Tag: creditor protection

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

UNLOCKING THE MYSTERIES OF A REVIVED CANADIAN CONSUMER PROPOSAL: A LOOK BEYOND THE ESSENTIAL 5-YEAR BARRIER

a happy couple who just unlocked the secret to fixing their financial problems

Reviving a Canadian consumer proposal: Introduction

If you’re fighting with financial debts and want to stay clear of filing for bankruptcy, a consumer proposal might be a great alternative to take into consideration. A current Court decision in Ontario highlights the significance of making your Canadian consumer proposal payments on time to guarantee its success.

In this Brandon’s Blog, the situation is analyzed, as well as the factors that determine whether a Court can revive a consumer proposal more than five years after it was filed are discovered. This Brandon’s Blog provides useful information for people seeking a fresh financial start.

What a Canadian consumer proposal is all about

A Canadian consumer proposal occurs as an intricately structured contract, between an individual and their unsecured creditors, with the single function of agreeably resolving their burdensome financial debts. Once agreed to, it stands as an irrevocable pact, wielding the power to instantly save the beleaguered debtor from the unrelenting pursuit by his or her creditors, while simultaneously affording the debtor the ability to systematically repay a portion of their debts over an extended period of no more than 5 years. After making the required payments laid out within the Canadian consumer proposal, the outstanding unpaid amount is erased.

To launch a Canadian consumer proposal, one must employ the services of a duly licensed insolvency trustee, also referred to as a LIT or Trustee. The LIT meticulously scrutinizes the person’s financial world and then crafts a detailed debt settlement repayment plan for them.a happy couple who just unlocked the secret to fixing their financial problems

The benefits of a Canadian consumer proposal

Going with a Canadian consumer proposal presents a person with the bankruptcy alternative that provides a myriad of advantages that can be likened to a world of financial peacefulness:

Immediate Shelter: Upon the submission of a Canadian consumer proposal, a debtor finds themselves wrapped up in a bulletproof shield of creditor protection. It legally protects them against the claims of their creditors. This bars creditors from starting or continuing any legal actions to recover what is owed to them. This includes collection calls and other collection actions on things like credit card debt or income tax debt.

Financial Debt Settlement: The borrower’s obligations go through a metamorphic reduction, changing them right into a workable sum that the borrower can repay over some time. As a result, just a portion of the debts are paid back. After making all the required payments, the unpaid balance is written off.

Structured Settlement Blueprint: The Canadian consumer proposal allows the debtor the opportunity to get into a binding agreement with their creditors to fix their debt problems across an extended period, not surpassing the five-year mark. This gracious break grants the borrower the latitude to pay an amount they can afford, all while finding support in the eyes of their creditors. The debtor also benefits through the two mandatory financial counselling sessions.

Unified Monthly Commitment: Instead of juggling a myriad of creditors paying them inconsistent amounts, a consumer proposal streamlines the borrower’s financial trip. Right here, the debtor need only make the agreed-upon regular payments to their appointed Trustee. The LIT manages to pay the funds out according to the ratified debt settlement plan.

Eligibility requirements for a Canadian consumer proposal

The Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy and the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) clearly lay out the eligibility requirements for this Canadian consumer proposal legal process. People coming to grips with frustrating debt and satisfying particular financial standards could find themselves suitable prospects for starting a consumer proposal.

These prerequisites include an overall debt level ranging from $1,000 to $250,000 (not including any mortgages or lines of credit secured against the person’s principal residence), while at the same time not being able to pay their debts as they come due. An essential element for restructuring one’s financial debts within the realm of a Canadian consumer proposal is having a consistent source of income.

Additionally, individuals cannot file a second consumer proposal if they are already in one. Also, if a debtor defaults on making all the payments under a consumer proposal, they cannot file another one (more on this soon). It is necessary to understand that each person’s circumstances are unique. So consulting with a Trustee is of the utmost significance in determining one’s eligibility as well as figuring out the personalized plan for debt reduction, including the amount that needs to be paid.a happy couple who just unlocked the secret to fixing their financial problems

Types of debt covered by a Canadian consumer proposal

A Canadian consumer proposal addresses unsecured debt responsibilities. This includes credit card indebtedness, unsecured personal loans and lines of credit, payday loans, and the worry of income tax obligations. It is incumbent to recognize that secured financial encumbrances owing to secured creditors, such as home mortgages and vehicle loans, do not drop within the ambit of consumer proposals.

Nevertheless, if a debtor’s unsecured debts are significantly affecting their ability to pay off their secured debts, the consumer proposal might yet manifest as a probable option. Student loans do not typically get discharged with consumer proposals, except in cases where the borrower has stopped being a full or part-time student for no less than 7 years.

In summation, the Canadian consumer proposal emerges as a pragmatic solution for people facing monetary problems, earnestly in search of a break from the weight of their insolvency.

Annulment of a Canadian consumer proposal

The annulment of a Canadian consumer proposal is the cancellation of the commitment binding a debtor to their creditors, as laid out in section 66.3 of the BIA. This termination transpires when the borrower either falters in the discharge of their duties or due to a change in their circumstances, making them incapable of sticking to the agreed-upon payments.

The beginning of the annulment procedure can be initiated by the LIT, functioning as the consumer proposal Administrator of a Canadian consumer proposal, or, by any of the creditors. When annulled, the borrower gives up the sanctuary provided by a Canadian consumer proposal, protecting them from legal proceedings.

Debtors need to comprehensively grasp the implications of annulment and get expert advice if they encounter difficulties in meeting their commitments. The annulment of a consumer proposal has significant financial consequences and should be avoided whenever feasible.a happy couple who just unlocked the secret to fixing their financial problems

The Canadian consumer proposal before the Ontario Court

Background

This case, Re Cumberbatch, 2023 ONSC 5287 is very instructive. It involved a hardworking individual battling financial difficulties, who made a consumer proposal to manage her debts effectively. As she struggled to meet her monthly debt obligations, she realized that a consumer proposal could provide her with much-needed relief and a structured repayment plan.

In the case heard by the Associate Justice, his pronouncement in this circumstance conveys very useful insights. This case featured a person trying to come to grips with the unrelenting stress of financial misfortune, who, in a positive step, filed a Canadian consumer proposal as a strategic method of efficiently navigating her financial obligation problems. As she faced the tough task of meeting her financial responsibilities, the realization dawned upon her that a consumer proposal might function as the cure-all, delivering the much-coveted respite that a skillfully created structure for financial debt negotiation provides.

She approached a LIT who assessed her financial situation, including her income, expenses, and outstanding debts. After careful evaluation, the Trustee determined that she was eligible for a consumer proposal and worked with her to develop a reasonable and manageable debt repayment plan.

Before diving into the Court’s reasoning, let’s first provide some background information about the case. The consumer proposal was initially filed by the debtor to deal with her outstanding debts.

However, due to a collection of unanticipated events, the debtor defaulted under her Canadian consumer proposal by not keeping up with her payments. The debtor defaulted in making payments to the Administrator under the consumer proposal.

As a result of missing 3 months of payments due the consumer proposal was deemed annulled by subsection 66.31(1) of the BIA.

Jurisdiction to revive a Canadian consumer proposal

In the realm of bankruptcy and insolvency law, consumer proposals provide individuals with an alternative to personal bankruptcy. A consumer proposal, as defined under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA), allows debtors to negotiate with their creditors, proposing a plan to repay a portion of their outstanding debts. However, there are instances where a consumer proposal becomes dormant or inactive, leading to questions regarding the Court’s jurisdiction to revive such proposals after the initial five-year period.

The issue of jurisdiction was significantly addressed by the Supreme Court of Canada in the landmark case of A. Marquette & Fils Inc. v. Mercure. In that case, the Supreme Court of Canada stated about the BIA (then called the Bankruptcy Act):

“has its origins in the business world. Interpretation of it must take these origins into account. It concerns relations among businessmen, and to interpret it using an overly narrow, legalistic approach is to misinterpret it.”

In making this commentary, the highest Canadian Court said the purpose of the BIA, is to provide a framework for the effective administration of insolvency matters and to facilitate the rehabilitation of debtors. The Court acknowledged that the successful completion of a consumer proposal is aligned with this purpose, as it allows debtors to repay a portion of their debts in an organized manner.

Bankruptcy courts, applying this philosophy to consumer proposals, have determined that they have the jurisdiction to revive a Canadian consumer proposal that was annulled. The thorny issue before the Court in this case was that more than 5 years had passed since this Canadian consumer proposal was filed. The Court needed to consider if it had the jurisdiction to revive a consumer proposal that on the calendar, would take more than 5 years to complete.

Factors considered by the Court in deciding whether to revive a Canadian consumer proposal

In establishing whether to exercise its jurisdiction to revive a consumer proposal, the Court developed several factors to consider:

  • The debtor’s persistence in attempting to finish the proposal within the five-year duration.
  • The reasons for the consumer proposal becoming inactive.
  • The prejudice or lack thereof to creditors in reviving the proposal.
  • Any other pertinent factors, such as the debtor’s existing financial circumstance.

The Court emphasized that the decision to revive a dormant Canadian consumer proposal needs to be led by factors to consider fairness to both debtors and creditors. The Court needed to take on a balanced and discretionary approach when exercising its jurisdiction.

Recognizing the Court’s jurisdiction to revive a Canadian consumer proposal supplies higher clarity to debtors and creditors alike, eventually contributing to a much more reliable and equitable insolvency system.

Factors considered for reviving a Canadian consumer proposal

The LIT who acted as the consumer proposal Administrator in this Canadian consumer proposal process, made the application to the Court to revive the proposal. The Court had to take into consideration whether to provide this restoration and also evaluate the effect of reviving the proposal.

In figuring out whether a revival of that consumer proposal was appropriate, the Associate Justice meticulously analyzed different variables. These aspects played a significant role in deciding upon the expediency and justness of revitalizing this consumer proposal. Some of the crucial elements the Court took into consideration included the reason for annulment, the amount already paid under the proposal, and any creditor opposition.

Reason for annulment of the Canadian consumer proposal

The Court paid attention to the reason why the consumer proposal was initially annulled. Reasons that can lead to annulment are usually non-payment by the debtor of at least 3 months’ worth of payments or non-compliance with other provisions of the proposal. If the reason for annulment results from situations beyond the debtor’s control, such as an unexpected further financial setback such as job loss or a substantial life event, the Court may be inclined to revive a Canadian consumer proposal once the debtor shows the ability to continue and complete the outstanding payments.

However, if the reason for annulment is an outcome of the debtor’s deliberate non-payment or unyielding disregard for the proposal, the Court will probably decline a revival application. In such instances, the debtor will need to offer a convincing argument backed by evidence to show why the revival is appropriate.

Amount paid under the Canadian consumer proposal

Another vital aspect is the amount paid by the debtor under the consumer proposal before it was annulled. The Court examines whether the debtor has made a considerable contribution towards their financial obligations as agreed upon in the Canadian consumer proposal. If the debtor has fulfilled their payment responsibilities before the annulment and has shown an authentic initiative to meet their remaining financial commitment under the consumer proposal, the Court is more likely to consider the revival as a practical option.

On the other hand, if the debtor has fallen short of making significant payments or has constantly defaulted on their obligations, a revival probably will not be viewed favourably by the Court. The debtor needs to offer a legitimate reason for their previous repayment shortcomings and show the ability to fulfill the balance of the payments they originally agreed to.

Creditor opposition

The Court thinks about the level of resistance from creditors about the resurgence of the consumer proposal. Creditors play an essential function in the overall decision-making process. If a considerable variety of creditors reveal solid opposition to the revival, it can heavily affect the Court’s decision.

Nonetheless, the Court likewise considers the reasons behind creditor resistance. If creditors are opposed entirely as a result of their positions or an unwillingness to engage, the Court may offer much less weight to their arguments. On the other hand, if the creditors raise valid issues concerning the debtor’s conduct, ability to fulfill their obligations or the fairness of the recommended revival strategy, the Court will thoroughly evaluate these issues.a happy couple who just unlocked the secret to fixing their financial problems

This Canadian consumer proposal disposition: The Court’s decision in the case of Re Cumberbatch

When it comes to Re Cumberbatch, the Associate Justice made an important choice about the revival of a Canadian consumer proposal.

The Court very carefully assessed the situation surrounding the annulment of the consumer proposal and the reasons presented in support of a revival by the Administrator. It recognized that the unintentional expiry of the proposal was not an intentional act, but instead an oversight. The Court took into consideration the best interests of all stakeholders, consisting of the debtor, the creditors, and the Administrator.

Among the key variables that influenced the Court’s decision was the reality that given that the debtor validated that she would be able to pay the balance of her Canadian consumer proposal, its revival supplied the very best possibility for the debtor to pay off a portion of her debts in an organized and structured fashion. The Court recognized that the debtor had made significant initiatives to satisfy her commitment via the original proposal, and reviving it would allow her to continue on the path toward debt resolution.

Furthermore, the Court additionally took into consideration the interest of the creditors. Reviving the consumer proposal provided a structure where they would certainly receive more of a repayment than if the consumer proposal was not revived and the debtor filed for bankruptcy.

This approach by the Court prioritized fairness as well as guaranteed that the debtor’s financial situation was managed responsibly. The Court likewise followed the Supreme Court of Canada decision as well as others, to use its jurisdiction in a reasonable as well as business-like fashion in deciding that it could revive this Canadian customer proposal, even though doing so means it would take more than 5 years for the consumer proposal to be completed.

So with this set of facts, it is feasible for a Canadian consumer proposal to be revived and finished, in more than 5 years.

Canadian consumer proposal: Conclusion

In the matter of Re Cumberbatch, the Court’s deliberation regarding the approval of the Administrator’s request to reinstate the consumer proposal exemplifies the unwavering dedication of the judicial system to equity and the facilitation of avenues for debtors to remedy their fiscal obligations through the Canadian insolvency legislation. This particular case vividly underscores the paramount importance of procedural precision. Furthermore, it underscores the imperative need to ensure that unforeseeable external factors, which lie beyond the debtor’s sphere of control and yet obstruct the successful completion of a Canadian consumer proposal within the stipulated 5-year timeframe, do not constitute an impediment to the equitable resolution of debt-related affairs.

I hope you enjoyed this Canadian consumer proposal Brandon’s Blog. If you’re struggling with managing your overwhelming debt in a high-interest environment, don’t worry – there are some things you can do to take control of the situation. First, it’s important to create a realistic budget and track your expenses. From there, you can prioritize your debt repayment and make consistent payments to chip away at what you owe. It’s also a good idea to seek professional financial advice to help guide you through the process. Just remember, managing debt is a gradual process that requires commitment and determination, but you can do it! So don’t hesitate to reach out for help from financial professionals.

Individuals and business owners must take proactive measures to address financial difficulties and promptly seek assistance when necessary. It is crucial to recognize that financial stress is a prevalent concern and seeking help is a demonstration of fortitude, rather than vulnerability. Should you encounter challenges in managing your finances and find yourself burdened by stress, do not delay in pursuing aid.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing people, entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses with debt problems that are in financial distress. Are you now worried about just how you or your business are going to survive? Are you worried about what your fiduciary obligations are and not sure if the decisions you are about to make are the correct ones to avoid personal liability? Those concerns are obviously on your mind.

The Ira Smith Team understands these financial health concerns. More significantly, we know the requirements of the business owner or the individual who 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 and it does not mean that you are a bad person. 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 uses innovative and cutting-edge methodologies, to adeptly navigate you through the intricacies of your financial challenges, ensuring a resolution to your debt-related predicaments without resorting to the rigours of the bankruptcy process. We can get you debt relief now!

We have helped many entrepreneurs and their insolvent companies who thought that consulting with a Trustee and receiver meant their company would go bankrupt. On the contrary. We helped turn their companies around through financial restructuring.

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.

The Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team understands 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.a happy couple who just unlocked the secret to fixing their financial problems

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BILL C-228: WILL HUGE PENSION PRIORITY IN CANADIAN INSOLVENCY BE REAL FINALLY?

Bill C-228
Bill C-228 An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies' Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985

Bill C-228: Are pensions protected in Canadian insolvency proceedings?

The long-awaited Bill C-228, an Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 proposes to give priority and therefore some financial security to pensions of workers in the event of a Canadian insolvency of their employer, may finally soon become law. This is a significant victory for pensioners and unions across the country who have been advocating for this change for many years.

This new law will provide much-needed protection for pensioners in case of the insolvency of pension plan sponsors. It is a major step forward in ensuring that pensioners are able to retire with dignity, security and frankly, what they bargained for.

Bill C-228: Right now pensions in bankruptcy can be taken away

The Canadian insolvency system has come under heavy analysis and criticism for years for its treatment of pensioners when the employer goes bankrupt or files for bankruptcy creditor protection. Bill C-228 comes from a long line of private members’ bills presented in the House of Commons of Canada that never went anywhere – until now. It makes every effort to make previous employees getting a pension, and those who someday expect to get payments from their pension plan, a priority in the insolvency process.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I discuss the current status of Bill C-228 and its implications in making pensioners a priority in bankruptcy if it becomes law as presently composed.

Bill C-228
Bill C-228 An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985

Bill C-228: What can cause you to lose your pension?

Underfunding is a major concern for traditional, defined-benefit pension plans (DB Pension Plans). In other words, do they have enough pension assets and therefore enough money to meet their projected future pension obligations of insolvent pension funds? Inadequate actuarial assumptions, poor investment returns, and mismanagement can lead to pension plan underfunding. In the case of corporate insolvency of a large employer with a DB Pension Plan, this issue always arises. Underfunded pensions in bankruptcy wind up hurting retirees.

The Sears Canada court-supervised liquidation forced us to again focus on the treatment of pensioners in corporate bankruptcies under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) or restructurings and liquidations under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA). It was widely reported that representative for 17,000 Sears Canada retirees says insolvency laws are unjust when it comes to underfunded pensions.

When a company is insolvent and its DB Pension Plan is underfunded, pensioners suffer pension losses and ultimately income losses. In practice, pensioners’ rights are weak and highly inadequate, especially when pension plans are underfunded.

Although pension legislation at the provincial and federal level purports to offer some protection for amounts owing to an underfunded pension plan, insolvency legislation does not preserve that protection for the majority of those amounts. The insolvency protection of pensioners and pensions in bankruptcy proceedings is therefore limited.

Dr. Janis Sarra is the founder and director of the National Centre for Business Law and a professor at the Peter A. Allard School of Law. In her opinion, Canadian pensioners and employees are among the worst-protected pensions in bankruptcy and/or insolvency among 60 countries.

The history leading to Bill C-228

Let’s look at some history of attempts to protect pensions in bankruptcy. The Canadian Association for Retired Persons (CARP), a nationwide advocacy organization for Canadian seniors and retirees, lobbied politicians on Parliament Hill about legislation changes. According to CARP, the unfunded pension liability should be given priority so that it is handled first.

There is no priority for retirees when it comes to dividing up assets in bankruptcy, and CARP wanted to protect underfunded DB Pension Plans when the employer company goes through restructuring or bankruptcy.

CARP estimated that roughly 1.3 million Canadians, aside from the retired Sears employees, may be at risk due to underfunded DB Pension Plans. The closure of Sears Canada stores made the plight of retirees a top priority for CARP.

Marilène Gill, Bloc Québécois MP, introduced a member’s BILL C-372, on Oct. 17, 2017. It was intended to change the BIA and the CCAA. The change sought to correct the injustice faced by retired workers whose pension and health insurance policy benefits are not secured when their company declares bankruptcy or undergoes restructuring.

On October 17, 2017, Bill C-372 passed its first reading. The House rarely passes private member’s bills like this one. The Liberal Party did not support taking it further and allowed it to die.

Hamilton Mountain NDP MP Scott Duvall asked for leave to introduce Bill C-384 in the House of Commons on November 6, 2017. He proposed amending Canada’s insolvency laws so that companies must bring any pension fund to 100% before paying any other secured creditors. Additionally, it required companies to pay termination or severance pay owing before paying secured creditors. Similarly, this bill passed the first reading and then died.

Then, Senator Art Eggleton, P.C., proposed BILL S-253 shortly before his retirement to amend the insolvency legislation to deal with a pension deficit in Canada. After the first reading passed on September 18, 2018, the second reading followed on September 25. By introducing this bill, the BIA and CCAA would be amended. The plan proposed to give priority to claims for unfunded obligations or solvency deficiencies of pensions. This was applicable to both solvent companies as well as companies that might become insolvent if certain shareholder payments were made. That bill never went any further.

Bill C-228
Bill C-228 An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985

The current Bill C-228: Pension Protection Act

Then, Conservative MP Marilyn Gladu put forward her pension reform private member Bill C-228: An Act to amend the BIA, the CCAA and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985. It passed 2nd reading on June 22, 2022.

According to the Hansard transcripts, she noted that the proposed legislation would ensure that pension funds would be paid before secured and unsecured claims. Unremitted source deductions for the Canada Pension Plan, Quebec Pension Plan, Employment insurance, and taxes would be taken first. Suppliers who take back goods delivered within a month of bankruptcy or receivership and unpaid wages or salaries would be paid next. Then payment for insolvent pensions would come next before the claims of secured and unsecured creditors.

It then got a referral to committee, the Standing Committee on Finance. Once the referral to the Finance Committee happened, it did not take long to get through the committee. The committee held three meetings between October 17 and 31. It passed through the committee and on November 23, 2022, it passed 3rd reading and Bill C-228 was adopted.

A cross-party collaboration of New Democrat, Bloc and Conservative MPs was now finally achieved in order to move forward with key legislation to protect workers’ pensions in commercial bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings. The Liberal government which previously did not have this on its radar also voted in favour. In fact, PM Trudeau has tried to take some credit for this private member’s bill in the House of Commons.

The bill has now moved on to the Senate of Canada for review and amendment before returning to the House for final approval. It passed its first reading in the Senate on November 24. It now seems to have sufficient support and momentum to ultimately become law.

The current Bill C-228: What will the Pension Protection Act do?

The purpose of the private member’s Bill C-228, which will be known as the Pension Protection Act. is to deal with the insolvency of an employer where there is an unfunded liability or solvency deficiency in an employee pension plan or the employer ceases to fund a group insurance plan. It will prioritize the pension payments for such pensioners and employee claims for pension entitlements.

The proposed legislation would also amend the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 to require the annual tabling of a report on the solvency of pension plans.

The current wording of the proposed legislation proposes to accomplish pension security for retirees by amending existing legislation to deal with deficiencies of pension plans as follows:

  • BIA section 60(1.‍5)‍(a)‍, is the section that deals with employers trying to restructure through a BIA restructuring proposal. It already states that any pension amounts deducted from employees that were not paid into the pension fund must be in order for the court to consider approving the proposal.
  • It will be amended such that the court cannot approve any employer restructuring proposal unless it stipulates that any amount required to make all special payments, as determined by section 9 of the Pension Benefits Standards Regulations, 1985, that should have been paid to correct any unfunded liability or solvency deficiency will be funded by the employer.
  • It will also be amended so that any amount required to liquidate any other unfunded liability or solvency deficiency of the fund as determined at the time of the filing of the notice of intention or of the proposal if no notice of intention was filed, will be included.
  • BIA sections 81.5 and 81.6, are the sections that deal with the event of bankruptcy proceedings and receivership proceedings. They will similarly be amended.
  • CCAA section 5, which deals with the employer company with a pension plan, will be amended the same as the proposed amendments to the BIA. This will state that if the company participates in a prescribed pension plan for the benefit of its employees, the court may not sanction a compromise or arrangement unless there are the same provisions stated above to protect the interests of the employees.
  • The Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985 will be amended to require greater annual report requirements on the solvency of pension funds and their success in meeting funding requirements, and the corrective measures taken or directed to be taken by the Superintendent of Financial Institutions to deal with any pension plan not meeting the funding requirements.

As indicated above, there appears to be enough momentum for Bill C-228 to get through the Senate and ultimately receive Royal Assent to become an Act of Parliament. This will no doubt be a major change to bankruptcy protection insolvency proceedings in Canada relating to benefit plans if it becomes the new law dealing with pension plan deficits.

We will have to see if this Bill becomes law, once implemented and if there will be any unintended consequences. Time will tell if these changes will not have negative consequences on corporate restructuring and advisory, preventing what previously would have been successful restructurings of Canadian businesses, albeit on the backs of hard-working Canadians being the employees and retirees.

No doubt the insolvency community and the lending community will have to adjust to the new business environment. I will provide you with updates as they occur.

Bill C-228
Bill C-228 An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985

Bill C-228 transition period

The Bill, if passed, would introduce a four-year transition period between its implementation and the implementation of the proposed amendments. My guess is that such a long transition period has been established for two main reasons:

  1. to allow companies who currently are behind in their defined pension benefit payments to catch up; and
  2. to allow the lending community to try to figure out how they are going to adjust their commercial lending practices in this new reality.

Bill C-228: Pension reform to insolvency

I hope you enjoyed this Bill C-228 An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985, Brandon’s Blog.

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. Are you now worried about just how you or your business are going to survive? Those concerns are obviously on your mind. Coming out of the pandemic, we are now worried about its economic effects of inflation and a potential recession.

The Ira Smith Team understands these concerns of businesses and people facing a mountain of unsecured claims and financial liabilities. 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 have helped many entrepreneurs and their insolvent companies who thought that consulting with a trustee and receiver meant their company would go bankrupt. On the contrary. We helped turn their companies around through financial restructuring.

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.

Bill C-228
Bill C-228 An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act and the Pension Benefits Standards Act, 1985

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

THE LUCRATIVE RESP BANKRUPTCY PLAN TO DEBT RELIEF

resp bankruptcy
resp bankruptcy

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic. Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this Brandon Blog, please scroll to the very bottom of the page and click play on the podcast.

RESP bankruptcy introduction

Parents contribute to their child’s Registered Education Savings Plan (RESP) in order to save for their children’s post-secondary education. In contrast to Registered Retirement Savings Plans (RRSPs), RESP contributions, or the total amount of all contributions made by the parent(s), is a property that is available for seizure in bankruptcy of the owner of the RESP.

In this Brandon Blog, I explain why an RRSP, unlike an RESP, is mostly exempt from seizure in bankruptcy. RRSPs and a Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF) are exempt from seizure based on a balancing act between federal and provincial laws. The RESP bankruptcy is not exempt. Since I practice in Ontario, I will only comment on the situation there.

Will I lose my RRSP in bankruptcy?

An RRSP’s exemption from seizure in bankruptcy was determined solely by provincial law before 2008. The bankruptcy treatment of RRSPs was not outlined in federal insolvency law. The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA), being the federal bankruptcy law in Canada, other than the exception described in the next section, exempted assets contained in either an RRSP or an RRIF from seizure as of July 2008.

Inequality among RRSPs was the reason for changing the BIA. If your RRSP was held at a financial institution, it would not be exempt from seizure if you filed for bankruptcy. But if you held it:

  • at an insurance company; AND
  • the beneficiary designation of your plan was irrevocable as your spouse, child, parent, or grandchild in the event of your death

under the Ontario Insurance Act, the entire RRSP or RRIF was exempt from seizure.

The reason for amending the BIA was twofold:

  • all RRSPs and RRIFs should be treated the same, regardless of which institution holds them; and
  • retirement income should not be lost as a result of financial problems for Canadians who have gone bankrupt, since their fresh start is made possible by the bankruptcy system.

In other words, before July 2008, people who were going to file for bankruptcy and who had a sizeable RRSP with a chartered bank would transfer the RRSP to an insurance company and designate one or more beneficiaries accordingly. In Canada, bankruptcy courts heard many cases about transactions designed to save an RRSP from seizure in bankruptcy.

An insolvency trustee or bankruptcy trustee could replace the named beneficiary of an insurance policy or retirement investment, including RRSPs or RRIFs, with the Estate and then collapse the plan so as to obtain the funds if the beneficiary designation of the policy was revocable. Trustees cannot collapse investments if the beneficiary is irrevocable; such plans constitute exempt assets. A Trustee would have to use it as one of the reasons for opposing a bankrupt’s discharge. Since the person, aware of their insolvency, transferred the asset for no value, the creditors are unable to pursue them. This was is known as a settlement.

The leading case on this issue, which was eventually followed by other jurisdictions, including Ontario, is Royal Bank of Canada v. North American Life Assurance Co., 1992 CanLII 4696 (SK CA), also known as the Ramgotra case. Dr. Ramgotra was bankrupt. A lower court decision regarding what should be done with the RRSP funds, turned into an RRIF, prior to his bankruptcy but when he knew he was in financial trouble, was appealed by the Royal Bank of Canada, having received Court approval to appeal the case instead of the Trustee appealing. The Court of Appeal found that the property had an irrevocable interest in Mrs. Ramgotra despite the transfer of the RRSP being a settlement.

So effective July 2008, the Canadian government amended the BIA so that regardless of which of the financial institutions an RRSP was held, only the contributions made within 12 months of the date of bankruptcy were subject to being lost to the licensed insolvency trustee in bankruptcy.

resp bankruptcy
resp bankruptcy

Registered Education Savings Plans (RESP) and bankruptcy: RESP bankruptcy is not exempt

It is fairly simple to understand why RESP contribution funds are not exempt from seizure in bankruptcy. Since the parent can collapse the plan before maturity, the child does not receive a property interest in the RESP funds. There is therefore no trust or transfer of property to the child. In an RESP bankruptcy, the bankrupt parent’s Trustee can therefore collapse their RESP.

A Trustee must make satisfactory arrangements with the parent, or another relative, to have them pay the Trustee the equivalent amount of funds in the RESP at the date of bankruptcy. This way the Trustee will have recovered on the asset for the benefit of the bankruptcy estate and the bankrupt’s creditors. The bankrupt parent will have done what is necessary in order to avoid the RESP collapsing, losing the government contributions money and not having the plan value go forward for the child.

MP Dan Albas introduced his private member’s bill, An Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (property of bankrupt registered education savings plans), on June 3, 2019. In this bill, the purpose was to amend section 67(1)(b.3) of the BIA, so that RESPs receive the same treatment as RRSPs and RRIFs. Like many other private member’s bills that die, this bill has not made any progress.

The thrust is obviously to make sure that other than for contributions made in the 12 months before the date of bankruptcy, a parent should not lose the RESP benefits for their child’s post-secondary school education because of their bankruptcy.

No matter how well-intentioned, one societal reason this Bill C-453 initiative will fail is that an elementary or high school student’s college tuition differs from that of a retiree whose earning years are behind him or her. So to date, there is no federal law that provides creditor protection for a Registered Education Savings Plan.

How to preserve an RESP bankruptcy

Your RESP’s liquidation cash value can be determined by contacting the financial institution holding the funds. The liquidation value does not include the government grant portion of the funds that are only available if the child attends a qualified educational institution.

You can instruct your Trustee to contact the financial institution holding the RESP funds to have the plan cashed out and remit the proceeds (net of government contributions) to the Trustee. This way the asset of the bankruptcy estate will go for the benefit of your creditors if you are not interested in keeping your RESP, which is unlikely in almost every case.

Preserving an RESP bankruptcy can be achieved in two ways. The first is to avoid bankruptcy. No, I don’t mean to tell you not to deal with your financial problems because like it or not, you are in an insolvency scenario. Just don’t use bankruptcy. If your debts not secured by your primary residence are $250,000 or less, you should consider a consumer proposal. You may use the large debtor proposal provisions of the BIA if the debts exceed this amount.

Second, the nonbankrupt spouse, or another relative, can buy the Trustee’s right, title, and interest in the RESP for an amount equal to its liquidation cash value. Thus, the purchaser becomes the owner of the RESP, and the child will continue to benefit from it. In acting in the best interests of unsecured creditors, the Trustee will have recovered the liquidation cash value.

resp bankruptcy
resp bankruptcy

RESP bankruptcy: A very recent divorce example

Having just dealt with this issue last week in one of our personal bankruptcy filings, I am writing about the RESP bankruptcy treatment today. I am the insolvency trustee in a bankruptcy filed by a divorced mother who is now on her own. The failure of her restaurant caused by the COVID-19 pandemic caused her to go bankrupt because of her high debt load.

Her ex-husband and she owned a registered education savings plan for their only child. As part of the no-cost session I provide to anyone contemplating insolvency, I discussed what might happen to an RESP bankruptcy if a bankruptcy is filed.

It was an upsetting experience for the mother. It was clear that she was upset at the prospect of losing half the liquidation proceeds if the plan collapsed. In addition, it was part of the divorce agreement that the jointly owned RESP would be continued for the benefit of the child. We had to create a plan to keep the RESP afloat in the event of RESP bankruptcy. I had no trouble coming up with the plan. What was tricky were the technical details.

This is what we came up with. First, we told her to contact the financial institution where the funds were held and obtain a written statement of the plan’s liquidation cash value. After receiving the written statement from the financial institution, we told her to pass it along to us. She did, and it turned out that the total liquidation value was approximately $26,000. She, therefore, had a half-interest valued at $13,000. We then got her permission to contact her ex-husband and explain the situation.

The ex-husband was informed that his ex-wife would be filing for bankruptcy by us. There would be an RESP bankruptcy. He knew that he had to maintain the RESP. When his ex-wife went bankrupt, we told him that if he purchased our right, title, and interest in the RESP, he would become the sole owner, and the fund would be preserved in an RESP bankruptcy and they could continue contributing to it. It was no problem for him, thankfully.

Because she had actually not yet filed for personal bankruptcy, we had not yet been designated as the licensed insolvency trustee. Our objective was to make sure there wouldn’t be a change of mind despite the divorce condition. Based on Canadian bankruptcy legislation, we scheduled the ex-husband to offer a $13,000 third-party cash guarantee to cover the costs of carrying out the personal bankruptcy.

Furthermore, we agreed that upon the bankruptcy, subject to the approval of the Inspectors, if any were appointed in this summary administration bankruptcy, we would then convert this third-party guarantee into the right, title, and interest as the licensed insolvency trustee of the RESP.

A bill of sale would be issued to him, and we would confirm jointly with the financial institution that he is now the sole owner of the RESP, and they would need to amend their records accordingly. This RESP bankruptcy would have been fully realized as we had gotten the full value of the mother’s half-interest in the RESP. It was a win-win situation for everyone involved.

resp bankruptcy
resp bankruptcy

RESP bankruptcy: What about you?

Hopefully, you see from this Brandon Blog, there are ways to deal with an RRSP both in bankruptcy and non-bankruptcy situations. I hope you found this RESP bankruptcy Brandon Blog informative. Are you in financial distress and a debt crisis? Are you worried about any RRSP or RESP contributions? Do you not have adequate funds to pay your financial obligations as they come due? Are you worried about what will happen to you in retirement? Do you need to find out what your debt relief options and realistic debt relief solutions for your family debt are?

Call the Ira Smith Team today. We have decades and generations of experience assisting people looking for life-changing debt solutions through a debt settlement plan and AVOID the bankruptcy process.

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

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

You can have a no-cost analysis so we can help you fix your troubles.

Call the Ira Smith Team today. This will allow you to go back to a new healthy and balanced life, Starting Over Starting Now.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic. Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

resp bankruptcy

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION: THE UNDENIABLE BEST THING YOU NEED TO KNOW TO CASH YOUR INSOLVENT CUSTOMER’S CHEQUE SAFELY

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic. Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

Bankruptcy protection: What happens if a company gets into financial trouble?

A Canadian company seeking bankruptcy protection has two choices when it is financially troubled and wants to reorganize. By hiring insolvency legal counsel and a licensed insolvency trustee to get both insolvency and bankruptcy law advice and financial advice, they can protect themselves from their creditors, either by:

  • using the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) to file for bankruptcy protection; or
  • working with an insolvency trustee and filing a Notice of Intention to Make a Proposal under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) you can obtain bankruptcy protection.

In order to reorganize in Canada, an insolvent company files for bankruptcy protection. If you are insolvent in Canada, then you must file for bankruptcy protection, which is equivalent to Chapter 11 in the United States. The process is called financial restructuring or financial reorganization. By doing this, the company will try to restructure while it continues to operate to come up with a restructuring plan that allows the company to survive while satisfying the needs of the creditors to some degree.a

This Brandon Blog discusses a recent court decision that demonstrates that there is a risk to creditors who receive payments from the insolvent company under bankruptcy protection for goods or services supplied if the restructuring fails.

What happens to the company that files for bankruptcy protection?

An organization that files for bankruptcy protection, or as it is sometimes called, creditor protection, differs from an organization that files for bankruptcy. A pure bankruptcy procedure consists of a liquidation. The company ceases to operate unless the Trustee sees value in continuing to operate the company for a limited period of time.

The trustee in bankruptcy takes possession of all assets that are either not subject to valid claims by secured creditors (typically financial institutions) or that belong to third parties (for example, equipment under lease or goods undergoing repair that are in the company’s possession). A licensed insolvency trustee then formulates a plan for selling the unencumbered assets of the company to maximize the proceeds. Afterwards, the Trustee distributes the funds in accordance with the BIA.

In the case of a company filing for bankruptcy protection, this is one of the alternatives to bankruptcy. The intention is to continue operating while it tries to restructure. Most of the time, this entails downsizing. A plan will be devised to repay some of the remaining debt in exchange for the creditors writing off the balance that is owed. With success, the company can retain employees and continue to operate. Creditors will be able to earn money by supplying the reorganized company in the future.

The CCAA allows companies that owe at least $5 million to their creditors to file for bankruptcy protection. Either the business will be restructured and continue to exist on new financial terms or a wind-down will be supervised to pay back anyone owed money by selling assets. BIA restructuring provisions can be used by companies that owe less than $5 million.

In other words, a company that goes bankrupt will shut down. Those who file for bankruptcy protection want to keep operating. As disruptive as bankruptcy and restructuring are, they can be beneficial for businesses, individuals and the economy since they preserve value and prevent assets from being wasted.

As soon as the company enters bankruptcy protection (or bankruptcy), proceedings against it are stayed. As a result, all collection rights for creditors are suspended. A “time-out” gives the company a chance to restructure, or the Trustee can handle its duties in bankruptcy without interference from creditors. Additionally, it “freezes” all creditors at the time of the filing, so that one cannot gain an advantage over another.

bankruptcy protection
bankruptcy protection

A record number of companies have sought creditor protection under COVID-19 and more are on the way?

The list of large Canadian companies with outstanding debts looking for bankruptcy protection from creditors got to a decade high in May and June 2020. Numerous financial commentators believed there would be a full-blown financial crisis and that a lot more would certainly file as a result of COVID-19 caused the economic downturn. Despite this, the number of corporate insolvency filings appears to have stabilized and also slowed down in 2021. One main reason is the number of government programs supporting Canadian business. In the same way as the virus itself, COVID-19 has actually taken a hefty financial toll on companies with pre-existing conditions.

Some familiar Canadian corporations in the list of companies that filed in that time due to their financial situation were:

  1. Reitmans
  2. Frank & Oak
  3. Aldo
  4. DavidsTea
  5. Cirque Du Soleil
  6. Mendocino
  7. Bow River Energy
  8. FlightHub
  9. Christian charity, Gospel for Asia
  10. Cequence Energy
  11. Delphi Energy
  12. Sail

Twenty-two major Canadian companies sought creditor protection in May and June 2020, almost four times the usual rate. The list obviously does not include major U.S. names such as Chesapeake Energy, J Crew, Neiman Marcus, Brooks Brothers, Pier 1 and Boy Scouts of America.

The bankruptcy protection court case facts

I want to tell you about Schendel Mechanical Contracting Ltd (Re), 2021 ABQB 893. On November 9, 2021, the Honourable Mr. Justice Douglas R. Mah released his decision.

Schendel Mechanical Contracting Ltd. (Schendel) was one of three associated companies that at one time collectively formed a major construction concern in Alberta under the Schendel name. As a result of financial difficulties, it was an insolvent entity and it filed a Notice of Intention to Make A Proposal under the BIA on March 22, 2019. Schendel continued operations as part of its restructuring effort. On various Schendel projects, Schendel bought HVAC equipment from the supplier between April 2018 and May 2019.

Ultimately, Schendel’s debt restructuring plan failed. Schendel was deemed to have filed for bankruptcy when it failed to implement a successful BIA Proposal restructuring. Schendel went bankrupt immediately. Its secured creditor applied to the Court for the appointment of a Receiver, which was granted.

As a result of reviewing the company’s books and records, the Receiver found and disputed the legality of a $40,000 payment from Schendel, an insolvent company, to one of its suppliers. According to the Applicant Receiver, the payment was prohibited for a number of reasons and the funds should be returned. The recipient supplier asserted that the payment was both innocent and validly received and that it was entitled to retain it.

In this case, a cheque dated July 8, 2019, to make the payment. Due to an unknown reason, the supplier did not negotiate the cheque until 11:48 AM on July 19, 2019. Schendel was also deemed to have filed for bankruptcy and the Court made the Receivership Appointment Order all on the same day, July 19, 2019. The Court had, however, no evidence regarding the exact moment the receivership and bankruptcy decision was made on that same day.

bankruptcy protection
bankruptcy protection

The bankruptcy protection case: The Receiver’s position

It is noteworthy that the action to recover the $40,000 was brought by the Court-appointed Receiver and not the insolvency trustee of the bankruptcy estate. According to the Receiver, the funds should be returned on the following grounds:

  • the automatic stay under section 69(1) of the BIA was in effect at the time of filing and throughout the extension of the proposal period, so the supplier was without recourse against Schendel;
  • the Court-ordered stay contained in the Receivership Appointment Order of July 19, 2019, as well as the concurrent stay imposed by a deemed bankruptcy under the BIA, deprived the supplier of all collection remedies as of that date;
  • as an alternative, the payment may be prohibited under the Fraudulent Preferences Act; or
  • it may be in violation of the Statute of Elizabeth (see note below).

NOTE: The English Parliament passed this statute in 1571 with the purpose of prohibiting transfers that would defraud creditors or hinder their collection efforts. As a result of widespread fraudulent transactions designed to defraud creditors, the 13 Elizabeth Statute was passed. It is still in effect in Alberta today.

The bankruptcy protection case: The supplier’s position

The recipient supplier said that it received the payment both innocently and legally and that it is entitled to retain it. In addition, the recipient supplier said:

  • besides some routine questions about payment, the supplier had not engaged in any activity to try to collect the debt;
  • the relationship with Schendel was arm’s-length;
  • both of the last two extension orders for the NOI define a process by which Schendel may pay, and the Receiver has fallen short to prove that the procedure was not followed when it comes to the subject payment; and
  • for either the Fraudulent Preferences Act or the Statute of Elizabeth, the required intent cannot be shown.

Since the bankruptcy trustee was not involved in this case, nobody was claiming that the payment was a preference or transfer under value under the BIA.

bankruptcy protection
bankruptcy protection

The bankruptcy protection case: The Judge’s decision

The Court was not presented with evidence on whether the $40,000 payment in question was approved within the proposal extension process or whether it was not approved. There was evidence to support Schendel’s compliance with approved procedures. In the post-NOI period, the supplier was found to have provided goods to various Schendel projects worth $34,476.75.

There was evidence that the payment was not just a payment on account of a pre-filing debt without further transactions post-filing. According to the Judge, the stay would not apply to indebtedness arising from goods or services supplied to Schendel after the filing of the NOI. This is because such indebtedness would not be a claim that could be a proven claim in the bankruptcy.

The Judge further stated that it is the Receiver’s responsibility to prove that the payment violated the stay. Schendel and the supplier did continue to do business together after the NOI was filed, according to the evidence. During the hearing, the Judge said that he should not simply assume facts in the Receiver’s favour. Additionally, the evidence indicated that some of the $40,000 payment was applied to the post-NOI supply of goods. A total of $34,476.75 worth of product was supplied to Schendel after the NOI was filed.

As a result, the Judge rejected all of the Receiver’s arguments and dismissed his Application in its entirety. Consequently, the supplier kept the $40,000.

Bankruptcy protection: How to cash your insolvent customer’s cheque safely

Companies filing for bankruptcy protection, whether under the CCAA or BIA, are reorganizing to stay in business. Businesses require purchasing goods and services and paying for them. It’s possible that some pre-filing debts will be paid after the filing date even though the debts are frozen from a collection perspective.

The stay does not necessarily prohibit every post-NOI payment by an insolvent company to a creditor. Such payments are valid when they are necessary to enable the company to move forward with restructuring. For example, a creditor may require payment of all or a portion of its pre-filing debt in order to supply post-filing.

Parties can agree to repay past debts in order to secure future supplies. First and foremost, the BIA process aims to encourage a debtor to reorganize as a going concern. Both creditors and debtors benefit from the debtor’s continued operation during this critical time. The BIA’s stay provisions and preference provisions give debtors breathing room to reorganize their finances. Setting up legitimate agreements with key suppliers is an integral part of that process.

In the end, it is critical to determine whether the payment of past indebtedness is a valid condition of post-NOI supply, which is required for restructuring to proceed. In that case, the post-filing payment of the pre-filing amount will be valid. If not, the insolvency trustee can recover it from the supplier.

Creditors seeking to recover pre-filing debts must make the payment as a condition of a post-filing supply arrangement. Additionally, because all of this is playing out in real-time in higher-risk settings, a supplier is free to amend the pricing post-filing. Similarly, if the supplier can secure it, there is no reason for them to not try to go from an unsecured creditor to a secured creditor on the post-filing supply by taking security or requesting a letter of credit. This would all be done out of an abundance of caution because as stated above, unpaid post-filing debts are not a claim provable in the company’s bankruptcy if the restructuring is unsuccessful.

bankruptcy protection
bankruptcy protection

Bankruptcy protection summary

I hope you found this bankruptcy protection Brandon Blog post informative. Are you worried because you personally or as business owners are dealing with substantial debt challenges and you assume bankruptcy is your only option? If it is too much debt for any reason, call me. It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

The Ira Smith Team utilizes new modern-day ways to get you out of your debt difficulties while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you the relief you need and so deserve.

The tension put upon you is big. We know your discomfort factors. We will check out your entire situation and design a new approach that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. We will take the weight off of your shoulders and blow away the dark cloud hanging over you. We will design a debt settlement strategy for you. We know that we can help you now.

We understand that people and businesses facing financial issues need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” method with the Ira Smith Team. Even though we are licensed insolvency trustees, we have found that not everyone has to file bankruptcy in Canada. The majority of our clients never do. We help many people and companies stay clear of bankruptcy.

That is why we can establish a new restructuring procedure for paying down debt that will be built just for you. It will be as one-of-a-kind as the economic issues and discomfort you are encountering. If any one of these seems familiar to you and you are serious about getting the solution you need, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. group today.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation. We will get you or your business back up driving to healthy and balanced trouble-free operations and get rid of the discomfort factors in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic. Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

bankruptcy protection
bankruptcy protection
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHERE IS LAURENTIAN UNIVERSITY WITH ITS HELPFUL CONCLUSIVE COMPENSATION CLA1MS PROCESS?

where is laurentian university

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

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

Where is Laurentian University in dealing with ‘An ugly stain for years to come’: Laurentian University students, staff reeling from cuts

As regular Brandon Blog readers know, I have been writing about the financial difficulties leading to the Laurentian University creditor protection filing under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) as major events unfolded. The filing for bankruptcy protection was to allow for ongoing operations to continue and to come up with a Plan of Arrangement to deal with creditor claims.

The end of this week was scheduled to be another milestone in the Laurentian CCAA insolvency process, but it appears that event won’t happen on time. The purpose of this Brandon Blog is to discuss where is Laurentian University at with its compensation claim process for current and terminated faculty and staff?

Laurentian University situation so dire, it couldn’t afford to pay staff

This post-secondary institution faced a cash crisis and many financial issues leading to having filed its application for creditor protection on February 1, 2021. So far, I have written on:

Where is Laurentian University with the Amended and Restated Claims Process Order?

I previously wrote about the Laurentian University Amended and Restated Claims Process Order (A&R Claims Process Order) when it was obtained from the Court on May 31, 2021.

Among other things, the A&R Claims Process Order developed a claims process to recognize, identify and deal with certain claims of creditors. The A&R Claims Process Order left out Compensation Claims to allow Laurentian, with the help of the Monitor and in discussions with the Laurentian University Faculty Association (LUFA) and also Laurentian University Staff Union (LUSU), to establish a process as well as a method for the identification of Compensation Claims.

Compensation Claims usually consist of the claims of current and previous employees, retirees, and also the labour unions relative to employment, benefits, pension, and/or labour contracts among the stakeholders and Laurentian University, and also claims of specific third parties relative to involvement of their employees in the retirement health benefit plan.

In their application to Court last May, Laurentian University told the Court that they would be back to have the Compensation Claims process approved no later than July 30, 2021.

where is laurentian university
where is laurentian university

Where is Laurentian University with its creditor protection compensation claims program now?

Laurentian told the Court that its Compensation Claims process will:

  • develop the key groups of claims to be covered in a Compensation Claims
    procedure;
  • determine what info and also how the information needed to calculate such
    claims can be assembled based upon the information in the hands of Laurentian and third-party service providers;
  • develop the Compensation Claims Methodology; and
  • think about alternate procedures for notice as well as claims handling.

In its motion record dated July 23, 2021, Laurentian has advised the Court that although it is working diligently with the Monitor, LUFA and LUSA, Laurentian will not be able to serve materials explaining its Compensation Claims process in time to seek Court approval no later than July 30. So, Laurentian is asking for an extension from July 30 to August 20, 2021. In the motion record, it is not stated exactly where is Laurentian University in this process. Laurentian has advised that its lawyers have booked time with the Court to hear the motion on August 17, 2021, at 9:30 AM.

UPDATE: On July 28, 2021, the Court approved amending paragraph 46 of the Claims Process Order to extend the date that Laurentian University must bring a motion to the Court to seek approval of: (a) the Compensation Claims Methodology, and (b) the process for notification of Employees and claims process, from “no later than July 30, 2021” to “no later than August 20, 2021”.

Where is Laurentian University? Ask current President Dr. Robert Haché

In support of this motion for an extension of time, the motion material includes the affidavit of Dr. Robert Haché, University President and Vice-Chancellor of Laurentian University of Sudbury, sworn on July 23 (the Haché Affidavit).

The Haché Affidavit really doesn’t say much and unfortunately, it does not say exactly where is Laurentian University in the finalization of the Compensation Claims process. It summarizes the background about the bilingual university financial troubles as to how this post-secondary education institution got to where it is today in the Laurentian CCAA insolvency process and advises the Court that:

  • Laurentian and the Monitor have been working diligently on settling the Compensation Claims Methodology, nonetheless, as a result of a variety of competing and urgent demands put on the University’s limited resources, (which presumably includes the demands of day to day operations) development has actually been slower than expected.
  • Although the information-gathering phase took longer than anticipated, drafts of the Compensation Claims Methodology have been prepared and also shown to LUFA and LUSU.
  • Regardless of best efforts, Laurentian was not able to finalize the Compensation Claims process in order to have everything in time for the Compensation Claims Methodology to be provided for Court authorization by July 30, 2021, based on the A&R Claims Process Order.
  • Therefore, the University looks for a short extension to that date. This requires a change to paragraph 46 of the A&R Claims Process Order to prolong the day whereby Laurentian can bring a motion to the Court to seek the authorization for the Compensation Claims Methodology to no later than August 20, 2021.

The Haché Affidavit is light on details as to what the issues getting in the way are, what has been agreed to so far and where is Laurentian University in all this? Close or still far off? It provides no real useful information to determine where is Laurentian University on this issue. My review of documents that were made public sheds no more light than what I am telling you in this Brandon Blog. They are obviously hoping that this request will not meet with any opposition so that it will allow for a positive impact on the financial restructuring.

So, unfortunately, there is no real insight into what is holding up the Compensation Claims process for claims of current and former faculty and staff, including severance payments, which certainly will be in the millions of dollars.

I doubt that anyone will wish to try to upset the restructuring over this issue. As of the time of writing this Brandon Blog, there is not a current Monitor’s Report in support of this motion yet made public.

Where is Laurentian University in all of this? I suspect that Laurentian will receive the extension it is requesting.

where is laurentian university
where is laurentian university

Where is Laurentian University summary

I hope that you found this where is Laurentian University Brandon Blog interesting. Problems will arise when you are cash-starved and in debt. There are several insolvency processes available to a person or company with too much debt.

If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges, you need debt help and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

The Ira Smith Team utilizes new modern-day ways to get you out of your debt difficulties with debt relief options as alternatives to bankruptcy. We can get you the relief you need and so deserve. Our professional advice will create for you a personalized debt-free plan for you or your company during our no-cost initial consultation.

The tension put upon you is big. We know your discomfort factors. We will check out your entire situation and design a new approach that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. We will take the weight off of your shoulders and blow away the dark cloud hanging over you. We will design a debt settlement strategy for you. We know that we can help you now.

We understand that people with credit cards maxed out and businesses facing financial issues need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” method with the Ira Smith Team. Not everyone has to file bankruptcy in Canada. The majority of our clients never do as we know the alternatives to bankruptcy. We help many people and companies stay clear of filing an assignment in bankruptcy.

That is why we can establish a new restructuring procedure for paying down debt that will be built just for you. It will be as one-of-a-kind as the economic issues and discomfort you are encountering. If any one of these seems familiar to you and you are serious about getting the solution you need to become debt-free, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. group today.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

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

where is laurentian university
where is laurentian university
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

COMPANIES’ CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT: CREDITORS ARE NOW ABLE TO MAKE BOLD CLAIMS AGAINST LAURENTIAN

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

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

companies' creditors arrangement act
Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act

If you would like to listen to an audio version of this Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the very bottom and click play on the podcast.

Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act: Facing insolvency, Laurentian University files for creditor protection

Laurentian University’s filing under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act has been reported in the media and I have written about it in previous Brandon Blogs. On February 1, 2021, Laurentian University filed for what the media calls the “bankruptcy protection process” under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act. It is really a creditor protection process for a financial restructuring. A large amount of work and involving tough choices will definitely be required for Laurentian to emerge from this as a financially and operationally sound university.

This restructuring will call for difficult negotiations with its lenders, suppliers, faculty and labour unions. Laurentian will have to overhaul its academic programs and look for brand-new revenue generation opportunities to survive. As well it will require a re-evaluation of its federated colleges’ design (Laurentian is just one of 4 universities that make the Laurentian Federation; the others who are all part of the Laurentian Federation Agreement are: the University of Sudbury, the University of Thorneloe, and Huntington University).

The stay of proceedings provided by the Court gives Laurentian protection from creditors and prevents them from taking steps against Laurentian, without the prior leave of the Court. The Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act filing means that Laurentian has concluded that it cannot fulfill its financial commitments as they end up being due and uses the protection supplied by this restructuring law to reduce its overall debt load without having to pay its debts in full.

FOR A FULL DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THE COMPANIES’ CREDITORS ARRANGEMENT ACT IS AND HOW IT WORKS, SEE OUR BLOG:

CCAA CANADA: OUR EXTRAORDINARY GUIDE TO 2020 TROUBLED CANADIAN COMPANIES SEEKING BANKRUPTCY PROTECTION

FAQ on the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act Insolvency Proceedings of Laurentian University

As I mentioned, I previously wrote three blogs so far on the Laurentian University Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act insolvency process:

Every time there has been a major event in this court-supervised restructuring, I have written about it. So far the topics I have covered are:

  • The filing under the Companie’s Creditors Arrangement Act.
  • What creditor protection is under the “Bankruptcy Protection Legislation“.
  • What a stay period and a stay of proceedings are.
  • What does CCAA mean?
  • The Laurentian President affidavit upon filing and what it said about the university finances.
  • What Laurentian has said about its day-to-day operations, the Federated University model and the need to get out of that agreement and general oversight of university affairs.
  • The shock and the effect on Northern Ontario’s community over Laurentian’s filing.
  • The potential effect on current students, both undergraduate and graduate students and the overall student experience.
  • The initial list of creditors, both secured and unsecured creditors, in this restructuring process filing.
  • The unions have lost the fight to unseal documents relating to Laurentian communications with the provincial government.
  • Faculty and other staff terminations.
  • The union represents faculty members on a new collective agreement reached by Laurentian Union Faculty Association or LUFA.
  • Adjustments to the benefit pension plan and health benefit plan.
  • The failure of the non-Laurentian parties to the Federated University agreement in appealing Laurentian’s disclaimer of the Federated University model agreement.
  • The status of the interim financing DIP loan in the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act administration.
companies' creditors arrangement act
Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act

So as you can see, all the topics that I have covered in these 3 previous Brandon Blogs really are answers to a legal FAQ regarding Laurentian University’s CCAA filing.

Decisions about Laurentian University being made by creditors, insolvency specialists and the Ontario Court but not public

The National Union of Public and General Employees have stated that in a free and democratic society, choices regarding publicly financed institutions are expected to be made by elected officials or people who are responsible to them. That makes sure that when choices are made the demands of our communities who are funding these institutions through our tax dollars and donations are considered.

But when such organizations, like Laurentian University, are permitted to use a bankruptcy protection statute like the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, that responsibility is lost. All that matters is what the creditors either desire or are willing to accept. They want the federal government to change bankruptcy protection legislation so that this cannot happen again.

Liberal MP Paul Lefebvre introduced a bill in Parliament that aims to keep Laurentian University’s turmoil from happening at other schools. He and the Union believe that public institutions shouldn’t be allowed to use bankruptcy protection to force through cuts. I don’t believe that at this time, the bill has any traction to change bankruptcy legislation.

4 inspectors will be chosen to work with court monitor in the claims process

This now brings us current to the last attendance in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Commercial List where Laurentian and its court monitor brought forward a claims process to be approved by the court in this Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act process.

The lawyer for TD Bank advised the Court that TD supports the making of a Claims Process Order however feels that, in the circumstances, the procedure ought to contemplate that the Monitor will disclose its analysis of the claims filed with the Pre-filing Lenders. The Bank said that Laurentian and the Monitor have acknowledged that there may very well be material claims filed, some of which will be unliquidated and/or contingent. Some may be subject to a bona fide conflict – both relative to liability as well as quantum.

The Bank proposed a modification to the Monitor’s Claims Process where material cases should be discussed with the Pre-filing Lender group so that there could be a consensual resolution of such claims. The Bank said that it is reasonable as well as proper in this case to produce a reasonable and transparent process that enhances the goals of the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act.

Based upon information available to TD Bank at the time its factum was issued, the overall quantum of claims is unidentified, yet can sensibly be expected to include substantial claims representing: (a) the claims of the Pre-filing Lenders; (b) claims of current and also previous employees; (c) those of the federated colleges occurring from the termination and disclaimer of their contracts with Laurentian; (d) potential claims developing from the pension-related issues; as well as (e) claims of various other creditors with prefiling and also restructuring claims.

The Judge specified that he bore in mind the TD Bank submissions that it is extremely vital to move quickly, however not to rush. The Claims Process needs to be reasonable to all. He acknowledged that the Pre-filing Lenders should have some involvement in the Claims procedure. So the Judge borrowed from the provisions of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA), as there were no specific rules for this in the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act. He ruled that there will be a bespoke process.

Laurentian and the Monitor should modify their proposed Claims Process by assigning 4 Inspectors; 2 of which will be representatives of the Pre-filing Lender group. The remaining 2 will be drawn from the creditors from those with a claim over $5 million.

The Inspectors will:

  • Be selected by the Monitor who will devise an appointment process.
  • Act in the interests of all creditors.
  • Stand in a fiduciary capacity on behalf of all creditors.
  • Need to accomplish their duties on an impartial basis.
  • Are entitled to payment by following the payment structure for Inspectors set out in the BIA.
  • Help the Monitor in evaluating and admitting material claims.

    companies' creditors arrangement act
    Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act

Laurentian expecting about 15 claims of more than $5M from creditors, court documents show

Laurentian reported that upon filing under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, it estimated its liabilities at $322 million. The categories of creditor groups are properly summarized by legal counsel for TD Bank recently in Court, indicated above.

The “bespoke” Claims Process approved by the Court is now underway. It is for all claims against Laurentian, but not including any form of compensation claim by any current or former employee. That type of claim has been defined by Laurentian and its Monitor as “Compensation Claims“. The Monitor advised the Court that it would soon come back to Court to get approval for a special process to establish the Compensation Claims.

The current Claims Process, not including any Compensation Claims, works like this:

  • Any creditor who has not received a Claims Package and who believes that he or
    she has a Claim against Laurentian, under the Claims Process Order must contact the Monitor
    in order to obtain a Proof of Claim form or visit the Monitor’s website.
  • Employees (and Former Employees) will not be receiving a Claims Package and do not need to complete a Proof of Claim at this time. Compensation Claims of Employees and Former Employees will be determined by a Court Approved Compensation Claims Methodology at a later date.
  • Three types of Claims qualify for this Claims Process: (i) Claims for amounts owing as at the date of Laurentian filing under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Pre-filing Claims), February 1, 2021; (ii) Claims which arose as a result of the restructuring itself (Restructuring Claims); and (iii) Claims against senior management, Directors and Officers, the Board (D&O Claims).
  • In order to for Claims to be considered in the Claims Process, the fully completed Proof of Claim must be received by the Monitor no later than:
    • For Pre-filing Claims, 5:00 PM Toronto time on July 30, 2021 (Pre-Filing Claims Bar Date).
    • For Restructuring Claims, 5:00 p.m. (Toronto Time) on, whichever is later: (i) July 30, 2021, or (ii) the date that is 30 days after the date on which the Monitor sends a Proof of Claim Document Package to the Creditor with respect to such Restructuring Claim (Restructuring Claims Bar Date).
    • For D&O Claims, 5:00 PM Toronto time on July 30, 2021 (D&O Claims Bar Date).

No doubt the Monitor, the Inspector Group and Laurentian will be very busy sorting out all the Claims.

Public institutions shouldn’t be allowed to use bankruptcy protection to force through cuts

There has been an outcry from the public service community that public institutions should not be allowed to make use of Canadian insolvency laws like any other person or company that qualifies. I doubt that movement will get much traction.

I hope that you found this Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act Brandon Blog interesting. If you are concerned because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges and you assume bankruptcy is your only option, call me.

It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

The Ira Smith Team utilizes new modern-day ways to get you out of your debt difficulties while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you the relief you need and so deserve. Our professional advice will create for you a personalized debt-free plan for you or your company during our no-cost initial consultation.

The tension put upon you is big. We know your discomfort factors. We will check out your entire situation and design a new approach that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. We will take the weight off of your shoulders and blow away the dark cloud hanging over you. We will design a debt settlement strategy for you. We know that we can help you now.

We understand that people and businesses facing financial issues need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” method with the Ira Smith Team. Not everyone has to file bankruptcy in Canada. The majority of our clients never do. We help many people and companies stay clear of bankruptcy.

That is why we can establish a new restructuring procedure for paying down debt that will be built just for you. It will be as one-of-a-kind as the economic issues and discomfort you are encountering. If any one of these seems familiar to you and you are serious about getting the solution you need to become debt-free, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. group today.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

companies' creditors arrangement act
Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic.

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

Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

LAURENTIAN UNIVERSITY INSOLVENCY RESTRUCTURING – OUR UPDATED GUIDE ON ITS MASSIVE CUTS TO GAIN FINANCIAL HEALTH

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic. Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

laurentian university insolvency

Laurentian University insolvency: Laurentian students, faculty ‘shocked’ at university’s declaration of insolvency

On February 8, 2021, I wrote my blog about the Laurentian University insolvency filing for creditor protection under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA) on February 1, 2021. It was the very first time in Canada that a public university took such creditor protection action. That blog is titled: Laurentian University Facing Insolvency Makes Startling CCAA News By Filing For Creditor Protection.

Post-secondary education can be a hard path for lots of young Canadians. The road can be filled with challenging experiences. Nevertheless, students never thought that having their college or university teeter on the edge of bankruptcy while they’re still going there would be a reality they would need to face! “It was a surprise,” declares one third-year Laurentian University student, resembling the views of her peers.

The students found out about the Laurentian University insolvency when they logged into their student portal. That is when they found out that the school has declared itself insolvent. The University President and Vice-Chancellor stated in the CCAA proceedings that the university’s dire financial situation financial issues were first determined as early as 2008-09 when a prior administration.

The students who were accepted to the school on the understanding that the school would continue operating and that their field of study would not be in danger surely feel betrayed by this. What a stressful time for them.

Everyone was pretty shocked when we found out that the Laurentian University insolvency CCAA filing happened. Nobody had really focussed before on the fact that public institutions like Laurentian would become insolvent and then be eligible for a CCAA process.

What went wrong in this Sudbury, Ontario-based university? In this Brandon Blog, I’m going to give you an update to my February 8, 2021, Brandon Blog and what has gone on since then in this Laurentian University insolvency process.

Laurentian University insolvency: Is Laurentian University closing?

No. The purpose of the CCAA filing is to allow Laurentian University to restructure so that hopefully it will remain open for a long time to come. Laurentian has continued operating. Courses are continuing (virtually because of the COVID-19 pandemic).

Laurentian opened up discussions with its different stakeholders, including its students, faculty, other staff, trade suppliers, research-granting agencies and donors immediately after the issuance of the court order approving the Laurentian University insolvency filing.

Laurentian has to negotiate functional modifications in order to drive go-forward financial savings. Consequently, these conversations have included settlement negotiations between Laurentian and the:

  • Committee of representatives chosen by the Senate, to deal with the course offering to restructure.
  • Federated Universities;
  • Laurentian University Faculty Association, the bargaining unit representing the professors; and
  • Laurentian University Staff Union, the bargaining unit for non-faculty personnel.

    laurentian university insolvency
    laurentian university insolvency

Upon the initial CCAA filing, the Laurentian University insolvency application included a request for a sealing order to keep away from public viewing two Exhibits. Laurentian’s position was that stakeholders should not be able to see those documents as it would weaken and perhaps totally frustrate Laurentian’s ability to restructure. The court granted the sealing order.

On March 4, 2021, the Ontario Confederation of University Associations, the faculty union and the Canadian Union of Public Employees served notices looking for leave to appeal the sealing order from the Court of Appeal for Ontario. On March 31, 2021, the Court of Appeal for Ontario issued its decision dismissing the motion for leave to appeal.

Laurentian University cuts 100 professors, dozens of programs

Laurentian University told the court that it had many programs relative to its number of pupils. Since the day of the CCAA declaration, Laurentian had roughly 209 different programs – 166 undergraduate programs as well as 43 programs for graduate students. Laurentian additionally advised that a lot of programs have continually reducing enrolment and are not financially sustainable.

The university undertook an evaluation of low-enrollment programs and a review of the variety of courses to be provided moving forward. This procedure led to a full review of programs as well as potential program closures. The results of this analysis led to recommendations for academic program restructuring. The recommendations were accepted by the Senate Sub-Committee charged with completing this review and also the complete Senate.

The program closures consist of 38 English-language undergraduate programs and 27 French-language undergraduate programs. This represents 39% of the undergraduate programs offered as of February 1, 2021. This will affect about 772 undergraduate students (557 in English language programs and 215 in French-language programs). In addition, Laurentian proposes to close 11 graduate programs (4 in French; 7 in English).

If programs are being cut, then it stands to reason that teaching costs and other staff costs also need to be reduced. At the commencement of the CCAA proceedings, approximately 612 employees were represented by LUFA including 355 full-time faculty, many of whom had tenure pursuant to the collective agreement, 252 sessional faculty or health care professionals and 5 full-time counsellors.

The faculty and the Laurentian Board are parties to a collective agreement with a three-year term which expired on June 30, 2020. Pursuant to the provisions of the agreement, it automatically continues year-to-year unless notice is provided that either the union or university intends to terminate or amend it. In February 2020, the union provided the Laurentian Board with a notice to bargain. The agreement automatically remains in force during any period of negotiation.

On April 7, 2021, after participating in insolvency negotiations and mediation, the parties entered into a new labour agreement term sheet. Since academic programs were cut, faculty cuts had to follow. The term sheet calls for a new collective agreement with a five-year term expiring on June 30, 2025. It declares 116 full-time faculty positions and 1 counsellor position redundant.

The faculty downsizing will be achieved through voluntary resignations and termination of employment. Faculty to be terminated, who is currently teaching, will be terminated effective May 15, 2021. Those faculty who were not teaching in the current term were terminated effective April 30, 2021. There are also some other salary decreases across the board and benefits reductions for continuing faculty.

As far as other unionized staff (non-faculty), there will be 42 job losses. For the remaining non-teaching staff, there will be certain salary and benefits adjustments. For non-union staff, there is some salary rollback and loss of certain benefits.

laurentian university insolvency
laurentian university insolvency

Laurentian University insolvency: Court ruling allows Laurentian University to reduce value of pension plan payouts

The institution oversees three pension and benefit plans: (a) a registered defined benefit pension plan (DBP); (b) a supplementary unfunded retirement plan (SURP) and (c) a retirement health benefits plan (RHBP). The SURP, as well as RHBP, are currently unfunded. Repayments pursuant to the SURP and RHBP have remained stayed, in conformity with the terms of the CCAA Order.

The DBP is a plan registered with the Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario under the Ontario Pension Benefits Act as well as the Income Tax Act (Canada). The DBP has a going-concern pension deficit of roughly $4.5 million. The University needs to deal with the going-concern shortage. Under provincial government regulations, it needs to do so within a 10-year duration.

Terminated personnel that are DBP members, need to think about whether they want to move their pension plan entitlement to a different trustee due to the fact that they are not qualified to receive their pension payments yet. Alternatively, they could maintain their pension with Laurentian University as trustees. For retiring or terminated staff, depending on their situation, they must elect either an immediate pension plan payment or a deferred pension.

On March 17, 2021, the court made an order specifying, amongst other things, that for any kind of DBP participant that wanted to transfer their pension plan, a transfer proportion of 65.8% will be used for any commuted value transfer request for anyone that received a retirement or termination statement and an election form, for whom such transfers had not yet been made.

Therefore, anyone making such an election lost 34.2% of what they believed their pension entitlement was going to be. Various other amendments to the DBP are also proposed to take place in the Laurentian University insolvency matter. As you can imagine, the further amendments are aimed at creating long-term solvency for the DBP. Therefore, it involves certain reductions to what the remaining members thought they bargained and signed up for!

As part of the restructuring, the Laurentian University insolvency process also proposes that the RHBP will be terminated. Any claims against the SERP will be dealt with in the CCAA proceedings.

The SURP was implemented on July 1, 2002, to supply additional retirement benefits to Laurentian staff members who were in the DBP, to get additional benefits for those earning income over a certain limit. Retiring employees that qualified for the SURP were automatically enrolled. They received either a yearly or monthly payment from the SURP. All of the SURP commitments are unfunded. Historically, the university made annual payments in respect of the SURP from existing operating funds every July.

The insolvency negotiations and mediation have led to the Laurentian University insolvency process recommending that the SURPs be terminated. Accumulated obligations will be managed in the Laurentian University insolvency CCAA Plan of Arrangement. All SURP payments stopped on February 1, 2021, as a result of the CCAA stay of proceedings.

By March 17, 2021, all the changes I have talked about so far were approved by the court.

Judges reject appeals from federated universities, Laurentian insolvency plan can proceed

Laurentian has a federated school structure whereby it has formal affiliations with the Federated Universities: the University of Sudbury, Huntington University and Thorneloe University. Laurentian has a federated institution framework whereby it has official affiliations with the Federated Universities: the University of Sudbury, Huntington University as well as Thorneloe University.

The University of Sudbury is a Roman Catholic multilingual university offering programs in Culture and Communication Studies, Indigenous Studies, Philosophy as well as Religious Studies consisting of courses in both English and French. It was founded in 1913 as Collège du Sacré-Coeur before changing its name to the University of Sudbury in 1957.

Huntington is an independent university founded in 1960 with its own charter and offers programs in Communication Studies, Gerontology, Religious Studies as well as Theology.

Thorneloe is a university with historic origins and association with the Anglican Church of Canada. It offers programs in the departments of Ancient Studies, Religious Studies and also Women’s, Gender as well as Sexuality Studies.

Laurentian and the Federated Universities are connected via a selection of historical connections as well as contractual arrangements. Each of the Federated Universities is a separate legal entity and each is controlled by their own respective board of governors, independent of Laurentian providing oversight of university affairs, respectively.

The Federated Universities do not admit or register their own students and they do not confer their own degrees (with the exception of Theology at Huntington as well as Thorneloe). All Federated University programs and courses are offered by Laurentian University, and all students go to the Laurentian campus. Although the Federated Universities each manage their own respective financial affairs, they cannot receive provincial funding directly. The majority of the public funding for Federated Universities is processed through Laurentian.

As part of the Laurentian University insolvency CCAA restructuring, Laurentian served Notices of Disclaimer on the Federated Universities as it felt it was financially more advantageous for Laurentian to be free from those contractual responsibilities. As a result of the negotiation and mediation process, on April 16, 2021, Laurentian and Huntington entered into an agreement whereby Huntington essentially agreed to cease offering its courses and turn over certain course rights to Laurentian. The only exception allowed in this Laurentian University insolvency process negotiation was that if the court held that the University of Sudbury and Thorneloe University were permitted to continue to receive funding from Laurentian to teach courses or programs, Huntington could also, should it choose to do so.

The University of Sudbury and Thorneloe took a different approach. They each filed motion records in court objecting to the Notices of Disclaimer. The court heard the motions on May 2, 2021, along with Laurentian’s motion to extend the restructuring period and the resulting stay of proceedings to August 31, 2021, and to approve an increase of $10 million to its debtor-in-possession financing.

Laurentian argued that a condition of the increased financing was that the Federated Universities agreements be terminated and that terminating them will improve the University finances. The University of Sudbury and Thorneloe argued that it has not been shown necessary to Laurentian’s future viability and solvency that the Federated Universities relationship had to end and all it really is was an attempt to put them out of business.

Two different judges heard the University of Sudbury and the Thorneloe University motions. Each released their decisions last Sunday night. Each judge dismissed their respective motions. Laurentian’s increased financing and the extension of its restructuring period were also approved. The judges indicated that Reasons would follow. At the time of writing this Brandon Blog, the Reasons have not been released. When they are, I will certainly let you know what the Judges’ thought processes were.

laurentian university insolvency
laurentian university insolvency

Unprecedented Laurentian University insolvency summary

Seeking to escape a mounting debt problem, the administration of Laurentian University insolvency process has led to its filing for bankruptcy protection under the CCAA statute. This will have unfortunate consequences for some students whose courses of study are no longer offered. It will also have a terrible effect on the roughly 164,000 people who live in Sudbury, many of whom are directly involved in the school.

I hope you enjoyed the Laurentian University insolvency Brandon Blog post. You may be very upset and frustrated over this. You may have been directly affected by the course and employee downsizing. Perhaps your pension has just been cut drastically from what you thought it would eventually be. You may even be downright depressed. No doubt the Sudbury entrepreneurs may be very frustrated whether their businesses will be able to continue to pay all its debts as they come due.

Are you worried because you or your business are dealing with substantial debt challenges and you assume bankruptcy is your only option? Call me. It is not your fault that you remain in this way. You have actually been only shown the old ways to try to deal with financial issues. These old ways do not work anymore.

The Ira Smith Team utilizes new modern-day ways to get you out of your debt difficulties while avoiding bankruptcy. We can get you the relief you need and so deserve.

The tension put upon you is big. We know your discomfort factors. We will check out your entire situation and design a new approach that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. We will take the weight off of your shoulders and blow away the dark cloud hanging over you. We will design a debt settlement strategy for you. We know that we can help you now.

We understand that people and businesses facing financial issues need a realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” method with the Ira Smith Team. Not everyone has to file bankruptcy in Canada. The majority of our clients never do. We help many people and companies stay clear of bankruptcy.

That is why we can establish a new restructuring procedure for paying down debt that will be built just for you. It will be as one-of-a-kind as the economic issues and discomfort you are encountering. If any one of these seems familiar to you and you are serious about getting the solution you need, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. group today.

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

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

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this COVID-19 pandemic. Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting.

laurentian university insolvency
laurentian university insolvency
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

TARGET CANADA LIQUIDATION BEGINS FEBRUARY 5; ATTENTION TARGET CANADA SHOPPERS

Target Canada liquidation, Target Canada, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, CCAA, 17,600 employees, debt, Target Corporation, liquidation plan, creditor protection, Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc., Starting Over Starting Now, restructuring of insolvent corporations, restructuringThe Target Canada liquidation plan for the sale of its inventory, fixtures, store leases and other real estate was approved by Order of The Honourable Regional Senior Justice Morawetz on February 4, 2015. In this blog, we will focus only on the Target Canada liquidation of the inventory, furniture and fixtures located at its retail stores, distribution centres and corporate head office. Hopefully, we will succeed in explaining it in plain English!

Target Canada sought and obtained creditor protection on January 15, 2015 under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36) (“CCAA”), a Canadian federal statute. As we indicated in our earlier blog, TARGET CANADA CLOSING: $5.4 BILLION AND COUNTING, the CCAA, which is normally used for the restructuring of insolvent corporations with debts over $5 million, in order to preserve all or a portion of the business and jobs. This time, rather than being used for a restructuring and turnaround, it is being used to provide for an orderly liquidation.

The closing of the Target Canada stores will put 17,600 people out of work over the next five months. The Initial Court Order provided for an Initial Stay Period was to expire on February 13, 2015. In order to carry out the Target Canada liquidation plan, part of the relief it sought and obtained was an extension of the Stay Period to May 15, 2015.

The two questions that we have been asked the most are: 1. what is the Target Canada liquidation plan for its inventory and chattels and how long will it take; and 2. will the suppliers receive everything they are owed from the liquidation?

The first question is easier to answer than the second. First, below in point form is a summary of the Target Canada liquidation plan for its inventory and chattels which is now approved by the Court:

  1. An exclusive agent was approved to conduct the Target Canada liquidation of the inventory, furniture and fixtures located at the retail stores, distribution centres and corporate head office, to liquidate in its entirety.
  1. The exclusive agent is a contractual joint venture comprised of Merchant Retail Solutions ULC (“ULC”), Gordon Brothers Canada ULC and GA Retail Canada. ULC will collectively act as the exclusive agent.
  1. The current time estimate is that the Target Canada liquidation will end no later than May 15, 2015 for the stores, April 30, 2015 for the distribution centres and March 31, 2015 for the corporate office. Circumstances may alter this schedule, but this is the current plan.
  1. All sales will be “final sales” and “as is” and all advertisements and sales receipts will reflect same.
  1. The exclusive agent has guaranteed that Target Canada will receive a net minimum amount of 74% of the “Cost Value” of the Merchandise (the “Guaranteed Amount”), computed in accordance with the Agency Agreement, and subject to adjustment in accordance with the Agency Agreement, if: (i) the aggregate Cost Value of the Merchandise is less than $445 million or greater than $475 million; and/or (ii) the Cost Value of the Merchandise as a percentage of the Retail Price of the Merchandise exceeds 63%. (This part was not plain English!!).
  1. What this means is that if there is no adjustment to the Guaranteed Amount calculation based on the Agreement, Target Canada is guaranteed to receive a minimum estimated amount of $340 million from the liquidation of the inventory, furniture and fixtures (based on an average Cost Value of $460 million).

Now for the second question. Target Canada owes money to nearly 1,800 businesses around the world, from India to Shanghai and Brampton to Winnipeg. It is impossible to estimate at this time what suppliers may expect to receive from the Target Canada liquidation, for the following reasons:

  1. There is no current estimate for what the net proceeds may be from the sale of the Target Canada store leases and real estate.
  1. There will be further deductions from the Target Canada liquidation including the:
  • trust claims of any party, statutory or otherwise, against the assets, properties and undertaking of Target Canada;
  • operating costs and liquidation specific costs for which Target Canada will have used its own cash flow rather than having borrowed those funds;
  • exclusive agent’s Charge and Security Interest (on the Limited Inventory Charged Property only);
  • Administration Charge (to the maximum amount of $6.75 million);
  • KERP Charge (to the maximum amount of $6.5 million);
  • Directors’ Charge (to the maximum amount of $64 million);
  • Financial Advisor Subordinated Charge (to the maximum amount of $3 million); and
  • DIP Lender’s Charge.
  1. The final amount of claims to ultimately be filed and admitted in the Target Canada liquidation are unknown. All we know is that in its initial motion material, Target Canada stated that it owed a total of $5.1 billion, of which $3.1 billion was owed to an entity related to Target Corporation in the United States. Target Corporation has stated that it will subordinate its $3.1 billion claim to those of the unsecured creditors.
  1. What claims may come before the claims of unpaid suppliers? The unpaid suppliers are ordinary unsecured creditors. The scheme of distribution, which has not been developed yet by Target Canada or submitted to the Court for approval, will have to reflect that the claims of trust claimants, other secured creditors and preferred creditors must be paid first before the claims of the ordinary unsecured creditors.

On paper, it seems that the Target Canada liquidation will provide sufficient proceeds to pay off all creditors in full, with assets and liabilities both in the $5-billion range. But the true value of the recorded assets will be less than stated. So for now, this second question cannot be answered.

We will continue to watch and blog about the Target Canada liquidation. If your business is showing signs of financial stress, contact Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. before your business problems lead to your business closing. The earlier you begin to deal with debt, the more options you’ll have. We approach every file with the attitude that financial problems can be solved given immediate action and the right plan. Starting Over, Starting Now you can live a debt free life.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

Target Canada owes more than $5-billion to creditors

Target Canada, Canada Revenue Agency, creditor protection, out of work, Canada, creditor protection, Ira Smith, Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc., Starting Over Starting Now, debt, trustee
Image courtesy of The Toronto Star

This blog about Target Canada is courtesy of the article written by Francine Kopun, Business reporter, The Toronto Star, published on Thursday January 22, 2015. Our Ira Smith is quoted extensively.

From India to Milton, Target Canada owes money.

Target Canada owes money to nearly 1,800 businesses around the world, from India to Shanghai and Brampton to Winnipeg.

The list runs 44 typed pages. It includes 3greenmoms, makers of eco-friendly sandwich bags in Potomac, MD ($3,751); 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment in Toronto ($3.7-million) and the Banhat Rattan Bamboo Co-operative in Ho Chi Minh City ($1,596).

Target Canada owes $1,926 to the Retail Council of Canada and $433,248 to Roots Canada Ltd. Roots was behind the popular Beaver Canoe line of goods tailor-made for Target Canada.

Target Canada owes Revenue Quebec $6.529-million. It owes more than $12-million to the Canada Revenue Agency.

“Did I see this coming? No,” said Jennifer Carlson, founder, Baby Gourmet Foods Inc., an Edmonton-based company owed $62,701.

Carlson said her first thought, when she heard the news of Target Canada shutting down, was for the employees who would be losing their jobs, and their families.

“Target was a great partner for us and at this point, it’s going to be (about) growing with our other retail partners,” said Carlson.

Target Canada announced last week it was seeking creditor protection as it winds down operations, closing all 133 stores and putting 17,600 people out of work over the next five months.

As of Thursday, all Starbucks operating within Target Canada stores will be closed, a Target spokesman confirmed.

“Generally speaking, the team members will be re-assigned to other areas of the store,” said Target Canada’s Eric Hausman.

Unable to keep shelves stocked and customers interested in their retail offering, Target executives made the decision to leave Canada rather than spend another five years chasing profits.

It has lost about $7-billion on its Canadian operations so far.

On paper, it seems that Target Canada is in a position to pay off all creditors in full, with assets and liabilities both in the $5-billion range. But the true value of the recorded assets is always less than stated, said Ira Smith of Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc.

“Everything gets recorded at original cost — what they paid for the assets. When they do the inventory sale, they will not recoup the original cost. The racking and fixtures, once they shut down, is by the pound,” said Smith.

Some assets listed by Target Canada include credit owing from vendors, but as Smith points out, once Target Canada stops paying the vendors, the vendors won’t be making good on those credits.

What Target Canada will be able to realize from the sales of leases and properties it owns will also likely be less than what they originally paid.

“Who is going to step in and pay what Target Canada did? No one,” said Smith.

Some – not all – the properties leased to Target Canada, were guaranteed by the parent corporation in Minneapolis.

Target Canada likely has its own internal estimate, but that is not something it is going to share, said Smith.

Target Canada has 30 days from the date of filing for creditor protection to present a plan that will satisfy creditors. It may also seek a 30-day extension from the courts, said Smith.

The parent company is owed at least $3.1-billion, but Smith, who has read the filings, said the amount is unsecured.

Contact Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. before your business problems lead to your business closing. The earlier you begin to deal with debt, the more options you’ll have. We approach every file with the attitude that financial problems can be solved given immediate action and the right plan. Starting Over, Starting Now you can live a debt free life.

Call a Trustee Now!