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

Introduction

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

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

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

1 – How do collection agencies work in Ontario

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

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

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

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

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

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

2 – Can a collection agency sue you in Ontario?

The short answer is yes.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 – How do I stop a collection agency?

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

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

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

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

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

Call the Ira Smith Group today.

Credit report Ontario: Introduction

My Brandon’s Blog describes a Court decision that if you owe money, even if it is too late for you to be sued, it can still show up on your credit report Ontario. This is a very interesting case from the Court of Appeal for Ontario for consumers and consumer reporting.

The case was an attempt by Mr. Grant to have the credit reporting agencies Equifax and TransUnion remove from his credit report debts that were more than two years old on the basis that because he can’t be sued anymore, the most accurate reporting would be to cut those debts from his credit report. He argued that since the Ontario Limitations Act provided for a two-year limitation for when he could be sued on certain debts, therefore, any debts more than two years old for which you haven’t been sued should be removed from his credit report.

Limitations Act vs. Consumer Reporting Act

The credit reporting agencies successfully argued against that as the lower court ruled against Mr. Grant. He was now appealing to the Court of Appeal for Ontario. The Ontario Consumer Reporting Act states that debts up to seven years old can be reported and there lies the discrepancy. The Court of Appeal for Ontario agreed with the lower court and said that just because the Limitation Act says that you can’t be sued after two years that has no application to the Consumer Reporting Act that says all valid debts can be reported for up to seven years.

What the Court of Appeal said

The Court of Appeal went on to say just because a creditor misses the deadline or chooses not to sue within the two-year period it doesn’t mean that the debt still isn’t owed. The Court of Appeal also went on to say that under the Consumer Reporting Act people have the right to communicate with Equifax and TransUnion to have errors removed from their credit report. Unfortunately for Mr. Grant in his case, this was not an error.

What should you do if you have too much debt?

Do you have too many debts causing you discomfort on your credit report? Is your credit report creating a bigger hardship for yourself? For help with your debt issues contact Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. We’re your best defence against debt. Make an appointment for a free, no-obligation consultation and you can be well on your way to a debt free life Starting Over, Starting Now. Give us a call today.

Credit Report Ontario: The decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario

COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO

CITATION: Grant v. Equifax Canada Co., 2016 ONCA 500

DATE: 20160623

DOCKET: C61664

Rouleau, van Rensburg and Benotto JJ.A.

BETWEEN

Gary Grant

Applicant (Appellant)

and

Equifax Canada Co., Trans Union of Canada,

Ministry of Government Services and Consumer Services

Respondents (Respondents in Appeal)

Gary Grant, acting in person

Stephen Schwartz, for Equifax Canada Co.

Alan Melamud, for Trans Union of Canada

Domenico Polla, for the Ministry of Government Services and Consumer Services

Mahmud Jamal and Raphael Eghan, for the intervener Canadian Bankers Association

Heard: June 21, 2016

On appeal from the judgment of Justice Kofi N. Barnes of the Superior Court of Justice, dated November 2, 2015.

ENDORSEMENT

[1] The appellant brought an application in the Superior Court seeking an order that two consumer reporting agencies remove debts over two years old that were shown on his credit report, where no legal action had been commenced or judgment obtained in respect of the debts. He relied on the provisions of the Limitations Act, 2002, S.O. 2002, c. 24, Sched. B, and in particular the basic limitation period of two years applicable to the commencement of a proceeding in respect of a claim.

[2] The appellant argued in the court below, and on appeal, that this two year limitation period should apply in interpreting the provisions of the Consumer Reporting Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.33 (the “CRA”). He asserts that, in requiring consumer reporting agencies to adopt all procedures reasonable for ensuring accuracy and fairness in the contents of their consumer reports (s. 9(1) of the CRA), the Act anticipates that debts will not be listed where a limitation period for their enforcement through legal action has expired. The most accurate record of a debt, he says, is one that has been or can be confirmed by an order or judgment of the court. When debts are included in consumer reports, where no legal action is possible, consumers are adversely impacted in their efforts to borrow money and to conduct other business.

[3] The respondents assert that the application judge did not err in his dismissal of the appellant’s application, on the basis that the basic limitation period has no application to the statutory framework for consumer credit reporting in Ontario, and that there was no violation by the consumer reporting agencies of the requirements of the CRA.

[4] We agree.

[5] The CRA provides for a regulatory scheme for the fair reporting of information regarding an individual’s history of credit activities. The CRA requires the registration of consumer reporting agencies, permits consumer reporting information to be provided only for certain prescribed purposes, and sets out standards for consumer reporting.

[6] The Limitations Act, 2002, by contrast, applies to bar “claims pursued in court proceedings” that are commenced outside the applicable limitation period. The Act does not apply to the CRA, whether expressly or by implication. Indeed, the CRA contains its own specific provisions prohibiting the inclusion of certain information in consumer reports, including debts or collections more than seven years old, unless confirmation that the debt or collection is not barred has been obtained. The CRA expressly contemplates that debts not reduced to judgment that are up to seven years old may be reported (see s. 9(3)(f)). This makes sense, as the passing of a limitation period does not extinguish a debt; it only precludes the commencement of a court proceeding for its enforcement. As such, the reporting of debts after a limitation period has passed, is not inconsistent with the purposes of the CRA, and is expressly contemplated by its terms.

[7] Under the Act, consumers, such as the appellant, have access to the information contained in their files, and a mechanism by which they can dispute information contained in a report to the consumer reporting agency, and to the Registrar of Consumer Reporting Agencies, with a right to apply to the Licence Appeal Tribunal for a hearing if they are aggrieved by a Registrar’s decision.

[8] The appellant availed himself of the right to dispute information, and was able to have certain stale information removed from his consumer reports. There was no basis, however, for requiring the removal of information concerning debts simply because they were more than two years old.

[9] For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.

“Paul Rouleau J.A.”

“K. van Rensburg J.A.”

“M.L. Benotto J.A.”