as between tenants in common vs joint tenancy they chose to own the home as tenants in common. There are no mortgages recorded on the title.

All title searches, including a current title search, did not reveal the nature of the interests of each of Mrs. Johansen, the bankrupt or his ex-wife held in that previous home. However, it did show that each of them had an interest in it. The Judge determined that when Mrs. Johansen and the bankrupt bought the current home, it is a reasonable conclusion that the bankrupt had a 20% ownership interest in it. It was not intended to only pass on Mrs. Johansen’s death.

Justice Pattillo did not accept the bankrupt’s evidence that he has no interest in the property and had no knowledge that he was one of the parties on title. Given the history and the fact that he signed the affidavit of Land Transfer Tax at the time of purchase, Justice Pattillo held that the bankrupt was aware he had an interest in the legal title in the property.

Justice Pattillo found that the Trustee had the standing to bring the application for partition or sale of the property since he is a person with an interest in it. The Judge noted that Mrs. Johansen is 90 years old and does not wish to sell her home. Based on the evidence, however, he did not consider that to be of sufficient hardship to warrant refusing the requested remedy.

Tenants in common vs joint tenancy: The bankruptcy of 1 co-owner will affect the others

The Judge stayed his order for three months. He encouraged the bankrupt and through him his mother to seek professional advice so that this issue can be resolved with the Trustee before the sale process begins. The order will take effect if a resolution is not reached within that timeframe.

Now that the prospect of the sale of the entire home, not just the bankrupt’s co-ownership interest, was a reality, the bankrupt and his mother needed professional guidance. Their professional advice would be that the Trustee is only entitled to 20% of the bankrupt’s equity interest. So, if the mother from her own funds, or by getting a mortgage, can come up with the value of the 20% interest and pay it to the Trustee, then the house will not get sold. She will have bought the bankrupt son’s 20% interest, and the Trustee will have all the money he is entitled to.

If one co-owner goes bankrupt, the other co-owners are affected as well. It is the Trustee’s responsibility to convert the bankrupt’s equity into cash. One or more of the remaining co-owners are the natural buyers of the bankrupt co-owner’s interest. Sometimes non-bankrupt co-owners must sell, as is the case for Johansen if the mother cannot purchase the son’s equity from the Trustee, but most often someone will purchase the Trustee’s equity to maintain the status quo.

Had the choice of ownership interest as between tenants in common vs joint tenancy, this would not have changed the outcome of this case.

A lawyer can help you understand tenants in common vs joint tenancy in Ontario

I hope that you found the tenants in common vs joint tenancy Brandon Blog interesting. Problems will arise when you or your company are in financial distress, cash-starved and cannot repay debts. There are several insolvency processes available to a company or a person with too much debt.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

tenants in common vs joint tenancy

Brandon Blog Post

REVERSE VESTING ORDER: 1 REMARKABLE CREATIVE WAY TO DO FINANCIAL RESTRUCTURING

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 2, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this Brandon Blog, please scroll to the very bottom of the page and click play on the podcast.

Vesting order and reverse vesting order

In a corporate insolvency case, a court may grant a vesting order, which authorizes the sale of a company’s assets to the buyer once the purchase price is paid. A vesting order vests ownership in the purchaser as a result of this court order. This is proof that the purchaser is entitled to transfer the assets into its name. No matter what insolvency process is used, this is the use of a vesting order.

In the past year or so, a new trend has emerged regarding the sale of the assets of insolvent companies as part of a restructuring under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). That new trend is the use of a reverse vesting order.

In this Brandon Blog, I explain what a reverse vesting order is and why I believe its use will be a significant feature of Canadian firm restructurings in 2021 and beyond.

Reverse vesting order – A powerful tool for maximizing recovery in complex insolvencies

A reverse vesting order can be very useful in complex insolvencies. A timely recovery can benefit creditors, and the process can maximize recoveries for all parties. Reverse vesting orders are a good solution for an insolvent debtor corporation when:

there are a large number of secured creditors, unsecured creditors and assets;
all of the assets do not have an immediate buyer;
the company is insolvent; and
the company must deal with unwanted assets and a group of creditors in a particular way.

It is best used in a large-scale CCAA corporate restructuring but is not limited to that.

reverse vesting order

Reverse vesting order as a third restructuring tool

There have traditionally been two insolvency processes available to licensed insolvency trustees, insolvency lawyers, and company stakeholders. The two are (i) liquidating assets; and (ii) reorganizing companies. In general, assets are liquidated through either receivership or bankruptcy. Incorporated companies can restructure either under the provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) or, for larger and more complex restructurings, under the CCAA. It is obvious that assets must be sold in order to liquidate them.

Sometimes, as part of a corporate restructuring, there are redundant and unwanted assets that can be sold to raise cash. The question is, what if the real value, especially a going-concern value of a company in a commercial insolvency case is not in its tangible assets. Rather, its real value lies in:

the ability to operate in a specific industry and such licenses cannot be sold by their very nature and wording – think of the cannabis and nursing home industries as two examples;
tax losses and tax attributes that can be monetized if the licensed insolvency trustee is also able to take over the shares; or
being listed on the stock exchange and thus as a public company having a greater market value than a private corporation.

As a result, it is extremely difficult to realize any value from such assets.

What is the importance of the reverse vesting order? How a reverse vesting order works will tell you all you need to know about why it is important as a third restructuring tool. Under a reverse vesting order, a newly incorporated residual corporation is added as a party to the CCAA proceedings.

As part of the CCAA restructuring, the operating debtor company transfers undesirable assets and liabilities to the newly incorporated non-operating company. With its assets and liabilities selected by the purchaser, the debtor company holds only the desirable assets and liabilities, which means its common shares can be sold rather than the company’s assets. As a result, valuable permits, contracts, tax losses, and statutory authority are preserved, which can otherwise be lost in a disposition of assets.

Why is reverse vesting order important?

A reverse vesting order is an alternative to the traditional CCAA plans of arrangement, particularly for companies operating in highly regulated environments or when there is no value remaining after the realization of secured debt and the parties intend to continue the running of the debtor company.

A reverse vesting order is an alternative to the traditional CCAA plans of arrangement, particularly for companies operating in highly regulated environments or when there is no value remaining after the realization of secured debt and the parties plan to continue operating the debtor company.

By using a reverse vesting order, existing corporations, which have been streamlined to become solvent through an innovative solution, are transferred to new investors instead of desirable assets being sold through a court-approved sale. The debtor corporation that initially filed for bankruptcy protection under the CCAA can now be removed from the restructuring proceedings. There are certain unwanted assets and unwanted liabilities that are transferred to the newly incorporated residual corporation. There can then be asset sales allowing for some sort of distribution to creditors (either in a plan of arrangement or in bankruptcy) in order to allow some creditor recovery.

A reverse vesting order may prove to be the most efficient approach to facilitate a going concern operation transfer through restructuring proceedings, letting businesses emerge from CCAA proceedings quickly without having filed a plan of arrangement, while preserving key attributes of the corporate entity and its existing corporate structure.

Legal challenges to the use of reverse vesting orders have been unsuccessful. I would like to discuss the case of Nemaska Lithium Inc.

Reverse vesting order issued by Québec Superior Court after first contested hearing

In December 2019, Nemaska Lithium Inc. and related companies (Nemaska Lithium or the Nemaska entities) commenced CCAA proceedings. A lithium mining project was developed in Quebec by them. A CCAA judge approved an uncontested sale or investment solicitation process (SISP) in January 2020 that led to the acceptance of a bid that was subject to the condition that a reverse vesting order is issued.

A proposed reverse vesting order provides that Nemaska entities will be acquired by the bidder free of the claims of the unsecured creditors, which will be transferred as part of a pre-closing reorganization to a newly incorporated non-operating company.

The reverse vesting order will allow the purchaser to continue to operate the Nemaska entities in a highly regulated environment by maintaining their existing permits, licences, authorizations, essential contracts, and fiscal attributes. In essence, it is a credit bid in which the shares of the Nemaska entities are acquired in exchange for the assumption of the secured debt.

A shareholder (who was also an alleged creditor) filed motions opposing the reverse vesting order issuance on multiple grounds, including:

a vesting order cannot be granted for anything other than a sale or disposition of assets through a vesting order for sales of assets;
the reverse vesting order is not permissible under the CCAA because it allows the Nemaska entities to exit CCAA protection outside of a plan of arrangement or plan of compromise;
this reverse vesting order contemplated a corporate reorganization that is not permitted by securities laws; and
in light of the proposed transaction, the directors and officers of Nemaska Lithium Inc. should not be released.

The Honourable Justice Gouin, J.S.C., reviewed and assessed:

the SISP process which led to the offer;
the lack of alternatives to the offer;
the potential harm to Nemaska Lithium‘s stakeholders, including its employees, creditors, suppliers, and the Cree community;
stopping the restructuring process to relaunch a SISP in the future following what was already a thorough examination of the market or, alternatively,
bankrupting the Nemaska entities.

In light of all these factors, the judge approved the reverse vesting order on October 15, 2020. Limiting the remedies available under the CCAA would unnecessarily hinder the development of innovative solutions for more complex commercial and social issues in Canadian insolvency matters.

The decision and formal recognition of reverse vesting order by the Court of Appeal

Leave to appeal the CCAA judge‘s decision was sought by the parties who objected to the reverse vesting order being made. The Appellate Court carefully considered the judge’s decision-making process and particularly that the Québec Superior Court judge relied extensively on the principles set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in the matter of 9354-9186 Quebec inc. c. Callidus Capital Corp., namely the:

development of CCAA proceedings and the role of the CCAA supervising judge;
remedial objectives of Canadian insolvency laws to provide timely, efficient, and impartial resolution of a debtor’s insolvency, secure fair and equitable treatment of creditors’ claims against a debtor, protect the public interest, and balance the costs and benefits of restructuring or liquidating the debtor company’s assets;
CCAA‘s goal of preventing social and economic losses from liquidating insolvent companies by facilitating their reorganization and survival as a going concern; and
CCAA judge‘s broad discretion under s. 11 of the CCAA in an effort to advance the CCAA’s remedial objectives while taking into account three fundamental factors that the debtor company application must prove: (1) the requested order is appropriate in the circumstances, and (2) good faith on the part of the applicant, and (3) the applicant has been acting with due diligence.

It was determined by the Court of Appeal judge that the risk of potential harm to stakeholders outweighed any legal merits of any arguments raised by the opposing parties. Therefore, the Quebec Court of Appeal denied the leave to appeal the decision of the CCAA judge.

Canada’s Supreme Court has denied leave to appeal. Having now established reverse vesting as an option for CCAA restructurings, the law is now set in stone.

The Nemaska case is the first reverse vesting order transaction to withstand judicial scrutiny in Canada and reaffirms the flexibility of CCAA proceedings for distressed M&A transactions of distressed businesses.

Reverse vesting order and distressed M&A opportunities

I hope that you found this reverse vesting order Brandon Blog interesting. Problems will arise when you or your company are in business distress, cash-starved and cannot repay debts. There are several insolvency processes available to a company or a person with too much debt.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Tags 9354-9186 Quebec inc. c. Callidus Capital Corp., Appellate Court, Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, Canadian insolvency, CCAA, CCAA judge, CCAA proceedings for distressed M&A transactions, CCAA supervising judge, commercial insolvency, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, corporate insolvency, corporate reorganization, corporate restructuring, court-approved sale, covid-19 pandemic, debtor company, debtor corporation, distressed businesses, going-concern value, insolvency processes, insolvent, insolvent companies, Ira Smith Trustee, leave to appeal, Nemaska entities, Nemaska Lithium Inc., newly incorporated non-operating company, newly incorporated residual corporation, plan of arrangement, plan of compromise, plans of arrangement, receivership, remedial objectives, restructuring tool, reverse vesting order, Reverse vesting order as a third restructuring tool, Reverse vesting order issued by Québec Superior Court after first contested hearing, Reverse vesting order – A powerful tool for maximizing recovery in complex insolvencies, sale or investment solicitation process, secured creditors, SISP, Supreme Court of Canada, The decision and formal recognition of reverse vesting order, undesirable assets, unsecured creditors, unwanted assets, vesting order, vesting orders, Why is reverse vesting order important