Tag: Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

TRUSTEE ACT ONTARIO BY A TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE

Trustee Act Ontario: Introduction

I want to highlight a provincial statute that is also important for the administration of a deceased estate; the Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.23 (Trustee Act Ontario). This blog continues my blog series to show how it would be proper to appoint a licensed insolvency trustee (LIT or bankruptcy trustee) (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) as the estate trustee (formerly called an executor or executrix) of a solvent deceased estate.

As always, since we are not lawyers, and I am by no means providing in this and upcoming Brandon’s Blogs advice on wills or estate planning matters. For that, you must consult your lawyer.

My prior estate blogs

In my blog TRUSTEE OF DECEASED ESTATE: WHAT A TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE KNOWS, I looked at some essential matters when it involves a deceased estate and why a LIT would be extremely knowledgable and competent to act as an estate trustee of a deceased estate with those basic requirements.

In the blog, TRUSTEE OF PARENTS ESTATE: DO I REALLY HAVE TO?, I explained why many times parents try doing the proper thing by appointing their children as estate trustees and how many times it just turns out all wrong.

In ESTATES ACT ONTARIO: TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE REVEALS HIDDEN SECRET, I describe how the requirements and provisions of the Estates Act are already very familiar to a bankruptcy trustee. In fact, most of the duties required by the Estates Act are already performed in the insolvency context by a LIT.

My blog ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES ACT CANADA: EASY FOR TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE TO DO, I explained why a LIT is a right professional to lead the administration of Estates Act Canada.

In this and my next blog, I will focus on two more Ontario statutes that impact the administration of a deceased estate by an estate trustee. The three statutes are:

  1. Trustee Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. T.23; and
  2. Succession Law Reform Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. S.26

As you have by now correctly guessed, in this blog, I will show how a bankruptcy trustee would be very familiar with the workings of this provincial legislation.

Things an estate trustee must be aware of

There are various sections of the Trustee Act Ontario that affects the duties and responsibilities of an estate trustee in administering a deceased estate. All the concepts are very familiar to a LIT.

Power of court to appoint new trustees

Section 5(1) of this statute gives the Ontario Superior Court of Justice the authority to make an Order for the appointment of a new trustee. This is the same Court that we attend for Court-appointed receivership and bankruptcy matters. So, a LIT is very familiar with the workings and requirements of this Court.

Who may apply for the appointment of a new trustee, or vesting order

Section 16(1) of this provincial statute says that anyone who has a beneficial interest in the property of the trust can apply for the appointment of a new trustee. This is very similar to how a Court-appointed Receiver is appointed. Although it is normally a secured creditor who makes the application, in theory, it could be any party that has an interest. Section 101(1) of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43 states that a receivership Order may be made “…where it seems to a judge of the court to be just or convenient to do so.”. It is the “just and convenient” clause that was relied upon by the judge when we were appointed Receiver and Manager of the assets, properties and undertakings of The Suites at 1 King West condo strata hotel back in August 2007.

For this reason, as a LIT, we are very familiar with this aspect of appointing a trustee.

Power and discretion of trustee for sale

In my blog ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES ACT CANADA: EASY FOR TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE TO DO, I referred to sections 16 and 17 of the Estates Administration Act. Section 17 in particular, provides the estate trustee with the power to pay off the debts of the deceased. It also allows a trustee to distribute or divide the estate among the beneficiaries.

Section 17 of the provincial Act provides the trustee with the authority to sell, but subject to the requirements of the Estates Administration Act.

A LIT, either in receivership or bankruptcy, is extremely acquainted and experienced in the sale of real and personal property. The LIT likewise makes certain that the creditors are paid in the correct order of priority.

Sales by trustees not impeachable on certain grounds

Section 18(1) deals with a certain aspect of the sale of the property. It states that unless it is proven that there was an inadequate sales price, a sale properly made cannot be impeached by any beneficiary. Any beneficiary wanting to try to impeach a sale must prove that the process used resulted in a sales price at less than fair market value.

Similarly, in a Court-appointed receivership or bankruptcy, the LIT must be able to prove that both the conditions of the sales process and the sales price achieved, was right for the types of assets in the circumstances.

The leading case is the Ontario Court of Appeal decision in Royal Bank of Canada v. Soundair Corp., 1991 CanLII 2727 (ON CA). The process a LIT must follow is known as the “Soundair principles”. This is the test used when deciding whether a receiver or trustee applying for Court approval of a sales process and the authority to sell assets has acted properly. The Court must decide whether the receiver or trustee has:

  • made a sufficient effort to get the best price and has not acted improvidently;
  • considered the interests of all parties;
  • Devised a fair process that has integrity by which offers were obtained; and
  • Introduced any element of unfairness in the working out of the process.

Therefore, I submit, that a LIT is very experienced in devising a sales process and selling assets in a way that is fair to all stakeholders or beneficiaries to attempt to maximize sales proceeds.

Trust funds and investing

Section 26 of the Act deals with the area of the requirement for a trustee to maintain trust accounts and to invest trust property in a way that will maximize the return while not putting the capital at risk to swings in investment pricing, inflation or income tax.

The LIT is very familiar and experienced in trust accounts and the investing of trust funds. Section 25 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) deals with the requirement of a trustee to establish trust accounts. Also, the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Directive no. 5R5 deals with Estate funds and banking. The Superintendent also monitors the banking of trust funds by all LITs across Canada.

Therefore a LIT is very knowledgeable and experienced in the banking, investing and protection of trust funds.

Security by the person appointed

If letters of administration were granted under the Estates Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.21, section 37(2) of the provincial legislation requires every trustee to post security.

I discussed in my blog ESTATES ACT ONTARIO: TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE REVEALS HIDDEN SECRET, the experience of a LIT in the posting of security by way of an insurance company bond.

Actions for torts

Section 38(1) of the provincial statute gives authority to an estate trustee of a deceased person to maintain an action for all torts and injuries to the deceased person or his or her property, except in cases of libel and slander. Any recovery forms part of the deceased’s personal estate. Section 38(3) provides for a limitation on such actions. The action cannot be brought after the expiration of two years from the date of death.

As a LIT, this is a familiar concept to us. When a person or company is insolvent and has a chose in action against one or more parties, such action can be started or continued by a receiver or bankruptcy trustee. In fact, in a bankruptcy, the action actually vests in the trustee.

The receiver or trustee has to make sure that they have a legal opinion on the likelihood of success. The receiver or trustee also has to make sure that they can afford to fund the litigation. The litigation cost cannot reduce the value of the assets under administration. This includes the issue of costs if the action proves unsuccessful.

Distribution of assets under trust deeds for benefit of creditors, or of the assets of the intestate

Section 53(1) of the Act lays out the requirements of a trustee to make a distribution for the general benefit of creditors. As I have described in previous blogs, Section 135 of the BIA deals with the admission and disallowance of proofs of claim and proofs of security.

A LIT is an expert at sorting out creditor claims and could certainly do so under the Trustee Act also.

Trustee Act Ontario: Summary

I hope that this blog reveals to you how the provisions of this provincial statute, detailing the duties of a trustee or estate trustee tracks really close to how a LIT performs in either a Court-appointed receivership or bankruptcy administration.

Therefore, the LIT is used to acting as a Court officer and could very easily perform the requirements and duties of a trustee as described in this provincial legislation.

If you have any questions about a deceased estate and the need for an estate trustee, whether it is solvent or insolvent, contact the Ira Smith Team. We have decades and generations of experience in helping people and companies overcome their financial problems. You don’t need to suffer; we can end your pain.

In my next blog, I am going to write a similar comparison. It will be about the requirements outlined in the Succession Law Reform Act and how a LIT is most familiar with it also.

In the meantime, if you have any questions at all, contact the Ira Smith Team.

 

trustee act ontario

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

PRIVACY BREACH LAWSUIT AGAINST LICENSED INSOLVENCY TRUSTEE FAILS

privacy breach lawsuitPrivacy breach lawsuit: Introduction

A licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) and a Court appointed Receiver are both officers of the Court. As such, they have a duty of care to all stakeholders and parties. A decision of the Supreme Court of British Columbia released in late 2018 deals with an application to begin a class action privacy breach lawsuit against a licensed insolvency trustee (LIT or Trustee).

The case I am referring to is Netlink Computer System Inc. (re),2018 BCSC2309. Netlink Computer System Inc. (Netlink) was a British Columbia-based business that marketed computers and associated software solutions. In late 2017, Netlink went bankrupt.

Privacy breach lawsuit: The request to go ahead

As is required under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA), any party wishing to initiate litigation against a bankruptcy trustee must first get the permission of the Court to do so.

In the Netlink case, a former Netlink customer wanted to start a class action lawsuit against the Trustee. The customer claimed that the Trustee breached the personal privacy of Netlink’s customers by permitting their personal details to be revealed. The unproven claim was that the Trustee sold to or, otherwise, allowed 3rd parties to get personal information of the Netlink customers.

This particular customer wished to start an action versus the Trustee for breach of privacy. If leave is approved, this customer would then seek certification of his case as a class action lawsuit.

Privacy breach lawsuit: The issue in requesting the leave of the Court

The Court’s task was to figure out whether to exercise its discretion to allow the claim to go ahead. The Court had to look at the nature and scope of the proposed claim taking into account the evidence. Leave is rarely given. If leave was granted in this case, it would be the first time in Canada a bankruptcy Trustee has been taken legal action against in a potential class action proceeding.

The BIA does not give any type of specific advice about the elements the Court ought to take into consideration in thinking about an application for leave to start an action against a LIT. These have just been developed through case-law analyzing and using s. 215 of the BIA.

For almost 150 years, Courts and legal scholars have been of the view that the bar for approving the commencement of litigation I versus a Court-appointed receiver or Trustee is not a high one. It is designed to protect the receiver or LIT against only frivolous or vexatious actions which have no basis.

The leading cases on the issue of leave to go ahead with litigation against either a Court-appointed receiver or LIT can be summarized as follows;

  • Leave to take such legal action should not be given if the action is frivolous or vexatious. Manifestly unmeritorious claims need to not be allowed to continue
  • Actions need to not be allowed to continue if the evidence submitted on behalf of the action, does not show a cause of action against the Trustee.
  • The court is not required to make a final evaluation of the benefits of the claim prior to granting leave.

This threshold tries to strike the ideal balance between the security of bankruptcy trustees and Court appointed receivers from the interruption of an insolvency administration from unimportant or simply tactical suits and preserving to the maximum degree possible the legal rights of creditors and other stakeholders.

In this privacy breach lawsuit case, the claimant states that his affidavit evidence provides proof reveals a real case against the Trustee. The Trustee says that the proposed claim and the evidence on its behalf does not satisfy the relatively reduced threshold called for to prove leave.

The claimant described in his materials, his potential claim. . He also discloses that he has already begun a claim against the auction company who sold the bankruptcy company’s assets, Netlink and Netlink’s landlord. (The action versus Netlink has remained stayed due to the fact that Netlink is in bankruptcy). The proposed claim against the LIT is exactly the same and consists of practically the same phrasing as the action already started. There is no separate accusation that the Trustee did anything different from the auctioneer, Netlink, or the landlord.

The proposed claimant’s main points were:

  1. He purchased a product from Netlink and provided personal information, including, his name, address and credit card details.
  2. The Trustee contracted with the auctioneer to sell the assets.
  3. During that process, the Trustee allowed customers’ private information, including addresses, credit card numbers, and various other sensitive information (the “Private Information”) to be exposed and offered to or otherwise acquired by 3rd parties, including criminals.
  4. The Trustee provided the auctioneer computers and Netlink servers and other records containing the Private Information.
  5. Criminals that obtained the Netlink servers offered the information to other criminals, consisting of cybercriminals and identity thieves.
  6. The trustee knew that customer details are often included in the property of such bankrupt’s estates and it took no steps to safeguard the information when taking guardianship of Netflix’s property.
  7. The Trustee’s choice to offer the Private Information, or at a minimum, the Netlink servers including the Private Information, was intended and deliberate and was made knowing that Netlink customers had not consented to their details being shared.
  8. Customers have suffered damages.

Privacy breach lawsuit: This evidence

The Court examined the claims and the evidence. Unfortunately, the claimant did not have first-hand knowledge of what the Trustee did or did not do. Rather, the claimant submitted two sworn affidavits of what he believed took place. The information contained in the two affidavits was derived mainly from blog posts and YouTube videos that the claimant believed to be true.

The Trustee submitted 2 sworn affidavits of the LIT responsible for the Netlink file. The Trustee’s evidence was mainly why the relatively low threshold for allowing a claim against a Trustee or Court appointed receiver were not met. It did not provide much information about what the Trustee actually did (or did not do).

The Court had no choice but to rule that the claimant’s evidence was mainly hearsay and not admissible. With no real evidence before the Court to support the accusations, the Court dismissed the application and leave to begin the action against the Trustee was denied.

Privacy breach lawsuit: My take

Based on my reading of this case, I believe the Trustee was very lucky that there was no real evidence against it. There is no information indicating what steps the Trustee took to make sure that all Private Information was protected prior to the assets being sold. It is imperative that privacy breaches do not take place. Once a Trustee or Court appointed receiver to take possession of assets that may contain private or sensitive information, steps must be taken to ensure that the information does not fall into the hands of 3rd parties who have no right to that information. It does not matter whether the information is stored on computer hard drives, in the cloud, or physically in books or on paper.

The claimant still has its action against the auctioneer and the landlord. My understanding is that the landlord is involved because once the auction sale was completed and the auctioneer left the premises, there were still books, records and papers that contained some or all the Private Information. The landlord disposed of such papers in a way that did not protect the Private Information.

My Firm’s standard practice is to remove hard drives that contain Private Information so that computers would be sold minus a hard drive. With respect to physical records, any documents not required that would contain Private Information, we have shredded. We do not just throw it into a dumpster intact for someone to find. These are minimum steps required to protect Private Information.

Unfortunately, in the Netlink case, the Court’s Reasons for Decision does not include any information indicating the Trustee took such steps.

Privacy breach lawsuit: What does it all mean?

What it all means is that in any insolvency assignment, the LIT needs to know what it is he or she has taken possession and control of. Decisions must be made that protect the interests of all stakeholders, as best possible. There are always competing interests. The LIT must balance them all carefully when making decisions.

Do you have too much debt because you are a victim of identity theft? Does your company have too much debt and is in danger of shutting down? Is the pain and stress of too much debt now negatively affecting your health?

If so, contact the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of helping people and companies in need of financial restructuring and counselling. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only professionals licensed and supervised by the Federal government to provide debt settlement and financial restructuring services.

We offer a free consultation to help you solve your problems. We understand your pain that debt causes. We can also end it right away from your life. This will allow you to begin a fresh start, Starting Over Starting Now. Call the Ira Smith Team today so that we can begin helping you and get you back into a healthy, stress-free life.privacy breach lawsuit

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY BLOG REVIEW: A LOOK AT MY TOP 2018 BANKRUPTCY BLOGS

Bankruptcy blog review: Introduction

I hope that you are all enjoying quality family time together over the holidays. As 2018 is nearly over, I thought that it would be interesting to do a bankruptcy blog review on my Brandon’s Blog. So here is a review of the 7 most viewed blogs over the past year.

Bankruptcy blog review: The 7 most viewed blogs in 2018

BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT: COURT MAY NOT LISTEN TO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE

This blog was about a very interesting case decided in the Court of Appeal of British Columbia. The bankrupt’s creditors applied to have the transactions reviewed under section I00 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (“BIA”). One of the areas of contention was that the judge in the lower court found he could not rely on the bankruptcy trustee’s opinion of value in the circumstances.

MORTGAGE LENDING CRITERIA SELF EMPLOYED: BIGGEST MYTH MAY BE RIGHT

In this Brandon’s Blog, I wrote about mortgage lending criteria self-employed, I discussed a Court decision that shows when it comes to a self-employed person’s mortgage, if there is a deemed trust claim by Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), you cannot solely rely upon the registry system.


STALKING HORSE CREDIT BID: WE NEED COURT APPROVAL BEFORE STARTING A COURT SUPERVISED SALES PROCESS

This bankruptcy blog review post came from our corporate case files. I discussed the decision making process the Court goes through when being asked to approve a stalking horse sales process and the stalking horse credit bid being recommended by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee).


CREDIT KARMA CANADA REVIEW: IS IT REALLY FREE AND LEGITIMATE?

Since 2007, Credit Karma USA has attempted to simplify credit and finance for more than 60 million Credit Karma members. They advertise very heavily on US television to attract new members. Becoming a member is free, and it allows any member to get access to their free credit score and credit report, with the option to update every single week. Credit Karma also provides financial education to put credit into context.

Credit Karma Canada arrived this past year from the United States. Its website is creditkarma.ca. The purpose of this blog was to describe what Credit Karma Canada is and to let you decide if it would be helpful or not for you or someone you know.


IS GOODWILL A NON PROFIT ORGANIZATION? ARE YOU SCARED BECAUSE YOUR COMPANY HAS TURNED INTO ONE?

 

The Goodwill Toronto bankruptcy confused and astonished many people. After all, how can Goodwill, a non-profit organization, go bankrupt? Isn’t the very nature of a non-profit or not-for-profit that it doesn’t have to make a profit? This Brandon’s Blog discussed the issues.


FILING FOR BANKRUPTCY IN CANADA: MENTAL HEALTH & DISCHARGED BANKRUPTCY

 

This bankruptcy blogspot dealt with filing for bankruptcy in Canada and the bankruptcy discharge process when mental health issues are involved.


POOR CREDIT PERSONAL LOANS GUARANTEED APPROVAL CANADA: REDUCE AND DON’T INCREASE DEBT TO IMPROVE YOUR CREDIT SCORE

 

This Brandon’s Blog was a discussion about and a warning against being seduced by ads from companies for poor credit personal loans guaranteed approval. We pointed out the pitfalls of the products being offered. We also showed how people with poor credit can go about settling their debts and improving their credit score.

 

Bankruptcy blog review: Conclusion

 

These are my 7 top viewed Brandon’s Blogs in 2018. Four are about personal debt issues or personal bankruptcy blog items and three are about corporate insolvency issues. Three are about a review of a then-recent court case.

I hope that the year 2019 will be a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year for you and your families.

Have you taken on too much debt in 2018 or the years before? Is the pain and stress of too much debt now negatively affecting your health?

If so, contact the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of helping people and companies in need of financial restructuring and counselling. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only professionals licensed and supervised by the Federal government to provide debt settlement and financial restructuring services.

We offer a free consultation to help you solve your problems. We understand your pain that debt causes. We can also eliminate it right away from your life. This will allow you to begin a fresh start, Starting Over Starting Now. Call the Ira Smith Team today so that we can begin helping you and get you back into a healthy, stress-free life.bankruptcy blog review

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY CANADA

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Introduction

Encountering major money troubles is life-shattering, especially if you automatically think that bankruptcy is your only alternative. As a matter of fact, lots of people erroneously think that serious financial difficulties immediately suggest the only answer is bankruptcy. The most common question I am asked is, “what is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada”.

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Insolvency

If you are having problems meeting your financial obligations or have stopped meeting those financial obligations as they come due you are insolvent, not bankrupt. Insolvent is a cash flow problem; bankruptcy is a legal state. You can read a detailed discussion on the definition of being insolvent in my last week’s vlog INSOLVENT DEFINITION: A NEW FOCUS FOR TORONTO BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE.

Bаnkruрtсу is a legal рrосеѕѕ under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA) that helps you to resolve уоur debts if they have become unmanageable. If you have relatively few assets and low іnсоmе and dесіdе to file for bаnkruрtсу, you will probably fіlе under the streamlined Summary Administration part of the BIA.

If you have realizable assets that will produce a value greater than $10,000, then your bankruptcy would be administered under the general administrative provisions. Don’t worry about these distinctions right now. For now, just know that the summary administration rules are shortened, and the cost of the bankruptcy administration is fixed by a tariff set by the Superintendent of Bankruptcy.

In either case, you will turn over to your Licensed Insolvency Trustee (“LIT”) (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) all уоur рrореrtу that is not exempt (protected) by law. The LIT will sell your property and the proceeds will be used to рау for the bankruptcy administration and then make a distribution to уоur сrеdіtоrѕ.

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Assets exempt in a bankruptcy in Ontario

In Ontario, where my practice is, the following assets are exempt from seizure in a personal bankruptcy:

  1. Your necessary clothing without any dollar restriction.
  2. Family furnishings and appliances up to a value of $13,150.
  3. Your tools and other personal property used to earn income from your occupation up to a value of $11,300.
  4. One vehicle with equity of no more than $6,600.
  5. Registered Retirement Savings Plan and Registered Retirement Income Fund savings, other than payments made within the 12 months immediately before the bankruptcy filing.
  6. The equity in your house if up to the amount of $10,000. Note that the current thinking is that if your equity is more than $10,000, then your exemption is zero.

If you have very little property, all of it may be рrоtесtеd so that you will not lose it.

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: Surplus income

How much уоur сrеdіtоrѕ will get in this process dереndѕ on how much уоur unрrоtесtеd property can be ѕоld fоr and whether you will be required to pay “surplus income” to your LIT. For a detailed discussion on surplus income, read my May 28, 2013 blog CAN YOU REALLY HAVE SURPLUS INCOME IF YOU’RE BANKRUPT?

Among all the things that seem to perplex many people when it involves the bankruptcy procedure is surplus income. It’s tough to get your head around the concept of surplus income when you are heading towards bankruptcy. Can that really be true if you are insolvent?

What is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency Canada: What is surplus income

Surplus income in a bankruptcy describes the amount the bankrupt must pay to the Trustee monthly. The Canadian bankruptcy system attempts to balance your right to end your debt and start over with the rights of creditors to be paid.

To permit Canadians to keep a sensible right to make a living throughout the bankruptcy administration, the federal government has established limits or standards on revenue a person can keep (after tax obligations and certain limited deductions) throughout their bankruptcy. The Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy establishes the limit restriction every year tied into the cost of living.

How do you figure surplus income?

The Federal Government establishes the formula used to calculate surplus income payments. The same formula is used for all of Canada.

The limits for surplus income are based off across the country “poverty line”. Surplus income has absolutely nothing to do with what you have left over monthly. It is a federal government formula that considers your revenue, specific non-discretionary costs as well as your household size.

The calculation is to find if you will need to contribute from your earnings monthly to your Trustee, for the benefit of your creditors.

Bankruptcy discharge

The final step of your bankruptcy process will be to get your discharge. Your discharge from bankruptcy acts as the trigger to discharge you from all of your debts. This means that you will not have to рау them (with possibly certain exceptions depending on your circumstances).

Whether you get an absolute discharge from your bankruptcy will depend essentially on your conduct. Before your bankruptcy, did you treat all your creditors the same? Does anyone feel aggrieved by your actions? That will decide if any of your creditors will oppose your discharge.

For an in-depth discussion of the personal bankruptcy discharge process, check out our vlog BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE: THE TOP 8 THINGS THE BANKRUPTCY COURT WILL CONSIDER ON ANYONE’S BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE APPLICATION.

Is your debt keeping you up at night?

Do you have extreme debt and have no concept of how to handle it? Are your debt woes keeping you up at night and causing you stress, pain and maybe even depression? We understand that pain and can cut it from your life.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has helped many companies and people throughout the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) juggling too much debt in their lives that requires a blueprint for Starting Over, Starting Now. Do not delay. Help is 1 phone call away. You can fix your financial troubles while avoiding bankruptcy as long as you take swift action. Call the Ira Smith Team today for your free consultation.what is the difference between bankruptcy and insolvency canada

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CORPORATE BANKRUPTCIES CANADA: SENATOR EGGLETON PROPOSES NEW PENSION FUND CANADA LAW

corporate bankruptcies canada
corporate bankruptcies Canada

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Introduction

The U.S. Steel Canada court-supervised restructuring and the court-supervised liquidation of Sears Canada have something in common. They both forced us to focus on the treatment of pensioners in corporate bankruptcies Canada under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA) (or restructurings and liquidations under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36) (CCAA)).

We previously wrote about these pension fund Canada issues and the beginning of the focus in Ottawa for the need for new legislation. My previous blogs were:

  1. TORONTO BUSINESS BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION: NDP WANTS FEDERAL INSOLVENCY LAWS CHANGED SO THERE IS PENSION PLAN SECURITY WHEN FINANCIALLY TROUBLED BUSINESSES FAIL – September 27, 2017
  2. SEARS CANADA CLOSING: POLITICIANS WANT NEW LAWS TO PROTECT PENSIONERS DUE TO SEARS CANADA CLOSING – November 1, 2017
  3. SEARS CANADA DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN SHORTFALL: MP SCOTT DUVALL COMES THROUGH ON HIS PROMISE IN CANADIAN PARLIAMENT – November 8, 2017

Senator Art Eggleton, P.‍C., shortly before his retirement proposed BILL S-253, An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and other Acts and Regulations (pension plans).

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Bill S-253

Bill S-253 passed First Reading on September 18, 2018, and Second Reading was moved on September 25, 2018. This Bill proposes to amend the BIA as well as the CCAA. It proposes to make certain that claims for unfunded obligations or solvency deficiencies of a pension are accorded priority. This is for both solvent companies and companies that would be rendered insolvent by certain payments to shareholders..

This proposed legislation likewise would change the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 as well as the Pension Benefits Standards Regulations, 1985 to equip the Superintendent of Financial Institutions to identify that the financing of a pension is impaired and to recommend procedures to be taken by the employer in regard of the financing of such plan.1

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Is Bill S-253 new?

Yes and no. In our earlier blogs, I told you about the proposals by Bloc Québécois MP Marilène Gill’s Bill, C-372 and Hamilton Mountain NDP MP Scott Duvall rose in the House of Commons for leave to introduce Bill C-384. The amendments proposed to the BIA and CCAA in those proposed Bills, to create a priority for unfunded obligations or solvency deficiencies, are pretty well the same as in Senator Eggleton’s Bill S-253.

However, Senator Eggleton’s Bill goes further. It requires a company to report to the Superintendent of Financial Institutions:

“…of any proposed or actual decision of the employer, transaction or event, including the repurchase of shares of the employer or the payment of dividends to shareholders of the employer…”

that would cause a solvency deficiency and/or render the company insolvent.

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: So what now for Bill S-253?

To become legislation, a Bill needs to initially be presented in either the Senate or the House of Commons. It needs to after that go through numerous phases in each House: 1st, 2nd and 3rd reading. After that, it has to obtain Royal Assent. No doubt there will be a lot of debating and tinkering with this Bill. It will be interesting to see if this Bill makes it all the way through, or dies before becoming legislation.

However, the picture is clear. The result of the Sears Canada dividend payments and asset liquidation is clear. Shareholders received dividends and pensioners will have to take a deep cut in their pensions. This has caught the attention of the legislators in Ottawa. It will be interesting to see if the political will is there for pensioners to be protected in Canadian insolvency cases.

Corporate bankruptcies Canada: Does your company have too much debt?

Is your company experiencing financial difficulties? If yes, call the Ira Smith Team. Our approach for each file is to create an end result where Starting Over, Starting Now takes place. This starts the minute you are at our front door.

The earlier you contact us, the more options we will have to implement. Whether it is a corporate restructuring or personal debt settlement through a consumer proposal, the goal is to avoid bankruptcy. However, if bankruptcy turns out to be the best option, we can assist there too.

You’re simply one phone call away from taking the necessary steps to get back to leading a healthy, balanced hassle-free life, ending the pain and stress you are feeling forever. Call Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. today for your free consultation.ira smith trustee

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

TRANSFER OF PROPERTY UNDER S.160 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT: PROPERTY ISN’T PROPERTY

transfer of property under s.160 of the income tax actTransfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: Introduction

Last August, Rudy Giuliani said, “truth isn’t truth”. Today I want to explore an important issue we come across many times when dealing with income tax debt driven insolvency files. That is the transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act (Canada). The decision of The Honourable Justice David E. Graham of the Federal Tax Court of Canada released July 6, 2018, gives rise to a variation of Rudy Giuliani’s comment to say – property isn’t property.

The case was an appeal by Aitchison Professional Corporation (“APC”) of an income tax assessment issued by the Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”). The case is Aitchison Professional Corporation v. The Queen, 2018 DTC 1101 (Tax Court of Canada).

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: The participants

APC is a law firm operating under the name Aitchison Law Office. The creation of APC happened in December 2003 by 3 people: James Aitchison (“James”) and his two daughters, Kelly Aitchison (“Kelly) and Laurie Aitchison (“Laurie”). All three are Ontario lawyers.

In 2012, the Minister of National Revenue assessed APC for nearly $2.1 million pursuant to s. 160 of the Income Tax Act. The assessment stated that James had actually moved property worth even more than $3 million to APC for little or no value.

There was no disagreement that, at the time of the claimed transfers, James owed practically $2.1 million to the CRA. James had not paid any income tax since 1992. His tax obligation, along with interest and penalty, remains outstanding.

The main concern, in this case, was whether James moved property to APC. If he did, it would have to be valued. CRA claimed the property James transferred to APC is his right to invoice for legal services.

As indicated above, CRA’s position was that the right to invoice for legal services was the property transferred. It is interesting to note that they did not claim that either the work-in-process, the accounts receivable, or both, derived from James’ work, was the property transferred. In my view, this was a fatal error in their case.

The Court considered subsection 248( 1) of the Income Tax Act and in particular, His Honour considered the definition of the word property under the Income Tax Act is “a right of any kind whatever”. In his decision, His Honour stated the distinction that “property” has a wide meaning, but not every little thing of value is property.

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: The Judge’s words


The Judge found that:

  1. CRA had problems verbalizing specifically how James’ “right to invoice for legal services” is property.
  2. He thought CRA was attempting to fit a square peg into a round hole.
  3. CRA was attempting to take something that is clearly a service and trying to make it fit into the definition of property.
  4. CRA’s position is faulty. They argued that James carried out work for APC neither as an independent contractor nor as an employee. CRA did not provide any evidence as to what they believed the actual arrangement was.
  5. Notwithstanding it is prudent for a company to have an employment agreement with all of its employees, none of James, Kelly or Laurie had an employment agreement with APC. However, CRA accepts that Kelly and Laurie are employees of APC but do not recognize James the same way.
  6. James was either an employee of APC with no salary or, an unpaid volunteer. The Judge held that it was not necessary for him to determine which one it was.
  7. It is an employee’s right to be paid. If the evidence was that James was entitled to a salary but he waived it, then he would have found that the waived salary was property transferred to APC. However, this was not the case.
  8. CRA, to their peril, did not argue that James was a sole practitioner, transferring his work-in-process and/or accounts receivable to APC.

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: Saulnier v. Royal Bank of Canada

The intersection of insolvency and the issue of a transfer of property under s. 160 of the Income Tax Act is an important one. Although it did not help them, CRA referred to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Saulnier v. Royal Bank of Canada, [2008] 3 SCR 166, 2008 SCC 58 (CanLII). That decision was in a bankruptcy case, dealing with the transfer of fishing licenses.

In that case, the Receiver and Trustee applied to the Court for the authorization to sell its interest in the fishing licenses. Due to an opposition, the Trustee went to Court seeking approval of the sale. The trial judge decided that the fishing licenses was a property that could be sold. The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge.

The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal of the Court of Appeal’s decision, upholding the trial judge’s finding, that the fishing licenses was property under s. 160 of the Income Tax Act. The interesting thing about that case is that the fishing licenses were considered as property mainly because of the wide sweeping definition of property contained in another federal statute, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (“BIA”).

In the APC case, the Judge did not find the Saulnier case persuasive. The reason was the matter before him did not involve the BIA. In this case, it was only the Income Tax Act. Rather, the Judge relied upon a different case decided in the Federal Court of Appeal, Manrell v. Canada, [2003] 3 FC 727, 2003 FCA 128 (CanLII).

As explained by the Federal Court of Appeal in Manrell:

“[25] It is implicit in this notion of “property” that “property” must have or entail some exclusive right to make a claim against someone else. A general right to do something that anyone can do, or a right that belongs to everyone, is not the “property” of anyone . . . . . .

[50] The phrase . . . “a right of any kind whatever”, like the word “property”, has a very broad meaning. But it is not a word of infinite meaning. It cannot include every conceivable right. It cannot be given a meaning that would extend the reach of the Income Tax Act beyond what Parliament has conceived”.

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: The verdict and the Judge’s conflict

Based on the evidence, His Honour found that James didn’t transfer property to APC by working for APC for free. The Judge also awarded costs to APC.

However, the Judge gave his personal view of his decision in the judgment. He felt that this was a horrible outcome. Furthermore, he commented that James had not paid a cent of income tax since being discharged from his bankruptcy in 1992. The Honourable Justice David E. Graham did not feel this was a just result, based on his interpretation of the law.

So that is why I paraphrase Rudy Giuliani to say – property isn’t property!

Transfer of property under s.160 of the Income Tax Act: Is CRA pursuing you?

Is CRA pursuing you because of transferred property to you? If so, you need an income tax lawyer. However, if you have received legal advice that you don’t really have a case, or you can’t afford to fight it out in Court and the debt renders you insolvent, then you need the help of a professional trustee.

The Ira Smith Team has years of experience of negotiating with CRA on behalf of tax debtors. If you are an individual person and owe CRA and your other creditors, other than for any loans secured by your home, less than $250,000, you can enter into a consumer proposal debt settlement plan. If you owe more or are a corporation, we can still negotiate with CRA and restructure you with a restructuring proposal debt settlement plan.

Our approach for each file is to create an end result where Starting Over, Starting Now takes place. This starts the minute you are at our door. You’re simply one phone call away from taking the necessary steps to get back to leading a healthy, balanced hassle-free life, recover your money and move on to the next investment opportunity.

In conclusion, call us today for your free consultation.

Special thanks to Ian MacInnis of Fogler Rubinoff for bringing this decision to my attention and inspiring me to write this blog.

what does a court appointed receiver do

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

PROOF OF CLAIM BANKRUPTCY CANADA: TRUTHFUL CLAIM COMPLETION REQUIRED

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: Introduction

On September 24, 2018, the US Department of Justice Trustee Program (USTP) that it reached a $5 million settlement with Citibank. As described below, it had to do with the improper preparation and filing of bankruptcy proofs of claim. The purpose of this blog is to explain the issues and discuss what it means when completing a proof of claim bankruptcy Canada.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: The settlement requires Court approval

The USTP participated in a nationwide negotiation arrangement with Citibank N.A. (Citibank), Department Stores National Bank (DSNB) (jointly Citi), as well as FDS Bank. Citi will pay $5 million to remediate robo-signed evidence of proofs of claim submitted in more than 71,000 consumer bankruptcy files involving Macy’s charge card accounts.

Moreover, the suggested agreement has been submitted to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia, where it is subject to court authorization. FDS Bank serviced the accounts and retained certain bankruptcy-related services to outside vendors.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: The Robo-signing debacle

Between 2012 and 2015, tens of thousands of proofs of claim were filed in bankruptcy files throughout the USA for DSNB. These proofs of claim were incorrectly signed, under the penalty of perjury, by employees of an outside vendor who had not reviewed the respective file and proof of claim and/or lacked knowledge of the contents of the proof of claim.

In some cases, the electronic credentials of the vendor’s staff were used to file proofs of claim without being reviewed by that or any other person. These improper practices were identified when Citibank took over the servicing of the accounts in late 2015 from the third parties. Citi self-reported the errors to the USTP.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: The USTP comments

“I am pleased that Citi has acted responsibly by self-reporting these deficient bankruptcy practices and agreeing to remediate affected borrowers to address the errors,” said USTP Director White. “I am also encouraged that Citi has instituted internal bankruptcy procedures to ensure that the vendor’s errors should not be repeated. When creditors fail to comply with the bankruptcy laws and rules, they must be held accountable. The U.S. Trustee Program remains diligent in its effort to ensure that creditors, as well as debtors who disregard the law, will be held accountable for their actions.”

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: How to complete form 31 proof of claim

In completing a proof of claim form, for either a personal bankruptcy or corporate bankruptcy in Canada, the person completing the form must state that:

“I have knowledge of all the circumstances connected with the claim referred to in this form.”

A fully completed proof of claim must include details on:

  1. who the creditor is;
  2. the amount of the claim;
  3. what type of claim it is; and
  4. all contact details.

A proof of claim needs sufficient documentation attached in order for the Trustee to verify the claim.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: What will happen if a false or unsubstantiated claim is made

Section 201(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) states:

“201 (1) Where a creditor, or a person claiming to be a creditor, in any proceedings under this Act, wilfully and with intent to defraud makes any false claim or any proof, declaration or statement of account that is untrue in any material particular, the creditor or person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, or to both.”

The BIA provides for penalties in Canada also. A robo-signing exercise like in the Citi case, in my opinion, is an offence under this section of the BIA. Any false proof of claim will be disallowed, in whole or in part.

I am not aware of any court decisions in Canada on this section of the BIA. Perhaps Canadians as a whole are more truthful than those involved in the Citi matter!

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: Are claims being made against you or your company?

Are you or your company experiencing financial difficulties? If yes, call the Ira Smith Team. Our approach for each file is to create an end result where Starting Over, Starting Now takes place. This starts the minute you are in the door.

The earlier you contact us, the more options we will have to implement. Whether it is a corporate restructuring or personal debt settlement through a consumer proposal, the goal is to avoid bankruptcy. However, if bankruptcy turns out to be the best option, we can assist there too.

You’re simply one phone call away from taking the necessary steps to get back to leading a healthy, balanced hassle-free life, recover your money and move on to the next investment opportunity.

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

DEBT RELIEF IN CANADA: BANKRUPTCY COURT SALUTES CANADIAN MILITARY VETERAN

automatic discharge

Debt relief in Canada: Introduction

I recently read a decision of the Bankruptcy Registrar of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia in Bankruptcy and Insolvency that really inspired me. It got me thinking about the sacrifices our men and women in the military make for all Canadians. This particular Court decision, also made me think of sometimes they need our help for debt relief in Canada.

Debt relief in Canada: The case

The case I refer to is Durdle (re), 2018 NSSC 206, released August 31, 2018. The first two paragraphs of the Registrar’s decision, I found especially poignant:

“[1] This Court routinely considers situations in which the Bankrupt is indebted to the people of Canada, through tax or other liabilities to the State. As a matter of general policy, these obligations have a higher moral and sometimes legal priority than to private creditors as they are borne by all of us, as citizens and fellows of Society; and because the public generally must bear the share not paid by someone else. The collective public is an involuntary creditor in the result.

[2] What, then, is the situation when that is reversed – when it is the people of Canada who are indebted to the individual? Should compensation paid out as a consequence be considered divisible among creditors in an insolvency?”

Debt relief in Canada: The facts

Master Corporal Durdle was a career soldier. He spent 24 years in the military, retiring at the age of 45 years old. Master Corporal is now 49 years old and suffers from military service induced post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). He remains under professional care. He is in need of debt relief.

On November 13, 2013, Master Corporal Durdle filed an assignment in bankruptcy. This was his second bankruptcy and therefore, he was not entitled to an automatic discharge from bankruptcy. The purpose of the Court hearing was for the Court to consider what form of bankruptcy discharge he should be entitled to. In this second bankruptcy, there were minimal non-exempt assets and unsecured creditors totaling $73,476.76.

In 2014 while an undischarged bankrupt, Master Corporal Durdle received taxable income, including:

  1. $16,778 from a wage loss replacement plan;
  2. A rehiring allowance of $28,107.04, including $19,675 in severance pay;
  3. Pension income of $23,594.10;
  4. Disability income of $49,289; and
  5. $3,624 in employment income.

The decision the Court had to make was, as the guidelines existed in 2014, how much if any of this 2014 taxable income should be considered “surplus income”?ira smith bankruptcy trustee vaughan

Debt relief in Canada: The Court’s thinking

The Registrar made a point of saying:

“…I wish to be clear that nothing should be taken as putting military debtors on a different footing than a civilian. The rule of law, including that of civil contract, is one of the core values we hold as Canadians, and which is protected by our men and women in uniform. What is, however, on a different footing is the debt we owe those men And women when they are injured or ill in the discharge of those Duties.”

Debt relief in Canada: The Registrar’s analysis

The Registrar went through a very thoughtful analysis of the law. He considered it in connection with the various types of 2014 taxable income:

  1. Wage loss replacement plan – Wrongful termination awards would normally be included in total income, as would pay in lieu of notice. The Registrar, however, went on to comment that in this case, the wage loss replacement plan was not termination pay or pay in lieu of notice but rather, pay because Master Corporal Durdle’s PTSD prevented him to continue serving. The Registrar concluded that this amount should not be considered as income in accordance with Section 68 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA). Therefore, the Registrar also concluded that this amount should not be included in the calculation of surplus income.
  1. Rehiring allowance – The Registrar applied the same logic for this payment. He decided that it should not be included in the calculation of surplus income. He decided that this payment was a result of Master Corporal Durdle’s PTSD preventing him from continuing to serve in the military.
  1. Pension income – The Registrar could not determine whether this income was solely a benefit due to Master Corporal Durdle’s PTSD or not. However, it did factor into the Registrar’s ruling.
  1. Disability income – The Registrar considered this income in light of previous Court decisions involving lump sum awards. This included under a Workers’ Compensation Plan. The Registrar went on to review the actual Federal statute under which the payment was made to him, the Veterans Well-being Act (S.C. 2005, c. 21). The Registrar concluded that this amount would not be included in the calculation of surplus income.
  1. Employment income – The Registrar concluded that this amount is included in the surplus income calculation.

Debt relief in Canada: The Court’s decision

The Registrar concluded that if he includes the pension income ($23,594.10) and of course the employment income ($3,624) (less statutory deductions), Accordingly, Master Corporal Durdle’s income falls under the Superintendent of Bankruptcy threshold for 2014. Accordingly, Master Corporal Durdle had no surplus income to pay when considering Section 68 of the BIA.

Since this was Master Corporal Durdle’s second bankruptcy, he was not entitled to an absolute discharge. Therefore, the Registrar did not impose any conditions on his discharge, but rather, suspended his discharge for one day.

Debt relief in Canada: Sometimes understanding and kindness is required

The Registrar was obviously moved by Master Corporal Durdle’s service to Canada. He also considered his current plight brought on by service-related PTSD. The Registrar followed the law and also showed his understanding and kindness of this sad situation.

If you have financial difficulties, whether brought on by a medical cause or for any other reason, you need to seek professional advice from a Firm that will show you the understanding and kindness you deserve. The Ira Smith Trustee Team has seen many cases of personal and corporate financial distress. We understand your pain and we know how to alleviate it; with understanding and kindness.

Our strategy for every single business and person is to develop a result where Starting Over, Starting Now comes true, starting the minute you walk through our door. You’re just one call away from taking the necessary actions to get your debt settlement and back on the road to leading a healthy and stress-free life. Contact the Ira Smith Team today.debt relief in canada

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CONSUMER PROPOSAL OR BANKRUPTCY: LIST OF MY CREDITORS FOR CONSUMER PROPOSAL

Consumer proposal or bankruptcy: Introduction

We always perform an initial free consultation with people thinking about filing either a consumer proposal or bankruptcy. People ask me, what if I can’t create a list of all my creditors?

Consumer proposal or bankruptcy: A refresher

If you are a regular reader of my Brandon’s Blog, then you know the difference between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy. For those of you who need a brief refresher, both the consumer proposal and bankruptcy are different processes under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). To file either one, the person must be insolvent. That means that they cannot meet their liabilities as they become due and if they liquidated all their assets, it would not produce enough cash to pay of all the debts.

Consumer proposal – This is a restructuring process to avoid bankruptcy for any person who owes $250,000 or less, not including any mortgage or line of credit debts secured by a mortgage registered against their home. The purpose of a consumer proposal is to AVOID bankruptcy.

Division I proposal – This is a restructuring process for people who owe too much money to fit under the consumer proposal rules. A company can also reorganize under this section of the BIA.

Bankruptcy – If a person cannot successfully carry out a restructuring proposal but requires relief from their crushing debts, then they would file for bankruptcy. In this process, subject to certain provincial exemptions, you would hand over your assets to the licensed insolvency trustee (Trustee). The Trustee would then sell the assets for cash, call for your creditors to file a proof of claim with the Trustee and then distribute the money according to the rules of the BIA.

Consumer proposal or bankruptcy: A common question

Regardless of whether the person is thinking about a consumer proposal, Division I proposal or bankruptcy, a common question is: (i) what if I don’t know who all my creditors are; or (ii) what if I leave off some creditors from my sworn statement of affairs; or (iii) do I have to list all of my creditors?

Some of our clients come to us, tell us that they don’t even know who their creditors are. Sometimes it’s been such a long time that they don’t even receive the bills or notices anymore and their memories aren’t good enough. So here is an easy hack so that you can put together a list of most, if not all, of your creditors.

Consumer proposal or bankruptcy: The easy hack

We will add CRA to your statement of affairs. If you don’t know how much you owe them, we will put them in showing either “$1” or “Unknown” as a placeholder

Every person must file an income tax return. Most people know whether they are current or not in their tax filings. So Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) should always be listed.

CRA cannot file an accurate proof of claim if you have not been current in your income tax filings. So we tell everyone to file all outstanding tax returns and provide us with a copy before filing either a consumer proposal or bankruptcy.

Pull your credit report

You may obtain your credit report from either Equifax or TransUnion. Your credit report will list all those who you owe money to and who wanted to update their files with your new credit score. We will add those creditors to your statement of affairs also.

Check your mail and save the bills

No doubt your creditors will keep mailing your statements. Even if all it says is balance forward unpaid, or is from a collection agency or lawyer, it will list their address, their name and the amount they say you owe. We will put that information on your statement of affairs.

Your lawyer can easily do an execution search. This search will show who holds a judgement against you and some basic details. We will add those details to your statement of affairs.

Consumer proposal or bankruptcy: The test is due diligence, not perfection

The test is, did you use your best efforts to identify all of your creditors on your sworn statement of affairs. It is very rare that any of our clients know exactly how much they owe. It is normal for the amounts according to the sworn statement of affairs to be different from the proofs of claim filed. That is OK.

Sophisticated large creditors pay the Superintendent of Bankruptcy to get a download of insolvency filings on a regular basis. They match the names of those who have filed against their client database. If a client shows up that they did not have listed as having filed, they contact the Trustee. Once they contact us, we send them a creditor’s package. They will then be able to further check their records and if owed money, can file a proof of claim.

We had a client who said they mistakenly left off a few creditors in their proposal filing. Those creditors found out. All those creditors had judgements against the person who filed the restructuring proposal. These creditors were very mad at being left off the list, although they did not suffer any damages.

It made it much tougher for the person and us to get a deal struck with all the creditors. At the end of the day, a deal was struck and the person is currently performing and is currently making their payments under the restructuring proposal. The anger of these creditors rubbed off on creditors who would have otherwise been happy with a lesser proposal. So in the end, leaving these creditors off the initial sworn statement of affairs just cost them more money!

Consumer proposal or bankruptcy: Corporate filings

In terms of a corporation filing either a restructuring proposal or bankruptcy, we normally don’t incur the same issues. A company will have an accounting department and/or an accounting system. They will be able to produce a list of creditors. The amounts shown may not be current, but the list of names and addresses will be reasonably accurate.

However, the easy hack I described above also works for a company.

Consumer proposal or bankruptcy: More free stuff

I hope that you have found my free easy hack useful to answer the question of how to create a list of all my creditors. You can use it if you wish to do proper budgeting, which everyone should do. You don’t have to wait until you are insolvent!! With proper budgeting, you can avoid insolvency and therefore bankruptcy.

If you have too much debt and need someone to talk to about consumer proposal vs bankruptcy, call the Ira Smith Team. We will listen to your issues and provide you with our thoughts and recommendations for free. That’s right; a free initial consultation. So why not? All you have to lose is your stress. We will advise you whether or not we think you are a candidate for either a consumer proposal or bankruptcy. If we feel you can solve your financial problems without an insolvency process, we will tell you straight.

The Ira Smith Team understands the stress you are under and the pain it is causing you and your loved ones. We can eliminate your pain. I guarantee that you will start feeling better right away after our free initial consultation. Taking action after that will put you on the right path, Starting Over Starting Now.

consumer proposal or bankruptcy

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT CANADA: BANKRUPTCY LAW FAQ

Introduction

I am often asked general questions about the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada. Sometimes it is about the application of a certain section or topic. Other times, it is a simple question such as where can I find a copy that I can look at?

The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to list the most often asked questions. Not all of them may be of interest to you. However, for those that have questions about the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, hopefully at least one of these questions (and the answer) will be of interest to you.

So here we go.

Is there a book that explains the various topics and sections of the Act?

Yes, there is. The book is an annotated version of the statute. It has the complete Act and its rules and regulations. In addition, the annotations provide explanations on the application of each section as well as a listing of decided cases to support the explanations.

Can I look up the Act and decided cases somewhere online for free?

Yes. The Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) operates a website. It has the legislation online calling it the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada CanLII. CanLII can also be used to search bankruptcy legal decisions in both English and French.

Where can I find a listing of the many forms that a licensed insolvency trustee uses?

The best place to find all the mandated forms is on the website operated by the Government of Canada, Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy. It lists all the forms. They are also downloadable as pdf forms.

People ask me if they can perform a Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada search. What they really mean is can they perform a search to find out if a specific person or company did a personal or corporate filing under the Canadian bankruptcy system. The answer to this question is yes.

The Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy operates a database for people to search the bankruptcy and insolvency records in Canada. The database can be accessed for free by a licensed insolvency trustee. Any member of the public can do the same search for the cost of $8 per search. Eventually, the Government of Canada is going to move to a free system, but it is not in place yet.

What are the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada regulations?

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada regulations, otherwise known as the bankruptcy rules, form part of the Act itself. The pure legislation contained in the various sections of the Act is just that; the legislation. However, there are practical considerations which also need clarification. Such clarification is found in the Rules contained in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). For example, the rules describe steps to abide by a specific section of the Act, or who is responsible for establishing Court fees.

Is their equal treatment for all unsecured creditors?

This is always an interesting question. The answer is also confusing to many lay people. The answer is both no and yes. I will explain. There are two types of unsecured creditors; preferred unsecured and ordinary unsecured. Many people forget this.

All ordinary unsecured creditors ARE treated equally. Their claims rank equally. The licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called bankruptcy trustee) paying a dividend to the ordinary unsecured creditors, they will all receive theirs in proportion share. The calculation is based on their respective ordinary unsecured claims.

The preferred unsecured creditors ARE NOT treated equally. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada section 136 sets out the scheme of distribution for the rank of the claims. Payment to preferred creditors ALWAYS happens BEFORE payment to ORDINARY creditors.

The preferred creditors

However, preferred unsecured creditors are not equal. The Act states that there is a ranking of claims within the preferred group. The list and order of priority of the major types of preferred creditors are as follows:

  • for a deceased bankrupt, the reasonable funeral and testamentary expenses incurred;
  • the costs of the bankruptcy administration:
  • the levy payable by the licensed insolvency trustee under section 147 of the Act;
  • any wages, salaries, commissions, compensation or disbursements owing to employees for the six month period prior to the bankruptcy;
  • municipal taxes assessed or levied against the bankrupt, within the two years before the bankruptcy, that is not secured against the real property;
  • the commercial landlord for arrears of rent for three months immediately before the bankruptcy and accelerated rent for not more than three months following the bankruptcy (if entitled to accelerated rent under the lease);
  • one bill of costs of a lawyer for the creditor who first attached by way of garnishment or filed with the Sheriff an attachment, execution or another process against the property of the bankrupt;
  • indebtedness of the bankrupt under any Act about workers’ compensation, unemployment insurance or under any provision of the Income Tax Act creating an obligation to pay to Her Majesty amounts that have been deducted or withheld;
  • claims resulting from injuries to employees of the bankrupt for which there will be a receipt of money from persons guaranteeing the bankrupt against damages resulting from those injuries; and
  • any other claims of the Crown

The Trustee must pay the claims of the preferred creditors in full, less the statutory levy mentioned above. If there are insufficient funds to pay some or all the preferred creditors, then their claims become ordinary unsecured claims.

In personal bankruptcy, are there any claims not discharged upon the person receiving their absolute discharge from bankruptcy?

Yes. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada section 178 lists the claims not discharged in a person’s bankruptcy. Such debts are:

  • a fine, penalty, restitution order or other order similar in nature imposed by a court in respect of an offence, or any debt arising out of a recognizance or bail;
  • any award of damages by a court in civil proceedings in respect of bodily harm intentionally inflicted, sexual assault, or wrongful death as a result of such an act;
  • a debt or liability for alimony or support under a court order or valid written agreement;
  • the debt or liability arising out of fraud, embezzlement, misappropriation or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity;
  • debts or liabilities resulting from obtaining property or services by false pretenses or fraudulent misrepresentation;
  • the entitlement to a dividend a creditor would have received on any provable claim not disclosed to the trustee unless the creditor had notice or knowledge of the bankruptcy and failed to take reasonable action to prove a claim;
  • any debt or obligation of a loan made under the Canada Student Loans Act, the Canada Student Financial Assistance Act or any enactment of a province that provides for loans or guarantees of loans to students where the date the person ceased being a full or part-time student was within seven years before the date of bankruptcy;

All claims against a bankrupt person are discharged when the person obtains their absolute bankruptcy discharge except those indicated above.

Student loans

There is an additional provision in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada student loans section. It states that any time after 5 years after the bankrupt person has ceased to be a full or part-time student, they can apply to the Court for relief. The Court can cut the student loan debt if proved that the bankrupt person:

  • has acted in good faith in trying to repay the student loan debt, and
  • the bankrupt person has and will continue to experience financial difficulty and will be unable to pay the debt

What is the history of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act in Canada?

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act in Canada has a very interesting history. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act of Canada has its origins in the Bankruptcy Act of 1919. The Act changed in 1949. In terms of the history of our country, this means the Act is a relatively young piece of legislation. The reason for the enactment is that every modern society has to realize that some of its citizens and businesses will run into financial trouble. A modern and efficient economy has to have the means to help those people and businesses out of their trouble. Everyone deserves a fresh start. To redeploy a company’s assets there must be a formal system to allow this to happen.

The Act changed again in 1992, 1997 as well as 2008-2009. The 1992 reforms concentrated on maximizing value for creditors with reorganization and rehabilitation, boosting the fair distribution to employees and providers of goods and services to the bankrupt company.

The 1997 reforms urged consumer debtor responsibility and boosted the reorganization stipulations as well as the administration of the Act. It introduced new sections dealing with the insolvency of securities firms and dealing with global insolvencies.

The 2009 reforms, had 4 primary aims:

  • to urge the restructuring of viable, but financially hampered companies;
  • to better secure workers’ insurance claims for wages and holiday pay;
  • making the bankruptcy system fairer and lower abuse; and
  • to improve the administration of the Canadian bankruptcy system.

Is the Act federal or provincial legislation?

Federal legislation. The name of the Act gives the answer. Its name is the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Canada. Although there are laws in each Province that will come into play during the administration of a bankruptcy or reorganization, the Act is Federal.

Summary

So I hope you have a better understanding of the most asked questions about the Government of Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The Act deals with bankruptcy insolvency issues for both bankruptcy law personal and corporate.

If you have any questions about how the Canadian bankruptcy system works or feel that someone you know could benefit from a free first consultation with a professional licensed insolvency trustee, feel free to contact me.

The Ira Smith Team have decades of experience in both personal and corporate insolvency matters. We can handle complex corporate and other business financial restructurings as well as personal financial problems. In both corporate and personal insolvency matters, we first look at how we can reorganize and restructure the person or business to do a rescue.

bankruptcy and insolvency act canada

Call a Trustee Now!