Tag: Bankruptcy

TRUSTEE COMPANY RESPONSIBILITY IN REVIEWING BANKRUPTCY PROOF OF CLAIM

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 25, 2019

Introduction

I recently read a case from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba. The decision deals with the responsibility of a trustee company in reviewing and disallowing bankruptcy proofs of claim.

The case

The case citation is Re 5274398 Manitoba Ltd. o/a Cross Country Manufacturing (Bankrupt) 2019 MBQB 89. This is an appeal of Bellhop Express Corp. (“Bellhop”) from the Notification of Disallowance of Claim by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a trustee in bankruptcy) (Trustee). 5274398 Manitoba Ltd. operating as Cross Nation Production (the Company) filed a Proposal under Division I Part III of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA).

On February 6, 2018, a creditors meeting was held in Winnipeg at which time the creditors of the Company, existing in person or by proxy, elected to approve the proposal. On February 5, 2018, the day prior to the meeting, Bellhop sent its Proof of Claim and also registered its ballot voting down the Proposal.

The Trustee disallowed the Bellhop Proof of Claim for voting. The Trustee also did not count Bellhop’s vote against in the calculation in whether the Proposal received the required majority of creditors.

The Court approved the Proposal. After Court approval, the Trustee again reviewed Bellhop’s Proof of Claim. On September 10, 2018, the Trustee sent a formal Form 77—Notice of Disallowance of Claim, Right to Priority or Security or Notice of Valuation of Claim to Bellman.

Bellhop appealed the Trustee’s decision to the Court. Their right to do so is found in Section 135 of the BIA.

The appeal

In the Canadian bankruptcy system, the obligation to prove a claim is that of the creditor. When a creditor files a Proof of Claim, the Trustee has the duty of examining it in order to identify whether the claim stands. If the Trustee is not pleased with the Proof of Claim, he or she might look for additional details from the creditor. The goal of the Trustee is to figure out whether the claim of the creditor is a claim provable under the BIA.

Once the Trustee has made its determination, the claim is either admitted or disallowed. If disallowed, in whole or in part, the Trustee must issue its disallowance using Form 77—Notice of Disallowance of Claim, Right to Priority or Security or Notice of Valuation of Claim. The creditor receiving such a Notice of Disallowance can appeal the Trustee’s decision to the Court.

In this case, before getting to the merits of the appeal, the Court had to decide if the creditor was allowed to present new evidence in support of its claim not previously provided to the Trustee. In this case, the Court decided that it would be appropriate for this new evidence to be presented.

The Trustee did not handle its investigation properly

The Court was prepared to approve additional Bellhop evidence. The Court said that the Trustee company got Bellhop’s Proof of Claim and made inquiries through the Company regarding it. It obtained specific information and made use of some or all of it. The Trustee then developed its Notice of Disallowance.

The Court was critical of the Trustee’s analysis of the Proof of Claim. The Court stated that the Trustee should have shared with Bellhop the information it obtained from the Company and the Company’s legal counsel which it relied upon to develop the Notice of Disallowance. The Trustee could have also shared a draft of its Notice of Disallowance to see if Bellhop had any other documents or information to refute the Trustee’s analysis. Unfortunately, no such transmittal of details was provided by the Trustee to Bellhop before the issuance of the Notice of Disallowance.

The Court went on to say that it was this failure to share such details, it denied Bellhop of the chance to comment on it. It also, therefore, created this situation where Bellhop had to seek leave of the Court for the chance to submit extra details.

The Court’s view was that a Trustee could prevent this situation by having telegraphed its decision to the plaintiff before the official Notice of Disallowance was issued. The Trustee should have asked for the Bellhop’s remarks of any type of, prior to providing its Notice. If the plaintiff failed to react, or react properly, after that it will certainly have a harder job in obtaining approval to provide more proof of its claim.

So under these circumstances, the Court allowed Bellhop to submit more evidence.

The review of the claim and the Trustee’s disallowance

It is a shame that the Trustee seemed to stop short of a fullsome review of all potential information before reaching its decision to disallow the Bellhop Proof of Claim. The reason being is that the Court spent a great deal of time having to determine the issue of presenting additional evidence. The Court was quite critical of the Trustee in its handling of the adjudication of the claim requiring the motion for leave to present more evidence.

In the end, the Court agreed with the Trustee’s decision to disallow the Bellhop claim. The Court held that the proof sent to the Trustee did not warrant a claim of $3,270,684, or anything near that. To reach a decision to allow the claim, part of which was for the loss of income, the Trustee would have to decide on an arbitrary basis. The role of the Trustee is to be neutral and rely upon evidence; not act arbitrarily.

The Court went on to say that there is a responsibility upon creditors in a BIA proceeding to equip a Trustee with sufficient proof that sustains the claim they are making. That did not happen in this case. The Court went on to say that additionally, there is no responsibility on a Trustee to sustain the cost of a substantial examination of a claim which on its face seems blatantly overvalued. Were that the situation, creditors would certainly be urged to submit extremely pumped up claims.

The far better strategy is to urge a circumstance where creditors file sensible claims with sufficient proof to sustain them. That way creditors ensure that the time, initiative, and expense of a Trustee to examine, analyze and value the claim is reasonable.

So in the end, the Court sided with the Trustee’s decision but admonished the Trustee for essentially wasting the Court’s time.

Trustee company summary

Do you or your business have creditors claiming against you? Are you in financial distress? Do you not have sufficient funds to pay your expenses as they come due?

Call the Ira Smith Team today so we can get rid of the tension, anxiousness, pain and discomfort from your life that your money issues have generated. With the unique roadmap, we establish simply for you, we will promptly return you right into a healthy and balanced problem-free life.

We have years as well as generations of experience helping people and businesses trying to find debt restructuring to avoid bankruptcy. You can have a no-cost evaluation so we can assist you to repair your financial difficulties.

As a Trustee company, we are the only experts recognized, approved and audited by the federal government to offer insolvency guidance and solutions. A proposal is a federal government accredited debt settlement strategy to remove your debt and let you avoid bankruptcy.

Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will definitely enable you to return to a brand-new healthy and balanced life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

Tags Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, Bellhop Express Corp., BIA, court, form 31 proof of claim, Form 77—Notice of Disallowance of Claim, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, proof of claim, Re 5274398 Manitoba Ltd. o/a Cross Country Manufacturing (Bankrupt) 2019 MBQB 89, Right to Priority or Security or Notice of Valuation of Claim, trustee company, trustee in bankruptcy

Brandon Blog Post

HOW TO FILE FOR BANKRUPTCY IN CANADA: PERSONAL BANKRUPTCY MODUS OPERANDI

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 16, 2019

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this how to file for bankruptcy in Canada Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click on the podcast below

Introduction

I am most often asked by people how to file for bankruptcy in Canada. When I receive that question, I tell people that there are a few steps that need taking before the actual filing. These steps are the process I use to make sure that the person can actually benefit from personal bankruptcy. I don’t just put someone into bankruptcy and hope that it will work out alright for them. I have to make sure upfront that there is a benefit for them. It has to make sense.

Getting over the initial fear

It takes a lot for a person to overcome that initial fear and reach out to phone me. They are admitting that they have financial problems. I understand the fear a person has. My role in that first phone call or meeting, for which there is no charge, is to help the person get over their fears. I answer the most important questions the person wants to be answered. I also need to remind them that the answers are by necessity, generic. Once I have their specific information, then I can answer their questions in a way that is specific to their situation.

How do I apply for bankruptcy in Canada?

The first step in the application process is providing me with detailed information about your specific situation. We get this information by having you complete our initial assessment intake sheet. We call ours the Debt Relief Worksheet.

The Debt Relief Worksheet collects the information we need to do a proper initial assessment. The information collected includes:

Basic details such as name, address and marital status.
A listing of all your assets and your debts.
Your employment.
Your household monthly cash flow/budget.
Questions whose answers are important to understanding who you are.

You can click here to see a copy of our Debt Relief Worksheet.

The free assessment

Once I have a fully completed Debt Relief Worksheet, I can then analyze the information and provide you with an assessment designed specifically for you. Normally, when you first submit the information to me, I will have to follow up on questions for you to answer. This is all normal.

Once I have the full picture, I can properly assess what bankruptcy will mean for you. This will lead us to a discussion of alternatives to avoid bankruptcy that is right for you. It may be that you have a specific issue that can be dealt with outside of bankruptcy. Once resolved, the rest of your situation is manageable without resorting to a filing under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, RSC 1985, c B-3 (BIA).

The next possibility is you can’t fix things on your own, but you still do not need a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a trustee in bankruptcy) (Trustee) to do a BIA filing on you. Perhaps with credit counselling, you can get your budget under control and pay down your debts.

If the right answer is that you do not need to file under the BIA, I will tell you so and connect you with the proper help that you need. The cost for me to review your situation and provide you with the right alternatives available to you is zero. It will not cost you anything.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy

If you do need a formal insolvency filing, we have to figure out which one. We are still looking at if you can avoid bankruptcy. We do this by looking at your whole situation. We first look at what bankruptcy means to you. What would the outcome of your bankruptcy be?

Some of the factors we consider are:

Your assets that would not be exempt and therefore would be handed over to us as your Trustee.
Have you ever been bankrupt before?
Are your debts $250,000 or higher, not including any mortgages or other loans secured by your principal residence?
Do you owe $200,000 or more to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) for unpaid income tax?
Are all your tax filings up to date?
Your income and do you have a surplus income?
If you do have surplus income, what would your monthly payment be and can you afford it in your budget?
Based on the information you gave us, can we determine the likelihood of any creditor opposing your discharge from bankruptcy?
Any other special circumstances you have told us about.

The answers to these questions help us determine if you need to file for bankruptcy or not. In many cases, I help people avoid bankruptcy by filing a consumer proposal. As I have written before, in many cases, it is possible to avoid bankruptcy.

By filing a viable consumer proposal debt settlement plan, you are offering to pay your creditors a fraction of what you owe. You are promising to make monthly payments for a time period not greater than 60 months. A successfully completed consumer proposal will release you from your debts that exist at the time of your filing.

Those that are eligible to file a consumer proposal choose this option. They are happy to avoid bankruptcy. Our assessment and the advice we give you on consumer proposal vs bankruptcy is still free.

How to file for bankruptcy in Canada

If we decide that bankruptcy is necessary, we will then prepare the required documents. These documents include your sworn Statement of Affairs and your monthly cash flow budget. The Statement of Affairs is a document that:

Identifies you.
Lists your assets with their respective estimated realizable value.
Indicates which assets are exempt from seizure, if any.
Lists your creditors by name and amount owing.

Part of the filing process is that the insolvent person swears that the document is accurate. This is done in our office as our Trustees are also commissioners for taking oaths for the work we do. All of this is done in my office.

I then electronically file the sworn Statement of Affairs and other required documents with the Superintendent of Bankruptcy. Once the Official Receiver, who is the Superintendent of Bankruptcy’s local official, reviews and accepts the filing, the insolvent person is officially bankrupt.

This is how a person files for bankruptcy in Canada.

What happens if I declare bankruptcy in Canada?

Once you declare bankruptcy (or file a consumer proposal), all collection and enforcement action against you stops. Creditors can no longer sue you or harass you trying to collect the outstanding debts. You are now protected by the stay of proceedings.

Then the Trustee needs to take possession of your assets that are not exempt from seizure under provincial law. Before you file, I always tell you what those assets are and what will happen.

If you declare bankruptcy (or file a consumer proposal), you will have to attend two counselling sessions. Those sessions are conducted in my office by the Trustee who is also a qualified credit counsellor.

If you have met all of your duties and responsibilities in your bankruptcy, including the payment of surplus income if required, you are then entitled to a discharge from bankruptcy. If no creditor or the Trustee objects to your discharge, then you receive an absolute discharge. If there is something in your activities or your background where there is an objection to your discharge, then the matter must be heard in the bankruptcy court.

Before you file, I will give you my best-educated guess on the likelihood of an objection to your discharge arising.

Will I lose my house if I file bankruptcy in Canada?

If you declare bankruptcy, there are various ways and conditions in bankruptcy that you will NOT lose your house.

Everybody who owns a house and also experiences financial issues is worried about losing their house. Losing your home is possibly among the most terrible concerns people with a huge debt load that is crushing them have. This is exactly how it functions if you file for personal bankruptcy in Ontario.

In Ontario, the provincial regulation that describes what is excluded from seizure is called the Execution Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.24. For a full checklist of all bankruptcy Ontario exemptions, please review my Brandon’s Blog, BANKRUPTCY IN ONTARIO CANADA SECRETS EXPOSED.

The exemption in Ontario for your house is $10,000 of equity. The present thinking is that if your equity is $10,000 or less, if you go bankrupt, then your entire equity is excluded from seizure by the Trustee. Nonetheless, if your equity is $10,001 or greater, your whole equity in your home is NOT exempt and also is readily available to your Trustee for the benefit of your creditors.

Keep in mind that we are talking about your equity. In determining your equity, we first have to determine the market value of the house. We then deduct any mortgages or other loans registered against the property. The net result of this calculation represents your equity. If you own the home jointly with your spouse, then it is half of that number that is your equity. The other half belongs to your spouse.

If someone is available and willing to purchase your equity from the Trustee for its value, then the Trustee will collect that money. Once the Trustee sells its interest in the equity of your home, the Trustee no longer has an interest. If the person purchasing your equity is your spouse, another relative or friend, they are doing it so that you will not have to leave your home.

If that happens, then you will not lose your house if you file for bankruptcy. If you have no equity because the loans registered against your home is equal to the home’s value, again, you will not lose your home.

How much does it cost to file bankruptcy in Canada?

The expense of declaring bankruptcy is something you will certainly need to take into consideration. Just how much you will need to pay to go bankrupt relies on a number of variables, including:

your month-to-month income;
what assets you own;
the size of your family members; and also
whether you have ever been bankrupt in the past.

You are required to your surplus income into your estate every month. Surplus income is defined by the federal government. If your household makes over a certain amount every month, you pay a component of your earnings over that base set by the government each year. That base is essentially the poverty line.

The surplus income computation is reasonably complicated. I recommend you bring your current pay stubs to your meeting with me to make sure that I can accurately estimate it for you.

The fee a Trustee is entitled to charge in an ordinary personal bankruptcy must be approved by the Court. In a bankruptcy where there really are no assets, the fee is set in the statute.

If you have non-exempt assets, the Trustee sells them and receives the proceeds of the sale(s). If you have surplus income to pay, the Trustee collects those payments from you. The Trustee’s fee, which is the cost of the bankruptcy, comes from the money collected by the Trustee. So, in this example, where the Trustee has collected more than the cost of the bankruptcy approved by the Court, there is no additional cost to you at all. In this way, the Trustee is free!

If there are no assets or surplus income, then the bankrupt has to make monthly payments to the Trustee to cover the cost of the bankruptcy. If the bankrupt person cannot afford to, then you will have to get a relative to put up the money necessary to pay for the cost of your filing for bankruptcy. In this case, the government approved fee is in the range of $1,800.

Summary

I hope this Brandon’s Blog gives you a good idea of how to file for bankruptcy in Canada. We know that having too much debt is very stressful.

The Ira Smith Team understands how to help you rid yourself of your debts. However, more importantly, we understand your emotional needs. You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges. You are worried not only about yourself but also your family.

The stress placed upon you due to your 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 problems; financial and emotional. The way we deal with your problems and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that when you are facing financial problems you need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a debt settlement plan for you as unique as the financial problems and pain you are 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 you back on the road to a healthy stress-free life. We will help you to recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

Tags Bankruptcy, bankruptcy in Canada, Consumer Proposal, consumer proposal vs bankruptcy, Debt, debt relief, debt relief worksheet, debt settlement, debt settlement plan, file bankruptcy in canada, how do i apply for bankruptcy in canada, how much does it cost to file bankruptcy in canada, how to file for bankruptcy in canada, Ira Smith Trustee, personal bankruptcy, surplus income, what happens if i declare bankruptcy in canada, will i lose my house if i file bankruptcy in canada

Brandon Blog Post

CANADA INSOLVENCY CHANGES: FEDS PRESS RELEASE OFFERS FEW DETAILS

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 9, 2019

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

Introduction

On September 4, 2019, the Government of Canada department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, issued a press release. They announced that there would be changes coming to the Canada insolvency legislation.

I have previously written about the fallout from the Sears Canada insolvency. Specifically, about the plight of retired employees seeing their medical benefits eliminated and their pension entitlement slashed. After that, there have been several private member bills trying to fix the Canada insolvency laws.

Budget 2019

As I have written in previous Brandon’s Blogs, the concern is for retired people (and present employees) when a company enters into an insolvency proceeding. Like in the Sears case, the worry is associated with the staff member’s health benefits plan which could be gutted for retirees. An equally important concern, are underfunded pension plans when a firm enters into bankruptcy protection.

Insolvent employers have placed a moratorium on reimbursements to workers and especially retirees on valid medical claims. Also, the staff member pension plan payments can be cut for retirees because the insolvent firm has not made the called for contributions. The retirees are in the weakest position as they can never make up for what they are now losing.

Pension payments are postponed income. In an insolvency filing, there is generally absolutely nothing left for current (other than perhaps their WEPPA claim in bankruptcy or receivership) and retired employees.

The reality is that all politicians currently acknowledge simply exactly how unsecure pension plans and health plans may be in the case of insolvency, restructuring or bankruptcy.

The Liberals acknowledge that this is a significant issue. Nonetheless, in this budget, they chose to ignore the problem.

What the press release said

The Government of Canada said that it is dedicated to far better safeguarding the rights of pensioners, employees and others during insolvency procedures. They say they can guarantee all Canadians can have satisfaction when it pertains to retirement. They say they can do this while maintaining laws that continue to support growth, advancement and also great jobs in Canada.

The Honourable Navdeep Bains, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada said, that beginning November 1, 2019, reforms to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) announced in Budget 2019 will be enacted. He said that this will be done to enhance retired life security by making the insolvency procedure fairer, much more clear and also easily accessible.

So what is being planned?

The press release was consistent with the wording in Budget 2019. The press release went on to say that the BIA and CCAA modifications pertaining to boosting retirement protection will:

call for participants in an insolvency process to act in good faith (isn’t that already enshrined in our legislation and enforced by our Courts?);
offer the possibility of court-ordered disclosure of a creditor’s real financial interest in an insolvent business (how does this help retirees?);
enforce director obligations in suitable cases for senior management compensation settlements in the lead-up to an insolvency proceeding (whatever appropriate means);
limit the choices that can be taken initially in a CCAA administration to measures necessary to avoid the immediate liquidation of an insolvent company, thus boosting participation of all players (does this mean the government plans to outlaw a liquidating CCAA?);
exclude assets held in registered disability savings plans from creditors’ claims in bankruptcy;
reforms to the BIA and CCAA to guarantee the safeguarding of intellectual property user rights in insolvency, announced in Budget 2018, will also be enacted for November 1.

The devil is in the details

The Minister stated:

“It is unacceptable that some pensioners face hardship because of their employer’s insolvency and underfunded pension plans. Our government believes that after a lifetime of hard work, Canadians deserve a secure and dignified retirement. With these reforms, we are protecting Canadians’ retirement security and the ability of businesses to invest, grow and create more good jobs.”

This sounds great, but what does it mean? I don’t see anything in Budget 2019 or this recent press release that actually provides specifics on how retirees will be helped. There are no words talking about the super-priority of the amount of underfunding of pension plans. There is also no language on directors’ liability for such underfunding when the company continues to pay dividends to shareholders or bonuses to executives while the pension plan is underfunded.

We will have to wait to see how the proposed legislation actually reads. The other issue is our upcoming Federal election. Insolvency legislation is not a hot topic that gets votes. Perhaps real protection for retirees does. The government had a chance to really lay out how they will protect retirees, but they failed to do so. They talk about many issues in the press release. However, I don’t see anything directly related to retiree protection.

So I hope that the current federal government will follow through with legislation that has real teeth to protect retirees. But the 2019 Canadian federal election is scheduled to happen on or before October 21, 2019. That means that campaigning will have to begin very soon. So when will there be time to introduce the required legislation to be effective on November 1?

The federal government must have a plan otherwise they would not have put out the November 1 date in the press release. So let us wait and see and cross our fingers that retiree protection will be for real.

Canada insolvency summary

Are you nearing retirement with too much debt? Is your employer’s employee pension plan underfunded? Are you worried about how you will make ends meet in retirement?

The stress you are under because of your money challenges is huge. I understand your pain. At no cost to you, I will look at your whole set of circumstances and develop a plan that is as special as your issues. I know that I can help you through this.

There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why I can develop a debt settlement plan for you as unique as the financial problems and pain you are 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.

Tags Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, bankruptcy protection, BIA, canada insolvency, CCAA, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, insolvency, insolvency legislation, Ira Smith Trustee, pension plans, receivership, restructuring, retirees, sears, WEPPA

Brandon Blog Post

CANADA STUDENT LOAN FORGIVENESS: BANKRUPTCY TREATS STUDENT LOANS FAIRLY

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 4, 2019

UPDATE OCTOBER 30, 2019: On September 27, 2019, the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta issued its decision on the appeal of this case. The decision described in this Brandon’s Blog was reversed. You can read about it in our new blog:

STUDENT LOAN BANKRUPTCY DISCHARGE CANADA: REGISTRAR DECISION REVERSED

“Forgiveness does not change the past, but it does enlarge the future.” Paul Boose

Introduction

In my last Brandon’s Blog, I talked about the balance between a debtor and the creditors the Canadian insolvency system strives for. I just read today a decision of the Registrar in Bankruptcy sitting in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta in Edmonton. In this case, Morrison (Re), 2019 ABQB 521, highlights this balance in this case dealing with Canada student loan forgiveness.

Can Canada student loans be forgiven in bankruptcy?

This is an application according to s. 178( 1.1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA). As I have previously written in several of my Brandon’s Blogs, in general, student loans cannot be discharged by a bankruptcy where the date of bankruptcy occurred within seven years after the date on which the bankrupt discontinued to be a full-time or part-time student.

Section 178(1.1) of the BIA, allows for after five years after the day on which a bankrupt with student loan debt ceases to be a full-time or part-time student, the Court may, on an application, order that the financial debt will be discharged. For such Canada student loan forgiveness, the Court has to be satisfied that:

the bankrupt person has actually acted in good faith about their obligations under the student loan debt; and also
the bankrupt has and will continue to experience economic trouble to such an extent that the bankrupt will certainly be not able to pay that financial debt.

So it is possible for student loans to be forgiven in bankruptcy. In this case, if the bankrupt’s application for student loan forgiveness succeeds, the student loan debt will not survive after her discharge. The application was opposed by both Canada Student Loans and the Ontario Student Assistance Program (the government).

Is the forgiveness all or none?

Before getting into the unusual details of this case, the Registrar’s decision dealt with one of the issues that came up over the course of the application. The issue was whether the choice to forgive student loans is all or none. That is, whether it is open to a Registrar hearing this application to find that only a part of the financial obligation needs to survive, in contrast to releasing all of it.

Based on the case law, the Registrar was satisfied that this was an all or none proposition. The Registrar stated that he was somewhat let down that it had to be that way. If the decision is that these financial debts are extinguished by the bankrupt’s discharge, the government could object to the bankrupt receiving an absolute discharge.

Like any other creditor, they could ask that a financial condition be enforced as a condition of discharge. In other words, the bankrupt would have to pay a portion of the student loan amount into the estate to be distributed by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (Trustee) as a condition of getting a discharge. This frequently occurs with high tax obligation debtors.

As it turns out, the government did not oppose the discharge application that was heard following this student loan application. They also did not ask that a monetary condition be applied to the terms of the conditional Order that was given.

So, it had to be all or none.

The vital facts

In 2015 Ms. Morrison was in financial hardship. At the time, she estimated her overall unsecured financial obligations were $71,501.00. Of that amount, about $50,000.00 was student loan debt. She sought the guidance of a Trustee and then assigned herself into bankruptcy. Ms. Morrison’s stated intent was to have all her unsecured debt on an equal footing to make sure that she can take care of everything via the insolvency process. She told her Trustee that she wanted her student loan debt to be included in her unsecured debt that would be eliminated by her discharge from bankruptcy. She clearly wanted Canada student loan forgiveness.

Ms. Morrison was last a full-time student in April 2008. Her last day of classes was on April 18, 2008. She had been a full-time student up until that day. So, arguably, she discontinued being either a full-time or part-time student on April 19, 2008. Unfortunately for her, she assigned herself to bankruptcy on February 27, 2015. Her personal bankruptcy in February 2015 was just a bit too early.

This somewhat defeated her stated reason for going bankrupt. So this is why she made this application to try to have her student loan debt forgiven by her discharge from bankruptcy. Depending on how you do the calculation, Ms. Morrison’s date of bankruptcy was about 60 days or so too soon.

If she had actually waited until April 19, 2015, to become bankrupt, rather than February 27, 2015, as she did, her student loan debt would be eliminated by her bankruptcy discharge.

The government tried to argue that under the student loan legislation, you calculate the time that she ceased being a full-time or part-time student begins on the 1st day of the month following the month she finished her studies. The Registrar was not having any of that.

He said that the student loan treatment he was asked to consider was based on the terms of the BIA. Therefore, he was going to use the more practical conclusion that for BIA purposes, the day you ceased being the student is the day after classes ended. I guess you could quibble that the day after you finish writing your last exam was really the date you ceased being a student, but nobody raised that issue.

The considerations

The Registrar considered cases from both Alberta and other provinces laying out the factors that relate to the discretion the Court had in such a forgiveness application. As I stated above, the Registrar had to determine if:

the bankrupt person has actually acted in good faith about their obligations under the student loan debt; and also
the bankrupt has and will continue to experience economic trouble to such an extent that the bankrupt will certainly be not able to pay that financial debt.

The Registrar laid out his understanding of the factors he needed to consider based on previous decisions. His list was:

Whether the student loan funds were utilized for the purpose it was loaned for.
If the person finished their education.
Did the applicant obtain financial gain from education?
Whether the applicant has actually made reasonable initiatives to repay the financial debts.
If the applicant has made use of the option of applying for interest rate relief.
The timing of the bankruptcy.
Do the student loans form a significant percentage of the total debt?
Whether the applicant had an adequate job and therefore income to be expected to make payments against the student debt.
The applicant’s lifestyle.
Did the applicant had sufficient earnings for there to be surplus income in bankruptcy under the Superintendent’s Directive.
What approaches the applicant made to the government for debt relief and what the government’s response was.
Whether the applicant went to at any time was unable to work due to medical issues or disability.

The Registrar’s findings

Registrar’s findings reveal the following:

The student loans were used for the purpose the funds were loaned.
Ms. Morrison completed her education.
She acquired a financial advantage from her education as she currently works in the area she studied for, or a related one.
She made some effort to settle the student loan debt. She entered into a contract with the government but her financial condition prevented her from making good on that plan. She apparently made some repayment.
The bankrupt’s initiatives at getting to a practical arrangement were not trivial. However, it appears that she required the framework of an insolvency process for her to come to terms with all her debts.
The applicant got interest-free standing for a period of time.
The student loans developed by far and away made up the best part of the bankrupt’s general indebtedness.
The applicant is (and was) for the most part a single parent of one. She committed a significant percentage of her income to her child (now a teen).
She lived a modest way of life.
She now has full-time employment and surplus income.

The decision

The Registrar found that the timing in connection with the seven-year cut-off was extremely close. The bankrupt’s primary interest and her shared intent at the time of meeting with the Trustee were to deal with all of her creditors on equal ground. Ms. Morrison did not look for bankruptcy to avoid her student loan debt but rather to deal with all of her financial problems.

There was obviously miscommunication between Ms. Morrison and her Trustee. The trouble was that the miscommunication aggravated her stated goal, which was the entire point of her insolvency proceeding.

When the matter was heard, it was approximately eleven years after her education was finished. The Registrar stated that in these extremely uncommon conditions he is completely satisfied that it remains in the interest of justice that an order goes pursuant to s. 178(1.1).

The government did not otherwise oppose the discharge. The Registrar made a conditional order of discharge taking all circumstances, including her surplus income, into consideration.

In this way, the Registrar balanced the right of this honest but unfortunate debtor to get her fresh start, with the rights of her creditors.

“True forgiveness is when you can say Thank You for that experience.” Oprah Winfrey

Canada student loan forgiveness summary

Are you or your company in need of debt forgiveness. Have you tried your best to balance your financial survival with those of your creditors but you just cannot keep up?

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.

Tags bankrupt person, Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, bankruptcy trustee, BIA, can canada student loans be forgiven, canada student loan forgiveness, canada student loans, condition of discharge, financial hardship, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, student, student loan debt, student loan debt forgiveness, student loans, surplus income

Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY SMALL BUSINESSES: COMPLETE BANKRUPTCY OPTIONS FOR SMALL BUSINESSES

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 2, 2019

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

Tags assignment in bankruptcy, Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, bankruptcy and restructuring, bankruptcy filing, bankruptcy small businesses, BIA, CCAA, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, corporate restructuring, creditors, Ira Smith Trustee, liquidation, proposal, reorganization, small business

Brandon Blog Post

CANADA BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT GRANTS STAY OF EXECUTION

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 28, 2019

canada bankruptcy and insolvency act

Canada bankruptcy and insolvency act introduction

The Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act is a federal statute. It attempts to balance the rights of an insolvent debtor with the rights of creditors to get paid. One of those balancing acts is that when you file under the statute, the person filing is granted a stay of proceedings. What that means is that debt collection and enforcement activities are stopped and cannot continue without the prior permission of the Court.

I recently read a very interesting decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice out of Ottawa, ON. What that case also shows is that if the insolvent and the then bankrupt person just told the truth, he would have been much better off.

Before getting into the actual case, there are a few questions that I am regularly asked that I would also like to answer. I think those answers will also help with understanding this case.

**What is the purpose of the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act?**

The main purpose of the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act is to help the honest but unfortunate debtor. It is designed to allow a person or a company to get financial rehabilitation through financial restructuring. It also allows a person the same opportunity to shed their debts through bankruptcy.

As mentioned above, at the same time, the rights of the creditors to get paid are also balanced. So that is why in a true restructuring, the creditors must receive more money than if the person or company went bankrupt. That is also why in a bankruptcy, the debtor must give up all their assets to the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (Trustee). The only assets not given up are those for which there is an exemption under either provincial or federal law. That is also why there is the concept of surplus income payments in a personal bankruptcy filing.

The presumption is that the debtor is honest but unfortunate. That is both before and during their insolvency process. As you will see from the case description below, the debtor was not honest and it is his lies that got him into trouble.

The insolvency process begins with the requirement that in order to obtain relief from debt, the insolvent debtor will be truthful. That is why a filing is initiated by a sworn statement of affairs.

Is insolvency a criminal offence?

As you may recall from some of my prior Brandon’s Blog posts, being insolvent is a financial condition. It is that:

your debts are greater than your assets;
if you liquidated your assets there would not be enough money to pay off your debts in full; and
you have generally ceased paying your debts when they come due.

So becoming insolvent is not a criminal offence.

Similarly, filing for either a consumer proposal, Division I Proposal or for bankruptcy is not a criminal offence. However, if you really are not the honest part of the honest but unfortunate person the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act is designed to help, you must seek the advice of a lawyer before filing anything.

There are also certain offences a person could commit under the actual bankruptcy statute. Some are quasi-criminal in nature. Again, if you think you are in trouble, you need the advice of a lawyer.

canada bankruptcy and insolvency act

Now for the case – ***Re Brennan*, 2019 ONSC 4712 (CanLII)**

On August 8, 2019, this decision of The Honourable Mr. Justice Kershman was released. The case involved the bankruptcy of Mr. Lawrence Brennan (Mr. Brennan) and his creditor, Mr.André Robert (Mr. Robert).

Mr. Robert made an application to the Court to lift the stay of proceedings stopping Mr. Robert from enforcing his judgment against Mr. Brennan’s asset. Mr. Robert said that Mr. Brennan supplied incorrect and deceptive details relating to the presence of a Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) throughout a judgment debtor exam on July 10, 2018.

Mr. Robert brought this motion for:

An Order stating that the stay of proceedings according to sections 69 to 69.31 of the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 does not apply in regard to Mr. André Robert, yet is restricted to the seizure of Mr. Brennan’s RRSP with the Lawyers Financial Investment Program.
An Order proclaiming that Mr. Robert will be qualified to proceed with his enforcement process for repayment of his judgment, plus interest and the cost of enforcement restricted to Mr. Brennan’s above-noted RRSP.
Indemnification for the costs of this motion.

Mr. Robert’s argument was that, had it not been for Mr. Brennan’s bankruptcy, there would be no stay of proceedings and he would have the ability to take Mr. Brennan’s RRSP according to the Execution Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.24.

The honest but unfortunate debtor

Mr. Robert is a lawyer. Mr. Brennan and others sought and obtained his legal advice. Mr. Robert then billed Mr. Brennan and each of his colleagues for the legal work. They thanked Mr. Robert by not paying him.

Mr. Robert went to Court to claim his legal fees and won. He then sent the Sheriff to seize any assets that could be found belonging to the defendants, including Mr. Brennan. That exercise awarded Mr. Robert with the princely sum of just under $65. So, Mr. Robert then notified Mr. Brennan that he was required to attend a judgment debtor examination. The purpose of this exam was for Mr. Brennan to answer questions, truthfully under oath, as to the nature, extent and location of all of his assets.

Throughout the judgment debtor exam, Mr. Robert asked Mr. Brennan if he possessed any kind of RRSPs. Mr. Brennan said, under oath, that he did not. This response was substantiated by Mr. Brennan’s written financial form, which was finished by Mr. Brennan as a component of the examination under oath.

It turns out that Mr. Brennan lied under oath to Mr. Robert. Seventeen days later, Mr. Brennan filed for bankruptcy. In his sworn statement of affairs completed as part of his bankruptcy filing, Mr. Brennan attested that he owned an RRSP in the amount of $13,017.00 held by the Lawyers Financial Investment Program.

Mr. Brennan may have been unfortunate, but prior to his assignment in bankruptcy, he was not honest.

Seizure of an RRSP – in bankruptcy and no bankruptcy

The evidence before the Court was that there were no contributions to Mr. Brennan’s RRSP in the 12 months prior to his date of bankruptcy. There was also evidence that there was no insurance element to the RRSP either.

This is important for 2 reasons:

If there is an insurance element to an RRSP, and the beneficiary is what is called a “designated beneficiary”, normally a spouse, parent, child or grandchild, then the RRSP is exempt from seizure under Ontario law.
In bankruptcy, an RRSP is exempt from seizure under federal law. The only amount that can be recouped by a Trustee is any contributions made to the RRSP within the 12 months prior to the date of bankruptcy.

So in this case, none of those conditions existed. The issue before the Court was because under Ontario Law, absent a bankruptcy, a judgment creditor can execute against a defendant’s RRSP. In other words, if there is no bankruptcy, in Ontario, the judgment creditor can seize the RRSP.

canada bankruptcy and insolvency act

Mr. Brennan’s defence

Mr. Brennan represented himself in Court. His defence consisted of that he:

Did not understand that he had any RRSPs in his name.
Informed Mr. Robert around one month prior to the examination that he would certainly need to go bankrupt.
Needs the Court to have pity for his circumstances.

Certainly not the most compelling defence in the circumstances.

The Court agrees with Mr. Robert

The Court went through an analysis of the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act as well as the relevant Ontario laws. The Court concluded that:

The RRSP currently in this bankruptcy is exempt from seizure but was available to be seized before the bankruptcy. If Mr. Brennan had been truthful in his examination under oath, Mr. Robert would have seized the RRSP through the Sheriff in enforcing his judgment.
Therefore, the Court lifted the stay according to section 69.4 of the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act to be equitable so that Mr. Andre can seize them.
To alleviate any kind of tax obligation effects, the Court ordered that 30% of the RRSP should be subtracted at source and also to the Canada Revenue Agency to the credit of Mr. Brennan’s current year income tax account. The remaining amount of the RRSP is to be paid to the Sheriff of the Judicial District of Ottawa, who will disperse it in conformity to the Execution Act and the Creditors Relief Act.

The moral to Mr. Brennan’s story

Although the Court decision does not say it, Mr. Brennan must have not obtained any legal advice before participating in the judgment debtor examination. Any lawyer hearing his story would have told him exactly what I tell every person who comes to my office to talk about an insolvency proceeding. Be honest and truthful.

Mr. Brennan did a really dumb thing. Part of the evidence that came out in Court is that he went to see the Trustee who did his bankruptcy filing six weeks prior to the July 10, 2018 judgment debtor examination to discuss his financial situation. He must have talked about the RRSP then.

If Mr. Brennan was honest and truthful at his judgment debtor examination, he could have filed for bankruptcy before the Sheriff managed to seize his RRSP. In that case, Mr. Brennan would have told the truth and his RRSP would have been exempt from seizure in his bankruptcy.

So instead of telling the truth and keeping his RRSP after bankruptcy, Mr. Brennan lied and therefore lost his RRSP, notwithstanding his bankruptcy.

That is the moral of Mr. Brennan’s story. By telling the truth and then becoming the honest but unfortunate debtor, the Canadian bankruptcy system will protect you.

Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act summary

Are you an honest but unfortunate person in financial trouble? Have you run your company in an honest fashion but through various circumstances, the company’s debts are greater than its assets. Is there just not enough cash to pay all the bills?

If so, you need to call me today. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called trustee in bankruptcy) we are the only professionals licensed, recognized as well as supervised by the federal government to give insolvency assistance. We are also the only authorized party in Canada to apply remedies under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). I can definitely help you to choose what is best for you to free you from your financial debt issues.

Call the Ira Smith Team today so we can get free you from the stress, anxiety, and discomfort that your cash issues have created. With the distinct roadmap, we establish simply for you, we will without delay return you right into a healthy and balanced problem-free life, Starting Over Starting Now.canada bankruptcy and insolvency act

Tags 2019 ONSC 4712 (CanLII), Bankruptcy, bankruptcy trustee, canada bankruptcy and insolvency act, Consumer Proposal, honest but unfortunate, insolvent debtor, Ira Smith Trustee, is insolvency a criminal offence, licensed insolvency trustee, Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Re Brennan, restructuring, RRSP, statement of affairs, surplus income, trustee, what is the purpose of the bankruptcy act

Brandon Blog Post

FINANCIAL LITERACY: FINANCIAL LITERACY FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN ONTARIO

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 26, 2019

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

Introduction

When I was in high school, I was very fortunate. I thankfully took two accounting courses, in addition to the normal reading, writing and arithmetic. It was in accounting, that I received some financial literacy education. Anyone who did not take accounting did not get any exposure to basic financial education.

When Ontario grade 10 students go back to school next week, their course curriculum is now amended so that a financial literacy course is mandatory. The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to discuss why financial literacy is important and what the new course will offer these students.

What is financial literacy and why is it important?

Financial literacy is the education, learning and understanding of different financial subjects related to handling personal money, budgeting and investing. This topic focuses on the capability to manage individual finance matters in a reliable way.

With such education, people gain an understanding of making suitable decisions about their personal money. Without a basic financial understanding, how can people develop their financial skills? Where will you learn about things such as investing, insurance, budgeting, saving, retired life and income tax concepts?

Why is financial literacy important for students?

The typical high school curriculum of education and learning is extremely important. People generally do not get specialist education until they are in a career program. To become a medical professional, an auto mechanic or a web developer requires specialist education for career success. The one area of education that is generally missing to equip our youth to be able to make smart economic decisions in their lives is proper financial education.

Our society values money and entrepreneurship, yet for some reason, our institutions appear to assume you will somehow just know or pick up the proper financial skills to succeed. Perhaps if there was a mandatory financial education system in place we would see the gap between the rich and poor lessen. Teaching basic financial concepts and skills can go a long way to make sure that people can learn good financial habits and keep their heads above water.

How do you get financial literacy?

The Ontario curriculum for Grade 10 career studies for the first time this school year will include a section on financial literacy. The provincial government believes that it is important for students to understand budgeting and financial management. I applaud this effort.

The education system’s overall expectation is that students will get an understanding of responsible monitoring of financial resources and of services readily available to support their financial proficiency as they prepare for post-secondary life. This is an excellent thing.

I remember my first day at university. Day one all the banks have tables to entice students to sign up for a new credit card. Young adults who have student loans and have never been exposed to financial management courses will now have the ability to take on more debt. Not a good thing.

The specific expectations are that students will:

Learn the principles of financial responsibility
Evaluate the advantages of a variety of financial savings options
Explore financial planning tools available with banks and other sources

What are the three main components of financial literacy?

The three main components that the new financial literacy piece to career studies program will cover are:

Financial responsibility
- setup and follow a budget
- sensibly handling bill payments and using credit wisely understanding the difference between
- knowing the difference between a bank and a credit union
- managing their very own bank accounts
- defending themselves against monetary scams and fraud

Financial savings choices
- types of interest-bearing accounts and their associated rate of interest
- tax-free savings accounts (TFSAs)
- registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs)

Different kinds of borrowing and their advantages and disadvantages
- federal government student loans
- provincial government student financings, such as those available with the Ontario Student Assistance Program (OSAP)
- loans or bursaries from their local cities and towns
- personal (unsecured) loans from a financial institution, be it a chartered bank or a credit union
- lines of credit, credit card and overdraft products
- recognizing the benefits and disadvantages of the numerous kinds of credit products
- how the responsible use of a credit card can boost an individual’s credit score ranking
- how improper use of the same credit card can hamper a person’s credit score ranking
- that the proper use of bank loans can allow a person to pay for a costly item, such as a car or home
- how the improper use of loans and excessive debt can lead to a poor credit rating, money troubles and even insolvency and bankruptcy
- How borrowing from family or close friends can be advantageous, but how defaulting on repayment can negatively impact personal relationships

The teacher’s role

The teacher’s role will be to provide illustrations to drive home these points. In the context of spending and personal finance, the students will learn the difference between “needs” and “wants”. Teachers will ask the students to reflect on exactly how a person’s values will influence their wants or the ways in which they satisfy their needs. Students will learn what “living within your means” really means.

The teacher will lead a discussion on exactly how a person can do this successfully. Students will consider what the impact on a person will be from not paying expenses promptly and from using numerous credit cards.

Students will learn the benefits of beginning to save at a young age. They will be exposed to the advantages of then having a formal financial savings plan. All this will naturally lead to a realization that budgeting for both short-term objectives, such as purchasing clothes, differs from budgeting for long-term goals, such as buying and maintaining a car. Students will also learn about the different types of savings vehicles as well as debt products. They will also learn the proper use of debt.

In my view, the students will learn about the three most important parts of any financial literacy program: 1. proper budgeting techniques; 2. the importance of saving from an early age and the various savings vehicles available; and 3. debt and how to use it properly.

Summary

Hopefully, by exposing grade 10 students to these concepts, they will be motivated to keep learning and using proper financial management techniques. My hope is that more students will come out of high school and begin their post-secondary career, whatever that may be, by having better financial management skills and therefore fewer people will be able to stay clear of insolvency.

Prior to the new mandatory curriculum, the first exposure many people had to financial literacy education was as part of insolvency counselling, which means they already made mistakes before having a chance to learn the basics.

Are you on the edge of insolvency? Are bill collectors hounding you? Are you ducking all your phone calls to the point where your voicemail box is always full?

If so, you need to call me today. As a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a trustee in bankruptcy) we are the only professionals licensed, recognized as well as supervised by the federal government to give insolvency assistance. We are also the only authorized party in Canada to apply remedies under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). I can definitely help you to choose what is best for you to free you from your financial debt issues.

Tags Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, budget, budgeting, credit card, credit score, financial literacy, financial literacy course, financial literacy for high school students, financial literacy for students, how do you get financial literacy, insolvency, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, trustee in bankruptcy, what are the three main components of financial literacy?, what is financial literacy and why is it important, why is financial literacy important for students

Brandon Blog Post

COLLECTION AGENCY ONTARIO: HOW DO COLLECTION AGENCIES WORK IN ONTARIO?

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 19, 2019

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

Introduction

In many of the free consultations I provide, the issue of collection agency Ontario arises. More often than not, people and companies that are insolvent, experience harassing phone calls from debt collectors.

In fact, in certain corporate bankruptcy or receivership matters that I handle, there are certain situations where I hire a collection agency. They can be very effective in collecting amounts owing to the insolvent company.

The purpose of this collection agency Ontario Brandon’s Blog is to answer the top 4 questions that I am asked about collection agencies.

1 – How do collection agencies work in Ontario

In Ontario, debt collectors need to be signed up and should adhere to the guidelines outlined in the Collection and Debt Settlement Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.14 and its regulations.

The Ontario Ministry of Government and Consumer Services registers and controls these firms.

Ontario registered collection agencies must first send you a personal letter by mail or email. Their letter should include:

details on just how much you owe as well as the kind of product and services that put you in debt
the name of the business/individual you owe money to
the amount of the debt on the day it was initially due and payable and, if different, the level of debt presently owing
advice that a breakdown of the present amount owing will be offered upon demand
the name of the collection agency and also the individual collector that is requiring payment of the financial debt
that the debt collector is registered in and as a collection agency Ontario
the contact details of the debt collection agency, including the complete mailing address, phone number and, if applicable for communication, their email address
a disclosure statement, which discusses your legal rights and the steps you can take if you believe the debt collection company has broken the law

After the agency sends out the letter they need to wait six days prior to their next effort to get the payment of the financial debt.

Collection agencies work on a commission basis. They get to keep a percentage of the debts collected on behalf of their respective clients.

2 – Can a collection agency sue you in Ontario?

The short answer is yes.

A collection agency, once it gets approval from its client, the party that feels you owe them money, can sue you. If it is a large amount of money, they will definitely hire a lawyer to do it. If it is a smaller amount that can be handled by Small Claims Court, they might hire a lawyer, a paralegal, or just have one of the collectors do it him or herself in Court.

The rules of the Court will apply. The collection agency will issue a Statement of Claim against you. You will then have the time the Court allows to file your defence. The Court will look at all the evidence before it and render its judgment. If you are found liable for the debt, then the collection agency can attempt to enforce the judgment against you. They will try to garnishee your bank account and/or a portion of your wages.

Keep in mind that in Ontario, the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B has a fundamental restriction of 2 years. Anyone has specifically two years, starting from the day you first recognized or should have known, that a loss occurred, to file a claim and sue. The two year period would start running the day the person trying to collect a debt from you first contacted you about your being in default.

For example, a credit card company writes to you telling you that you are in default and asks that you pay up in full or else they will take further action against you. You don’t reply or pay, and they write to you again threatening legal action. Again you don’t respond or pay, and then you get a letter from a collection agency. The collection agency then sues you.

The collection agency is only the agent of the credit card company. The debt they are collecting is not their own, it is the debt of the credit card company. So, the first date the credit card company knew of a loss is not the first time you are contacted by the collection agency. It is the first time you are contacted by the credit card company. That is the day you start counting the two years from.

If the collection agency begins its lawsuit against you more than 2 years after the date the credit card company first advised you that you are in default, it is too late.

3 – How long can a collection agency collect on a debt in Ontario?

This is always a fascinating question for me. Even if the 2-year statute of limitations kicks in, all that means is that you cannot be sued any longer. It does not mean that you no longer owe the money. Most normal people, if they know they can’t be sued, will not pay. However, since the collection agency works on commission, it does not mean that they will necessarily stop calling you to ask for the money, even though they can no longer sue you.

You will always owe that debt. The Ontario Court of Appeal confirmed this in the case of Grant v. Equifax Canada Co., 2016 ONCA 500 (CanLII). In that case, the Court ruled that if you owe money, even if it is too late for you to be sued, it can still show up on your credit report in Ontario. The Court of Appeal went on to say just because a creditor misses the deadline or chooses not to sue within the two-year period it doesn’t mean that the debt still isn’t owed.

The only way in Ontario short of paying off the debt, or a lesser settlement amount, is to file either a consumer proposal or assignment in bankruptcy. Once you successfully complete your consumer proposal or get your discharge from bankruptcy, that debt and all other unsecured debts are wiped out. They are discharged. However, if the only debt you are not paying is the one the collection agency is trying to collect, an insolvency filing may be a very drastic and unnecessary step.

To find out for sure, you would have to consult with either a lawyer or a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee).

4 – How do I stop a collection agency?

The only real way to stop a collection agency in Ontario is to either pay off the debt in full or arrange for a debt settlement and pay it. The settlement can be an immediate payment for less than the total amount owed, or paying off some amount over time.

If you cannot make a settlement with them that you can afford to pay and live up to, then you the only other way is to do an insolvency filing. As I mentioned above, in the case of an individual person, that would be either a consumer proposal or filing for bankruptcy. In the case of a company, it would be either a restructuring proposal or bankruptcy.

Are you on the edge of insolvency? Are bill collectors hounding you? Are you ducking all your phone calls to the point where your voicemail box is always full?

If so, you need to call me today. As a licensed insolvency trustee we are the only professionals licensed, recognized as well as supervised by the federal government to give insolvency assistance. We are also the only authorized party in Canada to apply remedies under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). I can definitely help you to choose what is best for you to free you from your financial debt issues.

Call the Ira Smith Group today.

Tags assignment in bankruptcy, Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, bankruptcy trustee, can a collection agency sue you in ontario, collection agencies, collection agency, collection agency ontario, Consumer Proposal, credit report, credit report ontario, debt collector, how do collection agencies work in ontario, how do i stop a collection agency, how long can a collection agency collect on a debt in ontario, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee

Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY TRUSTEE IN ONTARIO: REMARKABLE CARE NEEDED TO TAKE OVER A CLAIM

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 12, 2019

If you would prefer to listen to an audio version of this bankruptcy trustee in Ontario Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click on the podcast.

***Bankruptcy trustee in Ontario*: Introduction**

As a bankruptcy trustee in Ontario (now called a licensed insolvency trustee ), there are many times where our investigation indicates that the bankrupt (usually a bankrupt corporation) has a claim against another party. The claim may very well be a good one worthy of pursuing. However, like with any potential litigation, there could be not enough funds to pay for pursuing that claim in the Court, or it may be unwise for a bankruptcy trustee in Ontario (Trustee) to assume the litigation risk.

In cases like this, the licensed insolvency trustee can offer up the opportunity to the creditors to take on the action in their own name. One or more creditors can get an order under s. 38 of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. B-3 (BIA) from the Registrar in Bankruptcy, authorizing the assignment to them by the licensed insolvency trustee of the bankrupt company‘s right to advance that claim and if necessary, sue.

Without going into all the finer details and circumstances, any creditor or group of creditors who obtain that right can keep any amount collected under that claim up to the total of their claim against the bankrupt company plus the costs they spent in obtaining that award. Any surplus must be paid over to the bankruptcy trustee in Ontario.

A recent decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario highlights an interesting issue regarding the interplay between advancing such a claim by a creditor and the limitation period in Ontario.

Bankruptcy trustee in Ontario case background information

The Ridel family used an investment and stock brokerage company called e3m Investments Inc. (e3m). In December 2006, the Ridels issued a Statement of Claim versus their account representative, as well as his employer, e3m. The action was for negligence, breach of contract and violation of fiduciary obligation in the monitoring of their financial investment accounts.

After a ten-day court hearing, judgment was issued against e3m as well as the account representative in Ridel v. Cassin, 2013 ONSC 2279. The judgment was especially scathing of both the account rep and e3m. The judgement, in the amount of $1,036,245.85, was upheld on appeal. As a result, the account representative needed to make an insolvency filing. My Firm administered the successfully completed Division I restructuring Proposal of the account representative. Given the judgement, he needed to do an insolvency filing and it was in his best interests to attempt to restructure to avoid bankruptcy. The Ridel family controlled the voting in his successful Proposal. e3m filed for bankruptcy on January 20, 2015.

The bankruptcy trustee in Ontario case before the Court of Appeal

On July 31, 2019, the Court of Appeal for Ontario released its decision in Ridel v. Goldberg, 2019 ONCA 636. The underlying claim was one the bankrupt company may have had against its Director and majority shareholder.

On October 25, 2016, the Ridels, as an unsecured creditor of e3m, got an order under s. 38 of the BIA. They obtained an assignment of the claim of e3m against its sole Director, a Mr. Goldberg. Since e3m was found liable under the Ridel judgement, e3m could have a claim and institute proceedings against its Director, Mr. Goldberg.

The s. 38 order supplied the Ridels with the legal authority to assert e3m’s claim against Mr. Goldberg “to recover the damages for which e3m became liable pursuant to [the 2013 Judgment, as amended] in their own name and at their own expense and risk, based on Mr. Goldberg’s failure to fulfil his obligations as a director and officer of e3m by abdicating his responsibility to supervise the Ridels’ accounts at e3m”.

The Ridels launched their lawsuit proceedings in the lower Court against Mr. Goldberg the day they obtained the s. 38 order, October 25, 2016. The Ridels were trying to get a summary judgement. Mr. Goldberg raised several defences, including, the Ridels’ claim was statute-barred under the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B (Limitations Act).

The lower court judge dismissed the Ridels’ action on two fronts. First, the judge found that there were concerns about needing a trial. Second, the lower court judge agreed that the claim should be dismissed because of the expiration of a two-year limitation period The Ridels appealed the lower court’s decision to the Court of Appeal for Ontario.

The fascinating part (for me anyway) of the Court of Appeal’s decision

The unanimous Court of Appeal ruling agreed with the lower court judge’s decision that the action the Ridels took by way of an assignment document from e3m’s licensed insolvency trustee was statute-barred under the Limitations Act. However, the appeal court review of the lower court decision disagreed with the reasons given by the lower court. Upon agreeing that the Ridel’s action should be dismissed based on it being barred by the Limitations Act, the appeal court did not wade into whether or not the lower court judge’s decision was correct that summary judgement should not be granted as there was a triable issue.

The arguments given for the limitation period are somewhat complex. I will attempt to summarize them here so as not to be confusing. The lower court judge held that the Ridels as applicants knew of the existence of the potential claim of e3m against its Director as early as in July 2006. Since they did not launch the e3m claim in a court action until October 2016. Hence, the limitation period of 2 years made that claim statute-barred.

The Ridels state that the limitation period cannot have actually begun up until after e3m was bankrupt. Before then, they could not take an assignment of any claim from e3m’s licensed insolvency trustee, especially a potential claim by the company against its Director (and Officer).

They also stated it is impossible to get an s. 38 order before the company actually is bankrupt.

The lawyer for the Ridels did not argue the testing of the timing of their very own understanding of the Director’s misdeed in regard to e3m. Rather, he focussed on the fact that the Ridels were not in a place to do anything concerning it, at a minimum, until the bankruptcy of e3m.

The appeal court went through a detailed analysis of the relevant statutes and case law. The Court of Appeal confirmed that the action launched was not a claim by the Ridels personally, but rather the company’s claim of which they took a court-approved assignment. So the appeal court agreed substantially with the Ridels that they could not have started their action until they took the assignment from the e3m licensed insolvency trustee.

When was e3m’s knowledge of its claim?

So the appeal court said what is important, since it is e3m’s claim and not the claim of the Ridels, when did e3m first become aware of the potential claim against its Director? The appeal court stated it fully understood why the Director would not have had e3m sue him or otherwise enjoin him in the original claim against the account rep and e3m. However, when did e3m first become aware of the potential of its claim?

On the proof in this matter, regardless of the Ridels’ or Goldbergs’ understanding of the case or his aversion to act against himself in support of e3m, at the very least, by April 2013, every one of the other e3m investors/shareholders had received a copy of the Reasons for Decision and Judgment against the account rep and e3m. It included different referrals to the Director’s misbehaviour. Those investors had the capacity to make e3m file a claim against the Director.

The Court of Appeal for Ontario judges determined that e3m recognized that: 1. an injury had actually happened; 2. its loss was brought on by an act or omission; 3. the act or omission was purportedly that of the Director, and 4. an action against the Director was a proper way to treat it. Regardless of the Director’s control to protect against such a lawsuit, the investors might have taken control of e3m’s board of directors and cause e3m to make such a case versus Goldberg.

So the appeal court decided that e3m first recognized that it may have a claim against the Director in April 2013, but the action was not commenced until October 2016. Accordingly, it was outside of the 2 year limitation period and the action was statute-barred.

So what does this mean for a bankruptcy trustee in Ontario?

As the bankruptcy trustee in Ontario in either a corporate bankruptcy or personal bankruptcy, many times we find as a result of our investigation that the bankrupt may have a claim against another party. More often than not, we either do not have sufficient funds or are not prepared to risk the funds in the Estate to the litigation risk. So, what we do is communicate with all known creditors to advise of the potential claim and that the licensed insolvency trustee is either unwilling or unable to act upon it. Accordingly, we are giving the creditors a chance to apply to the Court to take an assignment of such action under s.38 of the BIA.

Creditors seriously considering taking over the bankrupt’s claim must seriously consider the issue of whether or not launching a court action will be met with a defence that the claim is statute-barred, amongst other defences that may be available to the defendant(s). The Court of Appeal for Ontario has clearly communicated that the creditor taking an assignment of the bankrupt’s claim, cannot be in a better position than the bankrupt itself. The first knowledge that a claim exists will be when the bankrupt first had the knowledge, not the date that the creditor obtained the right to sue or any other date.

Bankruptcy trustee in Ontario Canada conclusion

The business world contains normal daily risks. This case clearly shows that. Are your company’s viability and solvency being threatened by claims against it, or for any other reason?

Is your company experiencing financial problems and requires debt relief? Are you on the brink of filing for bankruptcy just like e3m was because of your debts? Or are you an individual that has too much debt and you are looking at personal bankruptcy as your solution? Don’t wait until it is too late to properly restructure your company’s financial affairs. You don’t have to be another one filing bankruptcy in Canada. We can show you the various alternatives to bankruptcy.

As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only professionals who have met the requirements of the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada to obtain a trustee licence. One of those requirements to be trustees in bankruptcy is to pass an oral board of examination.

Insolvency trustee’s operations are licensed, authorized and their duties supervised by the federal government to offer insolvency advice and to implement solutions under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). We are a licensed insolvency trustee operating in Ontario Canada and we will help you to select what is best for you to free you from your debt issues.

Contact the Ira Smith Team today so we can use our qualifications to get you or your company the debt relief that you deserve. We will eliminate the anxiousness, tension, discomfort and pain from your life that your bills and your cash problems have caused. With the unique roadmap, we develop just for you, you can eliminate your debts and we will promptly return you right into a healthy and balanced problem-free life.

Tags Appeal Court, Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, bankruptcy and insolvency act canada, bankruptcy trustee, bankruptcy trustee in ontario, Corporate Bankruptcy, Court of Appeal for Ontario, division 1 proposal, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, limitation period, limitations act, personal bankruptcy, restructuring, section 38, trustee

Brandon Blog Post

HELP WITH DEBT: WILL THIS NEW METHOD ACTUALLY WORK?

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date August 5, 2019

Help with debt

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

Help with debt introduction

Many people need help with debt; especially credit card debt. They are stuck lugging around this debt. They only make the minimum monthly payment while a high rate of interest cost continues to accumulate. The net result is they never really make a dent in paying down the balance owing.

Canadian household help with debt

In March 2019, Equifax Canada reported that Canadian consumer debt delinquent accounts are increasing. Equifax also reported that the average Canadian household consumer debt is an average of $23,000, not counting mortgages. Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz previously said that the typical Canadian owes about $1.70 for each dollar of income she or he earns each year, after taxes.

This, of course, is not a new story for Canadians. I have been writing about Canadians’ love affair with taking on more debt for several years now.

The Province of Quebec is trying to make a difference for help with debt

On November 15, 2017, Quebec’s Bill number 134, “An Act mainly to modernize rules relating to consumer credit and to regulate debt settlement service contracts, high-cost credit contracts and loyalty programs”, came into force. On August 1, 2019, certain aspects of this legislation, aimed at trying to curb credit card debt in Quebec, come into force.

Now in Quebec, brand-new charge card accounts opened up need the minimum monthly payment to be increased to 5% of the balance owing on those brand-new credit cards. For cards issued before August 1, 2019, cardholders will continue being required to pay a minimum of 2% of the outstanding balance. They have until 2025 to begin paying the new minimum of 5%. However, the minimum payment limit each month will be increased by half a percentage point annually after August 1, 2020, up until it gets to the five percent level.

Consumer advocates feel that other provinces will be viewing carefully what Quebec is doing. The Quebec government obviously believed that debt issues are an essential problem in Quebec that needed to be addressed.

**Will this help with debt work?**

Canadians have actually gone away from being a country of savers to a nation of borrowers. Therefore, if an unanticipated financial emergency hits, on average, Canadians do not have the resources to deal with it.

Many Canadians strung out on credit card debt need credit card debt help. A simple credit card debt calculator shows how problematic unpaid credit card debt is. Take a charge card with a balance owing of $1,000 with an annual 19.9% rate of interest and a two percent minimum monthly payment. It will take 26 years to pay off the balance. As well, it will cost $3,000 in interest. All this with an original balance of $1,000!

If the minimum monthly payment increases to 5%, that same credit card balance of $1,000 will take six years to pay off with $442 of interest. So you can see what the Province of Quebec is trying to achieve for its citizens.

The arithmetic of course works. However, the issue is not one of arithmetic. Better arithmetic won’t save Canadians who go into debt they cannot repay. If their budget does not allow them to pay more than a minimum of 2% each month, where will the extra money come from? Wage growth is stagnant and family expenses rise each year.

The Quebec government feels that having its people experience short-term pain for long-term gain will work.

As noble and well-intentioned this Quebec Bill 134 is, it does not appear that it has thought through what the real consequences will be. Will it help Quebeckers reduce their household debt faster? How will people who can only afford to pay a minimum monthly amount of 2% find the money to pay the higher amount. For Quebeckers in debt, it deserves asking if this sort of the change in policy will really help the people? Or, will it speed up the rate at which people in Quebec will have to make an insolvency filing, be it a consumer proposal or bankruptcy?

**Has Quebec tackled the real help with debt issue?**

High credit card debt is plainly a difficult situation for many. Time will tell exactly how effective a technique it is to raise the minimum monthly payment to 5% on a charge card will be. What Quebec is doing is a step in the right direction but it may not be one of the best high household debt solutions. But I am disappointed that it was not coupled with the requirement for better financial education and financial literacy.

In my opinion, it would have been much more impressive for Quebec to have at the same time developed simple online financial education tools for its citizens in trying to combat the problem of too much debt. What is really needed is to teach people that paying only the minimum monthly balance increases the cost of paying off the balance. Ideally, people need to adjust their household budget to be able to pay the full balance off every month.

Help with debt: Financial education was never on any curriculum

For many Canadians, proper money management and budgeting had not been a large subject in their house growing up. They get to college or university and they obtain that bank card. They just start spending and perhaps they also have student financial debt. They graduate and may or may not get a well-paying job to start off their new career. Then life takes place and living costs increase. Perhaps now a home with a home mortgage, children, automobile loan repayments and all other living costs take hold. Due to stagnant wage growth, or worse, corporate downsizing, there is not enough income in the family to keep up with all these debts. Now all you can do is make minimum payments.

To avoid this mess in the first place, people need to be taught basic budgeting skills. People need to understand that a household cannot spend more money than is earned, after income tax. This is the most basic concept for those in need of help with debt. The concept of having emergency savings funds is also necessary. People need to understand how fast credit card debt can grow and how hard it is to pay it off if the most you are able to pay is the minimum monthly payment.

Money management education and learning are so vital. People need to know that when they purchase things on a credit card, they do really need to have the money available to pay off that credit card at the end of the month. A credit card, unfortunately, is treated by many as an extra source of cash. In reality, it is a financial tool for convenience, but not an additional source of income.

Do you have too much debt?

Do you feel that you don’t have sufficient financial literacy? Do you believe that the lack of knowledge has led to you making financial mistakes? Have these mistakes caused you to now have too much debt? Is the pain and stress of too much debt now negatively affecting your health? Do you need help with debt?

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

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

Tags average Canadian household consumer debt, Bankruptcy, bankruptcy trustee, consumer debt, Consumer Proposal, credit card debt, credit card debt calculator, Debt, financial education, financial emergency, financial literacy, help with debt, household consumer debt, household debt, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, minimum monthly payment, stephen poloz

Introduction

The case

The appeal

The Trustee did not handle its investigation properly

The review of the claim and the Trustee’s disallowance

Trustee company summary

Introduction

Getting over the initial fear

How do I apply for bankruptcy in Canada?

The free assessment

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy

How to file for bankruptcy in Canada

What happens if I declare bankruptcy in Canada?

Will I lose my house if I file bankruptcy in Canada?

How much does it cost to file bankruptcy in Canada?

Summary

Introduction

Budget 2019

What the press release said

So what is being planned?

The devil is in the details

Canada insolvency summary

UPDATE OCTOBER 30, 2019: On September 27, 2019, the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta issued its decision on the appeal of this case. The decision described in this Brandon’s Blog was reversed. You can read about it in our new blog:

Introduction

Can Canada student loans be forgiven in bankruptcy?

Is the forgiveness all or none?

The vital facts

The considerations

The Registrar’s findings

The decision

Canada student loan forgiveness summary

Bankruptcy small businesses introduction

Bankruptcy small businesses: That is not how bankruptcy protection works

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

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

Bankruptcy small businesses: A restructuring attempt could go wrong

Bankruptcy small businesses: Advantages of an insolvency process for debtors

Bankruptcy small businesses: Benefits of the insolvency process for creditors

Bankruptcy small businesses conclusion

Canada bankruptcy and insolvency act introduction

What is the purpose of the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act?

Is insolvency a criminal offence?

Now for the case – Re Brennan, 2019 ONSC 4712 (CanLII)

The honest but unfortunate debtor

Seizure of an RRSP – in bankruptcy and no bankruptcy

Mr. Brennan’s defence

The Court agrees with Mr. Robert

The moral to Mr. Brennan’s story

Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act summary

Introduction

What is financial literacy and why is it important?

Why is financial literacy important for students?

How do you get financial literacy?

What are the three main components of financial literacy?

The teacher’s role

Summary

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

Introduction

1 – How do collection agencies work in Ontario

2 – Can a collection agency sue you in Ontario?

3 – How long can a collection agency collect on a debt in Ontario?

4 – How do I stop a collection agency?

Bankruptcy trustee in Ontario: Introduction

Bankruptcy trustee in Ontario case background information

The bankruptcy trustee in Ontario case before the Court of Appeal

The fascinating part (for me anyway) of the Court of Appeal’s decision

When was e3m’s knowledge of its claim?

So what does this mean for a bankruptcy trustee in Ontario?

Bankruptcy trustee in Ontario Canada conclusion

Help with debt introduction

Canadian household help with debt

The Province of Quebec is trying to make a difference for help with debt

Will this help with debt work?

Has Quebec tackled the real help with debt issue?

Help with debt: Financial education was never on any curriculum

Do you have too much debt?

**What is the purpose of the Canada Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act?**

Now for the case – ***Re Brennan*, 2019 ONSC 4712 (CanLII)**

***Bankruptcy trustee in Ontario*: Introduction**

**Will this help with debt work?**

**Has Quebec tackled the real help with debt issue?**