Tag: court appointed

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

RECEIVERSHIP MEANING: OUR NURTURING 8 POINT CHEAT-SHEET ANSWERS WHAT IS RECEIVERSHIP

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.

Receivership meaning introduction

My last Brandon’s blog was about bankruptcy meaning; the duties, rights and responsibilities of the different stakeholders in a bankruptcy administration. So I thought it would be fitting to follow that up with a blog on the topic of receivership meaning.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I answer the 14 most often asked questions about the meaning of receivership.

Receivership meaning: What’s the meaning of “receivership” in simple words

The receivership meaning in English, according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary is:

“Definition of receivership

1: the office or function of a receiver

2: the state of being in the hands of a receiver”

Those are the simplest words I can think of. Unfortunately, it does not tell you much. I doubt that it aids in your understanding. Simple words don’t help. Let’s get a little more complex.

Receivership meaning: What does it mean when a receiver is appointed?

First, a receivership is a remedy for secured creditors, such as a chartered bank or another lender who lent money to a company and took back valid security. One of the terms of the security agreement will be that upon one or more events of default, the secured creditor has the right to appoint a receiver.

When a secured creditor wishes to realize upon the assets of the borrower company that is subject to its security, they employ the services of a Licensed Insolvency Trustee (Trustee) to be the receiver. A receivership is performed under the authority of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA).

In Canada, only a Trustee can be a receiver. The secured creditor appoints the receiver to take possession of the collateral covered by the lender’s security. The receiver then conducts a receivership.

Receivership meaning: How is a receiver appointed?

There are two kinds of receiver appointments: (i) private appointment; or (ii) court appointment. The type of appointment depends upon the circumstances facing the putative receiver. The main question to answer is are there practical or legal reasons why the court is required to make decisions and oversee this proposed receivership. If no, then a private appointment can take place. If yes, then an application to court needs to be made to have a receiver appointed.

Before being able to either make a private appointment or seek the assistance of the court, the secured creditor must give the borrower company adequate notice. It must provide the borrower with written notice of the events of default and demand full repayment of the loan. The lender must give the company at least 10 days’ notice before being able to appoint the receiver. The company that borrowed the money can waive the 10 day notice period, but the lender cannot.

Receivership meaning: What happens when the receiver is called in?

When the receiver is appointed, there are certain steps that the receiver must take. The receiver is charged with the responsibility of taking possession of the assets of the company in receivership. The receiver must get possession and control of the assets to safeguard them, wherever they are located. The receiver must make sure that an inventory of all the assets is quickly taken and that the assets are adequately insured.

Keep in mind that the assets belong to a company that was carrying on an active business. Therefore, one of the first things the appointed receiver must decide is whether or not to carry on the business of the company. The receiver must answer many questions, including:

  • Was the business already shut down when the receiver was appointed?
  • Are experienced employees available and willing to work for the receiver?
  • Will the assets of the company be worth more if sold on an operating business basis than on a shutdown liquidation basis?
  • Can the receiver operate the business in a cash-flow positive way?
  • If the receiver is estimating that the business being run in receivership will produce negative cash flow, is the secured creditor willing to fund the losses to take the chance that the assets will sell for a higher price than if the business is shut down right away?
  • Are there any legal, regulatory, or environmental issues that would preclude the receiver from operating the business?
  • Can the business be run safely?
  • Is there property located on the company’s premises that belong to third parties and therefore are not assets of the company covered by the lender’s security? This includes any assets, normally inventory, that might be subject to the right of revindication.

These are just some of the considerations for the receiver. The receiver must be able to make decisions rather quickly. The receiver must also be able to support the decisions with facts and evidence. So as you can see, the receivership meaning, in the beginning, means that there is a lot of hectic activity and decisions.

receivershp meaning
receivership meaning

Receivership meaning: Under receivership meaning

So when the company is placed in receivership, it is under receivership. Once the receiver makes the various decisions I talked about above, with facts backing them up, the receiver then needs to get approval.

In a private appointment, the receiver only needs the approval of the secured creditor that appointed the receiver in an attempt to recover its secured loan. In a court appointment, the receivership meaning is that the receiver needs to take several steps.

First, the appointed receiver should make sure that the secured creditor who applied to the court for the receivership appointment order is onside with the receiver’s recommendations. Once that is the case, the receiver needs to prepare its report to court to advise the court of the receiver’s activities up to that date and the receiver’s recommendations for going forward in the receivership administration. The receiver is asking the court for its approval of the actions and activities of the receiver to date and for its go-forward recommendations.

Receivership meaning: What does a receiver do in business

Once the receiver receives the appropriate approval from the holder of the secured debt in a private appointment, or the court order approving the receiver’s recommendations, it then proceeds with implementing its recommendations in the receivership administration. If the receiver is continuing to run the business while advertising the business assets for sale, that is called a going-concern sale.

If the receiver is not operating the business and is just selling the assets of the closed-down business, that is called a liquidation sale. That is what happens in a liquidation.

Receivership meaning: What is the difference between receivership, liquidation, and insolvency?

When trying to figure out the receivership meaning, I have been asked the following questions many times:

  • What is the difference between receivership and liquidation?
  • What’s the difference between liquidation and insolvency?
  • What happens when a company goes into receivership in Canada?

I hope that based on what you have read so far, you now understand that receivership is an enforcement action started by the holder of secured debt or a secured loan. Liquidation can have two meanings. The first one is when the receiver (or bankruptcy trustee) sells the assets while NOT operating the company’s business. The second meaning of the word is in the phrase “statutory liquidation”. This happens when the shareholders decide to close down the business, but the value of all the assets is enough to provide funds to not only pay off all the debts. It also provides funds for the shareholders. A statutory liquidation happens when the company is solvent.

Insolvency, or insolvent, is a financial state. It means that the company cannot pay its debts as they come due. It also means that if the company’s assets are liquidated, there would not be sufficient funds to pay off all of the liabilities.

Finally, my whole discussion above is meant to explain in a receivership meaning sense, what happens when a company goes into receivership in Canada.

Receivership meaning: How do receivers get paid

The financial institution or other secured creditor who is responsible for the appointment of the receiver is liable to pay for the cost of the receivership. The receiver has a first charge against the assets of the company secured by the lender. That first charge is subject only to any valid trust claim against those same assets.

If the assets are insufficient to pay for the cost of the receivership and fully repay the outstanding debt of the secured creditor, then that creditor will suffer a shortfall.

Receivership 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.

receivership meaning
receivership meaning
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

TOP COURT APPOINTED RECEIVER SECRET: DETAILS MATTER

court appointed receiver

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

Introduction

I recently read an interesting case from the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta involving a court appointed receiver. To me, it highlights that sometimes the simplest of things can provide major difficulty. I will explain, but first, I will go over some basic facts that will help you understand the issue in this case better.

What is a court appointed receiver?

When a borrower defaults on its borrowing agreement, typically by non-payment, the secured creditor needs to decide if it is required to enforce against its security. The most common method for a lender to use is receivership. There are 2 types of these procedures in Canada; 1) private appointed or; 2) court appointed.

Normally, the procedure begins with the secured creditor seeking advice from its legal counsel and the receiver it is thinking of using. If it is chosen that there should be a receiver appointed, the secured creditor, normally a financial institution, then makes a selection. They can either appoint the receiver by private letter of appointment or make an application to the Court for an Order designating the receiver (court-appointed).

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) requires that just a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) can work as a receiver. A privately appointed receiver acts on behalf of the selecting secured creditor. A court appointed receiver has a duty of care to all creditors.

1305402 Alberta Inc v 0774238 B.C. Ltd, 2019 ABQB 982

This case was an application by the court appointed receiver (as a British Columbia Court designated receiver of two individuals and also several companies) to have funds in the amount of $281,711.11 paid to it in its capacity as the receiver. The application on its face seemed simple.

The British Columbia Securities Commission (the “Securities Commission”) made considerable enforcement orders versus the individuals and the companies (the “Debtors”). The total fines exceeded $9 million in total. They arose from the Debtors having gotten from various parties real estate financial investments without a prospectus and various other violations.

The Securities Commission got a receivership court order from the Supreme Court of British Columbia on October 3, 2019, appointing a receiver (the Receivership Order). The Debtors are the named parties whose assets the Receivership Order covers.

This application in the Alberta Court was made by the court appointed receiver to take possession of surplus cash paid into the Alberta Court, available from the sale of a property located in the Province of Alberta.

The Court’s problems

On the face of the Receivership Order, it was difficult to tell which parties were originally served with notice of the case. The Receivership Order indicates that a list of those served was attached as Schedule A. Yet Schedule A was not the service list. Rather, it was an example of the Receiver’s Certificate to be utilized in securing financing of the receivership. There was also a Schedule B to the Receivership Order. Unfortunately, it also was of no help. Its only purpose was to list the legal description of the subject land.

Counsel for the applicant argued that certain findings in the original receivership application would decide the outcome of this case. As a result, the Master said that it would certainly have been handy to understand whether the objecting party to this application had any type of capacity to make any kind of argument now!

For example, was the matter in this application already decided in the original motion, or, are there any estoppel issues that would stop someone with notice of the original receivership application from objecting now? In the end, the Master decided that the documents now before the Alberta Court was not adequate to figure out those problems now.

Duties of a court appointed receiver

In addition to having a general duty of care to all stakeholders, the specific duties are spelled out in the Receivership Order. Like all such orders, this one gave the receiver the duty to take possession of all of the assets of the Debtors.

The funds in Court are surplus from a sale or foreclosure in Alberta known as the “Rocky View Lands”. There was a consent order for repossession in the foreclosure action giving the mortgagee title. It was not readily evident from the material before the Master just how surplus proceeds were generated. Nevertheless, the funds were being held by the Court and the receiver was applying to take possession of the cash under its Receivership Order powers and duties.

The receiver’s problem

The proceeds were paid into Court on the application of the previous authorized owner of the Rocky View Lands. Unfortunately, that owner was not one of the Debtors! Just to make matters worse, one of the individuals who were one of the Debtors, filed an affidavit that appended a purported Trust Agreement. The Trust Agreement stated that the owner of the Rocky View Lands was holding the property in trust for 19 different named investors who were opposing this application.

The Master held that the applicant did not adequately prove its case to its entitlement to the funds paid into the Court. The owner of the lands was not one of the Debtors. It was only the property of the Debtors the court appointed receiver had authority over.

So the Master decided that the parties could come back to Court for a full trial to figure out who really had an interest in the funds. This could only be decided after full argument by both the receiver and the opposing parties. It was too early to direct that the funds be paid to the court appointed receiver now.

The devil is in the details

From the Master’s decision, it is obvious that the court appointed receiver came to Court without knowing all the details. In addition, the details that it must have known about who was served with the original receivership application were missing. I am sure this receiver was not trying to pull a fast one over anybody – they were just sloppy.

A detail like whose property was the receiver trying to take possession of is not a small thing. A detail like was any party who was opposing the receiver’s request already stopped from raising such opposition is also not such a small thing. The Master was correct in not allowing the receiver’s application to take possession of the cash sitting in the Alberta Court. This receiver will have to do its homework for when it comes back to Court when a full hearing is conducted.

Summary

I hope you have seen why details matter. Not only for a Court but for a licensed insolvency trustee also. When someone comes to consult with me about their business or personal debts and financial situation, I need details too so that I can fully understand their situation.

Do you or your company have too much debt and in need of debt restructuring? Wouldn’t it be beautiful, though, if you could do a turnaround?

The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a debt 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.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHAT IS A CREDITOR IN BUSINESS LAW NOT TO DO?

What is a creditor introduction

The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to tell you a true story that all business people can learn from. Especially those wishing to provide consulting services to stakeholders in an insolvency proceeding. Let’s start simply by answering what is a creditor.

A creditor is a person or company that has advanced credit and is owed the payment by a different person or company. The debtor is the party that owes the money and a creditor is a person or company that wishes to be paid.

Vaughan Crossings Inc.

In January 2017, my Firm became the court-appointed receiver of the real property of Vaughan Crossings Inc. (VCI). VCI owned real property comprised of 5.5 acres of commercial development land located at the northwest corner of Dufferin and Centre Streets in the City of Vaughan. The first mortgagee made the application to Court for our appointment. The second mortgagee was a fund made up of many small investors.

Upon our appointment, we learned that the second mortgagee stakeholders had retained a business consultant to advise and assist these investors to try to obtain value out of the receivership from their investment. We dealt with the business consultant throughout the receivership.

It became clear to everyone that there was insufficient value for the second mortgagee group to recoup any funds through the sale of the property. So, the business consultant put together a group which included those who had registered a lien against the property for non-payment and the second mortgagee group.

The business consultant was not paid in cash by the second mortgagee group for his work. His fee and costs were also part of the buying group. They ended up paying above market value in all cash. I was not involved in their financing discussions so, I don’t know how they were able to get the required financing.

The sale was completed and we were discharged as the court-appointed receiver. Now it gets even more interesting.

The business consultant

The second mortgagee group of VCI was put together by a promoter. It turns out that promoter had other properties that they financed by way of the second mortgage the same way. My Firm was not involved in those other properties. However, it appears the same business consultant was involved in at least one other property.

It also appears that the business consultant experienced the same problem in that other property that he did in VCI; no cash to be paid from. In fact, as it turns out, he didn’t even have a retainer to act on behalf of the second mortgage investors in those other properties. That didn’t stop him from trying to work that property and chase his VCI dollars!

The court case

That issue was decided in the court case, The Superintendent of Financial Services v. Textbook Student Suites (525 Princess Street) Trustee Corporation, 2018 ONSC 7392 (CanLII). The consultant’s primary claim is against the Investors’ Committee. He asserts to be entitled to costs for solutions that he executed for the board. He claimed against the Investors’ Committee that because of the work he did in advising them, his charges need to be safeguarded by a court-ordered charge against the properties.

He claims that as a “bankruptcy expert” that his solutions were for the advantage of the stakeholders. Therefore, he ought to be paid his charges in advance of any kind of distributions to lenders.

He also said that his job also helped the lenders in their recuperation of the funds owing to them. He did not provide the court with any case law to support his position. Rather, he was relying on the inherent jurisdiction of the court to order such security.

The analysis

Of course, there was not a written agreement between the consultant and the Investor’s Committee signed by both parties. The Judge stated that the legislation is well-settled that in identifying whether the parties had a binding agreement, the court will take into consideration whether they reached agreement on every one of the material terms. One term that can be material is whether an arrangement requires to be in writing or whether an oral contract will be enough.

As it turns out, there were several drafts of the consultant’s engagement letter discussed with the Chair of the Investors’ Committee. However, the Investor’s Committee found the engagement letter to be too vague. They told the consultant this and asked him to provide a more detailed engagement letter of the activities he would undertake, the time estimate for each phase of his work and what his hourly rate would be for those services. The consultant did not provide a more formal engagement letter and as a result, one was never signed.

Rather, the court found that the consultant continued working. At the same time, he was exchanging emails with the Investors’ Committee. The Committee learned that at this same time, the consultant was trying to strike a deal with the second mortgagee stakeholder in my VCI file. Now the Investors’ Committee felt that the consultant may have a conflict, and did not seek an engagement letter to sign. At the same time, the consultant advised the Investors’ Committee that his retainer, was subject to their legal counsel obtaining a court-ordered charge for his fee and costs ahead of any distribution to be paid to the second mortgage investors.

This email turned out to be the downfall of the consultant in this court case. The court found that by this email, the consultant knew that he did not have that priority, yet was continuing his work. No court application was ever made to obtain that court-ordered charge. The consultant tried advancing all sorts of other arguments as to why he should now be granted the priority claim, but none were persuasive, or even correct!

The Judge ruled against the consultant. So, not only did the consultant not get paid for his work, but he also had costs awarded against him for losing this court battle.

So what is a creditor not to do?

What you should not do is:

  • Not start working if you do not have a properly written retainer to provide the consulting services.
  • Even if you have the properly written retainer, know how you are going to be paid and that the party you are contracting with has the ability to pay.

This is especially true in an insolvency situation. In a receivership or bankruptcy administration, there are many claimants against the assets. Many times the creditor claims are competing. So anyone wishing to provide goods or services to a stakeholder in an insolvency administration better make sure there is a clear contract and know who is going to be actually paying. This consultant found out the hard way that a court is not going to protect you for your mistakes later on, no matter how reasonable you believe it is.

What is a creditor?

Is your business in financial distress because you cannot collect your billings? Do you not have adequate funds to pay your creditors as their bills to you come due?

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

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

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

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

what is a creditor

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

MOVE FAST TO OBJECT TO AN ONTARIO RECEIVERSHIP COURT ORDER

What is a receiver in insolvency?

A recent case heard in the Court of Appeal for Ontario clarifies what the time limit is to object to an order made in a Court-appointed receivership of a company in Ontario. The bottom line is you better move fast. Before I describe this very interesting decision, I should first remind newer readers on some receiver 101 basics.

What is it?

A receivership is a remedy for secured creditors to enforce their security. In the event, the company defaults on its loan agreement, normally by non-payment, the secured creditor. There are two types of these proceedings in Canada; 1) privately appointed or; 2) court appointed. A receiver might additionally be selected in an investor dispute to complete a task, liquidate assets or market a business.

Typically, the process begins with the secured creditor consulting with a Receiver. If it is decided that there should be a receiver appointed, the secured creditor then makes a choice. They can either appoint the receiver by written appointment letter (privately appointed) or make a motion to the Court for an Order appointing the receiver (court-appointed).

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) states that only a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) can act as a receiver. A privately appointed receiver acts on behalf of the appointing secured creditor. A court-appointed receiver has a duty of care to all creditors.

What are the duties of a receiver?

The receiver’s first duty is to take possession and control of the assets covered by the secured creditor’s security in a private appointment, or all the assets indicated in the court order in a court appointment. The receiver must decide whether it can get a higher value for the assets if it operates the business. Alternatively, the receiver may decide that the risk of operating the business is not worth it in terms of any meaningful increase in the value of the assets.

The receiver then develops a plan to on the running of the business and for the eventual sale of the assets. The type of business and the nature of the assets will dictate what approach the receiver will take. In the meantime, the receiver must inventory all the assets, protect them and make sure there is adequate insurance in place for what the receiver wishes to do in terms of running the business and selling the assets.

In a private appointment, the receiver needs to get the approval of the secured creditor before embarking on the business and asset plan. In a court appointment, the receiver requires the approval of the court.

What happens when a company goes into receivership?

When the company goes into receivership, senior management and the Directors lose most of their authority for decision making. The Directors’ general corporate duty of maintaining corporate records continues, but any decision-making about the running of the business or its assets will not be effective. This is especially true in a court appointment. The subject of Director liability is too broad to start mentioning in this Brandon’s Blog. i am planning to soon write a blog on that topic.

Management’s and employees’ responsibilities about the business in a practical sense will stop upon the appointment of the receiver. Their advice and help are only required if requested by the receiver. They certainly will not be paid for any efforts unless the receiver agrees in writing to make money available for their pay.

Court of Appeal for Ontario says you better move fast

Why the confusion? Isn’t the process for an appeal of a court order straightforward? The confusion comes about because, in the standard model Appointment Order of the Commercial List of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, the court-appointed receiver is appointed under two statutes:

  1. Section 101 of the provincial Ontario Courts of Justice Act, RSO 1990, c C.43 (CJA).
  2. The federal BIA, section 243(1).

The applicant, in this case, was the purchaser of assets from a court-appointed receiver of a company. One of the standard provisions in the Appointment Order is that anyone wishing to take legal action against the receiver must first get the approval of the court to do so.

They brought an application for authorization to sue the receiver over a disagreement arising from the purchase of the assets from the receiver under the asset purchase agreement. On May 17, 2018, the lower court judge dismissed the application, finding that their allegations were not supported by the evidence. On November 8, 2018, the same judge refused their demand to resume the application based on new evidence.

The applicant filed appeals from both decisions. Its notices of appeal were on time under the provincial CJA, under which there is a 30-day time limit for commencing an appeal. They were late under the federal BIA, which imposes a 10-day time limit.

The lower court judge dismissed the appeals. He held that the BIA was the governing authority for the appeal, not the CJA. He stated that the origin of authority under which the receiver was appointed was section 243( 1) of the BIA and therefore appeals are governed by the BIA, not the CJA. He further went on to say that the appointment also under the CJA did not have the result of ousting the BIA as the source of authority. He further held that it also cannot supersede the federal BIA holds paramountcy over the provincial CJA.

receivership

Business Development Bank of Canada v. Astoria Organic Matters Ltd., 2019 ONCA 269

The Court of Appeal for Ontario decision was released on April 8, 2019. The appeal court found that this was a very narrow issue to decide so that it did not have to get into the merits of the case of the purchaser wanting to sue the receiver over a disagreement arising from the purchase of the assets from the receiver under the asset purchase agreement.

The Court of Appeal rejected the applicant’s appeal and did not find that the chambers judge made any errors. They said that when the order sought to be appealed was made in reliance on jurisdiction under the BIA, the proper appeal path is the BIA.

The lower court, the Ontario Superior Court Justice Commercial List, rejected the purchaser’s demand to sue the receiver, which is the decision the applicant wishes to appeal. The requirement to get leave of the court to sue the receiver comes from the Appointment Order. The court’s authority to include that arrangement order comes from the statutory power to appoint a receiver under s. 243( 1) of the BIA.

The Court of Appeal agreed that the legal power to appoint a receiver is also found in s. 101 of the CJA. But considering that authority for the leave to take legal action against the receiver comes from the BIA in spite of that the receiver was appointed under both laws, the appeal is governed by the BIA as a matter of paramountcy.

Therefore the Court of Appeal for Ontario dismissed the applicant’s appeal and awarded costs against them.

Does your company need to move fast?

Does your company have way too much debt? Is your company’s cash flow not enough to meet all of its financial obligations? Are you afraid that your company’s main secured creditor is about to demand repayment of its loan in full and you just can’t move fast enough to save your company?

If you answered yes, call the Ira Smith Team today so we can end the tension and anxiousness that these financial problems have triggered. We will develop a plan special for your company, to save it from extinction.

Call the Ira Smith Team today. We have years and generations of experience restructuring and saving companies looking for financial restructuring or a debt settlement approach. As a licensed insolvency trustee, we are the only professionals acknowledged, accredited and supervised by the federal government to provide insolvency advice to save companies.

You can have a no-cost analysis to aid you so we can repair your company’s debt problems. Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will certainly allow you to get back to Starting Over Starting Now.

receivership

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

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

2

Stalking horse credit bid: Introduction

In last week’s vlog, “STALKING HORSE ASSET PURCHASE AGREEMENT: THE WEINSTEIN COMPANY GALLOPS INTO A COURT SUPERVISED SALES PROCESS“, I described what a stalking horse asset purchase agreement is. I also defined and described the proposed stalking horse credit bid process of The Weinstein Company. That process was approved last Friday by a Delaware bankruptcy judge. The Court delayed the court sales auction by a couple of business days to May 4, 2018.

Stalking horse credit bid: Our earlier case studies

Over the last few weeks, I have provided some case studies from our files for both personal and corporate insolvency matters. As a refresher, these case study vlogs are:

Stalking horse credit bid: Our stalking horse sales process case study

This is the last vlog along our case study theme. The purpose is to show the decision making that the Court goes through in being asked to approve a stalking horse credit bid and a stalking horse sales process in a corporate insolvency file.

We were Court-appointed as Receiver and Manager of a club operating a golf course, restaurant and party function business. The first secured creditor filed its motion to appoint us. We were appointed very close to Christmas that year. Obviously, the golf course was not operating at the time of our appointment. The food and beverage facilities only had one remaining Christmas party and the annual club New Year’s party. No parties were booked yet into the New Year.

We did the normal things a Receiver does such as:

  • taking physical possession of the premises and the books and records;
  • identifying if there were any assets located off premises; and
  • arranging for property and liability insurance.

We were able to use the time to understand the business and the nature and extent of the assets.

There was already a purchaser ready to give an offer to purchase the Receiver’s right, title and interest in the operating assets comprising the club’s businesses. We arranged for an appraisal of the assets and business. We received and reviewed the appraisal. The secured creditor told us the form of offer they would support.

Armed with the appraisal information and the secured creditor information, we entered into a conversation with the potential purchaser. The amount this purchaser told us it was willing to pay was far more than appraised value and above the minimum threshold for acceptance from the secured creditor.

Stalking horse credit bid: Our stalking horse offer

We decided that a stalking horse bid process would be ideal. We doubted that any party would bid higher than the value this potential purchaser was discussing. It made sense to also have the court supervised sales process completed prior to April, so that it would be the purchaser opening up and preparing the course for play and running the food and beverage business, rather than the Court appointed Receiver.

The potential purchaser agreed to become a stalking horse bidder and to the timeline. We and our legal counsel worked with the potential purchaser and its legal counsel to prepare a draft stalking horse asset purchase agreement. The purchase price was the amount this now stalking horse purchaser was always discussing.

Stalking horse credit bid: We galloped off to Court

We filed our motion for approval of our activities to date, requested permission to enter into the proposed stalking horse agreement and sought approval for our proposed stalking horse sales process. The Court had no problem with our activities to date, or the stalking horse agreement, but did not like our truncated stalking horse sales process. We were not able to be in Court until February and we wished to complete the sale by March 31. The Court felt that was not enough time to run a sales process that was fair to all potential bidders. Our legal counsel attempted to persuade the Judge that comparing the appraisal (which the Court saw but our purchaser did not see) and the value of the stalking horse offer, we did not feel that there would be any other bidders.

We could not persuade the Court. The Judge approved everything, but he amended the timeline so that we would run a process that would last at least 5 weeks from the time we ran our advertisement for this business opportunity.

The Court considers various factors when asked to approve a receivership or bankruptcy sales transaction. The basis for this comes from a 1991 Court of Appeal for Ontario decision in Royal Bank of Canada v. Soundair Corp., 1991 CanLII 2727 (ON CA). In no particular order, the Court is concerned with:

  1. Whether the Receiver has made enough effort to get the best price and has not acted improvidently.
  2. Considering the interests of all parties.
  3. The efficacy and integrity of the process used to get offers.
  4. If there has been unfairness in the working out of the process.

In the Judge’s opinion, a 5 week sales process would ease any concerns he had.

ISI 4
stalking horse credit bid

Stalking horse credit bid: The outcome

We amended our sales process in accordance with the Judge’s instructions. We then:

  • ran the advertisement and issued our preliminary “teaser” sales document to all those that requested it; and
  • set up our online data room of pertinent business and other information about the assets and business operations.

Anyone who wished to do due diligence signed our confidentiality agreement. Everyone who signed our confidentiality agreement was then provided with a unique password to enter the online data room.

The due diligence period ended and since everyone knows the amount of the stalking horse offer, no other potential bidders submitted an offer. Nobody wanted to bid more.

We went back to Court to tell of the results and obtained Court approval to complete the transaction of the stalking horse bidder whose asset purchase agreement was already approved by the Court.

In the meantime, spring had arrived. We hired the necessary golf course superintendent and other maintenance and operating staff and opened up the golf course. We ran the golf club until the sale was completed near the end of June that same year. In the eyes of the Court fairness was achieved, we operated the golf club and the secured creditor was happy with the result of the sale.

Stalking horse credit bid: Is your business facing financial problems?

This case study shows how we were able to satisfy all stakeholders in a Court supervised sales process, to transfer the assets to a new business, remit funds to the secured creditor on a basis acceptable to them and meet the requirements of the Court.

Is your business facing financial problems? Perhaps your company is in need of a restructuring. The Ira Smith Team can develop a restructuring plan which may or may not include the need to file for bankruptcy protection.

The Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. Team understands the pain you are going through trying to keep your company alive while trying to negotiate with potential purchasers. We understand that you are playing beat the clock, and the pain and stress you are feeling thinking that you may just run out of time. The bankruptcy protection process can ease this stress and provide a level playing field so that no potential purchaser takes advantage of you.

The Ira Smith Team has a great deal of experience in running a stalking horse stalking horse asset purchase agreement. The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. Call the Ira Smith Team today for your free consultation. We can end your pain and put your company back on a healthy profitable path, Starting Over, Starting Now.

stalking horse credit bid 0
stalking horse credit bid
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

COURT APPOINTED ESTATE TRUSTEE FROM OUR CASE FILES

320efcd005100f3ee3522fefba70f917 3

Court appointed estate trustee: Introduction

In last week’s vlog, CLAIM BANKRUPTCY IN ONTARIO CASE STUDY: SHE REALLY WANTED TO BUT WE STOPPED HER AND SOLVED HER PROBLEMS, our video provided a case study about a doctor we helped solve her pain and get her life back on track. This week, I want to tell you about another one of our cases where we acted as the court appointed estate trustee. It was a bit unusual, however, it did call on me to use my skill sets as a licensed insolvency trustee.

It seems straightforward so what do you need us for?

An estates lawyer we know contacted us to help him solve a problem for his client. His client was a single man. His mother, whose husband predeceased her, passed away. Her only assets were two pieces of real estate; one a commercial property and the other the family home. The fully leased commercial property was producing income.

On the surface, it appeared to be a very simple situation. Two pieces of real estate and the only beneficiaries were the single man and his single sister. There were no spouses or grandchildren involved. So I asked our lawyer friend the obvious question: “It seems straightforward so what do you need us for?”.

The facts

The lawyer told me that:

  1. his client and his sister cannot agree on anything;
  2. the sister’s lawyer is making unreasonable requests;
  3. the sister is a hoarder, which is a mental health issue;
  4. nobody lives in the home and the utilities turned off services a long time ago; and
  5. the sister has hoarded so much personal property in the home you cannot get past the front door!

The lawyer went on to say that the situation cries out for an expert to intervene to get things done so that the properties can be sold and the funds distributed. Neither sibling is capable of agreeing with the other and then doing what needs to be done. The receivership fees to solve their problems would be less than the legal fees spent fighting and not solving anything.

Please don’t call me the receiver

After a thorough discussion with the lawyer, I said it sounds like what you need is a for the Court to appoint a receiver. The lawyer responded that he felt he could get the other side to agree to the appointment of a custodian, but not to any proceedings called anything remotely close to a receiver or licensed insolvency trustee.

I said to my lawyer friend, that problem is easy to solve. How about we call ourselves either an estate trustee or asset manager? He loved the asset manager title.

The agreement

We took part in a conference call with our lawyer friend and the lawyer for the sister. Everyone discussed all the issues and we pointed out our firm’s wealth of experience in acting as a receiver in complex real estate matters.

Each lawyer agreed that assuming the finer points could be worked out, the brother’s lawyer would go ahead with a motion, on consent, to have our Firm act as the court appointed asset manager.

We provided our lawyer friend with a copy of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Commercial List model receivership order. He then amended it to fit the particulars of this situation and to do a global change from receiver to the title asset manager.

The appointment

Of course, the finer points could not be agreed to. Rather than the matter proceeding on a consent basis, the motion was argued. After hearing all arguments and considering all the evidence, the Court appointed our firm as the asset manager. The commercial property did not have any problems associated with it, so other than to tell you that the property sold, the rest of this story will concentrate on the residence.

ISI 4

Selling the house was the easiest part

The house was not just a house. It was the entire reason for the sister’s existence. Given the mental health issues, we quickly realized that from her perspective, we were about to take away her only joy in life; being able to enter the home and see her loot. It did not matter to her that nobody could enjoy the home and that it was mold infested. This was her baby and we were about to take her baby away from her.

Given these issues, our role was as much like that of a guardian for adults as much as it was about the property in Ontario.

We first obtained quotes for the removal of all of her personal property from the home. I realized that removing the property from the house would only give us another problem as hoarders are not willing to let go of anything. We had to devise a method where the sister would choose what was garbage and what would go to storage. However, even the storage could not go on forever.

The removal plan

We presented our plan to both lawyers. All the items would be removed in front of the sister. If the brother wished to attend he could, but it was not a need. We would also prepay from the proceeds of the sale of the home for six months of storage. That way we capped the brother’s liability for expenses. As items left the house, the sister had to say “garbage” or “storage”. Both sides agreed.

The removal began. What should have taken two weeks took six! The reason was due to mental health issues getting in the way of progress. We understood this and just had to work with it. Eventually, we completed the removal of personal property. We could finally see the entire inside of the house.

We entered with a firm we use to investigate and if necessary do environmental damage remediation work; Hazmat suits and all! Surprisingly, although there was mold, we obtained a verbal report that for our purposes, the home was safe for our purposes to enter for brief periods of time for a realtor and potential purchaser to view. Therefore, we did not need to do any remediation work.

Appraise and sell

The rest of the case could now go ahead. We obtained two appraisals of the house. The house was on a great lot in Toronto in a hot housing market. We listed the house for sale. Due to the house’s condition, it would attract a developer/renovator type of buyer.

After one week on the market, we received four offers to purchase. We rejected all of them and asked for everyone’s best and final offer. The final offer we accepted, subject to Court approval, was above market value. Working with our independent legal counsel, we put our motion material together, obtained the consent of both sides and then obtained Court approval for the sale.

We completed the sale, developed our distribution plan, obtained Court approval for that, distributed the funds and got our discharge.

Court appointed estate trustee: Do you have a financial problem that needs someone else to help you solve?

I present this case study to show how, as a licensed insolvency trustee in the GTA, we can use our skills set in a way that may not seem obvious at first. We look at the entire story of each person or company that comes to us for help.

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 dealt with this problem and devised an alternate plan for the siblings, allowed them to monetize the assets they were incapable of doing on their own and letting them get on with their lives.

We know that people facing financial problems need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious in finding a solution, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team today.

Call us now for a free consultation. We will get you back on the road to a healthy stress-free life and recover from the pain points in your life.

court appointed estate trustee
court appointed estate trustee
Call a Trustee Now!