Tag: BIA

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

COMMERCIAL TENANCIES ACT ONTARIO AND THE BANKRUPT TENANT: THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO HAPPILY LOCking IN A LANDLORD’S CLAIM

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: Introduction

On October 28, 2020, the Court of Appeal For Ontario clarified the interplay between the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario and the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) when a commercial tenant in Ontario goes bankrupt.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I describe what the appellate court decided in the 7636156 Canada Inc. (Re), 2020 ONCA 681 (CanLII) case. I also discuss what it means for commercial landlords when one of its tenants goes bankrupt and what the relationship is between the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario and the BIA.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The facts

The facts were not in dispute. On May 1, 2018, the corporate tenant filed for bankruptcy and the Trustee was appointed. On July 23, 2018, the Trustee disclaimed the lease on the commercial premises.

One of the schedules for the commercial lease required the tenant to lodge a letter of credit (LOC) in the amount of $2.5 million in favour of the landlord. The LOC was to have an initial term of one year, renewed each year on an automated basis until 60 days after the expiry of the lease’s term. It was stipulated that the LOC is to continue to stand as protection for the landlord in case the tenant ended up being bankrupt.

According to the lease, the tenant provided the LOC. It was an irrevocable standby LOC issued by The Bank Of Nova Scotia (BNS) for the $2.5 million amount in favour of the landlord. The LOC had been renewed annually before the date of bankruptcy.

To get the LOC, the tenant put up money collateral in the amount of $2.5 million to BNS which was invested in a BNS GIC. BNS took security against the company and registered a financing statement under the Personal Property Security Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.10. The security was good and valid as against the Trustee. The Trustee was in agreement that the security was valid.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The landlord draws against the LOC

As of the bankruptcy date, there were no arrears of rent owing under the lease. Since the commercial tenant was bankrupt, the landlord made 3 claims on the LOC. These three claims totalled the full $2.5 million LOC value.

The initial draw, in the amount of $207,732.28, was made on May 16, 2018, before the Trustee disclaimed its interest in the commercial lease. Under the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario, the Trustee has the right to occupy the premises for 3 months from the date of bankruptcy, if it wishes. By the end of the 3 months, whether the Trustee occupied or not, it must either disclaim its interest in the lease or adopt it and assign it to a purchaser.

The opportunity to sell the lease would happen if the rented commercial premises are in a sought after location and the lease has value in it. A lease can have value if it is at a rental rate below the market rent at the date of bankruptcy.

The 2nd draw, in the amount of $1,709,768.40, occurred on December 4, 2018. The 3rd claim against the LOC, in the amount of $582,499.32, was made on April 2, 2019.

The LOC draws covered the losses asserted by the landlord as follows:

  • $207,732.28 being the rent for May 2018;
  • $1,621,160.72 for rent for the months of August 2018 to April 2019, inclusive;
  • $368,479 for the unamortized cost for the landlord allowance as included in the lease, inclusive of interest; and
  • $302,628 for restoring the premises, as allowed for in the lease.

In support of each demand against the LOC, the landlord gave BNS the required certificate verifying the debt of the tenant under the lease. The landlord was the beneficiary under the LOC for the debt of the tenant, for which repayment was demanded from the tenant and not paid.

BNS accepted the landlord’s draw claims under the LOC and paid the complete amount of the LOC to the landlord. BNS never asked the landlord to return the funds paid.

The landlord believed that it was entitled to the funds under the lease drawn up in accordance with the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario. BNS also believed that the landlord fulfilled its requirements to receive payment under the LOC from BNS.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The landlord’s proof of claim

The landlord knew how to complete form 31 proof of claim and filed it with the Trustee. The landlord filed for a preferred claim in the amount of $623,196.84. The preferred claim was for 3 months’ accelerated rent: May, June, and July 2018. The landlord’s proof of claim also attached a schedule showing the calculations.

In Ontario, a landlord’s preferred claim for rent in case of a commercial tenant’s bankruptcy is limited: a maximum of 3 months’ pre-bankruptcy arrears as well as for accelerated rent, a 3-month post-bankruptcy claim.

The right to accelerated rent must be stipulated in the lease. Further, the landlord’s entire preferred claim is limited to the value of the bankrupt company’s property on the premises, after the claims of trust claimants or secured creditors.

All these rights are laid out in the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The Trustee’s disallowance of the landlord’s proof of claim

The Trustee disallowed the landlord’s proof of claim, stating that the landlord’s preferred claim for three months’ accelerated rent had been paid by the landlord’s draws against the LOC.

The disallowance also stated that:

  • the funds used to pay the landlord from the LOC originated from funds that came from the bankrupt tenant;
  • the LOC was to be reduced prior to the date of bankruptcy; and
  • the landlord did not include proper support for its case for further damages in regard to the tenant’s obligations under the commercial lease.

The Trustee’s position that the LOC should have been reduced in amount is not important for the purpose of this Brandon’s Blog. I won’t spend any time on it other than to tell you that the court did not agree with the Trustee’s position.

commercial tenancies act ontario
commercial tenancies act ontario

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The landlord appeals

The landlord appealed the disallowance to the Registrar in Bankruptcy. The Registrar permitted the landlord’s appeal partly. She held that considering that the landlord had drawn on the LOC for the May 2018 rent, the Trustee appropriately disallowed the preferred claim for the month of May.

However, she further determined that the landlord was correct in its accelerated rent claim for the other two months. The landlord could look for payment from the bankruptcy estate or from the LOC. According to the Registrar, the Trustee therefore incorrectly refused the preferred claim for those other two months.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The Trustee’s motion to a judge

The Trustee wasn’t finished debating about the landlord’s rights to claim against the entire LOC given the Trustee’s disclaimer of the lease, the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario and the BIA. The Trustee made a motion to the court to determine what amount from the LOC the landlord was entitled to. The Trustee’s position was that the landlord was not entitled to the full amount of the LOC. Since the security for the LOC was funding from the company, any excess not required by BNS should be paid to the Trustee.

The parties’ positions that they laid out in their respective materials were largely what was already before the Master. The motion judge concluded that the landlord was only entitled to make use of the LOC for the 3 months’ accelerated rent.

The judge’s reasoning was:

  • a disclaimer of the lease by a trustee in bankruptcy is the same as a voluntary abandonment of the lease by the occupant under the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario with the consent of the landlord. This snuffs out all obligations of the tenant under the commercial lease;
  • he turned down the landlord’s submissions that the independent obligation of BNS to it under the LOC meant that the funds coming from the LOC were not the property of the bankrupt and therefore not payable to the Trustee;
  • that upon the disclaimer of a lease by a Trustee, a bankrupt commercial tenant does not owe any amounts to the landlord. Therefore, the landlord cannot make use of the LOC for any claim other than the 3 months of rent arrears and the 3 months of accelerated rent; and
  • that the obligation of BNS, under the LOC, to make payment to the landlord beneficiary is limited to the amount owing by the commercial tenant under the lease. As he ruled that from the disclaimer the tenant’s only obligation was for the rent arrears and the accelerated rent, therefore, the landlord could not claim any other amounts against the LOC.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The landlord appeals to the Court of Appeal For Ontario

The question before the appellate court that I want to discuss is, did the judge err in holding that, upon the disclaimer of the lease by the Trustee, the landlord was not qualified to make use of the LOC other than for the amount of its preferred claim?

The decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in considering this case and the interplay between the BIA and the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario clarified exactly what it means when a Trustee issues a disclaimer of lease and what the contractual relationship around the LOC means.

The Trustee argued that when it disclaimed the lease, the landlord was thereupon stopped from making use of the LOC for any amount other than the amount of its preferred claim. The Trustee contended that such a concept of insolvency legislation overrides the autonomy principle for a LOC and therefore limits the lawful amount the landlord could draw.

The Court of Appeal For Ontario made certain findings relating to a disclaimer of lease by a Trustee as follows:

  • The disclaimer under the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario is for the sole benefit of the bankrupt commercial tenant.
  • While a disclaimer operates to finish the bankrupt tenant’s responsibilities under the lease, the disclaimer cannot be interpreted to be a consensual surrender for all purposes (emphasis added).
  • A Trustee’s disclaimer of a bankrupt tenant’s lease ends the legal rights of the landlord against the bankrupt tenant’s estate relative to the unexpired term of the lease, aside from the three months’ accelerated rent claim under the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario and the BIA.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario: The landlord has a LOC on things

The appellate court recognized that the ability of the landlord to rely upon the LOC for more than just its preferred claim depends on the wording of the lease. In this case, the lease stated that the LOC functions as safety and security for indemnification of the landlord for losses:

“resulting from any termination, surrender, disclaimer or repudiation of this lease … in connection with any insolvency and bankruptcy or otherwise” and that the Landlord’s rights in respect of the LOC were not affected by the disclaimer of the Lease in any bankruptcy proceeding but would “continue with respect to the periods prior thereto and thereafter as if the Lease had not been surrendered, disclaimed, repudiated or terminated.”

Further, one of the terms of the LOC was that it will not be released, discharged or affected by the bankruptcy of the commercial tenant or the disclaimer of the lease.

The appellate court also went on to state that the motion judge’s decision runs counter to a standard principle relevant to LOCs. That is that providing financial institutions, such as BNS, have an independent responsibility to make a settlement to the beneficiary. The LOC is a contract between BNS and the landlord. It is regulated by the principle of the freedom or autonomy of LOCs, not by the BIA or the Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario.

Under the freedom principle, the issuer needs to pay the beneficiary upon appropriate qualification, subject to the minimal exemption for fraud which was not found in this case.

So with a properly worded lease and a properly worded LOC as security, the landlord can call on the LOC for all claims against the bankrupt commercial tenant after a Trustee disclaims its interest in the lease. With these facts, the landlord was successful in being able to claim everything it was owed, up to the limit of the LOC.

Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario summary

I hope you have enjoyed this Commercial Tenancies Act Ontario Brandon’s Blog. A sick insolvent company’s business can be saved by a debt restructuring.

Do you or your company have too much debt? Are you or your company in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt.

You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges. It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. 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 take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team.

That is why we can develop a restructuring process 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 or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

commercial tenancies act ontario
commercial tenancies act ontario
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY MEANING: OUR POWER LIST OF DUTIES OF THE BANKRUPT AND OTHERS

bankruptcy meaning
bankruptcy meaning

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

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

Bankruptcy meaning introduction

I recently read a decision of the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia in Bankruptcy and Insolvency. It was an interesting decision about a bankrupt who essentially absented himself and became AWOL after filing for bankruptcy. I will describe the case below. However, it did get me thinking that perhaps Brandon’s Blog about the duties of the various stakeholders in the bankruptcy process would be of interest. Put another way, if everyone does not do their part, what is the bankruptcy meaning?

The Merriam-Webster dictionary provides a bankruptcy meaning definition as:

“1a: a debtor (such as an individual or an organization) whose property is subject to voluntary or involuntary administration under the bankruptcy laws for the benefit of the debtor’s creditors

b: a person who becomes insolvent

2: a person who is completely lacking in a particular desirable quality or attribute

a moral bankrupt”

In this bankruptcy meaning Brandon’s Blog, I will focus on the first definition, as that is the one I am qualified to answer.

Bankruptcy meaning: The stakeholders

There are various players in the bankruptcy process. The primary ones are:

I will leave the duties of the bankrupt until the end. That description in the bankruptcy meaning list will flow nicely into my description of the Nova Scotia bankruptcy court case.

Bankruptcy meaning: Duties of the Trustee

There are of course various statutory steps that a Trustee must take in any bankruptcy administration. It is also obvious that the Trustee must perform those steps properly.

In addition, the OSB has established a Code of Ethics for Trustees. The Code of Ethics for Trustees is an integral part of the BIA General Rules.

The Code establishes a standard for services to be provided by Trustees. It addresses:

  • the information that Trustees must provide to creditors;
  • the treatment of funds entrusted to Trustees;
  • conflicts of interest; and
  • the sale and purchase of the property of a business or individual who has filed for bankruptcy.

It also contains standards for advertising by Trustees and for maintaining the good reputation of the Trustee community.

Rules 34 through 53 inclusive of the BIA General Rules contain what the bankruptcy meaning of the Code of Ethics for Trustees is. You can read them by clicking on this Code of Ethics for Trustees link.

There are also various Directives issued by the OSB that guide the statutory steps that a Trustee must take. Examples of these Directives are:

  • Directive No. 1R2 Counselling in Insolvency Matters – This Directive deals with how the Trustee should conduct the required financial counselling sessions.
  • Directive No. 4R Delegation of Tasks – A Directive about when certain Trustee or administrator tasks can be delegated to others.
  • Directive No. 5R4 – Estate Funds and Banking – How a Trustee must handle estate trust funds.
  • Directive No. 6R3 – Assessment of an Individual Debtor – The steps to be taken in assessing the financial situation of the debtor, explaining the various options available and what bankruptcy duties are.
  • Directive No. 11R – Surplus Income – When assessing the financial situation of the debtor who becomes bankrupt, how to calculate the surplus income payments obligation of the bankrupt person.
  • Directive No. 17 – Retention of Documents by the Trustee – This one is self-explanatory.

These are but a handful of the Directives issued by the OSB that Trustees must follow.

Bankruptcy meaning: Duties of creditors

In the bankruptcy meaning context, creditors have certain duties which can better be described as rights. Creditors are always invited and welcome to participate in the bankruptcy process. It begins with filing a Form 31 Proof of Claim as evidence of the debt owed to them by the bankrupt.

Once they file their claim in the bankruptcy estate, the creditor now has the status to fully participate in the administration of the bankruptcy estate. The filing of the proof of claim allows the creditor to vote, either in person or by proxy. They now have the authority to participate and vote at the First Meeting of Creditors. They can vote for the appointment of Inspectors.

A creditor may notify the Trustee of any kind of inappropriate activities or transactions on the part of the bankrupt that hurt the interests of the creditors. For instance, a creditor may have knowledge of assets or deals that the bankrupt failed to declare. In many cases, creditors who have dealt with the debtor over many years will have better information than the Trustee initially can gain. A Trustee always welcomes this kind of assistance from creditors. If a creditor thinks there is misconduct or illegal activities on the part of the insolvent the creditor should advise the Trustee and the OSB.

A creditor can oppose a personal bankrupt’s discharge from bankruptcy. The grounds for opposing are set out in section 173 of the BIA. The creditor must inform the Trustee and the bankrupt of the opposition and the reasons in the proper form.

By filing the opposition, the bankrupt’s discharge hearing must now go to court to be adjudicated. The Trustee cannot provide the bankrupt with an automatic discharge, even if they have fulfilled all of their duties. The creditor will provide its evidence to the court to support the opposition. The Trustee must file a report on the conduct of the bankrupt both before and during the bankruptcy administration.

Based on all the evidence, the court will then decide what kind of discharge the personal bankrupt is entitled to; absolute discharge, conditional, and/or a suspended discharge. In certain cases, the court may issue a refusal to the bankrupt. That is what happened in the Nova Scotia case I will shortly describe.

This is what the bankruptcy meaning for the rights and duties of creditors are.

bankruptcy meaning
bankruptcy meaning

Bankruptcy meaning: Advising the bankrupt or the officer of the bankrupt corporation of duties

The Trustee must explain to the bankrupt or the officer of a bankrupt company, his/her responsibilities. The responsibilities are found in sections 158 and 159 of the BIA. The Trustee must also explain the bankruptcy offences. Those are outlined in sections 198, 199, 200, and 204 of the BIA.

The minimum level of information a Trustee can give to the bankrupt or the officer of a bankrupt corporation is (as applicable):

  • information on bankruptcy for consumer debtors;
  • the above essential passages from the Act;
  • responsibilities of a bankrupt or the officer of the bankrupt company; and
  • debtor financial information (type and guide).

In all cases, the bankrupt or the officer of the bankrupt company has to be served with a copy of the relevant sections of the BIA. The Trustee must also get an acknowledgment from the bankrupt, or officer of the bankrupt corporation, that she or he has actually been provided with, and understands his/her obligations. The signoff by the bankrupt/the company’s officer needs to be kept on file by the Trustee.

If a bankrupt or officer of the bankrupt company declines to sign, regardless of being offered, Trustees have to keep in their file details of the refusal (i.e. evidence of service as well as details as to the refusal).

Bankruptcy meaning: The duties of the bankrupt or the officer of the bankrupt corporation

The focus of the BIA is for personal bankrupt, to return the honest but unfortunate debtor back to society free of his or her debts. The premise is that the bankrupt, or the officer of the bankrupt corporation, will fulfill their duties with integrity and honesty. The duties are outlined in the OSB’s Directive No. 26. If you are interested, you can read them HERE.

But what if they don’t? What if the individual bankrupt does not fulfill all of their duties and essentially absents themself from the process once they have filed their assignment in bankruptcy. In that case, the Trustee has an obligation to oppose the bankrupt’s application for discharge and bring the matter to court. What is the bankruptcy meaning in such a case?

That is what happened in the Nova Scotia case that I will tell you about now. I believe it is very instructive.

Bankruptcy meaning: Why a bankrupt’s discharge hearing may come to court

The substantial majority of bankrupts execute their obligations under the BIA. As a result, only a minority of bankruptcies end up in court. Mr. Jewkes’ case is one of them.

The usual factors for a bankruptcy case needing to involve the court include:

  • outstanding financial disclosure; and/or
  • surplus income payment obligations.

Discharges for third or more bankruptcy filings also need to come to court for a discharge hearing. Occasionally, a creditor objects to the bankrupt’s discharge. All matters are listened to on their merits and a decision is rendered as appropriate for the particular bankruptcy meaning.

Sometimes, there has actually been a lack of action in a bankruptcy file due to a bankrupt’s own difficulties. She or he may have a mental or physical illness. They may have not have been able to communicate with the Trustee for completely valid reasons. They might have genuinely misunderstood the obligations incumbent upon them. It is the responsibility of the Trustee and, that falling short, the court, to set things straight.

And then there is Mr. Jewkes. None of the factors where the Trustee or the court could excuse him for a simple oversight or mistake which can easily be corrected were present.

Bankruptcy meaning: The Nova Scotia case

Mr. Jewkes filed an assignment in bankruptcy in 2019. He cited “relationship breakdown” as the reason for his bankruptcy. This was his first bankruptcy. He showed income on filing to put him just below the OSB’s guidelines for paying surplus income. His assets were minimal, although he did identify the sale of his old vehicle and a mobile home with little or no equity just prior to his bankruptcy.

His creditors were the normal run of the mill kind of creditors in consumer files:

  • credit cards;
  • an unsecured line of credit;
  • a collection agency was after him, possibly for another credit card debt;
  • two mobile phone accounts; and
  • a utility company.

And that is where it ended. He has actually not provided the required income and expense information. He has not offered the Trustee with details required to prepare and file his pre-bankruptcy or post-bankruptcy income tax returns. He has not gone to his two mandatory credit counselling sessions. He has not complied with his payment arrangement for the Trustee’s fee. He has not given corroboration or accounting for his pre-bankruptcy vehicle and mobile home sales. His discharge hearing was held in August 2020. He did not show up for his own discharge hearing either by video or telephone.

The Trustee requested that the hearing be adjourned. The Registrar in bankruptcy court was not prepared to use more court resources and he denied the Trustee’s request.

Rather, he had enough and let his feelings be known. The bankrupt got his stay of proceedings. Notice of the bankruptcy was mailed out to the creditors. The collection calls from creditors or collection agencies stopped.

Garnishments, if such existed, ended. After that, this bankrupt went on with life and took the attitude that everyone else can take a hike.

Bankruptcy meaning: The Registrar’s decision

The Registrar wanted to send a bankruptcy meaning message that this kind of behaviour will not be tolerated. The Registrar decided that this bankruptcy meaning message will be sent by the:

  • bankrupt’s application for discharge being refused;
  • bankrupt having leave to apply on his own for discharge once he has fulfilled all of his duties;
  • Trustee finishing the administration and applying for its discharge forthwith;
  • Trustee being directed, upon its discharge, to write to all known creditors advising of the Trustee’s discharge and that the effect under the BIA is that the stay of proceedings protecting the bankrupt has ended and all creditors are free to begin or resume collection action against him.

This fourth point is not normal. It is obvious that the Registrar was fed up with this bankrupt and others who feel they can avoid performing their duties. The Registrar wanted to send a strong bankruptcy meaning message.

bankruptcy meaning
bankruptcy meaning

Bankruptcy meaning summary

I hope you have enjoyed this bankruptcy meaning Brandon’s Blog. Hopefully, you have better insight now into the fact that a sick insolvent company’s business can be saved by doing a sale of its assets to a healthy organization.

Do you or your company have too much debt? Are you or your company in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt.

You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges. It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. 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 take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team.

That is why we can develop a restructuring process 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 or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

DEFAULTING ON A MORTGAGE: THE BEST COURT-APPROVED WAY TO DEBT FREEDOM IN 2020 & BEYOND

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Defaulting on a mortgage introduction

I just finished reading a defaulting on a mortgage decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released on September 15, 2020. It had to do with a person who had filed a proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA). The court case is about the debtor who could not afford to pay all the mortgages on her home. The home was sold on a conditional basis, and a dispute occurred between two potential purchasers. I describe below how the court dealt with the dispute.

That case highlighted for me three things:

  • what we advise everyone who comes to us for a no-cost initial consultation who cannot afford to keep paying a loan registered against an asset, normally a vehicle or house;
  • how sometimes a strategic default on a mortgage or vehicle loan can help someone in dealing with all of their debts when they are about to file either a proposal or for bankruptcy; and
  • the appropriate manner (in my view) the court decided to resolve the dispute between the two potential purchasers.

Defaulting on a mortgage: What we advise debtors

Whenever someone comes to us for a no-cost consultation, we first get financial information from them. We want to understand the nature of their assets and liabilities and their household income and expenses. Through our analysis and discussion, we determine if the person can afford to keep paying that loan or mortgage. We also ask them, if appropriate, are they happy with the asset if it seems that they are paying too much based on the level of secured debt and the market value of the asset.

If the person says they would love to get rid of the asset, that they have no or little equity in, then we look at the impact of using defaulting on a mortgage as a strategic default so that any shortfall experienced by the lender will be an ordinary unsecured debt which can be discharged through either a proposal or bankruptcy.

Obviously, the person has to have a realistic option to replace that asset or have an alternate plan:

  • Can they lease a different vehicle at a lesser cost before filing which they can afford and therefore will not default on?
  • Is public transit a realistic option as opposed to having their own vehicle for the time being?
  • Is there a relative who will co-sign for them so that they can lease or buy a more reasonable cost vehicle?
  • Can they rent somewhere that they can afford for much less than what they have been paying on their home and then look at buying something after they are through their debt restructuring when they are back on their feet?

As I said, we do this all the time when working with people to look at all of their options for financial restructuring. We especially look at in the case of a home, does defaulting on a mortgage make financial sense?

Defaulting on a mortgage: What is a strategic default?

When the market value of your home is less than the amount owed on the mortgage, that mortgage debt is underwater. To put it simply, an underwater home mortgage loan has a higher remaining principal balance than the value of the house.

Homeowners with little or negative home equity can find themselves in this situation when housing prices fall, even if they are current on all their payments. It’s also described as being “upside-down” or having “negative equity” in the residence.

When it doesn’t make sense to keep using your cash to stay current on that underwater mortgage, rather than using that money for other necessary expenses, defaulting on a mortgage as a strategic default may be your only option. After establishing that you can’t see your property rising in value in a reasonable period to restore some of your equity, you may plan to just stop making mortgage repayments. You’ll default and eventually, the lender will enforce on its mortgage, take over the property and sell it.

Even if you have equity in the home, but you can no longer afford to keep up the payments, you may find that putting your home up for sale is your best option. Again, you need to have a realistic plan in place on where you will live once your home sells. Depending on the situation, you might decide to also create a strategic default by defaulting on a mortgage at the same time you list your home for sale. Once sold, the net proceeds of the sale, representing the equity in the home, can be used to help fund the proposal.

During the financial crisis in the United States, a strategic default on underwater homes by defaulting on a mortgage became progressively typical. Such home loans came to a head at 26 percent of all mortgaged homes in 2009. Many house owners did the math and made the agonizing however rational decision to leave the home and let the lender deal with the property and its underwater mortgage.

As I explain in the next section, in most cases, you can just walk away from such a loan in the United States. Unfortunately, it is not so easy for Canadians to walk away from their homes and defaulting on a mortgage. But there is one way to do it in Ontario.

defaulting on a mortgage
defaulting on a mortgage

Defaulting on a mortgage: Walking away from a mortgage in Canada is not simple

In the United States, it is normal for a mortgage to be “non-recourse“. What this means is that the lender can only look to the value of the property it has mortgage security against to repay the mortgage loan. If the lender suffers a shortfall, unless there is a separate guarantee given, the lender cannot sue the mortgagor, the borrower, for any shortfall. So if you have negative equity, defaulting on a mortgage may be the right decision for such a US resident.

In Canada, it is normal for a mortgage to be “full recourse“. This means that if the lender suffers a shortfall on the mortgage debt, the terms of the mortgage loan automatically allows the mortgagee, the lender, to go to court and get a judgment against the borrower for the amount of the shortfall. So defaulting on a mortgage needs to be done in conjunction with a plan to deal with the shortfall debt.

For this reason, walking away from a mortgage in Canada is not simple. However, there is one way to do it. Once the shortfall is known and, either before or right after the lender gets a judgment, the debtor can file a proposal under the BIA to restructure all their unsecured debt. If that is not practical, then bankruptcy is the other option.

Now the shortfall is caught in the insolvency proceeding. The filing invokes an automatic stay of proceedings so that the lender cannot take action to try to execute against any of the assets or income of the debtor who has filed. The debt is caught in the insolvency proceeding and will be dealt with in that forum.

Defaulting on a mortgage: The first sale

The court case deals with a woman in Ontario who had begun a proposal process under the BIA. The debtor owned (at least) two residential properties. The property in question had 4 mortgages registered against it. The other property had multiple mortgages against it, including a mortgage as additional security for the 4th mortgage loan against the property in question. To make matters worse, there was also a lien registered against the same residential property in favour of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) in the amount of $308,258.

The 4th mortgage was totally underwater. The debtor entered into an agreement of purchase and sale. The sale of the home would result in a shortfall of over $700,000. It would not provide any funds for the 4th mortgage. It would only partially repay the 3rd mortgage. So, one of the conditions of sale was that the vendor would either get a discharge of all of the mortgages or a court order vesting title in the home to the purchaser clear of all mortgages and other registrations against the title. The 4th mortgagee’s charge against the other home, which was also in 4th position, was also totally underwater.

As part of the proposal proceedings, the debtor brought a motion to the court to approve the sale (supported by appraisals) and get the vesting order to vest title clear of all registrations against the title. The debtor was not only going to be defaulting on a mortgage but on at least 2 of them!

Defaulting on a mortgage: The 4th mortgagee opposes the sale approval motion

The 4th mortgagee appeared at the motion with her lawyer to get an adjournment in order to oppose the authorization and vesting order and enable her to acquire the home on the same terms but also for even more money. This would enable the 4th mortgagee to possibly recover something on her outstanding mortgage loan at a later date.

The purchaser or the purchaser’s lawyer was not told in advance that there was going to be an opposition to the application. Therefore, the purchaser’s lawyer did not attend the hearing.

At the hearing, the court authorized the sale and vesting order yet suspended its issuance for 9 days to allow the 4th mortgagee the chance to make an offer. She did, on the very same terms yet $5,000 greater than the approved offer. She also had the deposit funds put into her lawyer’s trust account. She then made a motion for the approval of her offer and vesting order. Not surprisingly, and as to be expected, the first purchaser objected to her motion.

Defaulting on a mortgage: What the court decided

The 4th mortgagee’s lawyer argued that the first purchaser’s agreement of purchase and sale is nullified since there was neither discharges provided nor a binding court order vesting title free and clear from all mortgages and the CRA registration by the closing date. Therefore, it cannot now come to court and try to extend the closing of a deal that is already dead.

Legal counsel for the first purchaser argued that if the court approves the 4th mortgagee as the buyer, the sales procedure will be unfair. The first purchaser was not notified that there would be any type of objection to its motion for the approval and vesting order of its deal. Although the first purchaser can be criticized for not keeping up with what was happening both before and on the date of its court motion, it is still a good-faith buyer who took part in a fair sales process. The 4th mortgagee had every right to bid on the subject property when it was initially listed and did not do so.

The court decided that ultimately, this situation boils down to the process being fair and seen as being fair. So given all of this, the court decided:

  • All previous agreements of purchase and sale for the subject property are terminated.
  • A new sales process will be carried out where any of the interested parties, being the first purchaser and the 4th mortgagee, can send their best offers to the Trustee, on a confidential basis.
  • The offers are to be submitted and evaluated by the Trustee by September 18, 2020, with the closing of September 25, 2020.
  • In the event, the winning bid is not able to close on September 25, 2020, the other party may purchase the property.
  • If court approval of the successful offer and a vesting order is needed, a draft order may be provided to the court.
  • The proceeds of the sale, presumably net of the realtor commission, the vendor’s real estate legal fees, and any HST that may be applicable on the sale, are to be paid into court in order to figure out the proper amount and priority of the charges against the property.

As neither side was totally successful, the court did not award costs to any party. This seems to be the fairest outcome to all concerned.

Defaulting on a mortgage: A proposal is your best option

So as you can see, it is possible to use the proposal process under the BIA either to sell a home you can no longer afford to keep which has equity. The net sales proceeds can be used to partially fund the proposal. A proposal under the BIA is the only government-approved debt settlement plan.

Alternatively, you can use the proposal process to sell the home where you are defaulting on a mortgage where there are one or more mortgages underwater. The proposal process will compromise the resulting ordinary unsecured debt arising from the shortfall claim of underwater mortgage lenders. An application can be made to the court for an order approving the sales process, the sale, and obtaining a vesting order to complete the sale.

We have helped many people and companies do exactly that when defaulting on a mortgage.

Defaulting on a mortgage summary

I hope you have enjoyed this defaulting on a mortgage Brandon’s Blog. Hopefully, you have better insight now into the fact that there is a way to get out of a secured loan, especially a mortgage. It will require an insolvency proceeding to settle all your debts, including any shortfall on the sale of the secured asset.

Do you have too much debt? Are you in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt.

You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges.
It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. 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 take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people 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 restructuring process 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 or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

defaulting on a mortgage
defaulting on a mortgage

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

STALKING HORSE INSOLVENCY PROCESS: OUR BEST GUIDE TO GET YOUR M&A DEAL DONE

stalking horse

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

If you would like to listen to an audio version of this stalking horse insolvency process Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click on the podcast.

Stalking horse introduction

I have written before about a stalking horse in the insolvency context. Two things recently happened that suggested that I should write about it again, from a slightly different perspective. The first thing was that Ira Smith recently did a Zoom webinar presentation for the M&A Club Canada. The topic they wanted the webinar on and the title of the webinar was “Insolvency restructuring to get your M&A deal done”. Second, I see that there has been an increase in online searches for that term.

So, the purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to describe what a stalking horse is and provide you with some insight as to how an insolvency process can be used to get an M&A deal done.

What is a stalking horse in the insolvency and M&A world?

In the distressed M&A context, a stalking horse refers to a possible buyer participating in a stalking horse auction to purchase the assets of an insolvent debtor as a going concern. In a stalking horse public auction of a financially troubled business, an initial bid by the stalking horse bidder is divulged to the marketplace and becomes the minimum quote, or floor cost, that potential purchasers can then outbid.

It was first extensively utilized in the USA and currently is a routine part of the Canadian insolvency landscape. The stalking horse process is different than the sealed tender sale approach that is traditional in Canada. The stalking horse sales process has been used in Canada many times. The case study that Ira presented in his webinar and gone over below, was one that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved.

The stalking horse participates in the process understanding that it might be outbid. Accordingly, it negotiates a break fee to cover its costs. This includes its due diligence costs to put together the first offer. Typically, for a competing bid to knock out the stalking horse offer, it will certainly have to be more than the stalking horse bid plus the Break Fee (described below). The competing offer will certainly likewise need to be on the exact same terms as the stalking horse bid, and cannot include any kind of burdensome conditions.

Why would anyone want to become a stalking horse?

So, why would someone want to be a stalking horse? Initially, as a stalking horse, you will certainly have the most effective opportunity of discussing the terms of a purchase that are customized to satisfy your specific issues. Also, as the first prospective buyer, you will have even more time to evaluate and comprehend the insolvent debtor’s company. You will also have a chance to develop connections with management, vendors, and key stakeholders in the sales process. This gives the stalking horse bidder a leg up.

Their expenses of participating in the sales procedure are covered by the break fee that you will negotiate. That break fee is generally secured by a unique court-ordered charge against the assets of the insolvent debtor. However, you will need to consider the ranking of this charge against other charges that may have been already granted by the court.

How a stalking horse bid works

The stalking horse method permits a distressed company to prevent receiving reduced proposals as it sells its assets. When the stalking horse prospective buyer has made its deal, the court has accepted that quote and all other conditions of the court-supervised sale, other prospective purchasers may send contending bids for the company’s assets.

By setting the low end of the bidding process, the insolvent firm wishes to realize a greater price, yet understands it cannot obtain a lower one. Insolvencies are public. The general public nature allows for the disclosure of even more information about the opportunity and the company than what would certainly be available in a private deal. Because of this, in this case study, I explain below, I can mention some names.

Stalking horse prospective buyers can typically bargain which specific assets it wishes to obtain. It likewise does not have to acquire any of the insolvent business’s liabilities. It may however choose for business reasons to take some on voluntarily. Examples would be amounts owing to critical suppliers or employment-related liabilities for employees of the insolvent company they may wish to retain.

MPH Graphics stalking horse bid process case study

MPH Graphics inc. (MPH) was an insolvent company. They had a potential purchaser who was willing to stand as a stalking horse bidder. We ran a successful stalking horse process in this case. This case happened quite a few years ago, but, since then, we have used the identical technique in other cases. When a similar kind of case comes up in the future, we would use the same process. So, although the case is older, the steps taken are still well suited today.

MPH was a company that provided printing design and finishing for Canadian and US customers. MPH printed a variety of products such as business cards, direct mail pieces, annual reports, and marketing materials and primarily serviced government agencies, not for profit organizations, and unions.

MPH grew by acquisitions and required additional capital equipment financed by debt. The business also had to change because the industry was changing from traditional printing presses to digital. That changeover required further capital investment.

MPH was insolvent

MPH’s line of business primarily serviced government agencies, not for profit organizations, and unions. Absorbing the acquisitions produced inefficiencies and redundancies. It also needed to move to larger premises which meant moving costs and higher ongoing rent costs were being incurred.

At the same time, the industry was extremely pricing competitive. Gross margins were squeezed. Overhead costs, especially sales salaries and entertainment expenses increased. There was now a history of losses. The technical staff was very experienced. To get the union business, MPH’s technical side had to be a union shop. MPH had a blue-chip client list, which is what was really of interest to the stalking horse bidder.

Receivable collections were slowing down and the bookkeeper had to put payable cheques that were printed every month in a drawer. The cheques could not be released because there was not enough money to pay their liabilities as they become due.

stalking horse

The stalking horse bidder came knocking

The bidder was an industry consolidator. They came knocking to try to buy the MPH assets. The consolidator did its due diligence and issued a non-binding letter of interest. After further discussions, that interest turned into a binding agreement to purchase the assets. One of the terms of the deal was that the stalking horse bidder required court approval of the purchase and a vesting order from the court to vest the assets out of MPH into the acquiring corporation.

Notwithstanding there were tax losses, the purchaser did not want to purchase shares and have to deal with all the creditor issues. The company could not on its own give the purchaser the certainty it wanted by way of a vesting order. So an insolvency process was required.

What kind of stalking horse insolvency process?

There are generally three insolvency options. Some are not necessarily mutually exclusive. They are:

  • receivership;
  • bankruptcy; and
  • restructuring.

Receivership is a remedy for secured creditors. In a receivership, the company loses control of the sales process. Bankruptcy is a remedy for unsecured creditors. In bankruptcy, likewise, the company loses control. It needed a process where the company stays in control.

The insolvent company’s requirements were:

  • stay in control of the process;
  • do that specific transaction or a better one; and
  • get court protection for both the sales process and the sale.

So neither receivership nor bankruptcy would work. So what would allow the company to meet its requirements and run a stalking horse bid process?

A stalking horse process works best in an insolvency restructuring process

What is needed is a debtor in possession option. In the United States, it is called a Chapter 11 proceeding. In Canada, there are two federal statutes that apply and can accommodate the needed process:

The benefits of this approach are:

  • The company stays in control of the process.
  • It allows for the stalking horse transaction or a better one to be completed.
  • Allows the insolvent company to get protection from its creditors through the automatic stay of proceedings. This gives it the time to run the stalking horse process, go back to court for approval, and to complete a transaction.

Liquidating proposal under the BIA to run the stalking horse process

We chose the strategy of a proposal filing under the BIA. The main reason was that the CCAA is for companies that owe $5 million or more. MPH owed under that threshold, so only the BIA process was available. The strategy would have been the same, even if MPH qualified for a CCAA process and we decided to go under that statute.

As time was of the essence, we MPH first filed a Notice of Intention to Make a Proposal (NOI). This quickly got them the stay of proceedings they needed and access to the court, before needing to draft the definitive proposal document.

The company filed the NOI to implement a sale of its assets, properties, and undertaking, in order to attempt to preserve as much value as possible for the Company’s stakeholders, while preserving as many jobs as possible. As Trustee, we then wrote a report to the court in support of the company’s motion to get the purchaser’s agreement of purchase and sale to be approved as a stalking horse bid and for approval of a sales process, we would run.

As Trustee, we worked with MPH, the purchaser, and their respective legal counsel, to draft the sales process and the terms and conditions of sale. These would be the rules that would allow for the marketplace to become aware of the opportunity to purchase all or substantially all of the assets, properties, and undertaking of MPH.

Key elements of the stalking horse sales process

The key elements of the stalking horse sales process were:

  • The break fee payable to the stalking horse bidder if they turned out to not be the successful purchaser was set at the amount of $100,000.
  • The Overbid Amount (as described in the Stalking Horse Agreement of Purchase and Sale) was reduced to the amount of $100,000.
  • If an auction was to be held between parties that all qualified as successful bidders, each bid had to be at least $5,000 higher than the last one.

The outcome of the stalking horse sales process

The process we recommended to the court was a 5-week process. The court approved our recommendations and ran the sales process. The process included:

  • Advertising the opportunity in a national newspaper.
  • Preparing and distributing a “teaser” non-confidential information circular to distribute to anyone who requested it along with the terms and conditions of sale.
  • Preparation and distribution of a confidentiality agreement to those who wished more detailed financial information.
  • Receipt of signed confidentiality agreements and distribution of the confidential information memorandum we prepared.
  • Receiving non-binding letters of intent from potential purchasers and deciding which ones we chose to provide access to our electronic data room.
  • Potential purchasers performed due diligence and submitted their final binding offers with deposit funds.

We then reviewed all offers received, to make sure that they met the terms and conditions of sale. We did receive a better offer, but that purchaser’s offer was conditional on them obtaining financing. They could not waive the condition, so the stalking horse bidder’s agreement of purchase and sale turned out to be the winning bid.

Court approval of the stalking horse bid

As Trustee, we then prepared our report to court to provide all the information as to the steps we took and the results of the process. We obviously recommended that the company be allowed to complete the stalking horse agreement. The court agreed and issued the vesting order.

There were enough funds to pay out the government trust claim and all the secured creditors in full. There was also enough cash left over to pay for all the costs of the process. Unfortunately, there was not enough money to do any sort of proposal. So the company filed an assignment in bankruptcy and we became the trustee in bankruptcy.

Moving from our role as proposal trustee to the bankruptcy trustee, we informed all the creditors the details of the sale and the outcome. The business and many jobs were saved as a result.

Stalking horse summary

I hope you have enjoyed this stalking horse Brandon’s Blog. Hopefully, you have better insight now into the fact that a sick insolvent company’s business can be saved by doing a sale of its assets to a healthy organization.

Do you have too much debt? Are you in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt.

You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges.
It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. 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 take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people 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 restructuring process 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 or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CONSUMER PROPOSAL VS BANKRUPTCY ONTARIO: THE BEST INFO YOU REALLY NEED

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario introduction

What is the difference between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario is a question people calling me up these days are asking. No doubt the looming end of the various COVID-19 government support programs is now sparking this interest. People and businesses were given a reprieve with Canada’s COVID-19 Economic Response Plan and the courts being closed. Now fear is creeping back into everyone’s minds about their debts that essentially were put on hold for the last 6 months.

So, since people are asking me the question, I want to answer the consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario question in this Brandon’s Blog.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: Who qualifies for and what is a consumer proposal?

A consumer proposal is different from bankruptcy. Consumer proposals are available to individuals only whose overall financial obligations do not exceed $250,000, not including debts secured by their principal residence.

Division 1 proposals are offered to both companies with any debt level and people whose debts go beyond $250,000 (omitting the mortgage or any other debts secured by their primary residence).

Consumer proposals are official methods regulated by the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) readily available to individuals. Collaborating with a licensed insolvency trustee (Trustee) serving as the consumer proposal administrator, you make a proposal to:

  • Pay your creditors a percentage of what you owe them over a certain period not exceeding 60 months.
  • Expand the time you need to settle those debts.
  • Or a mix of both.

Payments are made via the Trustee, and the Trustee utilizes that cash to pay each of your creditors their pro-rata share. The consumer proposal must be completed within 5 years from the day of filing.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: Who qualifies for bankruptcy?

You can declare bankruptcy if you:

  • Live in Canada.
  • Continue business or have assets in Canada.
  • Have financial debts totalling a minimum of $1,000.
  • Are insolvent.

There are different tests for insolvency laid out in the BIA. They are:

  • for any reason, you are unable to pay your financial debts as they generally come to be due;
  • you have ceased paying present debts in the regular course as they usually are due; or
  • the complete worth of your property is not, at a reasonable valuation, enough, or, if sold at a sale under legal process, would not be sufficient to make it possible for repayment of all your financial obligations.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: What is bankruptcy?

A consumer proposal is an excellent option for you if you can afford to make payments towards your financial debts monthly. If you are entirely unable to make enough payments for a consumer proposal, then bankruptcy is probably your only other alternative.

By statute, the offer you make your creditors via a consumer proposal must be a much better option than what your creditors would certainly get in your bankruptcy. I help people make that analysis during our initial no-cost consultation prior to them selecting the ideal insolvency process for them. We discover the choices readily available, including a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario. Bankruptcy is an alternative when you cannot afford to fund a consumer proposal to your creditors.

If bankruptcy is the selected alternative, you work with me, as the Trustee, to complete the needed documents. I then submit them with the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada (OSB). When the OSB issues its Certificate, after that you are formally bankrupt.

From that point on, the Trustee will deal directly with your creditors in your place. As soon as you are bankrupt:

  • you will stop making payments to your unsecured creditors;
  • any type of garnishments against your wages or bank account will stop; and
  • any lawsuits for money against you from your creditors will also be stopped.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: What are the advantages of a consumer proposal?

The benefits of a consumer proposal vs. bankruptcy Ontario are:

  • You maintain all of your assets.
  • Actions against you by creditors, such as wage garnishments will quit.
  • Unlike informal financial debt settlement, the consumer proposal is a legal forum where every one of your creditors has to deal with your restructuring.
  • You do not have to think any more about the “B” word.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: What are the differences in credit score?

The person that files for bankruptcy will absolutely get an R9 rating. This is the lowest credit rating possible. It will continue to be on their record for at least 7 years. An individual that submits a consumer proposal will have an R7 credit score which is less extreme. It will certainly remain to be on their record for around 8 years overall, from the moment of filing.

You will absolutely pay less than the total you owe with a consumer proposal. Commonly as much as 70% less. All your unsecured financial obligations will be combined right into a simple regular month-to-month payment. This number will be based upon what you can afford.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: What are the costs and fees of a consumer proposal versus filing for bankruptcy?

When doing a consumer proposal, the Trustee’s charges are paid for out of the repayment you bargain with your creditors. For example, if your consumer proposal has you paying a total amount of $20,000 over 5 years, the Trustee’s fee and disbursements are drawn from those funds. The cost of the consumer proposal is likewise regulated by the BIA. The expense does not go up or down based upon the amount you are required to pay in your consumer proposal.

However, if you were to file for bankruptcy, the cost is once again controlled by the BIA. The Trustee is paid out of the funds available in your bankruptcy. Examples of sources of funds in personal bankruptcy are any surplus income you might need to pay as well as any assets that are available to the Trustee to sell.

If there are not expected to be any type of funds in your bankruptcy, the regulated cost to be funded either by the debtor or a third party guarantor will be around $2,000. This is one more difference between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: Are assets treated differently between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy?

If you do a consumer proposal, you can keep your assets whereas in bankruptcy your assets in most cases are affected. This includes the equity in your home if greater than $10,000, an auto or other vehicle worth greater than $6,600 (without liens against it), investments, tax refunds, as well as any RRSP contributions made in the 12 months immediately before filing for bankruptcy.

This distinction between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario is huge.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: What if I default on my consumer proposal vs bankruptcy payments?

If you do not keep up your payments on a consumer proposal, and drop 3 months behind, you have defaulted and the consumer proposal is void. You additionally are unable to submit a brand-new consumer proposal. Collection activity by your creditors will begin again.

In bankruptcy, if you do not complete all your obligations, you will not have the ability to get your discharge from bankruptcy. As soon as the Trustee gets its discharge, your creditors will certainly return to collection activities too.

This is one more consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario difference.

consumer proposal vs bankruptcy ontario
consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: When is a meeting of creditors held in a consumer proposal?

A meeting of creditors in a consumer proposal is held if one is requested by creditors that are owed at least one-quarter of the total amount of proven claims filed.

An ask for a meeting needs to be made by the creditors within 45 days of the declaring of the consumer proposal. The OSB can additionally ask for the Trustee to call a meeting any time within that same duration.

The meeting of creditors must be held within 21 days after being called. At the meeting of creditors, they vote to either accept or reject the proposal.

If no meeting of creditors is requested within 45 days of the declaring of the proposal, the proposal will be considered to have been approved by the creditors no matter any kind of objections made later.

How long does it take to complete a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario?

A consumer proposal is ended when the individual has made the call for payments over the amount of time stated in the proposal itself. In a bankruptcy, the discharge relies on a selection of different aspects, including whether it was the very first time the debtor filed for bankruptcy and if they need to make surplus income payments.

If the borrower has never proclaimed bankruptcy and they do not need to make surplus income payments, then they are entitled to be discharged 9 months. However, if the bankrupt has surplus income, then a first-time bankrupt will need to pay for 21 months before when they can be discharged

If this is not the person’s first bankruptcy, and they do not have surplus income, they cannot get a discharge before the expiry of 24 months. If that person has a surplus income requirement, then they must pay for 36 months before being able to be discharged.

This is another distinction between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: What do consumer proposals and bankruptcy have in common?

Both a consumer proposal and bankruptcy are lawfully binding treatments that are administered by a Trustee. If you are thinking of a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario, it is vital that you consult with a Trustee to ensure that you completely understand what’s involved, and the costs. You can talk with friends or family that might have applied for one or the other before. It is also important that you get referrals from professionals you trust.

Declaring bankruptcy or doing a consumer proposal are both issues of public record. That means there will be a permanent public record concerning your insolvency that can be accessed by anyone. If your debts are joint or co-signed or guaranteed by someone else, the other person is liable for the debt. That is the case even if you file for either a consumer proposal or personal bankruptcy.

Even these similarities still point out differences between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario.

How do I choose between a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario?

As you can see, when you consider a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario, there are most definitely differences between the two. But they are both formal insolvency processes to eliminate your debt. What’s essential, though, is that you discover the best method to get yourself back on the right track in such a way that will assist you to achieve your long-term goals.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: How to file for bankruptcy?

In order to take advantage of either a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario, you must involve a Trustee. This is a person or company licensed by the OSB to provide the insolvency process. The 10 actions listed below are a guide to the bankruptcy procedure.

  • Call a qualified Trustee and go to a meeting with him or her to talk about your personal circumstance and your alternatives including if it is possible for you to prevent bankruptcy.
  • Deal with the Trustee to complete the needed forms. The Trustee will after that submit the bankruptcy with the OSB.
  • The Trustee notifies your creditors of the bankruptcy.
  • You participate in a meeting of creditors if one is called.
  • You participate in 2 counselling sessions.
  • Based on your personal exemptions, the Trustee markets your available assets; you may additionally need to make surplus income payments to the Trustee.
  • In certain circumstances, you might need to participate in an examination held by an OSB representative.
  • The Trustee prepares a report describing your actions throughout the bankruptcy.
  • You go to the discharge hearing if needed.
  • You obtain your discharge from your bankruptcy.

Afterward, the Trustee completes the administration, including paying a dividend to your creditors, if offered.

Consumer proposals and bankruptcy Ontario aren’t the only ways of obtaining debt relief and consolidating debt

There are additionally other ways of fixing debt problems that do not include a formal process or paying a fee. If you honestly wish to thoroughly and objectively take a look at all your options, contact a Trustee, and meet with him or her. They’ll pay attention to your scenario and concerns and advise you on what will work best for you even if you do not need to file for either a consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario. Their assistance is normally cost-free and non-judgmental.

At my Firm, declaring bankruptcy is only encouraged until all other potential solutions have investigated. A consumer proposal is the only government-approved financial debt settlement strategy and is always the far better bankruptcy alternative.

Consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario: Move on with your life

I hope you have enjoyed this consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario Brandon’s Blog. Both a successfully completed consumer proposal or obtaining your discharge from bankruptcy lets you get back on the road to financial health, relieve the stress you face, and bring you:

  • Freedom from lawsuits and garnishments;
  • The ability to live better than just hanging on one payday to the next;
  • Improved credit scores; and
  • Better health and well-being.

Do you have too much debt? Are you in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt.

You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges.
It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. 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 take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a restructuring process 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 or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

consumer proposal vs bankruptcy ontario
consumer proposal vs bankruptcy Ontario
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHAT IS A LICENSED INSOLVENCY TRUSTEE? READ OUR BEST AND COMPLETE 12 STEP CHECKLIST

what is a licensed insolvency trustee
what is a licensed insolvency trustee

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this what is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the very bottom and click on the podcast.

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee introduction

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee is a question I see asked regularly. Is it the same as a bankruptcy trustee? The answer is yes. A bankruptcy trustee is an old name. Licensed Insolvency Trustee is the new name. The Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (OSB) changed the name in 2015. The change came about partly because of submissions made by the Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professionals (CAIRP).

The change came about since the new name more precisely explains the breadth of solutions they offer to consumers and businesses. The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to describe for the stressed-out person who is facing financial challenges, or the entrepreneur whose business is in financial trouble, what is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee all about and give a 12 point checklist to help you find the best one for you.

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee?

A Licensed Insolvency Trustee is a financial and debt specialist licensed and supervised by the OSB. The OSB released a directive calling for trustees to utilize the classification of Licensed Insolvency Trustee to more precisely show the solutions they offer.

What is the difference between a Licensed Insolvency Trustee, a credit counsellor, and a debt settlement business?

Licensed Insolvency Trustees, credit counsellors, and financial debt settlement companies, all provide financial guidance. However, they are extremely different.

A Licensed Insolvency Trustee is the only person who can file a bankruptcy or consumer proposal for you. A trustee can also offer you financial advice and help you plan on how to repay your debt. Credit counsellors and debt settlement businesses can give you financial advice and information. They can help you make a budget and make plans to repay your debt. But they can’t file a bankruptcy or consumer proposal for you.

Unlike the others, a Licensed Insolvency Trustee is an Officer of the Court, and as such, is the only financial debt relief professional in Canada legally allowed to administer insolvency proceedings under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA).

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee and what can they do for me?

A Licensed Insolvency Trustee will first gather info to comprehend the individual’s or business’s entire circumstance, examine the effects of different choices, discuss them with you and also suggest the one he or she really feels is ideal for you. When filing a restructuring debt settlement proposal or for bankruptcy, Licensed Insolvency Trustees will direct the debtor through the whole procedure, will certainly prepare and submit the needed paperwork, and be the one to deal directly with all of your creditors.

So what is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee? It is the only expert that can offer you a complimentary consultation and advice as well as recommendations. After that, she or he will either direct you what to do if you do not need an insolvency process to repair your financial concerns or administer the insolvency procedure if one is required.

what is a licensed insolvency trustee
what is a licensed insolvency trustee

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee and what sets them apart?

By now you should realize that a Licensed Insolvency Trustee is licensed and supervised by the OSB. No other professional dealing with consumer or business debt issues is. Licensed Insolvency Trustees also have to go through a rigorous course of study and examinations in order to obtain that license.

So what is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee? It is someone who:

  • successfully complete the Chartered Insolvency and Restructuring Professional (CIRP) Qualification Program (CQP), the CIRP National Insolvency Exam and the Insolvency Counsellor’s Qualification Course;
  • passed an Oral Board of Examination;
  • has been found to be a person of good character and reputation; and
  • has been cleared through an RCMP investigation.

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee and how are their fees calculated?

There are set calculations and rules that all Licensed Insolvency Trustees must strictly follow when administering a bankruptcy or proposal. Trustee fees are calculated and drawn from the funds that have been paid into each individual proceeding. Licensed Insolvency Trustees are not allowed to simply set their own fees and rates.

In most bankruptcies and proposals, the Licensed Insolvency Trustee’s fees are based on a tariff set by the BIA. Unlike other professionals, working with a Licensed Insolvency Trustee is not a “fee for service” – this means that a phone call to discuss any questions you have or get ongoing support throughout the process won’t result in an invoice.

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee and how do I find one?

The best way to find one is through a referral from someone that you trust. This could be your lawyer, accountant, a relative or a close friend. Someone you trust, who refers you to someone they trust, is always the best. I take pride that my Firm has many times helped relatives of lawyers and accountants who we work with. If they are willing to refer a family member to us, that is the highest compliment anyone can pay to me as a professional.

You can also contact a local non-profit credit counselling service. There are two benefits to doing this. A local non-profit credit counselling organization is probably one of the most objective places to find out about all your debt relief options. They’re not trying to sell you anything, and they’re not paid on commission. So they can actually help you look at all your options and see if insolvency (a consumer proposal or bankruptcy) is your best option or if there is something else that might make sense.

The OSB maintains a searchable database of all Licensed Insolvency Trustees in Canada. You can search for a trustee located near you. Finding a trustee near you may be convenient, but, it will not give you a sense of whether you feel you can work with that professional.

You can also search for “licensed insolvency trustee” or “bankruptcy trustee” in your favourite search engine. Just be mindful that the companies who appear at the top of your search results with the word “Ad” next to their name have paid for that listing. It has nothing to do with their expertise or rating.

Looking at the online reviews given by people who have worked with them is a great way to start to get a feel for each professional. If they write blogs or have videos posted online, that will also help to get a feel for the personality of the Licensed Insolvency Trustee.

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee and have they been recognized by any rating agencies?

Best Bankruptcy trustees in Vaughan

I am pleased to report that, for the 5th year in a row, Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has been voted as one of the Top 3 Licensed Insolvency Trustees in Vaughan, ON. (Yes, there are more than 3!). It is gratifying to get recognition fo the professional services we provide and our commitment to full service and support for our clients.

So what is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee and how should I go about choosing one? There are many factors that you must consider. Below is our 12 step checklist to make the best choice for you.

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee? Our 12 step checklist to help you find the best one for your situation

  • Do they have the necessary qualifications?
  • How many cases like yours have they done before?
  • Do they go to Court also or do you have to hire a lawyer to do so?
  • Is bankruptcy right for you and is it your only option?
  • How much will it cost you?
  • Will you be dealing with the actual licensee ultimately responsible to the OSB for your file?
  • Will you only be seeing one of many clerks once you enter the insolvency process?
  • How did you feel after meeting the people at their office after your initial consultation?
  • Do they practice exclusively in the bankruptcy/insolvency area?
  • Do they have experience in only personal insolvency matters, only corporate insolvency matters, or both?
  • Do they have enough experience and the time to handle your matter?
  • Will they communicate in a timely manner with you throughout?

As you can see, when trying to answer what is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee and who is the right one for me question, there are many things to consider.

What is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee summary

I hope you found this what is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee Brandon’s Blog about helpful. Sometimes things are too far gone and more drastic and immediate triage action is required.

Do you have too much debt? Are you in need of financial restructuring? The financial restructuring process is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt. You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges.
It is not your fault that you are in this situation. You have been only shown the old ways that do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team uses new modern ways to get you out of your debt troubles while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief freedom.

The stress placed upon you is huge. 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 take the load off of your shoulders and devise a debt settlement plan, we know that we can help you.

We know that people facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a restructuring process 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 or your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

EASY COMMERCIAL RENT RELIEF CANADA: THE SECRET TO CREATING A CORPORATE RESTRUCTURING

The Ira Smith Team is totally operational and both Ira and Brandon Smith are here for a telephone consultation, conference calls and virtual meetings.

Keep healthy and safe everybody.

Commercial rent relief Canada introduction

Commercial rent relief Canada is one of the biggest needs of Canadian businesses. This is a result of the COVID-19 induced economic shutdown. I have written before on this problem and about the Canadian government Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance (CECRA) Program.

This program is part of Canada’s COVID-19 Economic Response Plan. The CECRA has been updated from its original version which I also wrote about. You can view the updated discussion in my blog – COMMERCIAL TENANCIES ACT ONTARIO: NEW FIX FOR YOUR UNRULY LANDLORD’S COVID-19 COMMERCIAL LEASE TERMINATION.

The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to discuss how “unused” leased premises have been treated differently so far under both US and Canadian corporate restructuring. I will also fill you in on the secret to get commercial rent relief Canada for Canadian bankruptcy protection and financial restructuring. Unfortunately, as you will see, it isn’t much of a secret!

Commercial rent relief Canada – The US version

The US bankruptcy courts have been generous and pragmatic in cutting companies who filed under Chapter 11 some slack in relation to leased premises that were unused due to the economic shutdown. There were two cases in particular that I previously wrote about.

Modell’s Sporting Goods, Inc. et al Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings

On March 12, 2020, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court District of New Jersey issued the Order authorizing the Chapter 11 bankruptcy application of Modell’s Sporting Goods, Inc. et al (Modell’s) submitted on March 11. Modell’s is America’s earliest, family-owned ran store of sporting items, sports footwear, clothing and equipment. It was founded in 1889.

On March 27, 2020, the court granted Modell’s court application making an order attending to both a bankruptcy suspension and an operational suspension. The bankruptcy suspension maintained the bankruptcy protection proceedings until April 30, 2020 (the Suspension Period). The operational suspension enables Modell’s to shut down all shops and also not operate. The judge additionally gave Modell’s the right to apply on brief notice to the court to extend the Suspension Period. The order went on to state the stay of proceedings holds throughout the suspension.

As part of their application, Modell’s submitted a modified budget to show what sources of cash it would have and also what expenditures it would pay during the Suspension Period. It likewise showed what expenditures were being incurred, but not paid. Commercial rent on every one of its shops was among the expenditures being accumulated but left unpaid.

Modell did not put any of the commercial lease payments in its amended spending plan. They needed to shut down every one of their stores as a result of the coronavirus pandemic. Shops shut suggests no sales. They were not going to pay rent at the same time the stores were not generating cash.

The court order accepted the modified budget plan. It also verified that the only payments that Modell’s would make were those indicated as most important. The business considered payments to every one of its landlords as non-essential. The court order did indicate that the accumulated and overdue commercial rent payments were not and also were not deemed to be waived or not payable.

Pier 1 Imports took a page from the Modell playbook

In February 2020, Pier 1 Imports, Inc. (Pier 1) declared Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection as part of trying to find a purchaser of its operations. It then closed all of its shops in Canada and most in the United States.

On Tuesday, March 31, 2020, following the Modell’s precedent, Pier 1 applied to the court to stop paying commercial rent on its US retail locations on a temporary basis. Pier 1 had to shutter all of its shops as a result of the COVID-19.

Following the Modell’s model, the court provided its approval. It is interesting to note that no commercial rent relief Canada was sought from the Canadian court.

commercial rent relief canada
commercial rent relief canada

Could this commercial rent relief Canada occur under Canadian bankruptcy protection?

So the concern is, could a business get this new Modell’s/ Pier 1 precedent to take place in a Canadian bankruptcy protection restructuring? Put another way, could Canadian companies being formally restructured get commercial rent relief Canada?

Under the CECRA program, landlords and tenants need to cooperate and agree with each other to apply for that commercial rent relief Canada. However, what if the landlord plays hardball? Can a Canadian firm declare bankruptcy protection in Canada and be successful in having the court order commercial rent relief Canada?

The two corporate restructuring statutes in Canada are the Part III Division I section of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA).

There are no express arrangements in either statute to conjure up commercial rent relief Canada. Actually, the reverse is true. In either a restructuring or liquidation, the case law says that if a leased premise is being used then rent must be paid to the landlord. Fairness is part of the Canadian bankruptcy landscape. There are years of cases on this problem and they all wind up the very same. You don’t even have to be open for business. If you are tying up the location and preventing the landlord from the right of reentry, the rent needs to be paid.

However, there are two comparable sections in each of the BIA and CCAA. Section 183( 1) of the BIA says:

“183 (1) The following courts are invested with such jurisdiction at law and in equity, as will enable them to exercise original, auxiliary and ancillary jurisdiction in bankruptcy and in other proceedings authorized by this Act…”.

The wording has been interpreted by the courts to imply that the bankruptcy court in each province has the sole responsibility to supervise and approve all acts needed to be done for the correct administration of the Canadian insolvency system. This holds whether it is bankruptcy protection restructuring or straight-out bankruptcy liquidation.

The CCAA offers more adaptability in an insolvency business restructuring than the BIA does. Generally, the court will reach its decisions in a CCAA restructuring on the basis of fairness and also reasonableness. The court is required to be worried that what is being recommended is not prohibited and there are cogent reasons regarding why what is being proposed serves to benefit all or most of the creditors affected by the restructuring.

Until recently, a Canadian court has not published a decision in response to an application for commercial rent relief Canada due to the coronavirus pandemic shutdown in a BIA or CCAA restructuring.

We now have a commercial rent relief Canada answer from British Columbia

The case is Quest University Canada (Re), 2020 BCSC 921. Quest University Canada (Quest) filed for CCAA bankruptcy protection in January 2020. It had several motions between January and May to extend the restructuring proceedings.

Also in May, Quest premised its request for a boost in its restructuring interim loan facility, somewhat, on it deferring lease payments on four of its university residences from June-August 2020. Southern Star Developments Ltd. (Southern Star) is the owner of the residences and also Quest’s landlord. Southern Star and its mortgagee Bank of Montreal (BMO), objected to any lease deferment. The court had to figure out whether it is appropriate to allow Quest to delay rent payments to its landlord, Southern Star.

Quest mandated that as part of the educational experience, all students going to Quest were required to reside on campus in the residences. A significant percentage of Quest’s students (some 75%) were international students. In addition, some faculty members resided in the residences.

Effects developing from the COVID-19 pandemic, as experienced in BC, across Canada and all over the world, are well known. On March 12, 2020, Quest’s board of governors declared the closure of Quest to the general public. Students had to leave the campus and finish the springtime and summertime semesters online. All occupants vacated the residences. Only a small number of personnel stayed behind for security purposes.

Then the BC government issued a Ministerial Order whereby it declared a state of emergency. The federal government prohibited the entry of foreign nationals into Canada, initially except the United States under the Quarantine Act. The Canadian government then extended the ban to most travellers from the USA also.

The timing of the pandemic as well as its extreme repercussions couldn’t be worse for Quest in regards to its restructuring efforts.

Quest’s commercial rent relief Canada application like Modell’s and Pier 1

Without referencing the US bankruptcy protection court orders I discussed above, Quest made a similar application to the court. Quest was looking for commercial rent relief Canada just like was given to the US companies in the Chapter 11 cases.

On May 18, 2020, Quest advised Southern Star that it would not be making rent payments for the residences starting in June 2020. Quest said it needed to conserve cash due to the fact that the residences could not be used (the same argument as the Modell’s and Pier 1 cases). Quest mentioned the continuous restructuring process, the closure of on-campus learning and the unpredictability of what academic instruction it would be able to offer in fall 2020 as reasons for the deferral.

The court had so far accepted and approved interim financing to permit the restructuring to continue. Quest told Southern Star that it wished to discuss a rent deferral arrangement over the following numerous months. Quest hoped that Southern Star would be accommodating given their history of working together and the COVID-19 pandemic.

Unfortunately, Southern Star right away showed its unwillingness to do so. Southern Star stated that, without receipt of lease payments from Quest, Southern Star will certainly not have the ability to make its mortgage loan payments to BMO. For apparent reasons, that is not an enviable situation for Southern Star, nor obviously, BMO, to be in.

In late May 2020, Quest sought and obtained an increase in the approved interim financing by $3 million. The cash-flow forecast that supported that application, included the Monitor‘s Second Report, did not reference any kind of rent payments by Quest to Southern Star until October 2020. Accordingly, the accepted interim funding is not adequate to fund Quest’s lease payments over the summer season.

Quest contended that it is critical to preserve the use of the residences and its relationship with Southern Star. Quest says that its ability to restructure and continue as a university depends on it. They also content that Southern Star and BMO will not suffer any prejudice if the rent deferral is allowed. Quest believed that it would be able to make up the deferred payments sometime in the future.

Southern Star and BMO opposed the court granting that relief. They contend that they will be prejudiced if Quest does not have to make the rent payments.

The court’s decision in Quest’s commercial rent relief Canada application

The court’s analysis was very detailed. The BC court reviewed precedent decisions from various provinces, including Ontario. For Quest, an important question that it wanted the court to answer was were the residences being used?

Quest suggested that it left the residences because of safety issues and provincial health and wellness orders relating to the COVID-19 pandemic. It stated that it is only allowed to make use of the residences for student housing. The court did not equate this absence of physical use of the leased facilities by students with a total absence of “use”.

The court concluded that Quest is “using” the residences within the CCAA restructuring because:

  • Quest is allowing some staff members to live there.
  • It is insisting, as against Southern Star as landlord of the residences, according to its right to quiet enjoyment of the residences. Simply put, Quest is exercising its right to “use” the residences, as usual, notwithstanding they are mostly vacant.
  • Certainly, since June 2020, Quest was able to populate the residences with students or other persons safely. This would be consistent with what they have done every past summer season.
  • The court did not see the use over the summertime as being irregular with the specified and allowed use of the residences.
  • As of June and proceeding right into July and August 2020, the principal reason the residences are vacant is no different than from previous summers. In previous summers, Quest had to pay rent to Southern Star because it was still “making use of” the residences.
  • Quest has actually not chosen to disclaim the (Sub)leases. On the contrary, Quest’s evidence is that the residences are essential and it must maintain them to advance the possible restructuring options available to them. The existence of the residences, and Quest’s legal rights to their use, remain a crucial marketing factor in relation to possible financial partners.

Fairness is a typical touchstone in CCAA and all insolvency proceedings. In the court’s view, substantial indicia of unfairness arise by permitting the rental fee deferment. The court stated that it had the option to allow Quest to choose to pay the rent. The court stated however that it did not have the right to prevent Southern Star from requiring payment and taking action in the face of any kind of default.

The court found that it was not appropriate to grant the rent deferment sought and dismissed Quest’s application. In doing so, the court followed the long line of cases in both CCAA and BIA restructuring cases as well as bankruptcy liquidation cases. By not granting the commercial rent relief Canada requested, it differentiated the Canadian insolvency system from the US system as seen in the Modell’s and Pier 1 cases.

A word of caution:

  • There is no discussion in the decision that Quest attempted to claim or rely upon a force majeure argument.
  • Notwithstanding how detailed the court’s analysis is, this BC court decision is not binding on courts in other provinces.

So as I said at the beginning, the secret to getting commercial rent relief Canada in a formal restructuring simply based on this court decision is either reach a deal with the landlord on your own or just hand the premises back to the landlord. Those are the only ways!

Commercial rent relief Canada summary

I hope you enjoyed this commercial rent relief Canada Brandon’s Blog. The Ira Smith Team family hopes you and your family are staying safe, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person who has been affected either through inconvenience or personal family tragedy.

We are all citizens of Canada and we have to coordinate our efforts to stop the spread of the coronavirus. Social distancing and self-quarantining are sacrifices that are not optional. Family members are literally separated from each other. We look forward to the time when things can return to something close to normal and we can all be together again physically.

Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. has always employed clean and safe habits in our professional practice and continues to do so.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. Should you take advantage of the CEBA? I say a resounding YES!. I just wanted to highlight all of the issues that you should consider.

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

Are you now worried just how you or your business are going to survive? Those concerns are obviously on your mind. This pandemic situation has made everyone scared.

The Ira Smith Team understands these concerns. More significantly, we know the requirements of the business owner or the individual that has way too much financial debt. You are trying to manage these difficult financial problems and you are understandably anxious.

It is not your fault you can’t fix this problem on your own. The pandemic has thrown everyone a curveball. We have not been trained to deal with this. You have only been taught the old ways. The old ways do not work anymore. The Ira Smith Team makes use of new contemporary ways to get you out of your debt problems while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you debt relief now.

We look at your whole circumstance and design a strategy that is as distinct as you are. We take the load off of your shoulders as part of the debt settlement strategy we will draft just for you.

We understand that people facing money problems require a lifeline. That is why we can establish a restructuring procedure for you and end the discomfort you feel.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will listen to the unique issues facing you and provide you with practical and actionable ideas you can implement right away to end the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

The Ira Smith Team is totally operational and both Ira and Brandon Smith are here for a telephone consultation, conference calls and virtual meetings.

Keep healthy and safe everybody.

commercial rent relief canada
commercial rent relief canada
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CANADIAN BUSINESS: WHAT WILL BE THE ULTIMATE BUSINESS IN ONTARIO RECOVERY PROGRAM?

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

Canadian business introduction

In April 2020, a survey of entrepreneurs who own what could be called a small Canadian business across the GTA was conducted. It found that almost two-thirds of them might have to shut down for good as they struggle to stay on top of rent and other bills throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I look at entrepreneurs in Canadian business, both small and large, and talk about the one essential ingredient that will determine Canadian business success or failure. This one necessary item may turn out to be the only Canadian business recovery program that will ultimately work.

Canadian business opening-up again

Many are progressively opening up under local, provincial and federal government guidance. They need to navigate a host of constraints, including restrictions on the number of customers at any one time. I have read that many say the restrictions with their added layer of costs may stop them from being profitable. Even though COVID-19 cases appear to be under control in Ontario, companies have actually reopened to dramatically smaller sized groups, imperilling their survival.

To save local Canadian businesses, and the millions they employ, the federal government developed Canada’s COVID-19 Economic Response Plan. The federal assistance programs for Canadian business include:

I have already written about most of these support programs. I have attached relevant links above so that you can read up on the various support programs for Canadian business.

Provincial governments have also stepped up. For example, in Ontario, the Doug Ford Conservative government has implemented:

  1. Interest/penalty relief – Canadian business in Ontario will get five months of interest and fine relief to make payments for taxes administered by the Province. From April 1, 2020 – August 31, 2020, Ontario will not apply any penalty interest on any late-filed returns or incomplete or late tax obligation payments under the Employer Health Tax, Tobacco Tax and Gas Tax obligations. This enhances relief from the federal government on interest and other charges from not remitting the amount owing for corporate income tax.
  2. WSIB payment deferments – Employers can delay WSIB payments for 6 months.
  3. Rent support for local Canadian business – Ontario has partnered with the Government of Canada on the Ontario-Canada emergency commercial rent assistance for small businesses and landlords experiencing financial problems throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

But there are still Canadian business problems

Despite all these support programs, the Canadian business world still has to figure out how to pay the balance of their rent, utility, insurance as well as a host of various other recurring expenses. While some have had the ability to delay these expenses, they can’t do so for life. Companies will become required to take care of their unmet commitments. They will also have to figure out how they are going to go back to paying all their expenses in full once the support programs end and business has not yet come back to the pre-coronavirus pandemic level.

Some companies may have enough cash savings to ride out the pandemic or can access fresh cash resources from owners. That is both good and bad. Entrepreneurs will take from their retirement savings, and in some cases deplete them, in the hopes of keeping their business alive long enough to survive and once again be profitable. It is highly doubtful that Canadian business will be able to borrow from the Banks as a source of fresh capital under these circumstances.

For a lot of others, the crush of past-due costs will certainly limit and maybe even end their business.

What happens when the government support programs end?

That is a big question that I get asked always. The answer is somewhat obvious: Everyone will have to stand on their own two feet just like they had to before the COVID-19 pandemic. Right now all the Canadian business support programs are all scheduled to end August 31. What will happen then?

My personal belief is that the federal and provincial governments will not be able to end the economic response support programs that soon. Rather, I think they will have to extend all the programs again. They may tweak them to begin the process of weaning Canadian business off of government support. Nevertheless, I feel they will have to be extended.

I think the extension will come with stark warnings. I believe the government would not want to extend for more than 90 days, but Christmas will still come in December. Pandemic or no pandemic. Nobody will want to shut off the tap before Christmas. So, that means an extension until the end of the calendar year 2020. With it, the governments will have to warn everyone to get their houses in order now because for certain there will be no more support programs after December 31.

I don’t have any inside information. I am just guessing. But to me, that seems the most realistic to still help Canadian business because entrepreneurs and workers are still all scared. At the same time, the governments’ exit strategy time clock begins ticking. Everyone will have a fair warning.

There is one precious commodity Canadian business will need when the support programs stop

Please humour me. Let us just say you find my prediction to be a reasonable one. On January 1, 2021, Canadian business is not all of a sudden flush with cash. They have survived. Entrepreneurs will still be scared. They certainly will not hire everyone back with an uncertain economic climate. All of the creditors of the businesses will start demanding payment in full. They have been patient and understanding. But now, all business debts will be demanded.

What is the one commodity Canadian business will desperately need? Cash is an obvious one but, no more is coming. Not from the government, the Banks or investors. Entrepreneurs are already tapped out having used personal savings to keep their businesses afloat. The most precious commodity Canadian business will need is TIME. Time to gear up again. Time to get back on their feet and bring in some cash. The Courts will have reopened. Creditors will begin to sue. There will be no more “time-outs” built into our Canadian economic system.

How will businesses get the time they need?

Bankruptcy protection will very likely be the answer

Breathing time that briefly ices up the need to pay off old debt while letting Canadian business function and have the time to find a strategy to keep going. In most cases, that will only be able to happen with a bankruptcy protection insolvency filing.

While bankruptcy is only thought of with going out of business, there are two Canadian federal statutes that allow viable businesses to develop a restructuring plan to lead them back to success. The trouble is that bankruptcy laws don’t give sufficient time to do this while there is still a pandemic. Ongoing COVID-19 health problems will likely suppress the Canadian economy in 2021.

Some out-of-the-box thinking and creativity are going to have to go into bankruptcy restructuring. It will be incumbent on licensed insolvency trustees (formerly called bankruptcy trustees), insolvency lawyers and the courts to recognize viable businesses that deserve to survive. This will be the case even if the processes being recommended are a bit unorthodox. These times are unorthodox and the solutions will have to fit the realities of our time.

I have previously written many blogs on how the two Canadian insolvency statutes can be used to allow Canadian business to restructure. The two statutes are:

For the purpose of this blog, I won’t repeat what I have previously written about corporate restructuring under either the BIA or CCAA. For this blog, what you need to know is that CCAA proceedings are for companies with $5 million or more of debt. BIA proceedings are for those companies with $4,999,999 of debt or less. Both statutes allow for bankruptcy protection filing. They are the Canadian equivalent to Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States.

How will bankruptcy protections help Canadian business?

For numerous companies battling the consequences of COVID-19, the main issue will not be a massive backlog of debt. It will be the inability to pay off the debt fast due to an absence of immediate profits. Cash will be needed to carry on business and make commitments on a go-forward basis. Given enough time, Canadian business will be able to repay its debts which accrued during the coronavirus shutdown. Unfortunately, the time Canadian business will need will be much longer than how much longer creditors will be willing to wait.

This is where bankruptcy protection filing, under either the BIA or CCAA comes in. First, under a bankruptcy protection filing, there is an automatic stay of proceedings. Creditors will not be able to start or continue collection efforts. This includes repossession by secured creditors or beginning or continuing legal proceedings.

Other benefits of a bankruptcy protection filing for Canadian business will be:

  1. Buying some time to come up with a restructuring plan to keep viable businesses in operation.
  2. Saving jobs through restructuring rather than liquidating the assets of many companies.
  3. Allowing for the sale of entire business units to be integrated into other healthier companies in order for businesses to survive, albeit in a different legal format.
  4. To allow for the sale of redundant assets to raise much-needed cash.
  5. Get out of onerous equipment, IP or premises leases/contracts that need to be jettisoned or else a restructuring is not possible.
  6. Stopping secured lenders from calling a default on loan facilities due to either cash or non-cash impairment charges leading to going concern worries.
  7. Obtain operating capital by way of a new debtor-in-possession loan credit facility for restructuring. Most companies outside of a formal restructuring will be unable to borrow any more money as I have already mentioned. However, in a BIA or CCAA Canadian business restructuring, the court can approve emergency funding and raise that operating loan to the top of the pile by giving it a priority secured loan position.
  8. Stopping Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) from starting or continuing garnishee tactics, general collection efforts and especially placing liens on business property for unpaid taxes.
  9. To allow companies to restructure their debt and clean up their balance sheets in a post lockdown economy.

The biggest resource Canadian business will need is also going to be its largest enemy

So as you can see, I believe that the most important resource that Canadian business will need to survive will not be cash. It will be time. Creditors will no longer want to give businesses more time to repay. Companies will need more time to get back on their feet when the COVID-19 Economic Response Plan support programs end.

The only way I can see that truly happening while allowing for proper restructuring of viable businesses will be under bankruptcy protection filings. Those businesses that are not viable, by definition, will fall by the wayside causing more harm to many good people.

So this why I say formal bankruptcy protection proceedings to allow viable businesses to restructure will be the ultimate business recovery program in a post-lockdown Canada.

Canadian business summary

I hope you have found this Canadian business Brandon’s Blog interesting and helpful. The Ira Smith Team family hopes that you and your family members are remaining secure, healthy and well-balanced. Our hearts go out to every person that has been affected either via misfortune or inconvenience.

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

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

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days.

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

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

canadian business
canadian business
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY PROCESS: RIDICULOUS BUT TRUE BANKRUPTCY CHAPTER 11 CASE AND ONTARIO RESTITUTION LAW DEBT

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

Bankruptcy process introduction

This week two totally unrelated items caught my attention when thinking about the bankruptcy process. The first is about Hertz Global Holdings Inc. (Hertz) bankruptcy Chapter 11 case in the United States. An update to my recent blog about Hertz titled HOW HERTZ TEACHES US MODERN AND RISKY RULES OF BUSINESS BANKRUPTCY IN CANADA AND THE USA.

The second item that caught my eye is a decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. The decision really didn’t have anything to do with bankruptcy. However, the Court of Appeal did reference the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) in its decision. It really is about restitution law and the resultant debt.

The zany twist to the Hertz bankruptcy Chapter 11 case

In my June 8 blog about the bankruptcy process used by Hertz, I wrote about the irrational behaviour of investors in trading Hertz stock. Legendary investor Carl Icahn sold his entire Hertz holdings at $0.72 per share. The stock had touched a low of $0.40. For some reason, investors bid the stock up to $5.53. The stock at the time of writing this blog is just under $2.

This made no sense at all. The only thing I can attribute it to is that investors saw an opportunity to buy in during upward momentum, sell-off with a profit, and leave someone else holding the bag. Hertz debentures are selling for pennies on the dollar. The assumption being that those creditors will largely get wiped out as part of the bankruptcy chapter 11 case. If creditors get next to nothing, then for sure shareholders are going to get wiped out. That is what happens in these bankruptcy process cases.

This activity did not escape Hertz’s attention. Now the restructuring team got an idea. What if we could sell more stock, given the interest in our shares. If we sold $1 billion worth, while telling everyone it was worthless, then we would have the necessary cash to fund our restructuring. Better yet, Hertz would not have to borrow money with high rate debtor-in-possession financing. All they needed was to convince the court to approve it. It sounds like a Mel Brooks comedy script!

The Hertz bankruptcy process application for share sale approval motion

June 19, 2020 UPDATE: Late yesterday, Hertz announced that it has determined to end a questionable stock sale of as much as $500 million since the Securities and Exchange Commission questioned and put a hold on the insolvent company’s plans. Hertz is currently in talks for a debtor-in-possession bankruptcy loan of up to $1 billion to fund its business reorg.

On June 11, 2020, Hertz filed its motion for court approval to issue more of its common stock. Since the common shares are being actively traded, Hertz filed its emergency motion to seek emergency relief from the court to allow the Debtor to try to capture value for the unissued Hertz shares for the benefit of the bankruptcy process Estate.

The approval sought from the court was approval to participate in a sale arrangement with Jefferies LLC (Jefferies), to act as the sales representative. Under the sale contract, Hertz might offer and sell common shares of Hertz having an aggregate offering value not to surpass $1 billion. Hertz has 246,775,008 unissued common stock shares. Jefferies will use its best efforts to market, as the sales representative the unissued shares of common stock.

In support of their motion, Hertz advised the court that:

  1. The recent market prices of the trading quantities in Hertz’s ordinary shares creates a special possibility for Hertz to raise funding on terms that are much superior to any kind of debtor-in-possession funding.
  2. If successful, Hertz might possibly offer up to and an aggregate of $1.0 billion of ordinary shares.
  3. Unlike regular debtor-in-possession funding, the issuance of the ordinary shares would certainly not enforce restrictions on Hertz or its bankruptcy process restructuring efforts and would certainly not hinder any of the creditors.
  4. Additionally, the stock issuance would bring no repayment obligations to Hertz.
  5. Other than the Jeffries fee, there would be no other significant costs to obtain the funding through the sale of shares.
  6. Hertz would include disclosure in any prospectus for the sale of the unissued common shares highlighting that a financial investment in these Hertz’s shares involves substantial dangers. This includes the danger that the common stock can inevitably be worthless (emphasis added).

What the court said

After deliberating on the issue, on June 12, 2020, Judge Mary F. Walrath of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware granted Hertz’s motion. She ordered that:

  1. Hertz is allowed, but not required, to enter into the Sale Arrangement with Jeffries and perform all obligations called for in the agreement.
  2. Hertz may, but again is not required to, market the unissued common shares.
  3. Jeffries may earn its fee in accordance with the Sale Agreement.

This is truly novel, yet whacky. Anyone who would buy these shares must be gambling on the fact that market activity will remain hot and that they will be able to sell the shares for a profit.

As I mentioned above, creditors are going to be given a haircut. So how can shareholders expect a return on their investment? Any savvy creditor being asked to agree to a bankruptcy process restructuring plan certainly will insist that creditors must receive payments on account of what they are agreeing to give up, should funds become available, before shareholders see one penny.

Lots of people are going to be left without a chair when the music stops. It will be fascinating to see how this all works out.

Restitution law

This matter is totally unrelated to the Hertz bankruptcy process. It is in Ontario and I found the Court of Appeal for Ontario’s decision very interesting. Especially so because it really didn’t have anything to do with insolvency or bankruptcy either.

On June 11, 2020, the appellate court issued its decision in a matter dealing with restitution law. The case involved a 32-year-old man with high school education. In between September 30 and November 6, 2018, he went on a drug-fuelled rampage, that included the robbery of 10 businesses. He was sentenced to 4.5 years in jail and subject to a restitution order in the amount of $15,000. It was the restitution payment that was appealed.

His lawyer argued that the sentencing judge erred by not taking into consideration whether he had the ability to make restitution before imposing the restitution. They also argued that it will likely hinder his possibilities of rehabilitation. They said that the restitution order ought to be vacated.

The appeal court agreed. In allowing the appeal, the appeal court stated that the purpose of a restitution order is not intended to undermine the culprit’s chance for rehabilitation. The appeal court then went on to equate the rehabilitative aspects of restitution law with the rehabilitation intention of Canadian bankruptcies laws in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). The Court of Appeal for Ontario also correctly stated that a restitution order made by a sentencing judge will survive through any type of bankruptcy of the criminal. This suggests it is there for life and restitution is not meant to be a life sentence.

That is what caught my attention. I never would have equated restitution with bankruptcy or rehabilitation.

Summary

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

I hope you have found this bankruptcy process Brandon’s Blog interesting. I will eagerly watch what happens in the Hertz common share sale and the subsequent trading in the shares. I also never thought of criminal restitution as part of rehabilitation. I also for sure never thought of it in the area of bankruptcy and insolvency.

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

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

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days.

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

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

bankruptcy process
bankruptcy process
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

HOW TO USE QUADRIGA CX SCANDAL TO IMPROVE FINANCIAL LITERACY

quadriga cx
quadriga cx

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.

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

Introduction

Quadriga CX (Quadriga, QuadrigaCX or Quadriga CX) was a subsidiary of Quadriga Fintech Solutions Corp. (Fintech). Fintech operated an online cryptocurrency exchange system where parties interested in acquiring, offering or trading numerous cryptocurrencies were able to complete such purchases on the QCX System.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I explain how the QuadrigaCX financial scandal can be used as an important lesson to aid in our financial literacy.

The Quadriga CX demise

Quadriga was experiencing a liquidity crisis as well as having been incapable to honour withdrawal requests from individuals. Furthermore, Quadriga had not been able to find a substantial amount of cryptocurrency upon the death of QuadrigaCX founder and CEO, Gerald William Cotten.

As a result of the liquidity situation combined with missing cash and cryptocurrency, Fintech and related companies made a decision to call a time out by filing for bankruptcy protection and hope for business restructuring on February 5, 2019, under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act( Canada) (CCAA).

By April 11, 2019, it was obvious that there was no possibility of restructuring. On that date, the Court made a Termination and Bankruptcy Assignment Order was made by the court confirming the process through which the Quadriga CX CCAA procedure would terminate and shift to a corporate bankruptcy under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA).

QuadrigaCX 2020 update

The demise of the cryptocurrency trading system QuadrigaCX arises from a fraudulent scam by Gerald Cotten. Clients delegated their assets to Quadriga, which supplied fraudulent guarantees that those properties would be protected. In truth, Mr. Cotten invested, traded and made use of those properties as he pleased. Running with no proper system of oversight or interior controls, he had the ability to misuse those assets, uncontrolled and undiscovered, eventually bringing down the entire trading exchange.

On January 14, 2019, Quadriga CX announced that Mr. Cotten had passed away in India the previous month. With the Quadriga CX CEO death, he could not continue to manipulate the Quadriga CX platform and hide his fraud. The entire business operation imploded as described above.

It turns out that over 76,000 Quadriga CX customers were owed a combined $215 million. About 40 percent of the clients were from the province of Ontario. The bankruptcy trustee recovered $46 million in assets for distribution to unsecured creditors. The people that relied on QuadrigaCX collectively lost at least $169 million.

The Ontario Securities Commission investigation into the Quadriga CX demise

The staff of the Ontario Securities Commission (OSC) carried out an evaluation of the QuadrigaCX business operations to establish how the system was run, what created its collapse, and where the money went. Over a period of approximately ten months, a multi-disciplinary team of OSC Enforcement Branch staff analyzed trading and blockchain information, interviewed key witnesses and worked together with many regulatory bodies.

Most of the $169 million shortfall arose from Mr. Cotten’s fraudulent conduct. It has been widely guessed that the bulk of the losses arose from crypto properties ending up being lost or hard to reach as a result of Mr. Cotten’s death. The OSC found that most of the $169 million shortage arises from Mr. Cotten’s deceitful conduct.

The OSC report states that the bulk of the loss– about $115 million– occurred from Mr. Cotten’s illegal trading on the QuadrigaCX platform. He opened up Quadriga CX accounts under pen names and attributed himself with phony Quadriga cryptocurrency balances which he traded without knowledge by unwary Quadriga CX customers. He incurred losses when the price of the cryptocurrency would change, thus producing a deficiency in the assets needed to satisfy customer withdrawals. Mr. Cotten covered this deficiency with other customers’ deposits. This indicated that Quadriga CX, a state of the art new technology operated an old-time Ponzi scheme.

It is reported that Mr. Cotten lost an additional $28 million while trading customer deposits on three external cryptocurrency trading systems without permission from, or disclosure to, clients. He also misappropriated millions to fund his and his wife’s, Jennifer Robertson, way of living. In its final months, Quadriga CX had virtually no balances left and was running like a revolving door– brand-new customer deposits were quickly re-routed to money needed for Quadrigacx withdrawals.

In summary form, the OSC described the losses as:

  1. $115 million trading losses sustained by Mr. Cotten on the Quadriga CX platform.
  2. $46 million assets recovered or identified by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee).
  3. $28 million trading losses sustained on external platforms.
  4. $23 million which could not be accounted for because of the poor state of the Quadriga CX books and records.
  5. $2 million of client funds misappropriated for living and travel expenses.
  6. $1 million estimated operating loss.

What the Quadriga CX scandal can teach us for improving our financial literacy

  1. In Canada, lots of crypto property trading systems are not registered. They have taken the view that they do not need to sign up with regulatory authorities. This is an essential message to users and possible users of these platforms. So we need to keep in mind that there may be no regulatory oversight at all on these cryptocurrency trading platforms.
  2. Cryptocurrency trading and the trading platforms are risky. Trading in crypto assets carries threats. Many platforms preserve safekeeping and control of their clients’ crypto assets. Clients just have ordinary unsecured claims against the platform for their assets. Clients are relying upon the solvency and stability of the system operators. Crypto asset trading systems might not operate transparently. Clients might have restricted or no details regarding how the platform is protecting and managing their assets.
  3. Cryptocurrency system clients ought to perform due diligence and look out for signs of fraud. Anyone considering delegating their assets to a crypto asset trading platform should take action to learn more about the platform’s operations and approach to control the risk of monitoring. I recognize that this may not be feasible with the present degree of disclosure supplied by some systems. Cryptocurrency trading platforms are a bit of a black box that ordinary people do not really understand.
  4. If cryptocurrency trading platforms were required to sign up with the provincial regulatory authority, perhaps there would be some oversight and protection for consumers.
  5. Platforms need to make sure that they have systems as well as controls in a position to take care of risks. Having an internal control system to take care of risks, including those pertaining to business protection, vital employees and compliance with regulations is an important step for consumer confidence. The trading platforms should be able to describe the systems used to protect client assets. That way the public at least has a chance of being able to properly evaluate between different systems.
  6. Systems should reveal key details to customers. Supplying clients with exact details regarding crucial aspects of their operations – such as asset wardship and storage techniques, charges, reported volumes, system protection actions and internal controls will help with educated decisions by investors and also advertise capitalist confidence in the platform.

Summary

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

I hope you have found this Quadriga CX scandal Brandon’s Blog helpful. Cryptocurrency trading is still in the realm of the Wild West. Further work must be done before crypt currency can be widely used as a cash replacement. There are many financial literacy lessons we can garner from the Quadriga CX story. Even if Mr. Cotten had lived, the Ponzi scheme could only have been kept afloat for a finite time period before it would implode.

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

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

Income, revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs, their companies and individual Canadians. This is especially true these days.

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

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

Call a Trustee Now!