Tag: bankruptcy filing

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

LIQUIDATION OF COMPANY ASSETS: WHEN SHAREHOLDERS ARE INTENT ON CRUSHING EACH OTHER WHAT CAN A VOLUNTARY LIQUIDATOR DO?

liquidation of company
liquidation of company

Liquidation of company assets: What is the liquidation of a company?

In business and the law, liquidation is the process of bringing a company to an end and distributing its assets to creditors. This usually happens when a company is financially solvent and can pay all of its debts after all its assets are sold or collected.

When a product is not selling well, retailers may choose to liquidate it by selling it at a discounted price. This process called a liquidation sale can help them clear out slow-moving inventory. This is not the process I am talking about today.

If you want to learn more about the types of liquidation in Canada, then you’ve come to the right place. In this Brandon’s Blog, I will explain everything about the liquidation of company assets and give you a real-life example that my Firm is currently involved in. This real case is an example of what can be done when shareholders who originally agreed to a voluntary liquidation (defined below) can no longer agree on the liquidation of company assets or anything else, even how to pay them the cash the shareholders are entitled to receive!

Why would a company want to have liquidation of company assets?

There are a few reasons why companies pick a liquidation process, including:

The business is solvent yet no longer practical to operate

Possibly time has actually passed the business by. Technological adjustments have made the products or services the limited company offers unneeded as well as no longer relevant. The shareholders want to call it quits now, sell off the corporate assets and properties, repay creditors and also distribute the leftover funds to the shareholders.

The shareholders do not intend to or think it is possible to convert the business to make it viable again. They do not feel it deserves the investment of time and resources, as well as to endure ongoing losses in turning the business around so that it ends up being pertinent again.

Shareholder disputes

The shareholders in a private entrepreneurial company no longer get along. The dissident shareholder(s) cannot or refuse to buy out the remaining shareholders or vice versa. Alternatively, certain shareholders are willing to do a buy-out but either cannot agree on the price or balk at paying the amount calculated under the formula prescribed in the shareholder agreement.

The company is not saleable

The limited company’s business is not viable anymore. Nobody wants the company’s products or services and the company never moved forward with new product offerings that are in demand. Therefore, nobody wants to buy the company or its assets. So while it is still solvent, the shareholders decided to realize all the assets, distribute the cash first to pay off all of the company’s debts in full, make a distribution to shareholders for what is left over and formally dissolve the corporation.

To avoid bankruptcy

If the company is not wound up, it will eventually become an insolvent corporation. The shareholders realize that it is much better to now agree to a voluntary liquidation while there still can be a distribution to the shareholders after all the business assets are sold or collected and all creditors are paid in full. The shareholders wish to get this value and avoid a corporate bankruptcy filing.

liquidation of company
liquidation of company

How a liquidation of company assets begins

If shareholders wish to have a dissolution process for a corporation, they may do so by passing a special resolution to begin the liquidation process. In such cases, the company would call a meeting of shareholders in accordance with the corporate bylaws. Shareholders must be given notice of the meeting in advance. Alternatively, a court may make an order for the liquidation of company assets and the winding-up of the corporation. More on this below. This is how the liquidation of company assets and the winding-up of the company begins.

Shareholders will be given notice of the meeting where the special resolution authorizing the dissolution process will be considered. At the meeting, shareholders can vote to approve or disapprove of the special resolution for the dissolution of the company by special resolution.

Liquidation of company assets: What are the 2 types of liquidation in Canada?

When a company is struggling, it’s common to see a sale take place. When this happens, all of the assets of the company may be sold to pay off creditors. This process of selling off the company’s assets is known as “liquidation.” In Canada, there are two main types of liquidation: “compulsory liquidation” and “voluntary liquidation”.

Voluntary liquidation or voluntary dissolution begins with the shareholders agreeing to a special resolution for the liquidation of company assets, the distribution of the cash first to all creditors and then to the shareholders. When the liquidation is completed, the company is then would up.

Compulsory liquidation is when a court order is made directing the liquidation of company assets and the winding-up of the company.

In Canada, the laws under which a solvent company is liquidated depend on the laws under which the company was incorporated. If federally incorporated, then the Canada Business Corporations Act (CBCA) is the relevant statute. If provincially incorporated, then it would be the law of that particular province. In Ontario, it is the Ontario Business Corporations Act (OBCA). This is the statute that I will focus on in this Brandon’s Blog.

liquidation of company
liquidation of company

Liquidation of company assets: What is the OBCA process for liquidation?

The Ontario Business Corporations Act is a piece of provincial legislation that is designed to govern the formation, administration, and dissolution of corporations in Ontario. In reality, most liquidations filed in Ontario are voluntary. This means that the company shareholders decide to seek liquidation.

Part XVI of the OBCA sets out the process for the liquidation of company assets in Ontario. The OBCA provides a comprehensive framework for the voluntary winding up of corporations. Sections 193 to 205 of the OBCA set out the procedures and requirements for the voluntary winding up of corporations.

As I have previously stated, the OBCA requires shareholders of a corporation to vote for a voluntary winding up of the company as the first step in liquidation of company assets and ceasing business. The shareholders’ requirement is evidenced by a special resolution made at a properly convened meeting of shareholders.

At the meeting, shareholders will appoint one or more people as liquidators of the company. These people may be directors, officers, or employees of the company. Their job will be to wind up the company’s affairs and distribute its property. Shareholders may also provide other instructions at that meeting or at any subsequent meeting.

It’s also common for shareholders to appoint a third party experienced in winding up corporations, like a licensed insolvency trustee. Even though the company isn’t insolvent, shareholders see the advantages of keeping a professional experienced in liquidating assets on board.

A corporation voluntarily winding down will cease carrying out business operations, except where doing so would be beneficial for the winding down process. All transfers of shares, except those made with the approval of the liquidator, taking place after the commencement of the winding down are void.

The OBCA provides for a stay of proceedings when an Ontario company is being liquidated and wound up. After a voluntary winding up has begun,:

  • no legal action can be taken against the corporation; and
  • no seizure, sequestration, distress or execution can be carried out against the corporation’s assets or property.

You will need the court’s permission before taking any action. The court will then decide what terms to set.

Liquidation of company assets: Special considerations in a compulsory or court-supervised liquidation

The court may dissolve the corporation if:

  • If the court finds that the actions or inaction of a corporation or any of its affiliates has resulted in or will result in an outcome that does not consider the interests of any security holder, creditor, director, or officer fairly, it may order the dissolution of the corporation.
  • All shareholders agree that dissolution should occur after a specific event, and that event has occurred.
  • Proceedings have begun to wind up the corporation voluntarily.
  • The court finds that if the actions or inaction of a corporation or any of its affiliates has resulted in or will result in an outcome that does not consider the interests of any security holder, creditor, director, or officer fairly, it may order the dissolution of the corporation.
  • It is best for those who would have to contribute to a company’s assets in the event of its dissolution, and for those who are owed by the corporation, that the court supervises the dissolution process.
  • The corporation cannot continue its business because of its debts and it is advisable to end its operations other than by bankruptcy.
  • The shareholders vote by special resolution to wind up the corporation through a court-supervised process.

Who can apply to the court for a court-supervised liquidation of company assets and the winding-up of the corporation? If you want to dissolve a corporation through a court-supervised process, you can do so by filing an application with the court. Shareholders, a contributory or creditor having a claim of $2,500 or more, or a voluntary liquidator can all apply to have the corporation wound up.

In the section below titled “Liquidation of company assets: Real-life example when voluntary had to become court-supervised” I describe a file that my Firm is involved in the liquidation of two companies, and we were forced to use the right of a voluntary liquidator to apply to the court to turn the voluntary liquidation into compulsory liquidation.

liquidation of company
liquidation of company

Liquidation of company assets: How does the distribution of assets during liquidation work?

When a company is liquidated, its assets are sold off and the proceeds are distributed to creditors. The distribution of assets is first used to pay off secured creditors, then unsecured creditors, and finally shareholders.

The liquidator first needs to gain an understanding of all of the company’s assets and liabilities. The financial statements and the books and records of the company are a good place to start. The liquidator will put together a plan to collect and sell the assets of the company.

The liquidator then needs to put together a list of all creditors, and identify if they are secured creditors or unsecured creditors. This is necessary because the creditors need to be paid in order of priority. Any remaining funds will then be distributed to the shareholders.

The liquidator will keep company management and shareholders informed every step of the way. The liquidator would be very wise to get management and shareholder approval for all of the liquidator’s decisions. The liquidator will also need to make sure that the preparation of the company’s financial statements and income tax returns are kept current and that all government filings and payments are made on time.

The fee of the liquidator must be agreed to by the shareholders. The OBCA also provides for the court to be able to assess the fee charged by the liquidator. In doing so, the court will no doubt look at the steps and acts of the liquidator that were taken.

These are the main steps that every liquidator must carry out. Even in a compulsory liquidation done by court order, the practical steps involved in the liquidation of company assets are the same.

Liquidation of company assets: Real-life example when voluntary had to become court-supervised

The shareholders of two affiliated companies, each one a private company, passed special resolutions in August 2021 for both companies to begin liquidating their assets, winding up the corporations, and appointing Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. as the liquidator of both corporations. The desire to wind up both companies came from the very acrimonious litigation between family members.

We were very successful in helping the warring factions, through their respective legal representatives, make adequate provisions so that agreements could be reached in each crucial step of the liquidation process from August 2021 through April 2022. Unfortunately, we hit a snag in May 2022. The shareholders were unable to resolve their impasse due to the pertinent issues regarding the liquidation of both companies. Without court intervention, the stalemate would never end.

We knew that we could still provide value in helping these shareholders, but given their bitter disagreements, it could only be done under a court-supervised compulsory dissolution. Therefore, we prepared a report for the court and first circulated a draft to the stakeholders and their lawyers. We did so for two reasons:

  1. we wanted to make sure that we did not make any factual errors; and
  2. by circulating a draft in advance, we gave everyone the chance to consider consenting to our application to turn the voluntary liquidation into a compulsory dissolution.

We then had our legal counsel set up a court date, which they were thankfully able to get for mid-July. All stakeholders consented to the court-supervised liquidation of one of the two companies. One side also consented for the other company to enter a court-supervised process, but the other side opposed it.

The court made an order to convert the voluntary liquidation into a compulsory liquidation for the one private company that all shareholders consented to. It also set a hearing for mid-September, which will allow the opposing party to present their case, and for the consenting party and the liquidator to do the same. This provision in the OBCA allowing a voluntary liquidator to make the court application definitely prevented a less favourable outcome.

liquidation of company
liquidation of company

Liquidation of company assets: Difference between insolvency and liquidation

There is a big difference between insolvency and liquidation, just as there is a difference between insolvency and bankruptcy. Being insolvent is a very difficult financial condition to be in. When a company or individual cannot pay their bills, debts, or liabilities, it is insolvency. This often leads to either restructuring or bankruptcy.

The liquidation of a corporation under the CBCA, OBCA or respective provincial legislation is a legal process that can be undertaken when the company is not insolvent but the shareholders wish to end the life of the company for other reasons.

In a liquidation, the company’s assets are sold and the proceeds are used to pay off creditors. The remaining funds are distributed to shareholders. This is not the case for an insolvent company, which may be forced to close its doors through an insolvency process such as bankruptcy.

The first step in determining the solvency of a company is to look at its most recent set of financial statements.

Key point takeaways on the liquidation of company assets

I hope you found this liquidation of company assets Brandon’s Blog interesting. The key takeaways from this blog, in my view, are:

  • Liquidation and winding-up of a company must be considered when a company is still solvent but is facing insurmountable problems such as its business is no longer viable or internal fighting makes its survival doomed.
  • While value still remains in the company, it is in the best interests of all stakeholders to get that value for everyone.
  • A liquidator can be very helpful to shareholders in a private company who no longer can effectively manage the companies on their own and there is value to be obtained for them.
  • A voluntary liquidator can apply on its own to court to turn a voluntary liquidation into a court-supervised compulsory liquidation.

Among the many problems that can arise from having too much debt, you may also find yourself in a situation where bankruptcy seems like a realistic option.

If you are dealing with substantial debt challenges and are concerned that bankruptcy may be your only option, call me. I can provide you with debt help.

You are not to blame for your current situation. You have only been taught the old ways of dealing with financial issues, which are no longer effective.

We’re passionate about permanently solving your financial problems with you and getting you or your company out of debt. We offer innovative services and alternatives, and we’ll work with you to develop a personalized preparation for becoming debt-free which does not include bankruptcy. We are committed to helping everyone obtain the relief they need and are worthy of.

You are under a lot of pressure. We understand how uncomfortable you are. We will assess your entire situation and develop a new, custom approach that is tailored to you and your specific financial and emotional problems. We will take the burden off of your shoulders and clear 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 realize that people and businesses in financial difficulty need a workable solution. The Ira Smith Team knows that not everyone has to file for bankruptcy in Canada. Most of our clients never do, as we are familiar with alternatives to bankruptcy. We assist many people in finding the relief they need.

Call or email us. We can tailor a new debt restructuring procedure specifically for you, based on your unique economic situation and needs. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you’re serious about finding a solution, let us know.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

liquidation of company
liquidation of company
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

LICENSED INSOLVENCY TRUSTEE FEES: WHAT UNDENIABLE EVIDENCE IS NEEDED FOR COURT APPROVAL OF INSOLVENCY TRUSTEE FEES?

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: How is a licensed insolvency trustee paid?

Are your debts or your company’s debts and financial situation causing you so much stress that you are considering speaking to a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee or trustees in bankruptcy), but you are worried about the licensed insolvency trustee fees? Are you concerned about the professional fees to be paid because you think that businesses with debt problems already cannot afford to hire professionals? Your concerns are valid and relevant but you should not let that stop you from your initial inquiry. An insolvency trustee will always provide you with a no-cost initial consultation, discuss realistic options and explain the cost of each option to you.

Licensed insolvency trustee fees are set by bankruptcy laws and rules contained in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). They are reviewed by the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy and must be approved by the bankruptcy court. Fees are either drawn from the funds accumulated in the insolvency file from the sale of assets in the receivership or bankruptcy administration or the monthly payment funding of the restructuring proposal. If there are insufficient assets in the insolvency file, then the insolvency trustee gets its fee from a third-party retainer.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I describe how licensed insolvency trustee fees are calculated. Then, I review a recent Ontario court decision to show what kind of evidence the Trustee needs to provide the court in order for its fees to be approved.

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: Disbursements included in a streamlined personal insolvency process

Licensed insolvency trustees offer a range of services for both individuals and businesses. For individuals, there are two streamlined insolvency processes:

  • summary administration personal bankruptcy; and
  • consumer proposals.

    licensed insolvency trustee fees
    licensed insolvency trustee fees

Licensed insolvency trustee fees in a summary administration personal bankruptcy

The summary administration personal bankruptcy process applies when the assets of the bankrupt person to be sold are expected to sell for $15,000 or less. Licensed insolvency trustee fees for a summary administration personal bankruptcy are set by a formula called a tariff.

In a summary administration bankruptcy, the fees that insolvency trustees are entitled to are calculated as follows:

  • 100 percent on the first $975 or less of receipts;
  • 35 percent on the portion of the receipts exceeding $975 but not exceeding $2,000;
  • 50% of receipts exceeding $2,000;
  • for counselling fees of $75 per session, totalling $150; and
  • an allowance for administrative disbursements of $100.

The reason the formula refers to receipts (of cash) rather than net proceeds from asset sales is that, in any personal bankruptcy, there are two types of cash receipts: 1. from the sale of assets; and 2. surplus income payments made by the bankrupt person, if any.

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: How much will it cost me to file a consumer proposal?

The calculation of the amount you need to offer your creditors in your consumer proposal has no relation to what the licensed insolvency trustee fees will be. Licensed insolvency trustee fees for a licensed trustee acting as the Administrator in the consumer proposal process is also governed by a tariff. It is calculated as follows:

  • $750 on the filing of the proposal with the official receiver;
  • $750 on the approval or deemed approval by the court;
  • 20% of moneys distributed payable on distribution; and
  • counselling fee of $75 for each counselling session for a total of $150.

In a consumer proposal, administrative disbursements are paid out of the above fee calculation.

In both summary administrations and consumer proposals where the licensed insolvency trustee fees are only the tariff, there is no need for court approval.

licensed insolvency trustee fees
licensed insolvency trustee fees

What factors influence licensed insolvency trustee fees in other administrations?

There are no streamlined provisions for any corporate insolvency administration. In addition to administering summary administration bankruptcies and consumer proposals, licensed insolvency trustees also can provide the following services:

  • business review of a company to identify its solvency and future prospects so that financial advice can be given
  • ordinary administration personal bankruptcy
  • commercial bankruptcy
  • personal Division I restructuring proposal to creditors (for consumers who cannot qualify for a consumer proposal)
  • corporate Division I restructuring proposal
  • private corporate receivership
  • court-appointed corporate receivership
  • winding-up corporate liquidation, either voluntary or court-supervised
  • corporate restructuring under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act

In all of the above government-regulated insolvency proceedings/insolvency procedures, there are only two factors that influence the licensed insolvency trustee fees. They are:

  1. Hours spent by the level of staff working.
  2. The professional hourly rate of the staff.

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: How does an insolvency practitioner receive compensation?

In all of the non-streamlined insolvency processes, I just described, how the licensed trustee gets the fees it is charging requires approval. In private appointments, the licensed trustee needs the approval of the client. In a court appointment or administration for bankruptcy services or any other mandate under the BIA, the licensed trustee needs court approval.

What evidence do licensed insolvency trustees need to provide to prove the time that was spent doing the work? The documentation expected of a licensed trustee is the same that is expected from an insolvency lawyer or any other kind of lawyer. What is expected are detailed time dockets, so that everyone can see who spent what time, on what day on what activity.

But what if proper dockets are not kept? Well, that is exactly what the court case I want to describe to you is all about.

licensed insolvency trustee fees
licensed insolvency trustee fees

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: How do practitioners of insolvency get compensated – it takes a Final Statement of Receipts and Disbursements

I am writing this Brandon’s Blog to be informative, not to embarrass anyone. So I will not be providing the case reference of the case I am now going to describe. This is actually the second such case in Ontario that I am aware of in the last 12 months.

The case deals with a bankruptcy trustee who submitted its final statement of receipts and disbursements (SRD) to the court for approval. Contained in this final statement is amongst other things, the line item for the fee and disbursements the Trustee is seeking court approval for. The court expects to see a sworn affidavit from someone on the insolvency trustee’s staff who has knowledge of the time spent and the fee charged outlining what was done and why it was necessary. The court also expects to see detailed time dockets.

In this case, and the very similar one that came before it, the insolvency trustee’s material did not include detailed time dockets. Both Trustees applied for taxation of their SRD in an individual debtor’s Division I Proposal. In both cases, the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy issued clean letters of comment. The primary issue raised on this taxation is whether the insolvency trustee’s fees are to be approved. In the ordinary course, the debtor and the creditors have not been given notice of the taxation but it would appear that there is unlikely to be any objection.

The taxation raises the question of how the Trustee is supposed to establish its entitlement to fees when there is no time dockets kept or otherwise available to support the trustee’s claim. In this case (and the one before it), the Trustee is relying solely on the terms of the proposal. The proposal contains the methodology for calculating the fees to be taken by the Trustee in administering the proposal. The Trustee is relying on the fact that a Proposal is a contract between the debtor and its creditors, the court has already approved the Proposal and the Proposal includes the Trustee’s remuneration.

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: Bankruptcy trustees – why not keep accurate time records?

The Trustee requested fees (plus HST) based on the formula set out in the debtor’s proposal. While the Trustee provided an affidavit in support of its taxation, the Trustee did not provide any evidence of actual time spent at each staff level. The taxation came before the Associate Justice on September 1, 2021. She adjourned the taxation and requested time dockets.

The Trustee filed a report in response to the September 1, 2021 endorsement and request for time dockets, supporting the taxation and approval of the fees claimed, but no time dockets were included. In its report, the Trustee noted that it did not keep formal, detailed time records, as the terms of the Trustee’s fees and expenses are set forth in the Proposal as a “fixed fee” formula. This fee formula was accepted by creditors and approved by the Court. Therefore, the Trustee is relying upon that in not keeping time dockets.

The Trustee advised that its rationale for the development of a fixed fee formula to be charged by the Trustee, and for its decision to eliminate time docketing in such Division I proposals containing a formula for fixing a fee, were as follows:

  1. The fixed fee formula was designed by the Trustee to provide more certainty about the costs of administration for the Division I proposal. This formula also takes into account contingencies such as the time needed to negotiate the terms of the proposal and to verify the debtor’s financial information.
  2. The fixed fee formula was designed to make billing and accounting more efficient by eliminating the need to track chargeable time.
  3. The fixed fee formula was based on the consumer proposal tariff, to a certain extent.
  4. The fixed fee formula’s structure helped the Trustee keep initial costs low, so creditors could start getting dividends from the debtor’s monthly payments sooner.
  5. The fixed fee formula was designed to minimize unexpected increases in costs of administration and a resulting decrease in dividends.
  6. Not once has a creditor balked at the Trustee’s fixed fee.
  7. The court approved the proposal with the fixed fee formula, so the Trustee did not keep time dockets.
  8. There are many proposals whose administration is underway or completed that the Trustee has relied upon the fixed fee formula, and therefore has not maintained time dockets.
  9. The trustee’s fees, as claimed under the fixed fee formula, have not been objected to by the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada.

    licensed insolvency trustee fees
    licensed insolvency trustee fees

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: The court’s analysis and decision

The BIA provides for the determination of a Trustee’s remuneration in section 39. The Associate Justice said that s. 39(5) of the BIA provides the jurisdiction to increase or reduce the remuneration claimed by a Trustee. Further, the court was not a “rubber stamp” obliged to approve the fees claimed by the Trustee merely because they were in the Proposal. The court noted that it is common for Trustees to request remuneration based on the time spent and hourly rates charged. The burden is on the Trustee to convince the court that the amount claimed for remuneration is warranted.

The Associate Justice listed the following principles that must be considered when it comes to taxation:

  • Trustees should be given proper compensation for their services.
  • Prevent unjustifiable payments for Trustee fees that harm the insolvent estate and its unsecured creditors.
  • The efficient and conscientious administration of an estate for the benefit of creditors and, to the extent that the public is concerned, in the interests of the proper carrying-out of the objectives of the BIA, should be encouraged.

This Associate Justice also dealt with the previous case I mentioned above, which involved the taxation of a statement of receipts and disbursements in a Division I proposal where no time dockets were kept. In that case, she held that the lack of time dockets was not fatal to the approval of fees. She said the court is in a difficult position when there is no corroborative evidence as to the time and effort spent in the administration of the proposal.

So due to the lack of evidence justifying the time spent by the various staff members of the Trustee firm at their normal hourly rates, the Associate Justice was forced to look at the entirety of the Trustee’s administration. She found issues with it and therefore concluded that the Trustee was not entitled to the full fee being requested, based on the formula contained in the Division I Proposal. The Associate Justice determined, with the benefit of hindsight as to how the Division I Proposal turned out, that the debtor could have filed a consumer proposal and the creditors would have then been better off with a higher dividend distribution.

The Associate Justice ruled that, in this case, fees and disbursements will be set on a consumer proposal tariff basis. The proposal fund totalled $31,500. Using the formula for a consumer proposal, the Trustee was therefore entitled to fee and disbursements of $7,620 (plus HST) and not the $9,973.46 fee and $14,252.01 of disbursements (plus HST) formula amount.

The Associate Justice was also very critical of the Trustee’s administration and she had strong words overall for Trustees coming to court without proper evidence of the time spent when requesting approval for fees and disbursements at taxation. Her warning was that she did not accept the Trustee’s submissions that:

  • The court’s jurisdiction over approving the SRD and the fees to be claimed by the Trustee is replaced by the approval of the creditors and the OSB. Creditor and OSB approval are not determinative when it comes to taxation, but their approval is still relevant.
  • The appropriateness of the Trustee’s fees is not considered in an application for court approval of a Division I proposal. The court is not prevented from taxing the Trustee’s fee and disbursements upon the taxation of the SRD.
  • Any benefits to having a set fee remove the court’s jurisdiction to approve the Trustee’s fees. If the Trustee decides to save time by not documenting their hours worked, they do so at their own risk. The responsibility is always on the Trustee to justify their fees.
  • Creditors who want to know how much the Trustee’s fee will be cannot override the Trustee’s responsibility to explain to the court why the fee is fair and reasonable.

The court directed the Trustee to redo its SRD on the basis decided by the court, resubmit it to the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy for its comment letter and then resubmit the entire package to the court for the taxation order.

A tough day in court to be sure.

Licensed insolvency trustee fees: Call us for debt-free solutions

I hope you found this licensed insolvency trustee fees Brandon’s Blog interesting. Among the many problems that can arise from having too much debt, you may also find yourself in a situation where bankruptcy seems like a realistic option.

If you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges and are concerned that bankruptcy may be your only option, call me. I can provide you with debt relief advice in setting up one of various possible debt management plans using debt relief options for you or your company.

You are not to blame for your current situation. You have only been taught the old ways of dealing with financial issues, which are no longer effective. We are debt professionals who know how to use the new innovative tools to solving debt problems while avoiding a bankruptcy filing.

We’re passionate about permanently solving your financial problems with you and getting you or your company out of debt. We offer innovative services and alternatives, and we’ll work with you to develop a personalized preparation for becoming debt-free which does not include bankruptcy. We are committed to helping everyone obtain the relief they need and are worthy of.

You are under a lot of pressure. We understand how uncomfortable you are. We will assess your entire situation and develop a new, custom approach that is tailored to you and your specific financial and emotional problems. We will take the burden off of your shoulders and clear 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 realize that people and businesses in financial difficulty need a workable solution. The Ira Smith Team knows that not everyone has to file for bankruptcy in Canada. Most of our clients never do, as we are familiar with alternatives to bankruptcy. We assist many people in finding the relief they need.

Call or email us. We can tailor a new debt restructuring procedure specifically for you, based on your unique economic situation and needs. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you’re serious about finding a solution and improving your financial future, let us know. Starting Over, Starting Now.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation to find out what your debt relief options are.

licensed insolvency trustee fees
licensed insolvency trustee fees
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHAT DOES BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGED MEAN FOR 1 BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE AND SOMEONE WHO IS SERIOUSLY BANKRUPT?

 

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 bankruptcy discharged mean: Restrictions placed on undischarged bankrupts

By enabling debtors to file an assignment in bankruptcy or consumer proposal, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) provides relief to an honest but unfortunate debtor. Garnishment of wages (other than marital support) ceases, legal actions and collection calls cease, and the debtor receives some breathing space. If a bankrupt fails to fulfill his or her obligations, what happens? Can they receive a discharge from bankruptcy?

This Brandon Blog examines a recent case from Nova Scotia dealing with what does bankruptcy discharged mean for both a bankrupt person and for the licensed insolvency trustee. I also describe what does it mean for an undischarged bankrupt if the bankruptcy trustee gets its discharge when the bankrupt person does not have their bankruptcy discharge.

I will eventually get to the Court case, but there is first some background information that I will provide which sets the stage for a better understanding of the Court decision.

What does it mean to be an undischarged bankrupt?

In the event, you were unable to fulfill your obligations under your personal bankruptcy proceedings, your Trustee, and maybe a creditor or two would have opposed your discharge from bankruptcy. A bankrupt who has not been discharged poses many potential problems. Therefore, if you are an undischarged bankrupt, it is because you have failed to fulfill one or more of your obligations as a bankrupt.

what does bankruptcy discharged mean
what does bankruptcy discharged mean

What does bankruptcy discharged mean: Debts eliminated by bankruptcy discharge

A bankruptcy discharge means that you have completed your personal bankruptcy process and are no longer legally liable for any outstanding debt you included in the bankruptcy filing (with the exception of a few which I will describe soon). Upon receiving an absolute discharge from bankruptcy (we’ll get to that shortly), you are no longer responsible for any discharged debts.

The discharge in bankruptcy eliminates most of your debts, including unsecured debts such as credit card bills, medical bills, and payday loans. When you are discharged from bankruptcy, not the fact that you filed for bankruptcy, is what eliminates your debts. You need your discharge to get rid of your debts, which explains why it’s so important. That is what does bankruptcy discharged mean, really means.

What does bankruptcy discharged mean: Bankruptcy law can resolve tax debts

As well as the usual unsecured debts mentioned above, if you owe Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) money because you were not able to pay your whole personal income tax obligation when you filed your taxes, then a payment arrangement makes sense.

Collections officers from the CRA contact taxpayers regarding outstanding income tax debt arising from their tax filings and notices of assessment. They attempt to collect from delinquent taxpayers. When you say that you cannot pay the full amount at that time, they will offer you the option of a payment arrangement. The interviewer will ask you about your financial situation and may ask you to submit documents to support your income and expense claims.

They recommend a settlement plan after evaluating the information. Only if all attempts at collection have failed will legal action be taken. You must send the CRA postdated cheques to cover the agreed-upon monthly payment to participate in such a plan. Additional payments can be made if you have money to spare. The interest clock does not stop with a CRA payment plan. Be certain that all your cheques clear the bank as well. The entire payment plan can be cancelled if only one is returned NSF.

Should you enter into a payment plan? Yes. You should demonstrate to CRA that you want to work with them, and avoid tax debt collection activities that will disrupt your life. The most common enforcement activity involves freezing and taking money from your bank accounts, as well as garnishing your salary or wages if you’re employed. If you are a proprietor, they can notify your customers and claim your receivables. Furthermore, a federal judgment can be obtained without your knowledge to place a lien on your home.

You do not need to experience CRA’s more drastic collection methods. Be sure to pay your obligations on time. A tax garnishment, third-party assessment, or an asset lien is never pleasant. The consequences are severe and disruptive. In most cases, CRA only takes this step if you fail to comply with their efforts to enter into and maintain a CRA payment arrangement.

CRA tax debts can be discharged under bankruptcy law if no payment plan can be arranged. If bankruptcy is successfully discharged or a consumer proposal is fully completed, the income tax debt can be eliminated. We assume that CRA hasn’t already obtained a judgment against your interest in your home and registered it against it. Upon doing so, the CRA has successfully turned an unsecured debt into secured debt, and bankruptcy law no longer applies.

Several other things to keep in mind are:

  • A bankrupt who owes more than $200,000 in personal income taxes and whose personal income tax debt represents at least 75% of their total unsecured proven claims is considered a high-tax debtor. In this situation, you cannot be automatically discharged. It is unavoidable that the Trustee will object to your discharge and there will be a discharge hearing before the Bankruptcy Registrar in the Bankruptcy Courts. Additionally, the CRA will oppose your discharge and will make submissions at your hearing. I am certain you will receive a conditional discharge, at least with the condition that you pay a portion of your income tax debt to the Trustee for distribution among your creditors.
  • Unremitted employee source deductions owed by a proprietor or partner of an unincorporated business will not be helped by bankruptcy law. Generally, bankruptcy will eliminate HST obligations. For now, CRA ranks the debt as unsecured in a consumer proposal, but as CRA provides the accommodation, it is not a part of bankruptcy law. If the outstanding HST is extremely large, the CRA may argue that since you held the HST in trust for them, it still remains a claim even if you declare bankruptcy. Under Canadian bankruptcy law, they can do this, but I have not seen them do it yet.
  • Director liability for unremitted employee source deductions or HST is an unsecured claim against you for your personal liability as a Director. Bankruptcy and a properly worded Proposal will both eliminate that debt.

    what does bankruptcy discharged mean
    what does bankruptcy discharged mean

What does bankruptcy discharged mean: Debts never discharged in bankruptcy

In personal bankruptcy, there are certain types of debts that are not discharged. Section 178(1) of the BIA outlines the following debts that are nondischargeable debt:

  • Any type of fine, penalty, restitution order, or other order similar to a fine, penalty or restitution order, imposed by a court for an offence, or any kind of debt arising from a recognizance or bond;
  • Damages awarded by a court in a civil case for:
    • bodily injury intentionally caused, or sexual assault, or
    • wrongful death as a result of these acts;
  • the payment of spousal support or an alimentary pension;
  • any financial obligation or liability arising under a judgment establishing an association or regarding support, maintenance, or an agreement for maintenance and support of a spouse, former spouse, previous common-law partner, or child who is not living with the bankrupt;
  • a financial obligation or liability that results from fraud, embezzlement, misappropriation or defalcation in a fiduciary capacity or, in the Province of Quebec, while acting as a trustee or administrator;
  • apart from debts and responsibilities arising from equity claims, any debt or liability resulting from getting property or services by false pretenses or fraudulent misrepresentation;
  • unless a creditor had notification or understanding of the bankruptcy and didn’t take reasonable action to prove a claim, the liability for the dividend that a creditor would have received on any provable claim not disclosed to the trustee; or
  • student loans if the bankruptcy occurred before the bankrupt stopped being a full- or part-time student or within seven years of the date the bankrupt stopped being a full- or part-time student.

What does bankruptcy discharged mean: Absolute discharge vs. conditional discharge and so on and so forth

In order to obtain a discharge, a bankrupt person must have fulfilled all of their bankruptcy duties. These personal bankruptcy duties include:

  • providing all books, records or documents to the Trustee that identify the assets and liabilities of the debtor;
  • prepare and submit to the Trustee within 5 days after filing for personal bankruptcy, unless the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada extends the time, a sworn statement of affairs detailing the person’s assets and liabilities, and for each of the bankrupt’s creditors, their respective names, addresses and the amount owing;
  • disclose to the Trustee complete details of all dispositions of property within 1 year before the date of the bankruptcy;
  • make a disclosure to the Trustee of all the details of property disposed of by gift or settlement without adequate valuable consideration within a 5 year time period before the date of bankruptcy;
  • if a creditors’ meeting is called, attending it;
  • making any required surplus income payments to the Trustee;
  • participating in two mandatory financial counselling sessions; and
  • offering whatever assistance is requested by the Trustee.

If the bankrupt fulfill all of their duties, then the Trustee will not have a reason to oppose the discharge. If no creditor opposes, then the bankrupt is entitled to an absolute discharge. As already stated, the discharge is what eliminates unsecured debts.

In addition to an absolute discharge, there are other types of discharge under bankruptcy law available to a bankrupt person upon having a discharge hearing:

  • conditional discharge;
  • suspended discharge; and
  • refused discharge.

To read more on the different kinds of discharges available to be applied to a bankrupt person, and for what does bankruptcy discharged mean, take a look at my August 2021 Brandon Blog “A BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGED IS THE KEY TO HEARTWARMING DEBT ELIMINAT1ON“.

what does bankruptcy discharged mean
what does bankruptcy discharged mean

What does bankruptcy discharged mean: At long last, the Nova Scotia case

The Nova Scotia bankruptcy case deals with the discharge of the Trustee in a personal bankruptcy matter. Once the Trustee brings on the bankrupt’s application for discharge and a discharge Order is made by the Court, and the Trustee completes the rest of the administration of the bankruptcy estate, the Trustee is entitled to a discharge. If the bankrupt did not receive an absolute discharge and has not completed his or her duties, including complying with a conditional discharge order, eventually, the Trustee can still apply for its discharge. Upon the Trustee’s discharge two things occur:

The bankrupt goes into bankruptcy purgatory. No discharge occurs. The Trustee has fulfilled its obligation to present the bankrupt’s discharge request to the court and the court has issued an Order. Whenever the bankrupt wants to prove they have fulfilled all their obligations, obeyed the discharge order, and now deserve an absolute discharge, he or she will need to retain a bankruptcy lawyer and apply to the Bankruptcy Courts.

On the day the Trustee is discharged, the stay of proceedings that had protected the bankrupt from any enforcement action by creditors whose debts were owed at the date of bankruptcy no longer applies. As a result, creditors can now pursue the bankrupt person since the debts have not been eliminated and the stay of proceedings is no longer in place.

It is interesting to examine how far the Registrar in Bankruptcy directed the Trustee in this Nova Scotia bankruptcy case to ensure that all creditors understood that they still had the right to pursue the bankrupt.

The decision in Frost (Re), 2021 NSSC 296 can be boiled down to the following facts:

  • Mr. Frost went bankrupt.
  • He failed to fulfill his duties and moved to the UK permanently.
  • He didn’t inform the Trustee of his new address and telephone number.
  • His actions left his Trustee and other stakeholders to fend for themselves, explicitly telling the Trustee he wasn’t going to fulfill those duties and didn’t intend to do so.
  • A hearing was held for the bankrupt’s discharge and Mr. Frost was refused discharge.
  • The Court previously directed the Trustee to appear before it to be heard on the Trustee’s application for discharge.

The Court concluded that the Trustee completed the administration of the bankruptcy estate and gave the Trustee its discharge. However, the reason why the Registrar in Bankruptcy wanted the Trustee to attend such a hearing was so the Registrar could take things one step further. In the normal course, the Trustee sends out a notice to all those whose proof of claim was admitted of the results of the bankruptcy administration and of the Trustee’s discharge. However, the Registrar wanted to make sure that it was crystal clear to all creditors.

The Registrar wrote a cover letter for the Trustee and directed the Trustee to send it along with the normal statutory notice to creditors (or their debt collectors of record). Here is a copy of that letter:

what does bankruptcy discharged mean
what does bankruptcy discharged mean

What does bankruptcy discharged mean summary

I hope you found this what does bankruptcy discharged mean Brandon Blog post informative. Are you worried because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges and you assume bankruptcy is your only option? If it is too much debt for any reason, 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 while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you the relief you need and so deserve.

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 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. We help many people and companies stay clear of 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, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. group today.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We will get you or your business back up driving to healthy and balanced trouble-free operations and get rid of the discomfort factors in your 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.

what does bankruptcy discharged mean
what does bankruptcy discharged mean
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

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

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.

tenants in common vs joint tenancy
tenants in common vs joint tenancy

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
tenants in common vs joint tenancy

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.

tenants in common vs joint tenancy
tenants in common vs joint tenancy

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.

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.

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.

tenants in common vs joint tenancy
tenants in common vs joint tenancy
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY LAWYER IN TORONTO VS. BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE IN TORONTO: WE EXPLORE AND EXPLAIN COMPLETELY THE DIFFERENCES FOR YOU

bankruptcy lawyer in toronto
bankruptcy lawyer in toronto

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.

Bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto introduction

Canada is recognized for its cultural diversity, but it can be a battle to locate trustworthy information on the nation’s laws. Bankruptcy is a difficult topic to learn about; both learning the technical side and dealing with the emotional one.

If you or your company are thinking about bankruptcy, you might think you need a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto. However, you do not necessarily require one. A licensed insolvency trustee in Toronto (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee in Toronto) can help you pick the perfect insolvency process for you and make certain that you survive it as best as possible.

In this Brandon Blog, I discuss the roles of a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto and a licensed insolvency trustee. Sometimes they can overlap and many times they do not. We will take a detailed look at a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto vs a licensed insolvency trustee. We will discuss the differences between the two and exactly how they can each help you.

Bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto – Do you need one to file personal bankruptcy?

Whether it is personal bankruptcy proceedings, or one of the formal alternatives to bankruptcy such as a consumer proposal or a Division I Proposal that are being contemplated, a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto or elsewhere is not involved in the actual bankruptcy filing. or the Canada – restructuring & insolvency filing. That is what trustees in bankruptcy do.

When a person or company is contemplating an insolvency process, they can get a no-cost consultation with any one of the bankruptcy trustees they choose to meet with. During the consultation, information is gathered by the Trustee, analyzed and possible solutions are discussed.

Trustees must always be careful to not tread into areas that could possibly give them a conflict in providing their financial services. People wanting advice on asset transfers, asset protection, or preferring one or more creditors over others are areas that Trustees should not wade into.

In situations like that, I always advise potential bankruptcy clients that as there is no privilege in our discussions and we should not talk about those things so that I will not be conflicted. Rather, the person should get advice from a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto or elsewhere where the discussions and the legal advice are protected by solicitor-client privilege.

bankruptcy lawyer in toronto
bankruptcy lawyer in toronto

Do You Need a personal bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto to get your bankruptcy discharge?

As I have written before in several Brandon Blogs, there are 6 possible outcomes in a bankrupt’s application for discharge. This depends on whether the discharge is being opposed by either the Trustee and/or one or more creditors. The possible bankruptcy discharge outcomes are:

  • Automatic – This discharge is absolute and is given by the Trustee at the earliest possible time the bankrupt person is entitled to a discharge. It means that the bankruptcy has performed all of his or her duties, has fully cooperated with the Trustee and nobody has opposed the discharge.
  • Absolute – An absolute discharge is obtained when the Trustee issues the automatic discharge. it is also possible to obtain an absolute discharge when a creditor opposes the bankrupt’s discharge, the matter goes to court for a hearing, but the court does not believe the evidence presented by the opposing creditor is persuasive and the court orders an absolute discharge.
  • Conditional – In this type of discharge, there was opposition to the bankruptcy receiving an absolute discharge. The court considered the evidence and concluded that the bankrupt must fulfill one or more conditions before being entitled to a discharge from bankruptcy. More often than not, a conditional discharge includes a certain amount of money the bankrupt must pay to the Trustee for the general benefit of the creditors.
  • Suspended – A suspended discharge is given when there is opposition to the bankrupt’s discharge and the matter goes to court for a discharge hearing. Based on the evidence, the court believes that the bankrupt, either before or during the bankruptcy estate file administration, has conducted himself or herself in such a way that although a discharge will be given, it should be delayed. The suspension acts to delay the discharge and can be combined with conditions.
  • Refused – The bankrupt’s discharge is opposed probably by at least the Trustee and probably one or more creditors. There is sufficient evidence before the court that the bankrupt has not lived up to his or her duties and has probably failed to fully cooperate and provide full disclosure to the Trustee. The court, based on the evidence, refuses to consider the bankrupt’s application for discharge until such time as the bankrupt performs all duties and discloses all information.
  • No order – This is not an actual discharge type, but can be the outcome of a discharge hearing. The court can issue a “no order” instead of a refusal. The facts are probably similar to when the court can issue a refusal. However, in a “no order” situation, the bankrupt remains in bankruptcy but the Trustee is then free to pursue its discharge. Once the Trustee gets its discharge, the bankrupt lose the protection offered by the stay of proceedings. Creditors are then free to pursue all of their rights and remedies against the bankrupt in the enforcement of their trying to collect their respective debts.

When the time comes for the bankrupt to get his or her discharge from bankruptcy, if the Trustee or a creditor opposes, the bankrupt would be well advised to consult with a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto or elsewhere. The Trustee cannot give an automatic discharge and the matter is going to court for a trial. The bankrupt should get the benefit of legal advice and probably will need to retain the lawyer to provide legal services in representing the bankrupt in court. That is not the job of the Trustee.

Corporate Bankruptcy in Canada – Corporate bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto, Canada – Do you need one to file corporate bankruptcy?

As I will explain, every Canadian corporate insolvency file requires probably several, not just one bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto or elsewhere. Insolvency law is complex and lawyers will help all the parties involved.

The current economic climate in Canada is going to be challenging for Canadian businesses and I expect there will be many financial difficulties. Government COVID-19 support programs are scheduled to end soon. Companies have been tapped out while shut down just trying to stay alive with little or no revenue being earned. Companies will need cash now that it is time to start everything up again. No doubt there will be business casualties.

However, not all businesses are created equal. Some will be able to restructure, some will file for bankruptcy and others will merely shut their doors and fade away.

Among the keystones of a restructuring proceeding under either the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act or the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act is the debt workout. The restructuring is designed to maintain the debtor’s business and negotiate a financial debt repayment strategy with its creditors. The aim is to save jobs, allow the company to continue while avoiding bankruptcy liquidation.

Key components of a debt workout normally include debtor-in-possession lending (DIP lending) while the company is reorganizing, new capital for the company coming out of its restructuring and getting unsecured creditors, and possibly secured creditors, to agree to accept less than they are owed. In the very large corporate restructuring files, there are normally lending syndicates due to large and complex lending arrangements. They too will need lawyers to help them with the insolvency law.

If a restructuring proceeding is not possible or does not succeed, then either the company’s secured creditor will begin receivership enforcement proceedings or the company will file an assignment in bankruptcy or a creditor will launch a bankruptcy application to put the company into bankruptcy.

In every corporate insolvency file, legal services are required by all the stakeholders. Canadian counsel plays an important part in providing advice. In the larger files, a large team of lawyers will be needed for both the company and its main creditors. The Board of Directors will need their own independent legal team. The bankruptcy trustee in Toronto will also need a dedicated team of lawyers to help navigate through the formal restructuring in court or help in a court-appointed receivership, private receivership or bankruptcy.

As you can see, in pretty well every corporate file, a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto or elsewhere is pretty well a must-have requirement. Lawyers will be able to help the company, its Board of Directors, its creditors and the insolvency professional create effective solutions. The best ones will also make sure that they are also practical solutions.

bankruptcy lawyer in toronto
bankruptcy lawyer in toronto

Other situations where you could need a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto, Barrie, GTA, or elsewhere

When looking for a bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto, Barrie, GTA and elsewhere, you want to find one that has substantial experience. Depending on the situation you or your company are involved in, the experience could be in one or more of:

  • financial reorganizations;
  • debt reorganizations and debt restructurings;
  • debtor legal rights and creditor rights;
  • security enforcement;
  • forbearance/standstill arrangements;
  • lender liability suits;
  • receivership and related matters for banks or other secured lenders, court and privately appointed receivers;
  • insolvency and bankruptcy litigation or other complex matters; and
  • acting for receivers and Trustees, debtors, secured creditors, unsecured creditors or any other stakeholder in an insolvency process.

Take Your First Step Towards A Debt Free Life

I hope that you found this bankruptcy lawyer in Toronto Brandon Blog interesting and that you now have a better appreciation for when getting bankruptcy legal advice is necessary. 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.

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 and businesses facing financial issues need a realistic lifeline and practical financial advice. 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.

bankruptcy lawyer in toronto
bankruptcy lawyer in toronto

Call us now for a no-cost bankruptcy 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.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE ORDER: OBSESSED CREDITOR LOSES APPEAL OF THE DISCHARGE ORDER

bankruptcy dischargeWe 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.

What does bankruptcy discharge mean in Canada?

A bankruptcy filing is a form of insolvency process under Canadian bankruptcy law available to individuals and businesses. Bankruptcy deals with a person’s or company’s debt load and assets. After performing a detailed initial assessment, the licensed insolvency trustee will be in a position to advise the debtor if they will be better serviced through a restructuring process as an alternative to bankruptcy (consumer proposal or Division I Proposal for individuals, Division I Proposal or Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act bankruptcy protection for companies) with creditors, or whether the debtor will be better served filing for bankruptcy.

The final piece of any bankruptcy process for an individual is the bankruptcy discharge. Individuals who go bankrupt are entitled to a discharge from bankruptcy. Companies are only entitled to one if every bankruptcy claim filed is paid in full, with interest. Because this never happens, companies do not receive a bankruptcy discharge. It is not impossible, but for this reason, it really does not happen.

If you are thinking about filing an assignment in bankruptcy, then you may be wondering about the bankruptcy discharge process and how it will affect you. Many people think their debts are eliminated at the moment of their bankruptcy filing.

This is incorrect. It is the bankruptcy discharge that will remove all (with certain limited exceptions) of your unsecured debts from your life and will result in letting you move forward with a clean slate. In this Brandon Blog, I discuss the bankruptcy discharge process and a recent decision of the Supreme Court of British Columbia hearing an appeal to the decision of the Master sitting as bankruptcy registrar on a bankrupt’s application for discharge.bankruptcy discharge

Bankruptcy discharge and its consequences for the bankrupt

When you are granted a bankruptcy discharge, this means that those debts caught by your bankruptcy are no longer your responsibility. This means that every action from creditors or the collection agencies they have retained stops trying to collect the debt obligations.

As I previously mentioned, most almost all debts are wiped off your slate when you receive your discharge from bankruptcy. The kinds of debts that remain even after a bankruptcy discharge are:

  • spousal or child support payments;
  • fines or penalties mandated by the court;
  • claims arising from fraud or fraudulent breach of trust;
  • student loan debt if less than 7 years have passed since the bankrupt stopped being a part-time or full-time student.
  • any kind of financial debts that are secured against your assets, such as a home mortgage or automobile financing, are not discharged as a result of your bankruptcy discharge.

These sorts of financial debts endure after bankruptcy as they are not released. The individual will be required to continue paying those financial obligations according to their terms. All various other financial obligations are discharged and do not have to be paid.

What are the types of bankruptcy discharge?

If there is no Trustee opposition or creditor opposition to a bankrupt’s application for discharge, and the bankrupt has fulfilled all of their duties of a bankrupt, in most situations, the licensed insolvency trustee can issue an automatic discharge which provides the bankrupt with an absolute discharge from bankruptcy.

If there is an opposition or the bankrupt meets one of the criteria that does not allow for an automatic discharge (such as the bankruptcy process finding the bankrupt a high income tax debt situation), there must be a discharge hearing in court which is heard by a Master of the court sitting as the registrar in bankruptcy. There are 4 types of bankruptcy discharge and a 5th bankruptcy outcome is also possible. They are:

  1. absolute – an absolute discharge means the bankrupt is entitled to an immediate discharge. This can be given by the licensed insolvency trustee in the bankruptcy estate handling the bankruptcy administration if the bankrupt has fulfilled all of their duties and there is no trustee or creditor opposition;
  2. conditional discharge – can get a discharge after meeting one or more conditions. The most common type of condition of discharge involves paying a sum of money to the licensed insolvency trustee;
  3. suspended – the bankrupt’s discharge will take place at a later date and may very well be combined with either an absolute bankruptcy discharge or conditional bankruptcy discharge;
  4. refused– the court refused to grant a bankruptcy discharge probably because the bankrupt has failed to provide full disclosure or perform other bankruptcy duties; or
  5. “no order”– the Trustee advises the court that regardless of the time period that has passed, the bankrupt has actually not satisfied every one of his or her obligations and the bankrupt has actually failed to reply to the Trustee’s demands for information. In this situation, when the “no order” order is provided, the licensed insolvency trustee is at liberty to seek its discharge. Once the bankrupt person has actually fulfilled the requirements set by the court, the bankrupt can re-apply for a discharge hearing by the court.bankruptcy discharge

For a first-time bankrupt with no surplus income who fulfills of their duties, including attending the 2 mandatory credit counselling sessions, they are entitled to their bankruptcy discharge after a bankruptcy period of 9 months from the date of bankruptcy.

If this is your second bankruptcy a discharge will not be available after 9 months. A 2nd bankruptcy lasts for a minimum of 24 months if you do not have any surplus income payments to make to the Trustee. If you have surplus income, a second-time bankrupt must make those monthly payments for 36 months before they are entitled to a bankruptcy discharge.

For a 3rd or subsequent bankruptcy, the timeline is the same as the 2nd time bankrupt. However, it is much more possible that there will certainly be resistance to the discharge by the Trustee or the creditors. The court can also impose whatever conditions it sees fit.

Creditor objects to the decision of the Master on bankrupt’s application for discharge

On July 9, 2021, the decision in Hanlon (Re), 2021 BCSC 1348 in the Supreme Court of British Columbia was released. This was an appeal from an order by the bankruptcy registrar of the Supreme Court of British Columbia dated April 28, 2021 in Hanlon (Re), 2021 BCSC 800, VA B190492. This is an appeal under s. 192(4) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (BIA), from an order of a master of that Court, sitting as a registrar in bankruptcy, granting the bankrupt, Mr. Hanlon, a bankruptcy discharge that was made conditional on his paying $7,500 to the Trustee.

The appellant, Ms. Johnson, is one of Mr. Hanlon’s creditors. She states that the registrar erred in approving the discharge on those terms. If the appeal is allowed, she looks for an order refusing Mr. Hanlon’s application for a discharge, with leave to apply again in two years, or alternatively, giving a discharge conditional on his paying $50,000. The appeal is opposed by both Mr. Hanlon the bankrupt, and the Trustee. The appeal was heard by Judge Milman, Canada’s bankruptcy legislation, the BIA states that a person dissatisfied with an order or decision of a registrar can appeal that decision to a judge of that court who in that capacity is sitting as a bankruptcy judge.

The alleged errors made by the registrar in the making of the order of conditional discharge

Ms. Johnson argued that the registrar made certain errors in granting the conditional bankruptcy discharge order. Ms. Johnson says that in granting the bankruptcy discharge on those terms, the registrar erred as follows:

  • in concluding that Mr. Hanlon had complied with the injunction resulting from Ms. Johnson’s original successful litigation against Mr. Hanlon when he had not;
  • in falling short to take into account Mr. Hanlon’s refusal to agree with the accuracy of the trial judge; and
  • in failing to consider Mr. Hanlon’s real income earning potential.bankruptcy discharge

The standard of review on such an appeal

There is a standard of review on such an appeal from an order of a bankruptcy discharge hearing. S. 192(1) of the BIA gives the bankruptcy registrar the authority to, amongst other things, grant orders of discharge. S. 192(4) of the BIA allows a party dissatisfied with an order or decision of a
registrar may appeal it to a judge.

In granting an order of discharge in the bankruptcy process, the registrar is exercising judicial discretion. If the registrar has acted reasonably, the judge should not set it aside or ignore it. Further, if an appeal from a bankruptcy discharge order is based on alleged errors in findings of fact, the court will not interfere if there is no overriding error in the findings of fact and there is evidence from which the findings of fact could be made. Discretionary decisions may, naturally, be overturned if the registrar has materially misinterpreted the law or made an error in respect of the facts underlying the use of that discretion.

When a registrar’s decision in a bankruptcy discharge hearing imposes conditions, those conditions must be realistic for the bankrupt to perform in a reasonable period of time. Where the amount ordered was unrealistic and the bankrupt’s discharge is conditional on making additional payments, the appeal court did hold that results in an error of law and the appellate judge can either substitute the conditions or refer the matter back to the registrar for reconsideration.

The judge’s decision on the appeal from the registrar’s bankruptcy discharge order

The judge dismissed the appeal finding there were no overriding errors made by the registrar. With respect to the amount of $7,500 ordered as a condition of discharge from bankruptcy, the judge found as follows:

Ms. Johnson says that the registrar did not consider Mr. Hanlon’s untapped earning capacity and instead concentrated practically completely on her arguments of his potential inheritance. She suggests that Mr. Hanlon could be earning more than he is. In her opinion, he could earn more to enable him to make a settlement of $50,000 rather than the $7,500 that was ordered.

Mr. Hanlon’s real historic earnings offered adequate assistance for the registrar’s verdict that he was incapable of paying any more than the $7,500 that she ordered for him, did not have the financial prospects himself to do so and without getting personal loans from family members to help him with that. That was properly decided by the registrar based on the evidence before her.

The judge found that there is no merit in this or any other of the grounds of appeal. He found no error in the registrar’s decision, and having found the discharge condition that she imposed to have been reasonable in the circumstances, he dismissed the appeal.

Bankruptcy discharge summary

I hope that you found this bankruptcy discharge Brandon Blog interesting and that you now have a good appreciation for the process at the end of the administration for a person who files for bankruptcy and the considerations of the court if someone appeals a bankruptcy discharge order. 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.

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 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 bankruptcy consultation.bankruptcy discharge

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.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY MEANS: SERIOUSLY, CAN IT EVER MEAN BEGGING FOR A BANKRUPTCY ANNULMENT?

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

Bankruptcy means introduction

From my perspective, bankruptcy means that a person or company has either filed an assignment in bankruptcy or the court has issued a bankruptcy order against the debtor. The debtor has taken the voluntary action to seek relief and the benefits obtained by doing so under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). Or a court, based on the application of one or more creditors, has ordered that the BIA applies and the debtor is adjudged bankrupt.

As I have written in the past, this is different from insolvency. Insolvency is the financial state where a company or person cannot meet their liabilities as they come due or whose assets, if sold at fair value, would not be enough to pay off all of the liabilities. Bankruptcy is a legal state.

I recently read an article about Mr. Stanley Frank Ostrowski aka Frank Ostrowski, who lives in Winnipeg, Manitoba. Mr. Ostrowski filed an assignment in bankruptcy on February 12, 2019. He listed his assets having a value of $250. He stated that his liabilities were $259,621. This is his second bankruptcy. His first was in 1983 and he received an absolute discharge in 1985.

The article states that Mr. Ostrowski has now made an application to the court to annul his bankruptcy. This Brandon’s Blog looks at: Is it possible to annul a bankruptcy and under what circumstances? Put another way, is it really the case that bankruptcy means you can file for bankruptcy and then say oops, I didn’t really want to file? I am not really sure that is how bankruptcies work.

The reasons why Mr. Ostrowski thinks bankruptcy means it can be annulled

In May 1987, a jury decided that Mr. Ostrowski was guilty of first-degree murder. In March 1992, he was found guilty of possession of cocaine for the purposes of trafficking. He was sentenced to 15 years in prison, concurrent with his life sentence for murder.

He served 23 years, 2 months and 24 days in prison. He got out of jail on December 18, 2009. In 2014, then federal justice minister Peter MacKay asked Manitoba’s Court of Appeal to review the case. Then justice minister MacKay believed that there was a miscarriage of justice with respect to the murder conviction.

In a November 2018 decision, the Court of Appeal set aside the conviction after it discovered a miscarriage of justice took place when two vital details were not revealed to the defence or the court. While the court set aside his conviction, it did not acquit him. In their decision, the three-judge panel said they thought there was enough proof against the accused, which the court could have found him guilty even if full disclosure had been made.

The court also held that it would be unfair to have another trial given that it had been 32 years since the shooting. The court also entered a judicial finding that the charge is stayed from further prosecution.

In June 2020, Mr. Ostrowski retained legal counsel to commence an action for damages because of his wrongful conviction. His lawyers have not yet launched the claim but they plan to. The article said that he will be seeking $16 million in compensation.

Now he wants to have his 2019 bankruptcy annulled. He believes he has a realistic chance of receiving sufficient compensation to be able to settle all his debts. So with all this background information, do I think his bankruptcy means that he can get his bankruptcy annulled?

Bankruptcy means: what happens if I declare bankruptcy?

I have written before about what happens when a person or company declares bankruptcy. There is a responsibility to make full disclosure to the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (Trustee) all of your assets, liabilities, income and expenses. The debtor also must give to the Trustee all provincially non-exempt assets so that the Trustee can sell them for the benefit of the creditors.

In his bankruptcy filing documents, Mr. Ostrowski did not make mention of this potential lawsuit that had not yet been launched. He also did not indicate that he had the right to such an asset. If he had, there would be two realistic options.

He could have taken the position that the amount of recovery in a lawsuit not yet launched is unknown and speculative. So, the action should only be valued at $1 as a placeholder. By doing so, he would have made full disclosure to his creditors and to his Trustee as to the existence of this potential asset.

If Mr. Ostrowski had disclosed this asset and valued it at more than $259,371, then he would not have met the asset test for being insolvent and potentially would not have been able to file for bankruptcy. I say potentially because, in his affidavit, Mr. Ostrowski makes no mention of what his income and expenses were at the time of filing for bankruptcy or now. Mr. Ostrowski does not disclose in his affidavit whether or not he has to pay any surplus income to his Trustee for the benefit of his creditors.

Can bankruptcy be annulled?

Annulling a bankruptcy is more than just cancelling a bankruptcy. It is erasing it to the point as if it never happened. It is a complete elimination of the bankruptcy. If it was the person’s first bankruptcy, and it was annulled, they could honestly say they never were bankrupt.

To figure out what are the odds that Mr. Ostrowski will be successful in his application to annul his bankruptcy, we need to look at several factors. First, what reasons does Mr. Ostrowski say are the basis as to why his bankruptcy should be annulled?

In his affidavit sworn June 8, 2020, the reasons he gives are:

  1. “I have a realistic chance of receiving sufficient compensation to be able to settle my debts with my creditors in a manner that would be more advantageous to the creditors than if I pursue bankruptcy.”
  2. “I am advised by…” my lawyer “…that when he advised…” my Trustee, “… of my intention to seek an order annulling my assignment in bankruptcy…” my Trustee “…did not object to it.”.

That is it. No other reasons. To Mr. Ostrowski, his bankruptcy means that maybe perhaps he can do better for his creditors than they would get in his bankruptcy and his Trustee doesn’t object to his trying to annul his bankruptcy.

With all due respect to his legal counsel on this bankruptcy annulment application who only has what he has to work with, I rate those reasons somewhere between weak and lame! The bankruptcy annulment process was not designed for the convenience of the bankrupt.

Bankruptcy means when will a court annul a bankruptcy?

First, Section 181(1) of the BIA gives the court the authority to annul a bankruptcy. It says:

“181 (1) If, in the opinion of the court, a bankruptcy order ought not to have been made or an assignment ought not to have been filed, the court may by order annul the bankruptcy.”

This authority is discretionary. Generally, the court will only annul an assignment if it is shown that:

  • The debtor was not insolvent at the time of filing.
  • It was an abuse of process of the court
  • The debtor was trying to commit a fraud on his or her creditors.

If Mr. Ostrowski’s affidavit is the only evidence submitted in his application to annul his bankruptcy, he has not shown that the bankruptcy assignment “ought not to have been filed”.

Second, there have been cases where an assignment in bankruptcy has been annulled. The list of general reasons why the court found that a bankruptcy order ought not to have been made or an assignment ought not to have been filed are:

  1. An assignment in bankruptcy was completed and was to be held in escrow while the debtor negotiated with his creditors. The assignment was only to be filed if a resolution could not be worked out. A deal was reached but the assignment was filed in error. In other words, a verifiable mistake.
  2. The bankruptcy was of no benefit to the creditors. The creditors would receive a distribution but would bear all the costs of the bankruptcy administration.
  3. The debtor was restrained by court order from dealing with all of his assets without giving his estranged wife seven clear days’ notice and he filed an assignment in bankruptcy with no notice given.
  4. Joint assignment by a husband and wife where it was evident that a large amount of debt was from the husband’s unincorporated business and the wife was not in partnership with him.
  5. A bankruptcy assignment purportedly filed by an infant!
  6. The second assignment filed before the bankrupt received a discharge from the 1st bankruptcy.
  7. The husband filing an assignment in bankruptcy in an attempt to disgorge himself of his assets while embroiled in bitter family law proceedings.
  8. Directors of a company whose assets were already being administered under a court-appointed receiver having filed an assignment in bankruptcy for the company.

In all the above situations, the court DID annul the bankruptcy. The court did not agree that bankruptcy means it was the right choice in those situations.

Bankruptcy means when will a court NOT annul a bankruptcy?

Third, there have been cases where an assignment in bankruptcy was NOT annulled. The list of general reasons why the court found refusing the annulment request was appropriate are:

  1. The sole purpose of the bankruptcy was to rearrange the priorities of certain creditors.
  2. A bankruptcy to defeat the enforcement attempts of a judgment creditor.
  3. The sworn statement of affairs failed to show the name and amount of a creditor.
  4. The debtor had no assets.
  5. Debtor was insolvent and did not bring an application to annul the bankruptcy until 4 months after filing an assignment in bankruptcy. The court decided that an application to annul a bankruptcy only because the debtor did not wish to continue with the bankruptcy process should be brought immediately after the filing of the assignment in bankruptcy.

The last reason why the court did not annul a bankruptcy, is pretty much the reason Mr. Ostrowski says he wants his bankruptcy annulled. Only in his case, he is bringing the application some 18 months after becoming a bankrupt.

Interestingly enough, that last reason was a Manitoba case, Baker (Bankrupt), Re, 1997 CanLII 23100 (MB QB). In that case, the bankrupt contended that the Trustee filed the bankruptcy documents with the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy in error. However, she waited for 4 months and the court was not persuaded that the filing was an error!

In Mr. Ostrowski’s case, his reasons boil down to it will be more convenient for him! As you can probably tell by now, I don’t place a high probability of his chances of success in persuading the court to annul his bankruptcy. But then I am not the judge.

Bankruptcy means what should Mr. Ostrowski do?

The answer as to what his bankruptcy means and what Frank Ostrowski should do lies within the BIA. Mr. Ostrowski has two choices and I believe it will be what the court decides.

First, the BIA allows for a bankrupt, with the permission of the inspectors in his bankruptcy, if any, to file a restructuring proposal. He could get that started right now without any court application.

If his debts are truly over $250,000, based on the claims filed to date, then he can file a proposal under part III division I proposal under the BIA. If the claims filed are a total under $250,000, then he could file a consumer proposal. Either way, the administration would continue under the BIA.

His proposal would be a very simple one. It would essentially say that he has a claim against several parties for what his lawyer believes is $16 million. He knows he will get at least enough to pay all of his creditors in full. So, if you vote in favour of my proposal, if I win, enough money will be paid to the Trustee to pay all the creditors in full. If I don’t win, or there isn’t enough money to pay everyone in full, all creditors will share in whatever is available.

Once the restructuring proposal is accepted by his creditors and approved by the court, his bankruptcy is annulled. He will get exactly what he is asking for. His creditors will get paid presumably in full. They will not just get the chance to have their debts settled as Mr. Ostrowski states in his affidavit.

Second, section 144 of the BIA says that the bankrupt is entitled to any surplus remaining after payment of all creditor claims in full, with interest, and the cost of the bankruptcy administration. So, if Mr. Ostrowski is successful and gets $16 million, that money would go to his Trustee, after the legal costs of winning that award. The Trustee would keep what is necessary to pay all the claims in full, with interest, and the costs of the bankruptcy administration. Mr. Ostrowski would keep the rest.

I recommend the first way, the restructuring proposal route because that could get Mr. Ostrowski’s bankruptcy annulled fairly quickly, which is what he is asking for.

It will be interesting to see what the court decides. I will let you know when I find out.

Bankruptcy means summary

I hope you found this bankruptcy means Brandon’s Blog informative and interesting.

The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days. Some people think that bankruptcy means the end of their life. Bankruptcy should be a last resort for anyone. We strive to help people and companies avoid bankruptcy. But if bankruptcy is necessary, do not think of it as the end of life. It really is a fresh new beginning. That is what bankruptcy means.

If anyone needs our assistance for debt relief Canada COVID-19, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

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

bankruptcy means
bankruptcy means
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

HOW HERTZ TEACHES US MODERN AND RISKY RULES OF BUSINESS BANKRUPTCY IN CANADA AND THE USA

business bankruptcy in canada
business bankruptcy in canada

The Ira Smith Team is fully operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Stay healthy, well balanced and safe and secure everyone.

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this business bankruptcy in Canada and the USA Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click play on the podcast.

Business bankruptcy in Canada Introduction

Late in the day on Friday, May 22, 2020, Hertz Global Holdings Inc. (Hertz) filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Delaware. The filing gives Hertz some breathing room to operate its business. During this time, Hertz also needs to come up with a business turnaround plan and a debt restructuring plan that creditors can support. The movement of Hertz stock last week teaches us some modern and risky rules of business bankruptcy in Canada and the United States.

Corporate bankruptcies and the Hertz investors

Hertz stock closed on the NASDAQ exchange on May 22 at US$2.84. It dipped to a low of US$0.40 on May 26. Legendary investor Carl Icahn sold all of his Hertz shares at an average price of $0.72. He dumped his 39% stake in Hertz at a loss of nearly $2 billion. Last Friday Hertz shares closed at US$2.57 per share. This morning, the trading touched US$3.40 per share.

So Hertz is up handsomely since May 26. Hertz has filed for bankruptcy protection. It doesn’t make sense that investors should be pushing the stock up. Hertz is selling off its fleet and further depressing the used car market. So far there is no indication that a business plan and debt reduction plan has been developed, let alone accepted by the creditors.

As far as assets, they have locations and a database of customers. But every major rental car company also has locations and a database. Whenever business and leisure travel resumes to pre-COVID-19 levels, if you can’t rent a car from Hertz you will rent it from a different company. So what are the non-fleet assets worth?

So on the surface, the investor money finding a home in Hertz stock and pushing up the stock price doesn’t make sense. So, are there savvy investors getting into Hertz or are they all just following the herd and will all end up losers?

Why Hertz filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection

Since 2014, Hertz has had four different CEOs. It is difficult to develop and implement a cohesive business strategy with such turmoil in the senior management ranks. As the coronavirus pandemic brought travelling to a sudden halt, Hertz suffered dramatically as a mass of its revenue depended on business travellers and vacationers renting vehicles when arriving at their destination airport. Nobody knows how long it will take until travel gets back to where it was and what Hertz needs it to be.

Hertz’s debt has been increasing as it invested heavily in its vehicle fleet. They may have also missed the mark in the mix of vehicles consumers want, requiring it to take on even more debt to make further fleet purchases. Hertz could no longer afford to make the interest payments on its debt load. At the time of its bankruptcy filing, Hertz had US$1 billion of cash and US$13 billion of debt.

The $13 billion in financing Hertz made use of to acquire its fleet of 500,000 automobiles. The financing was done via what is known as asset-backed securities. These are connected straight to the value of the vehicles. When the value of the cars drops, Hertz must make up the difference in cash within about three months, unless values rebound before that time.

However, with the coronavirus pounding the brakes on the economy and eliminating employment for so many, the drop in the value of used vehicles is expected to remain that way for a long time. Hertz knew that it could not make up the difference to its lenders when they made a demand, which was their right. Hence the bankruptcy filing.

The modern risky rules of investing in business bankruptcy in Canada and the USA

Normally, in a public company restructuring, it is not only the creditors that take a hit. Shareholders usually get a good drubbing. Share values fall and new shares are issued to raise capital. This further dilutes the holdings and value of those holdings for shareholders. But investors must believe that Hertz will come back. How else can you explain the surge in the share price?

Before this year, the company had ten consecutive quarters of positive growth. They were still losing money, just not as much. Investors must believe that Hertz will be able to survive. They must believe that the company although leaner and smaller, this is the time to jump on an opportunity to make money.

I am not a financial advisor, I am not saying whether this is a good or bad investment. It certainly is a very risky one. All I am saying is that as a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a trustee in bankruptcy) administering business bankruptcy in Canada, this does not make any sense to me.

I guess only time will tell if these investors pushing up the stock price are insightful risk-takers or losers. Carl Icahn doesn’t believe it.

Business bankruptcy in Canada and the USA summary

I hope you have found this business bankruptcy in Canada and the USA Brandon’s Blog helpful.

The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

We all must help each other to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Families are separated from each other. We look forward to the time when life can return to something near to typical and we can all be together once again.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has constantly used clean, safe and secure ways in our professional firm and we continue to do so.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. This is especially true these days.

If anyone needs our assistance for debt relief Canada COVID, or you just need some answers for questions that are bothering you, feel confident that Ira or Brandon can still assist you. Telephone consultations and/or virtual conferences are readily available for anyone feeling the need to discuss their personal or company situation.

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Stay healthy, well balanced and safe and secure everyone.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY SMALL BUSINESSES: COMPLETE BANKRUPTCY OPTIONS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES

bankruptcy small businesses

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

Bankruptcy small businesses introduction

The press has reported that certain Big Pharma have considered bankruptcy as part of negotiations to reach a settlement over their liability in the opioid crisis. Bankruptcy, or bankruptcy restructuring is not just for big companies. There are bankruptcy small businesses too.

Earlier this year, Insys Therapeutics Inc. in the United States ended up being the first opioid drugmaker to use the bankruptcy statute. It followed its US$225 million settlement with the Federal government. In recent months, there’s been a supposition that drugmakers might utilize insolvency laws as a means to run away from accountability.

Bankruptcy small businesses: That is not how bankruptcy protection works

Thankfully, that’s not how bankruptcy works. Instead, as I’ve learned in my experience in the Canadian bankruptcy space, insolvency procedures are developed to not only help debtors. It likewise assists creditors too.

Bankruptcy and restructuring proceedings are not best for every stakeholder every time. The end result always appears unreasonable to creditors because they are not being paid in full. However, it’s most definitely not the free ride for the company filing under the bankruptcy laws that many people think it will be. This is especially true in the area of bankruptcy small businesses.

Bankruptcy small businesses: What happens when a small business files for bankruptcy?

To many people, the thought of bankruptcy creates an adverse reaction. The reason is simple: a bankruptcy filing means there is not enough money to pay everyone 100 cents on the dollar.

But the system makes the best of a grim situation by imposing an organized and open process that preserves value and urges negotiation. Bankruptcy reorganizations by well-known brand names such as General Motors revealed that it can bring parties to the table to reach agreements that could not be made absent the structured reorganization laws. It also resurrects sick businesses.

At the most basic level, the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) develops for the estate to:

  • value and account for every one of the debtor’s assets into one proceeding;
  • recognize and classify creditor claims against the debtor;
  • in bankruptcy liquidation, sell the assets and distribute the money in priority of the claims of the creditors; and
  • for a bankruptcy restructuring, to take a hard look at productive assets and those no longer needed, value them, allow for selling off redundant assets to allow the company to continue in its healthy business side and offer the creditors a better deal than they would get in a liquidation.

Specifically how those essential parts of the bankruptcy and insolvency legislation play out in a specific bankruptcy small businesses situation will differ depending upon what kind of insolvency filing the borrower makes and the specific truths regarding the conduct of the debtor.

Bankruptcy small businesses: What types of bankruptcy can small businesses file?

When we hear about bankruptcy small businesses we normally think of a liquidation. However, debtors have two choices under the BIA: liquidation or reorganization.

Pure bankruptcy liquidation is designed to sell off the assets either as a whole to one buyer to allow for someone else to carry on the company’s business, or just sell pieces to many individual buyers. In the latter case, it means that business will not exist anymore.

The value obtained from the asset sale(s) will be distributed to the creditors in priority. First to statutory trust claimants, then to secured creditors, if any. If anything is left after that, it will then be distributed to unsecured creditors: first preferred unsecured and then ordinary unsecured.

On the other hand, a filing under the proposal provisions of Part III of the BIA allows for the company to attempt to reorganize. All aspects of the business will be looked at. The debtor can sell some of its assets that are underperforming or no longer fit into the restructured business plan. The cash raised can be used in the reorganization strategy that aims to resolve the current business problems and allow the company to come out of bankruptcy protection as a new and profitable viable business.

The BIA restructuring provisions are what would be used for bankruptcy small businesses. Large businesses (defined in this case as companies that owe more than $5 million) could use the same BIA proposal provisions. Alternatively, those large companies could also use the CCAA statute to reorganize. The specific situation will dictate what legislation is used for a reorganization.

bankruptcy small businesses

Bankruptcy small businesses: A restructuring attempt could go wrong

It is possible that companies that originally file under the BIA restructuring provisions ultimately become bankrupt. The reasons can vary.

The company may find that the financing it thought it had was no longer available, so they could not put forth a successful restructuring plan. So it will have no choice but to liquidate.

The company’s creditors may not believe that the restructuring plan pays them enough, is not a viable plan or there is too long to wait for too little money. In this case, the creditors when voting on the restructuring plan will vote in sufficient numbers to tank the restructuring. Any company that tries to restructure under the BIA and receives a sufficiently negative vote, is deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy. In such a case, the only remaining option will be a liquidation, probably through a bankruptcy small businessses.

For a business wanting to make it through a restructuring, a successful plan needs lender assistance or a sufficiently strong cash flow so that the restructuring will be funded properly. If there is insufficient cash to fund the restructuring, the Trustee will have to report that to the creditors. The Trustee will also have to recommend against the restructuring plan if the Trustee believes the company does not have enough cash to provide the staying power to carry out the plan.

In that case, there will certainly be a negative vote and the company will go into bankruptcy liquidation. On the other hand, in a successful bankruptcy small businesses restructuring, as soon as a BIA proposal plan of arrangement is fully performed, a company emerges from bankruptcy protection and continues operating, generally in a more powerful position than previously.

Bankruptcy small businesses: Advantages of an insolvency process for debtors

Bankruptcy provides at the very least two valuable advantages to all debtors: time and room to maneuver.

The minute a debtor files, an automatic stay is in play for the debtor. It operates as a time out button on any litigation, collection or enforcement activities. Creditors can ask the Court to lift the stay under specific conditions, however, the standard for doing so is typically tough to satisfy.

The Bankruptcy Court has broad authority to regulate all issues involving the debtor’s estate, including adjudicating any disputed claims. By uniting all those with a stake in the business’s assets in one place, a debtor can effectively handle all claims against it.

While the stay is in place, debtors use the insolvency process to review their troubles and make the essential adjustments to prosper after reorganizing. Decisions are made about which contracts they want to carry forward and which to abandon.

To stay clear of a disputed process, smart debtors use the insolvency restructuring process to reach a total overall negotiation and agreement with all stakeholders. If necessary, smart debtors will also offer a benefit to top up its restructuring plan to make sure that it gets the number of creditors necessary for the plan to succeed.

Bankruptcy small businesses: Benefits of the insolvency process for creditors

Clearly, bankruptcy supplies debtors with substantial power to reposition their business affairs.

What lots of people misunderstand, nonetheless, is that this power is balanced by solid creditor benefits too. The BIA calls for debtors to disclose considerable information about their operations and imposes stringent checks on their actions.

As an example, the company wishing to reorganize must openly disclose financial and other information concerning every one of its assets. Much fo the disclosure is under oath in the sworn statement of affairs. There is also if necessary, the ability to examine company officials under oath. In many cases, the debtor must seek the court’s approval before taking action beyond running the business operations in the normal course.

Under the bankruptcy small businesses BIA provisions, the company is allowed to stay in possession of its property. Management also remains in control to continue running the business. The Trustee must report any material adverse change. The Trustee will also report to the creditors as part of the restructuring process.

Creditors that are worried concerning the debtor’s capacity to maintain the estate’s worth might ask the Court to expand the Trustee’s powers. It is possible to have the Trustee also appointed as an interim receiver to control the receipts and disbursements of the company. Creditors can also ask the Court to end the restructuring and place the company into bankruptcy. Creditors would need to show that either a key secured creditor or a large enough group of unsecured creditors, will under no circumstances vote in favour of any restructuring.

The insolvency laws allow for the creation of a board of unsecured creditors to oversee the restructuring. The Court might also form a unique board standing for a major group of litigants in situations where the debtor faces lawsuits or claimants whose damages are not yet quantified.

These and various other attributes include a degree of justness to an inherently unfair situation. The debtor might think that it is driving the bus, however, countless other stakeholders have the power to make sure that the business complies with the rules of the road.

With such safeguards in place, creditors and the general public need not be afraid of the most awful possible outcome if bankruptcy provisions are used to try to restructure companies involved in bitter disputes. The playing field will never be even, but the Canadian insolvency statutes try to bring as much fairness into the bankruptcy small businesses system as possible.

Bankruptcy small businesses conclusion

I hope that you found this bankruptcy small businesses Brandon’s Blog informative. The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex corporate restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur. You are worried because your company is facing significant financial challenges. Your business provides income not only for your family. Many other families rely on you and your company for their well-being.

The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your company’s problems; financial and emotional. The way we dealt with this problem and devised a corporate restructuring plan, we know that we can help you and your company too.

We know that companies facing financial problems need realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a company restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain it is facing. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious in finding a solution, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team today.

Call us now for a free consultation. We will get your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

bankruptcy small businesses

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CONSUMER PROPOSAL CANADA: A BLUEPRINT TO STOP BILL COLLECTORS

consumer proposal canada

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this Consumer proposal Canada Brandon’s Blog, please scroll down to the bottom and click on the podcast.

Introduction

I have written before on the concept of how a bankruptcy filing puts into place a stay of proceedings. A section of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) states that creditors are not allowed to take or continue any collection or enforcement activity against a bankrupt person or company. But what about a consumer proposal Canada? I will discuss this concept for a consumer proposal and highlight a recent case on this issue.

The federal law

Under section 69.2 (1) of the BIA, with certain limited exceptions, when a consumer proposal is filed, “…no creditor has any remedy against the debtor or the debtor’s property, or shall commence or continue any action, execution or other proceedings, for the recovery of a claim provable in bankruptcy…”.

So if the claim is one that is provable in a bankruptcy, and therefore in a consumer proposal Canada, then the creditor cannot begin or continue a lawsuit or try to enforce a judgment for the amount owed.

A recent decision from the Ontario Court confirms this law where a consumer proposal Canada will stop creditors and bill collectors from starting or continuing legal action against you.

The facts of this case

The case is Yigzaw v. Ashagrie, 2019 ONSC 2474. It is about a motion to lift the stay of proceedings to permit enforcement of an order issued against the debtors who have filed a consumer proposal.

The applicants, Philipos Yigzaw and Aster Abraham, seek to appeal an order issued by the Court on February 21, 2017 (the 2017 order). The 2017 order was gotten on the basis of summary judgment on an application started by the applicants. In their application, they sought repayment of $102,500 that they had advanced to the respondents Anaketch Ashagrie and Yilma Gari to fund a business operating under the name “Telling Roses”. They also seek an accounting of how the funds had actually been spent.

The 2017 order required Ashagrie and Gari to pay $102,500 to Yigzaw and Abraham in addition to costs of $6,250. The respondents were likewise required to provide an accounting. The Court declined to issue a certificate of pending litigation against the respondents’ residence, although a writ of execution was issued. The respondents submitted a consumer proposal the very next day.

In this enforcement motion, the applicants state that the respondents have failed to adhere to the 2017 order. They look for relief that would require Ashagrie and Gari to be examined and to pay the amount of the judgment. They also want a finding that the respondents are in contempt.

The issues for the Court to consider

The Court first considered section 69.2 (1) of the BIA I spoke about above. The Court then looked at the exception I alluded to, being Section 69.4 of the BIA.

That section says that a Court may, in certain circumstances, raise the stay to allow a creditor to pursue its rights against a debtor who has filed consumer proposal. To obtain a lifting of the stay, the creditor must persuade the Court that it is most likely to be materially prejudiced by the ongoing stay, or that lifting the stay is equitable on other grounds.

Canadian courts have held that the criteria in s. 69.4 might be fulfilled where the creditor’s debt will not be released as an outcome of the insolvency process. The types of financial obligations that are not discharged are provided in s. 178( 1) of the BIA.

They consist of a debt or obligation arising out of fraud, embezzlement, misappropriation or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity as well as a debt or obligation resulting from obtaining property or services by false pretenses or fraudulent misrepresentation. Lifting of a stay is not a routine matter.

To succeed, the applicants have to show how they are most likely to be materially prejudiced by the stay, or that there are various other equitable grounds to raise it.

In a typical motion under s. 69.4, the applicant looking to lift the stay says that it needs to have the opportunity to prove that its accusations come from an activity provided in s. 178( 1) to ensure that it may obtain a judgment against the bankrupt or insolvent person. If successful, then that claim would survive the insolvency process.

In that normal case, the Court examines the creditor’s claims to identify if the debt, if confirmed, would be released as an outcome of the bankruptcy or proposal. Sometimes, the Court may also consider evidence submitted by the creditor.

This case is uncommon because the applicants have already gotten a judgment on their claim. They are not seeking to show their claim. They are looking to enforce the Order. So the concern the Court must think about is whether that Order was made according to a cause of action listed in s. 178( 1 ). The Judge did this by reviewing the claims and evidence before the Judge who gave judgment, his analysis, and the evidence filed in this motion.

The Court’s analysis

The Court quite properly pointed out that in order to be successful for the lifting of the stay, the applicants had to show that their debt was more than just one of a contract to lend money that was not repaid.

The Court said that looking at the application in the most charitable method possible, the claims could not support a finding that the respondents obtained property from the applicants by false pretenses or fraudulent misrepresentation. The applicants state that their loan was conditional on the money being used for “Telling Roses”. They do not declare that they were induced to loan money to “Telling Roses” as an outcome of any type of illegal misstatement by the respondents. Likewise, the applicants do not allege that the respondents took part in any kind of deceitful acts that induced them to loan the funds. Therefore, the exception from the discharge of the debt in s. 178( 1 )( e) of the BIA was not advanced in the applicants’ claim.

The allegations in the application also do not support a finding that the participants engaged in fraudulence, embezzlement, misappropriation or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity. To meet that standard it is not nearly enough for a debt to have actually been brought on by fraud, embezzlement, misappropriation or defalcation. That form of criminal activity had to have occurred in the context of a fiduciary relationship.

The applicants do not declare that the respondents had a fiduciary obligation towards them. The relationship they explain with the respondents would not follow such a claim. Fiduciary relationships are unusual in arms’ length business transaction. The applicants additionally do not clearly affirm that the respondents participated in any type of scam at any point.

In reviewing the reasons given by the Judge who made the 2017 order, and in looking at all the other evidence in this motion, the Court found that it was anything more than one party loaning funds to another to start a business. The business never made a profit, it failed and therefore, could not repay the money.

The decision

Given these facts and the Court’s analysis, the Court found that the applicants could not succeed on their motion to lift the stay. Rather, the Court confirmed that the 2017 judgment could only be used as the basis for the applicants to file a proof of claim in the consumer proposal filed.

The basis for the 2017 order was a finding that the applicants lent the respondents the amount of $102,500. There is absolutely nothing in the underlying decision, or in the accusations in the application on which judgment was obtained, or in any evidence submitted in this motion, that puts the applicants’ claim in the classification of financial debts that are not released under s. 178( 1) of the BIA.

Therefore, the applicants’ motion to lift the stay under s. 69.4 of the BIA was rejected. They failed to show that they are likely to be materially prejudiced by the ongoing operation of the stay or that there are various other equitable factors that would lead to a conclusion to lift the stay.

Do you have too much debt?

Are you in financial distress? Do you not have adequate funds to pay your financial obligations as they come due?

If so, call the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of experience assisting people looking for financial restructuring, a debt settlement plan and to AVOID bankruptcy.

As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee), we are the only professionals accredited, acknowledged and supervised by the federal government to provide insolvency advice and to implement approaches to help you remain out of personal bankruptcy while eliminating your debts. A consumer proposal is a government-approved debt settlement plan to do that. We will help you decide on what is best for you between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy.

Call the Ira Smith Team today so you can eliminate the stress, anxiety, and pain from your life that your financial problems have caused. With the one-of-a-kind roadmap, we develop just for you, we will immediately return you right into a healthy and balanced problem-free life.

You can have a no-cost analysis so we can help you fix your troubles. Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will allow you to go back to a new healthy and balanced life, Starting Over Starting Now.

Call a Trustee Now!