Tag: proof of claim

PROOF OF CLAIM FORM 31: ESSENTIAL TIPS TO SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE THE NEW CANADIAN BANKRUPTCY FORM 31

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date June 24, 2024

Form 31 Proof of Claim Introduction

The Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (OSB) published several amended Forms under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) to promote a more efficient and effective insolvency system, removing some outdated elements and ensuring better data integrity for all stakeholders. These amended Forms were originally set to come into force on July 15, 2024. One of those new forms is the Form 31 proof of claim. This morning, the OSB announced that the effective date has now been pushed back to September 16, 2024.

In this Brandon’s Blog, given the new proof of claim form coming into use effective July 15, I feel I need to update my October 2018 blog titled: FORM 31 PROOF OF CLAIM: HOW TO PROPERLY COMPLETE THE PROOF OF CLAIM. I will compare the new form to the old one as there are substantial changes and advise on how it should be properly completed as we walk through the new form.

Background Information on Form 31 Proof of Claim

Purpose of Form 31 Proof of Claim

Claims of creditors in bankruptcy or restructuring proposal cases are made on a very specific proof of claim form. The purpose of the form is to furnish information about the claim by the creditor against the debtor. It asks for such things as the contact details of the creditor and permission to represent it if it is a corporate body. Additionally, there are interrogatives on debt aspects like the amount due and supporting papers.

The types of claims section encompasses unsecured claims, lessor claims, secured claims, farm or wage earner claims, plan administrator’s claims, director’s liability claims and client claims against their bankrupt securities dealer.

It also inquires whether or not there has been any relationship between the debtor’s recent transactions with the creditor such as recent payments.

One can obtain information regarding an insolvent person’s financial condition and their application for discharge from bankruptcy. There is a caution at the end of this document concerning penalties for making fake claims or giving false statements. The creditor must sign it himself or through the representative. If an affidavit is attached thereto, then it must be sworn by a person who is authorized by law to administer oaths.

Importance of Properly Completing Form 31

The proper completion of Form 31, Proof of Claim, is crucial in the claims process for creditors with substantiated claims. This form serves as a critical document for creditors looking to assert and potentially recover owed debts. Providing accurate and thorough information on this form is essential for creditors to establish a strong foundation for their claims.

Failure to provide complete or accurate information on Form 31 can lead to delays, rejections, or the disqualification of the claim. Therefore, it is imperative for creditors to closely follow the instructions and guidelines stipulated in Form 31. By doing so, creditors can ensure that their claims are accurately documented and processed efficiently within the specified timelines.

Section 1: Understanding the Basics of Form 31 Proof of Claim

Definition of Provable Claim

Section 2 of the BIA contains the definitions. In that section, a provable claim is defined:

“includes any claim or liability provable in proceedings under this Act by a creditor“

What does this mean? it means that a provable claim refers to a debt or obligation owed by a debtor that can be verified and substantiated through documentary evidence. For a claim to be considered provable, it must meet certain criteria established by the Act, including an amount that can be determined, is due and payable at the time of the bankruptcy or within a reasonable period after that, and not be contingent on some other event or unliquidated.

Difference Between Provable and Unliquidated Claims

An unliquidated claim under the BIA refers to a claim for a specific amount of money that has not yet been determined or quantified. This type of claim typically arises when the exact amount owed to a creditor is uncertain or requires further investigation to establish.

In the context of bankruptcy proceedings, unliquidated claims present a challenge as they may complicate the distribution of assets to creditors. To address this issue, mechanisms for resolving unliquidated claims include negotiations, mediation, a disallowance of the claim by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) (the “Trustee”) or court proceedings to determine the appropriate amount owed.

Properly handling unliquidated claims is essential for ensuring fair and efficient bankruptcy proceedings under Canadian law.

Identifying False Claims

Ensuring the validity of claims in Canadian bankruptcy proceedings is a crucial element in safeguarding the integrity of the bankruptcy system. Baseless claims hinder the fair distribution of assets to rightful creditors and undermine confidence in the process. The proliferation of meritless claims can result in delays, increased expenses, and potential financial harm to creditors.

It is essential for Trustees to thoroughly evaluate the authenticity of claims to prevent manipulation and dishonesty. Implementing rigorous verification procedures and penalties for unsubstantiated claims are essential strategies for upholding the fairness and transparency of Canadian bankruptcy proceedings.

Section 2: Required Information for Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim

Completing and returning a Form 31 proof of claim is an important phase in the bankruptcy process. They are one of the documents included with the notice of bankruptcy documents sent out by the Trustee to formally notify the creditors of the bankruptcy.

Personal Details of the Creditor

For proof of claim to be properly completed, the creditor must furnish their contact information, encompassing their mailing address, fax number, and email address. Moreover, the creditor must substantiate their legitimacy as a creditor of the debtor and exhibit a thorough understanding of all pertinent details related to the claim. This takes you from the top of the new Form 31 proof of claim down to numbered paragraph #2.

Details of the Claim

It is incumbent upon the creditor to clearly outline the total sum of the outstanding debt owed by the debtor, in addition to any potential counterclaims, accompanied by relevant documentation or substantiating evidence. The new proof of claim form now requires a creditor to verify that the debt remains within the statutory limitations stipulated by the pertinent provincial laws and regulations. In other words, the claim is not statute-barred.

Those details are covered by paragraphs 3 through 5 of the form.

Priority of the Claim

Paragraph 6 is where, as an unsecured creditor, you need to insert the amount for what you believe to be your claim provable in the actual restructuring proposal to creditors or bankruptcy of the person or company. You must also declare whether you do or do not claim a right to a priority. If you do not, this means that you are an ordinary unsecured creditor.

If you are claiming a right to a priority claim as an unsecured creditor, you are stating that you are entitled to a priority of payment ahead of the ordinary unsecured creditors. The new Form 31 proof of claim requires you to identify what type of priority you are claiming.

The various types of unsecured claims that can have priority over ordinary unsecured claims, which are called preferred claims, are, in order of priority:

For a deceased bankrupt, reasonable funeral and testamentary costs.
The claims for wages by a wage earner employee for unpaid wage claims and certain other amounts treated like remuneration for services rendered during the period beginning on the day that is six months before the date of the initial bankruptcy event or the first day on which there was a receiver. This claim is limited to a maximum payment of $2,000, less any amounts paid for their services by the licensed insolvency trustee.
Any shortfall to a secured creditor as a result of the claim for employees’ priority above.
Any shortfall to a secured creditor as a result of the claim of employees paid out for unpaid amounts regarding prescribed pension plans.
Alimony or support payments payable by the bankrupt person under either a court order or an agreement made before the date of the initial bankruptcy event.
municipal taxes levied against a bankrupt’s real property within the two years immediately preceding the bankruptcy not registered as a lien against the property. This preferred claim cannot exceed the value of the bankrupt’s interest in the property.
A lessor for rent arrears for no more than 3 months before the date of bankruptcy and only if stipulated in the lease, a claim for accelerated rent for no more than an additional 3 months. This claim is limited to the amount realized by the Trustee from the property of the bankrupt on those premises. Further, any payment made by the licensed insolvency trustee for accelerated rent shall be credited against any amount the Trustee may owe the landlord for the Trustee’s occupation of those leased premises.
One bill of costs of a lawyer for a judgment creditor who is the first to have garnished or otherwise executed against the property of the bankrupt, but only to a maximum of the amount obtained by the Trustee from the realization of assets from the sale of such property.
Certain government debts.
Claims from injuries to employees of the bankrupt where workers’ compensation legislation does not apply, but only if there is an insurer or surety guaranteeing damages from injuries and up to the maximum guaranteed.

Section 3: Additional Considerations for Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim

There are also specialized claims that a creditor may qualify for.

A Claim of Lessor For Disclaimer of a Lease

In a corporate restructuring under the Proposal provisions of the BIA, the insolvent company can disclaim or resiliate a commercial lease. The insolvent debtor must be able to show that it cannot successfully restructure if it still has to be responsible for that commercial lease. Upon the disclaiming or resiliation of the commercial lease, the landlord is allowed to calculate its claim using the formula and provisions laid out in the BIA.

Valuing a Secured Claim

Secured creditors have the option, though not a mandatory requirement unless stipulated by the licensed insolvency trustee, to file their claim. This process involves the secured creditor completing the proof of claim form, where they estimate the value of the assets linked to their security. Any outstanding amount owed to the creditor beyond the assets’ value is also specified on the proof of claim, thereby converting it into an unsecured claim.

Secured creditors must exercise caution when determining the value of their secured claim. As per subsection 128(3) of the BIA, a Trustee may opt to redeem a security by reimbursing the secured creditor with the security’s assessed value, as indicated by the secured creditor in the proof of claim. A licensed insolvency trustee would only proceed with redemption if they ascertain that the actual value of the assets surpasses the value assigned by the secured creditor to its security.

Moreover, a Trustee must seek an independent legal opinion on the security documents. That is why a Trustee will always ask for proof of security.

*Claim by Farmer**, Fisherman or Aquaculturist*

Claims of farmers, fishermen, and aquaculturists are granted specific privileges for claims under the BIA legislation. This particular category of creditors is entitled to certain rights. In addition to the standard revindication rights, farmers, fishermen, and aquaculturists have a 30-day window following the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings or the appointment of a receiver to submit their claim for products supplied within 15 days before the bankruptcy event. Once the claim is successfully filed, these creditors are granted a primary lien on all the inventory of the insolvent debtor, excluding any inventory that may be subject to another party’s repossession rights.

Claim by Pension Plan for the unpaid amount

I alluded to claims in respect of an unpaid pension amount above. In 2008 the BIA was amended in reaction to several high-profile corporate restructurings and bankruptcies where there were pension payment amounts deducted from employee wages but not remitted to the pension plan. When the employer went bankrupt, the employees’ pension entitlement was negatively affected (think Sears Canada). Pension entitlement is an important component of the overall employees’ remuneration.

Therefore, Parliament mandated a reform where a super-priority is created for claims for unremitted pension contributions outstanding when an employer becomes bankrupt. The kinds of amounts given this super-priority are pension payments deducted from an employee’s wages but not remitted to the pension plan administrator, amounts owed by the employer for the cost of benefits paid by the pension plan and employer contributions to a defined benefit pension plan. What is excluded from this super-priority is any amount needed to reduce an unfunded pension liability.

Claims Against Directors

This kind of claim comes into play when a BIA corporate restructuring proposal provides for the compromise of claims against directors. The kind of claims against directors that a corporate proposal can compromise must have a very specific set of characteristics:

A claim against directors is being compromised in the corporate Proposal.
Arose before the filing of the Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal or the Proposal itself.
Relate to corporate obligations that are director liabilities by operation of law.

They do not include any corporate liabilities that one or more directors may have personally guaranteed as individuals.

Claim of a Customer of a Bankrupt Securities Firm

The BIA delineates precise protocols for the allocation and distribution of cash and securities within a securities firm customer pool fund. The intricacies of this process are highly technical and exceed the purview of this blog post on completing a Form 31 proof of claim. It is essential to understand that distinct provisions are in place for companies of this nature that have filed for bankruptcy.

Complicated or Contingent Claims

There are a variety of claims that by their very nature, produce complications. Just because a claim might be complicated, it does not mean the proof of claim should not be fully completed and filed with the Trustee. It also does not mean that the licensed insolvency trustee does not have to review it to determine if it is admissible or not.

Examples of complicated claims are unliquidated claims discussed above and contingent claims. In a Canadian insolvency case, a contingent claim is a claim that is not yet due and payable but may become due and payable in the future. Contingent claims are often referred to as “contingent debts” or “contingent liabilities.”

A contingent claim may arise in various situations, such as:

A lawsuit or legal action that has not yet been resolved, but may result in a payment or settlement in the future.
A contract or agreement that provides for payment or performance in the future, but only if certain conditions are met.
A guarantee or indemnity that may become payable in the future if a specific event occurs.

When a contingent claim is filed in a bankruptcy or proposal case, the licensed insolvency trustee must handle it in a specific manner. Here are the key steps:

Initial Review: The Trustee reviews the contingent claim to determine its validity and the likelihood of it becoming due and payable in the future.
Assessment of Likelihood of Payment: The Trustee assesses the likelihood of the contingent claim becoming due and payable, considering factors such as the strength of the underlying legal claim, the likelihood of a settlement or judgment, and the potential for future payments or performance.
Valuation of the Claim: The Trustee values the contingent claim, taking into account the likelihood of payment and the potential amount of the payment.
Inclusion in the Statement of Affairs: The Trustee should include a contingent claim in the sworn Statement of Affairs, which is the document that outlines the insolvent debtor’s assets, liabilities, and financial affairs. The creditor would be listed as a contingent creditor. Because at this stage the Trustee has not received a proof of claim to review, it is wise to list the amount of this contingent debt either as “unknown” or with a value of just $1.
Monitoring and Follow-up: The Trustee monitors the contingent claim and follows up with the creditor to ensure that any future payments or performance are made following the terms of the agreement or contract.
Distribution of Funds: If the contingent claim becomes due and payable in a specific amount and the creditor has filed the proof of claim properly, the Trustee needs to include the valued claim in calculating a distribution to the unsecured creditors.

Creditors are required to furnish the licensed insolvency trustee with all essential documentation and information to substantiate their contingent claim. Subsequently, the Trustee will work with the creditor to ensure the appropriate handling of the claim.

Section 4: Procedural Requirements for Submitting Form 31 Proof of Claim

As a creditor, it’s crucial to understand the procedural requirements for submitting a Form 31 Proof of Claim in a Canadian insolvency case. In this section, we’ll delve into the key issues that creditors should be aware of when submitting their Proof of Claim.

Deadline for Submitting Proof of Claim

The deadline for submitting a proof of claim is a critical aspect of the insolvency process. In Canada, creditors have a specific timeframe to file their proof of claim. Until a creditor files a proof of claim with the Trustee, the creditor cannot participate in the insolvency process. Creditors should ensure they submit their proof of claim well within the deadline to avoid any potential issues.

The First Meeting of Creditors in bankruptcy or the Meeting of Creditors in a restructuring proposal takes place 21 days after the date of filing. If a creditor who has a provable claim wishes to vote at the meeting of creditors, then it is important to have filed the fully completed proof of claim, with all supporting backup documentation, in time for the Trustee to be able to review it.

At the meeting of creditors, it is up to the meeting chair to admit or disallow any claim for voting purposes. In a bankruptcy, the creditors vote on several matters, including the appointment of Inspectors. The Meeting of Inspectors normally immediately follows the meeting of creditors. So if a creditor wishes to nominate an Inspector, it has to have filed its claim to be able to vote. To be able to vote for or against a consumer proposal or corporate restructuring proposal, the proof of claim must be filed.

The only other real deadline to file a proof of claim is before the Trustee is going to make a distribution. A Trustee must send each creditor listed on the Statement of Affairs who has not yet filed a proof of claim notice to file a claim before making a final distribution. That notice will have a deadline in it. If the creditor misses that deadline then they are not entitled to receive any dividend from the insolvency estate.

Properly Filing the Form 31

Properly filing the Form 31 proof of claim is a critical step. Creditors must ensure they complete the form accurately and thoroughly, providing all necessary information, including the amount of the debt, the date the debt was incurred, and any relevant documentation. It’s also essential to sign and date the form, as well as attach any supporting documentation. Creditors should also ensure they file the form with the correct office, as specified in the bankruptcy notice.

*Notice of Intention**To Make A Proposal*

In some cases, the insolvent individual or corporation may file a Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal, which provides creditors with advance notice of the impending restructuring proposal. At the Notice of Intention stage, there is not a specific deadline for submitting a proof of claim. A proof of claim is not sent out at this notice stage. After the Proposal is filed and the Trustee sends out the Proposal package to the known creditors, in that package the proof of claim form 31 is provided. Creditors should carefully review the Proposal package and ensure they submit their proof of claim by the specified deadline.

I was involved some time ago in a corporate restructuring case where a financial institution creditor filed a proof of claim and a voting letter using their form at the notice of intention stage. The form was improperly completed and I warned the creditor that its proof of claim was not being accepted and that they must file a new one, properly and fully completed, after they receive the Proposal package from our Firm.

They ignored my warnings and did not do so. I therefore disallowed their claim which meant their vote did not count. They appealed my decision to the Court. The Court agreed with the Trustee. Not only did their vote not count, but because they lost the appeal, they also had to pay our lawyer’s costs!

Notice of Bankruptcy Process

The bankruptcy notification is a crucial document that provides creditors with essential information about the bankruptcy proceedings, including the timeline for submitting a proof of claim. This notification is distributed by the licensed insolvency trustee managing the bankruptcy process and offers creditors a detailed overview of the procedures involved, including the deadline for submitting proof of claims.

To ensure the accurate and complete submission of the claim form, it is advisable to follow the guidelines outlined below in Section 5. Submitting a Form 31 proof of claim is a critical aspect of the bankruptcy process. Creditors must meet the submission deadline, correctly file the form, and provide all necessary information. Understanding the procedural requirements for submitting a proof of claim helps creditors protect their rights and ensure their interests are properly represented throughout the process.

Section 5: Ensuring Accuracy in Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim – A Step-by-Step Guide to Filing a Proof of Claim

As a creditor, it’s essential to know how to complete Form 31, also known as the Proof of Claim, when dealing with bankruptcy or proposal proceedings. The only way for creditor claims to be registered properly is through the filing of a properly and fully completed proof of claim form.

Let me walk you through the step-by-step process of filling out this crucial document.

Step 1: Gather Required Information

Before starting to fill out Form 31, make sure you have the following information readily available:

The name of the bankrupt individual or corporation
The amount of the debt owed to you
The date the debt was incurred
Any relevant documentation, such as invoices or contracts

Step 2: Complete the Header Information

Begin by filling out the header section of the form, which includes:

The name of the bankrupt individual or corporation
The file number assigned to the bankruptcy proceeding

Step 3: Furnish Creditor Details

In this step, kindly provide the following details as the creditor:

Your full name and mailing address
Your business name and registered address (if applicable)
Your contact information, including phone number and email address

Step 4: Specify the Debt

Specify the debt you’re claiming:

The amount of the debt owed to you
The date the debt was incurred
A brief description of the debt, including any relevant details
Completing whether or not you are a secured, claiming a priority or an ordinary unsecured creditor
Make sure that you include the entire claim

Step 5: Provide Supporting Documentation

Attach any relevant documentation to support your claim, such as:

Invoices or receipts
Contracts or agreements
Bank statements or other financial records

Step 6: Sign and Date the Form

Once you’ve completed the form, including completing the proxy form section if the creditor is a corporation, sign and date it in the designated areas.

Step 7: File the Form

Submit the completed Form 31 to the professional trustee administering the bankruptcy, along with any supporting documentation. You can submit the proof of claim by fax, email, snail mail or delivery. The most important reason of course is that if there is going to be a distribution to the creditors, you want to make sure that you have submitted your claim for dividend purposes.

Additional Tips and Reminders

Ensure to maintain a copy of the completed form for your records.
If you’re unsure about any part of the process, consider consulting with a bankruptcy lawyer or the Trustee handling the bankruptcy case . In case of any uncertainties regarding any aspect of the process, it is advisable to seek advice from a bankruptcy lawyer or the Trustee overseeing the bankruptcy case.
File your claim on time to safeguard your rights as a creditor.

By adhering to these guidelines and furnishing precise information, you will complete Form 31 and safeguard your creditor rights throughout the bankruptcy or restructuring proceedings.

Section 6: Common Mistakes to Avoid when Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim

When engaging in the intricate process of submitting a proof of claim to the Trustee, it is imperative to steer clear of common errors that may result in delays, rejections, or potential dismissal of your claim. This section will outline three crucial errors to avoid when completing Form 31 for the proof of claim.

Providing incomplete or inaccurate information on your proof of claim: This can significantly hinder the processing of your claim or result in its rejection. To mitigate this risk, it is crucial to take the following steps:

- Thoroughly review your claim amount to ensure it aligns with your records.
- Verify the accuracy of creditor information, including names, addresses, and account numbers
- Organize your documents coherently and logically to facilitate efficient processing and evaluation.

By paying close attention to these details, you can enhance the accuracy and efficiency of your claim submission process.

Failure to include supporting documentation: This is a significant oversight that can result in the rejection or delay of your claim. To mitigate this risk, it is imperative to adhere to the following guidelines:

- Attach all pertinent supporting documents, including invoices, receipts, and contracts.
- Ensure that all documents are clear, legible, and easily readable.
- Organize your documents in a clear and logical order

Missed Deadlines for Submission: Be sure to allocate extra time for any unforeseen delays or complications when submitting your proof of claim before the deadline. To minimize last-minute stress, make sure to submit your claim well ahead of the due date. By being proactive and avoiding these typical errors, you can streamline the filing process and increase your chances of a successful outcome. Remember to thoroughly review your details, attach all necessary documentation, and submit your claim with ample time to spare. Finally, missing deadlines for submitting your proof of claim can have severe consequences, including dismissal of your claim.

To ensure a successful filing process, it’s important to avoid these common mistakes. Make sure to thoroughly review your information, attach all necessary supporting documents, and submit your claim with ample time before the deadline.

Section 7: Form 31 Proof of Claim FAQs

In this section, we’ll address some frequently asked questions about completing Form 31 proof of claim.

Q1: What is Form 31 Proof of Claim?

A1: Form 31 Proof of Claim is a prescribed form that creditors use to indicate their claim against a bankrupt estate or in a formal restructuring under the BIA. It is a crucial step in the process, as it allows creditors to assert their rights and receive a portion of the available funds.

Q2: Where can I find Form 31 Proof of Claim?

A2: Form 31 Proof of Claim may be obtained from the office of the Trustee or downloaded from the official website of the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada. Make sure you get the most up-to-date version of the form as the new one goes into effect on July 15, 2024.

Q3: What information should I include in Form 31 Proof of Claim?

A3: When completing Form 31 Proof of Claim, you should provide accurate and detailed information, including your name and address, the debtor’s name, the amount of your claim, and any supporting documentation.

Q4: Are there any specific formatting guidelines for completing Form 31 Proof of Claim?

A4: While there are no strict formatting guidelines, it’s important to ensure that your form is neat, legible, and organized. Use clear and concise language, and avoid any unnecessary details. Attach supporting documents in a logical order and label them appropriately.

Q5: Can I submit multiple claims using Form 31 Proof of Claim?

A5: Yes, you can submit multiple claims using Form 31 Proof of Claim. However, you must separate each claim clearly and provide all the necessary information and supporting documentation for each claim.

Q6: Can I make changes to my submitted Form 31 Proof of Claim?

A6: Once you have submitted your Form 31 Proof of Claim, it depends on the change. If it is something very minor, like your phone number, the Trustee will make that change for you. If it is a major change, like the amount you are claiming, it is recommended that you file an amended claim. Therefore, reviewing your form carefully before submission and ensuring its accuracy is crucial. If you need to make corrections or updates, contact the Trustee’s office immediately.

Remember, completing Form 31 Proof of Claim accurately and on time is essential to assert your rights as a creditor and receive a fair distribution from the estate. By following these tips and guidelines, you can navigate the process successfully.

Conclusion

Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim is crucial for creditors seeking to assert their rights in a bankruptcy case. By avoiding common mistakes, including providing inaccurate information, failing to include supporting documentation, and missing submission deadlines, creditors can enhance their chances of a smooth filing process. Remember to double-check all information, attach relevant supporting documents, and submit your claim on time. By doing so, you can ensure that your claim is properly considered and increase your chances of a successful outcome.

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

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

The stress placed upon you is huge. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your problems; financial and emotional. The way we take the load off of your shoulders and devise a plan, we know that we can help you.

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

That is why we can develop a restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain you are facing. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious about finding a solution, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team today.

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

The information provided in this Brandon’s Blog is intended for educational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal, financial, or professional advice. Readers are encouraged to seek professional advice regarding their specific situations. The content of this Brandon’s Blog should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional guidance or consultation. The author, Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. as well as any contributors to this Brandon’s Blog, do not assume any liability for any loss or damage resulting from reliance on the information provided herein.

Brandon Blog Post

THE CANADIAN BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY ACT EASY BEGINNER’S GUIDE

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 23, 2021

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.

What is in the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act?

Canada’s bankruptcy and insolvency laws are governed by two major pieces of federal legislation: the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act. Additionally, provincial legislation intersects with the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. During bankruptcy, a debtor can keep certain types of property based on provincial legislation. Details may differ amongst each Canadian province. Provincial governments and territories have their own laws regarding property exemptions, court orders, and debt collection.

The Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (often referred to as the “BIA” or the “Bankruptcy Act“) is a federal government statute that sets out the rules and procedures governing insolvency proceedings in Canada. These rules and procedures will apply to all corporations, individuals and partnerships that are parties to an insolvency filing. The whole point of bankruptcy legislation is to allow the honest but unfortunate debtor to shed themselves of their debts and to allow for the sale of assets or reorganization and refinancing of insolvent persons so that there is also fairness for the different claims of creditors.

Under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA), financially troubled corporations are given the opportunity to restructure their affairs in order to avoid bankruptcy. A corporation must have debts of at least $5 million to qualify for the CCAA.

The Canadian insolvency landscape is a complex one, with many different insolvency proceedings being used to deal with many different types of debtors. In this Brandon Blog, I provide an easy beginner’s guide of the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, as a primer into Canadian insolvency legislation and the administration of estates.

This Brandon Blog is not about the nuts and bolts of filing for bankruptcy. Other blogs I have written cover that topic and more. You can use the search function above to search for those Brandon Blog topics.

What is the purpose of the Canadian Bankruptcy & Insolvency Act?

Everyone knows you should do your best to stay out of too much debt, but for many people, it’s an impossible feat. When you’re over your head in debt, you’re having to keep up just to pay the interest on your debt. When you are spending more than you are making, you can’t pay your bills on time, or your assets when liquidated are worth less than your total liabilities, you are insolvent. Insolvency is the main test to see if you, or insolvent companies, qualify to start a bankruptcy process or a formal restructuring process, either under the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act or the CCAA.

The Bankruptcy Act was designed to help Canadians who find themselves in financial difficulty. It is the main piece of Canadian insolvency legislation that governs bankruptcy proceedings, receivership and personal and corporate restructuring proceedings through consumer proposals and commercial proposals. Commercial proposals are also available for those people with consumer debt levels greater than the amount allowed to qualify for a consumer proposal. All Canadian bankruptcies, proposals and receiverships are governed by the Act. It contains bankruptcy laws, rules and guidelines for all stakeholders: the Superintendent of Bankruptcy (which is part of Industry Canada) the Licensed Insolvency Trustee, the debtor, and the creditors.

What options are available under the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act?

The Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act provides a number of ways to deal with a financially troubled company or person. Most involve a court-supervised process. The options for a person or business in financial trouble and not able to right themself or itself are:

Consumer proposal

It is an offer to your creditors to repay a portion of your unsecured debt obligations in exchange for their elimination (with certain limited exceptions as laid out in the Bankruptcy Act). You can qualify if you owe $250,000 or less, excluding any debts registered against your home, such as mortgage debt or secured home equity line of credit debt.

A person proposes a plan to make monthly payments to the Licensed Trustee acting as the consumer proposal Administrator. The total amount offered to your unsecured creditors must be agreed upon by them. Within 60 months, you must pay off the entire amount accepted. Creditors typically accept a total payment of 25% or less of your total unsecured debt. Individual situations vary, however.

A successfully completed consumer proposal allows the insolvent person to eliminate their debts and avoid an assignment into bankruptcy.

Commercial proposal

Commercial proposals are also known as Division I proposals. The reason for this is because it is provided under Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, Part III, Division 1 (consumer proposals are found under Part III Division II). An insolvent corporation or person can use it for restructuring proceedings. When a consumer’s debt exceeds the limits of a consumer proposal, a “commercial proposal” would be filed. If a definitive commercial proposal cannot be immediately prepared but the debtor needs to file in order to invoke the stay of proceedings (discussed in the next section), they can get the immediate protection they need by first filing a Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal.

A commercial proposal works in a very similar way to a consumer proposal, except for some differences as follows:

- A commercial proposal may have various classes of creditors. A consumer proposal normally does not.
- Unlike for a person, there is no streamlined reorganization process for companies. Therefore, even if its debt is $250,000 or less, a company cannot file a consumer proposal.
- A meeting of creditors must be held as part of a commercial proposal. If the Official Receiver (being a representative of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy), doesn’t wish to chair the meeting, it can be delegated to the Trustee. A creditor who has filed a valid proof of claim has voting rights. They have the right to vote ahead of the creditors’ meeting by using a voting letter or in person. An official meeting of creditors is only held in a consumer proposal if 25% of the proven creditors’ claims request one.
- In a consumer proposal, if a meeting is not requested, the consumer proposal is deemed approved and there are no voting rights to be concerned about. If a meeting is requested, then the creditors who attend the meeting can vote by ordinary resolution for the acceptance of the consumer proposal. In a commercial proposal, it is a two-pronged test: 3/4 of the $ value voting AND a majority in the number of those voting.
- If the commercial proposal is voted down, the person or company is immediately deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy. There is no such automatic bankruptcy if a consumer proposal is not accepted.

As soon as the commercial proposal is accepted by the creditors and approved by the court, the debtor starts making the payments promised in the proposal to the Insolvency Trustee. Once full payment has been made, the trustee in bankruptcy will issue to the person or company their Certificate of Full Performance. At this point, all provable claims, regardless of whether they filed a proof of claim or not.

As part of a successful restructuring process, the Trustee will run a claims process, vet every proof of claim to ensure that they are valid and that only an allowable claim is considered for distribution purposes. The Trustee will then comprise a scheme of distribution in order to distribute the funds promised to the creditors in the commercial proposal.

Restructuring under either the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act or CCAA becomes possible for companies with debts greater than $5 million.

Receivers and Secured Creditors

Receiverships are remedies for lenders who have loaned money out and taken security over the debtor’s assets. It is most common in Canada for financial institutions to be lenders to Canadian businesses. As long as their loan documents, including the security agreement, allow for it in writing, a secured creditor may appoint a receiver when a debtor defaults on secured debt. Secured creditors and receivers are subject to certain requirements under the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act.

Receivership relies both on provincial laws and federal legislation. The Bankruptcy Act specifies several main requirements for receivership, including:

- It is not permissible to enforce a security interest on the business assets of an insolvent person unless the secured creditor has given 10 days prior notice in the prescribed form and manner.
- Only a Licensed Insolvency Trustees (formerly called Trustees in Bankruptcy) can act as a receiver.

The secured creditor can appoint the receiver privately or with court approval.

A private receiver’s primary responsibility is to the secured creditor who appointed it. A court-appointed receiver is an officer of the court who protects the interests of all creditors of the debtor company.

Private receivers usually have from the security documents the power to run the debtor’s business and sell the debtor’s assets through auctions, tenders or private sales.

A court appointment is also preferred over a private appointment when there are significant claims against the debtor or its property as well as litigation or a threat of litigation. It is according to the provincial rules of court and s. 243 of the BIA (National Receiver) that a court may appoint a receiver.

The receivership order normally stays proceedings (discussed below in the next section) against the receiver, the debtor, and its property. In terms of its purpose, it gives the receiver authority to manage the assets of the debtor, to borrow money against the assets to repay a loan, to sell the assets of the debtor with the approval of the court, and to commence and defend litigation on behalf of the debtor. A privately-appointed receiver does not enjoy a stay of proceedings.

Bankruptcy

If a personal or commercial restructuring is not possible, then the insolvent person or company has no choice but to file for bankruptcy. The first step in dealing with insolvency is to consult an insolvency trustee. You can learn about the bankruptcy administration process and your legal rights from Trustees in Bankruptcy so you can make an informed decision. A candid discussion about how much you earn, what assets you own, and what types of debts you have can help you decide if bankruptcy is the best choice for you.

Here is what the Canadian bankruptcy procedure is all about. After the bankruptcy assignment has been completed, the Trustee submits it to the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada. All legal obligations will be handled by the Trustee once the assignment has been filed. Your creditors will no longer receive payments directly from you.

The Trustee administers your bankruptcy. No more lawsuits or wage garnishments for you. Depending on your province’s law, some of your assets will certainly be exempt. The bankruptcy vests your non-exempt assets in the Trustee. The Trustee will sell them. According to the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the proceeds will be for the benefit of the bankrupt estate and there could be a scheme of distribution among your preferred creditors and ordinary unsecured creditors.

In the administration of bankruptcy, the Trustee will send your creditors a notice of bankruptcy. You must attend a creditors’ meeting if one is called. Additionally, you will need to attend two counselling sessions. Canadian insolvency legislation in Canada includes rehabilitation programs to help individuals regain financial stability.

Finally, you may need to make payments toward your debt. “Surplus income payments” ensure that people who declare bankruptcy and have sufficient income contribute to paying back a portion of their debt. Your debts will eventually be discharged, relieving you from the obligation of repaying most of the debt you had on the day you filed for bankruptcy.

Despite the fact that most debts can be discharged, some cannot, namely:

alimony and child support;
court fines and penalties;
debts related to fraud; and some
student loans.

You will suffer credit damage for several years after filing for bankruptcy. After your debt is discharged, you can start rebuilding your credit. Although it’s not ideal, it will lift the burden from your shoulders and solve the debt problems you couldn’t resolve on your own.

Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act: Can bankruptcy protect you from creditors?

In addition to bankruptcy, any filing listed above under the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act will protect you from creditors. In fairness to all stakeholders, the filing calls for a “time out” after which no claims for money, lawsuits, or collection efforts are permitted. In legal jargon, we call this a stay of proceedings.

By virtue of the individual’s bankruptcy or insolvency, you may not terminate, amend, or accelerated pay, or claim the term of any agreement. When an insolvent person files a notice of intention or a proposal, a similar provision is made.

Just like in bankruptcy, if you file a notice of intention or a Division I proposal or Division II proposal, all proceedings automatically stay and no creditor is entitled to take any action against the debtor or to pursue any execution or other proceeding for the recovery of a claim provable.

Commercial proposals are normally worded so that Directors of insolvent companies who have filed notices of intention or proposals enjoy similar protection.

A word on cross-border insolvencies

Many of the large CCAA reorganization filings in recent times have been cross-border insolvencies. Canadian courts prefer that cross-border insolvencies proceed as a single process with one jurisdiction acting as the primary entity. The Canadian court examines whether the Canadian case should be considered the main proceeding in order to determine whether it is significant and connected to Canada.

The other jurisdiction (most often the U.S.) usually recognizes the Canadian court’s authority when the court believes the insolvency action should be handled, for the most part, in Canada. Likewise, the opposite is also true.

Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act: Personal bankruptcy

Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act summary

I hope you found this Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act Brandon Blog informative. With too high household debt levels and not enough wealth, you are insolvent. You can choose from several insolvency processes to get the debt relief that you need and deserve. It may not be necessary for you to file for bankruptcy.

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

If you’re thinking about bankruptcy, you’re probably in a situation where you’re overwhelmed, frightened, and feel like you’re alone. That’s natural and it is not your fault.

It’s good that you’ve come to this site, where you’ll find answers to your questions, sort through your options, and discover that you can get help. You’re not alone, and the professionals at Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. are committed to helping you find a debt solution that’s best for you.

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 an alternative 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.

You are under a lot of pressure. Our team knows how you feel. You and your financial and emotional problems will be the focus of a new approach designed specifically for you. With our help, you will be able to blow away the dark cloud over your head. 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.

Because of this, we can develop a new method for paying down your debt that will be built specifically for you. It will be as unique as the economic problems and discomfort you are experiencing. 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.

canadian bankruptcy and insolvency 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.

Tags administration of bankruptcy, allowable claims, assignment into bankruptcy, bankruptcy estate, bankruptcy laws, bankruptcy legislation, bankruptcy procedure, bankruptcy proceedings, bankruptcy process, bankruptcy vests, canadian bankruptcy and insolvency act, canadian courts, Canadian insolvency legislation, claims of creditors, claims process, classes of creditors, commercial proposals, commercial restructuring, consumer debt levels, consumer proposals, corporate restructuring proceedings, cross-border insolvencies, debt obligations, debtor company, federal legislation, financial difficulty, insolvency proceedings, insolvent companies, insolvent corporation, Ira Smith Trustee, legal rights, licensed insolvency trustees, notice of inention, official receiver, preferred creditors, proof of claim, provable claims, restructuring proceedings, restructuring process, scheme of distribution, secured creditor, successful restructurings, trustee in bankruptcy, trustees in bankruptcy, types of debts, unfortunate debtor, unsecured creditors, voting rights

Brandon Blog Post

DEBT MANAGEMENT IN ONTARIO PLAN: HOW TO GET A METICULOUS ONE TO WORK FOR YOU IMMEDIATELY

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date May 31, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this coronavirus 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 and click play on the podcast.

What is debt management in Ontario?

The term “debt management in Ontario” can mean a lot of things to Ontario residents. There are debt management companies that offer a range of services, from credit counselling to debt settlement. In Ontario, these organizations offer their debt management services exclusively to individuals and not to businesses. Debt management is a process that helps you manage your debt and get it under control. A debt management program can only be successful if the person also learns new behaviours in how they deal with money and debt.

WARNING: The Canadian government has put out a consumer alert. This alert, titled Consumer Alert: What you need to know when getting help to pay off debt or repair your credit, warns Canadians about unscrupulous debt settlement companies and what you need to know. In many Brandon Blogs, I have also put out that same warning. There are only two choices when seeking the right credit counsellor to review your alternatives to deal with out-of-control unsecured debt, including tax debt. Legitimate debt management services in Ontario are provided via two types of specialists: accredited community-based non-profit credit counselling agencies and federal government accredited and supervised licensed insolvency trustees.

I recognize that debt is a huge issue for many people in Ontario and all of Canada. Most individuals do not also understand the massive influence it can have on them but trust me, it is all too genuine. In this Brandon Blog post, I review the different alternatives readily available to people looking for debt management in Ontario.

**What is debt management in Ontario plan?**

A debt settlement plan (debt management plan or DMP) is a tool supplied by a non-profit credit counselling agency that can help you get control of your money and back on course to living the debt-free life you wish to lead. Your dedicated credit counsellor can help you identify if becoming part of a DMP is appropriate for you. If not, the non-profit credit counsellor can lay out all your available alternatives.

For hard-working people who struggle to meet their monthly bills, a debt management plan might be the answer. Under the terms of a DMP, a person consolidates all of their unsecured debt under one plan. This plan, developed by any one of the many qualified counsellors, usually involves making a single regular payment, a monthly payment, under a debt repayment program, to the credit counselling service. The non-profit accredited credit counselling agency then distributes this money to creditors.

This kind of repayment plan can take normally as long as 5 years to pay off 100% of your unsecured type of debt, but it can also be the solution that allows a person to become debt-free quickly. It’s important to note that such an informal debt management in Ontario plan may not be the best option for everyone.

There is one major thing to consider before you sign up for a DMP. Before you take out a DMP, you want to make sure that you are in a position that allows you to pay off your debt without the assistance of your creditors.

In a DMP, you are promising to pay your creditors 100% of the principal you owe them when entering into the debt management plan, with no reduction from the total owing. So you need to have established a realistic budget working with your credit counsellor, for the entire DMP period showing you will be able to afford to maintain the monthly payment you are promising to make.

Will creditors continue to contact me while I’m on a Debt Management Plan?

Most people view the DMP as merely a temporary solution until you have paid off all debts. But in fact, if done properly and taken seriously, it is a legitimate solution and behavioural modification program. If you learn the budgeting skills and accept the financial advice in the program and follow them as a permanent change to your money management behaviour, it will allow you not only to focus on paying down your debt load while you are in the program but teach you the necessary skills to not get into financial crisis in the future. You will have the money to make each regular payment to pay off your normal bills and live a financially healthy life.

Once you’ve signed up for a DMP, your credit counsellor will communicate with your unsecured creditors to advise that you are under their program and that payments to creditors will be coming from the non-profit credit counselling agency. Your unsecured creditors will note that in their respective files and focus their communications to be with the debt management program credit counselling agency.

Does debt management in Ontario hurt your credit?

Most people entering a program for debt management in Ontario are on the financial edge of the ledge already. If they default on their debts, it will produce a lower credit score. While a DMP will lower your credit score at first, in the long run, if you keep up with the program and stick to your payment schedule and make your debt payment plan payments on time as agreed, your credit score will eventually improve.

Do I have to give up my credit cards in debt management in Ontario Program?

The question of whether you need to give up your credit cards in a DMP is among the most common inquiries we get asked by debtors. The answer is although there is no law that says you must surrender your bank card for financial debt management in Ontario plan, you do need to quit borrowing. This includes using your existing credit cards.

However, you can still utilize a secured credit card up to the limit you set with your financial institution that issued it. More likely though, the credit card firm will certainly remove your account once they obtain notification of your DMP.

When you’ve effectively finished your financial debt management in Ontario program, you will become eligible for a normal credit card once more.

What to do during your debt management plan

The Canadian government recommends that you:

ask the credit counselling agency for timely written reports on the status of your plan,
keep good records of all amounts you pay to the agency, and
get receipts of all money you pay to them as well as regular reports of amounts they pay to your unsecured creditors for you.

Carefully review your records and the regular reporting you receive from the agency. Ensure they are paying your creditors on time. This will keep you clear of any type of late fees or further adverse notations on your credit report.

What are the disadvantages of debt management in Ontario plan?

There are a few possible drawbacks to hopping on a DMP. However, in my view, they are not enough to stop you from doing one if you can afford it. The disadvantages are also common to any debt settlement in Ontario plan.

In no particular order, they are:

It won’t cover every one of your outstanding debts. DMPs typically won’t include your secured debts and some unsecured debts, such as student loans. This is especially true if you are still in university or college, have not finished your course of study and need to continue to apply for student loans because you wish to continue either as a full-time or part-time student.
Credit counsellors can guide you but will have to take your secured debt payments into account when establishing your monthly budget. You’ll typically need to manage those debts on your own. If you do not have any money left over each month after accounting for secured debt payments, rent or mortgage, food, income tax and other essential monthly purchases, then a DMP will not be possible for you.
There could some service charges to pay for the DMP.
As indicated above, no real accessibility to credit.

During the initial counselling session, the credit counsellor can help you review your realistic options. Perhaps you can still qualify for an Ontario debt consolidation loan. Keep in mind that if that is an option, you will need to be mindful of the effective interest rate you will be paying on your loan, albeit at an annual rate much less than on your existing debt.

If neither a DMP nor a debt consolidation program are viable debt consolidation options or debt settlement options for you, then you will need to explore with a licensed insolvency trustee the other debt relief options of either a consumer proposal or bankruptcy to eliminate your unsecured debt.

How long can you legally be chased for debt in Ontario?

The answer is two years. A Judge of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice In Bankruptcy and Insolvency recently released a decision. It was an appeal from the decision of a Master sitting in the same court. The case was about the issue of a claim which is statute-barred under the Ontario Limitations Act.

Section 4 of this Act says that you cannot enforce an outstanding debt for a claim the creditor has after 2 years from when the claim was discovered. This includes the day on which a creditor initially should have recognized they had a claim which called for enforcement.

This case was about a creditor filing a proof of claim in a debtor’s personal bankruptcy. The licensed insolvency trustee disallowed the claim because the claim was statute-barred. The creditor appealed the Trustee’s decision to the Master sitting in bankruptcy court. The creditor argued that although legal action cannot be taken on the debt, it does not mean that the debt still does not exist. The Master dismissed the creditor’s appeal and upheld the Trustee’s decision.

The creditor then appealed the Master’s decision to a Judge sitting in the same court. The Judge reviewed the matter and upheld the Master’s decision.

What this decision says is that not only can a debtor not be chased for a debt if no legal action was commenced within the 2 year period, they can’t even file a proof of claim in the debtor’s consumer proposal or bankruptcy!

However, keep in mind that just because it is no longer a legal debt, the creditor would have made a notation with the credit bureau for your credit report before the two-year period ended. So the damage to your credit score has already taken place.

Can a Trustee do a debt management plan?

The answer is a Licensed Insolvency Trustee can do for you the equivalent of a DMP. Consumer proposals can only be administered by a Trustee. Consumer proposals are also the only federal government-approved debt settlement plan in Canada. To be equal to the result of a DMP, you would offer to your unsecured creditors to pay them 100% of all the unsecured debt that you owe. Remember, above I stated that a DMP pays 100% of your unsecured debt.

There are many similarities between a consumer proposal and a DMP if you offer 100%. But as I indicate below, you can still have a successful consumer proposal by offering less than 100% to settle all of your unsecured debts. For details on how a consumer proposal works, check out my Brandon Blog, CONSUMER PROPOSAL FAQ: ANSWERS TO 10 TANTALIZING CONSUMER PROPOSAL QUESTIONS.

Which is better? A debt management plan In Ontario vs consumer proposal

Everyone’s financial situation is unique. A DMP will not be as harmful to your credit score as with a consumer proposal, nor will it jeopardize any of your assets as with bankruptcy. You’ll also gain money management skills that can help you in the long term and avoid debt in the future. But if you cannot get an Ontario debt consolidation service loan or a debt management plan is not appropriate for you, then there is another formal option that avoids bankruptcy.

In a consumer proposal, you will also gain money management skills. In addition to your no-cost initial consultation, there are also 2 mandatory credit counselling sessions with an accredited credit counsellor in the Trustee’s office. In a DMP, you need to pay 100% of your unsecured debt. In a consumer proposal, the amount you need to pay is calculated against what your unsecured creditors can expect to receive from your bankruptcy. In most cases, it will be much less than 100%. On average, you can expect to only repay about 25% of your total outstanding unsecured debt, including any tax debt.

A consumer proposal is for any person that owes $250,000 or less, other than for any loans secured against your principal residence. If you owe more than this limit, or your company owes too much debt, then you can still get debt relief under a different proposal section of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA).

Bankruptcy is of course the very last option anyone should consider. This should be considered only if you do not have the necessary cash flow to successfully complete any debt management plan.

So what is best for you? Give me a phone call and I will let you know whether debt management in Ontario plan or a proposal under the BIA is better for you. I will tell you at no cost to you.

Debt management in Ontario summary

I hope that you found this debt management in Ontario Brandon Blog informative. Many people feel that they are trapped in a cycle of credit card debts, unsecured lines of credit, tax debt and generally an unmanageable level of debt. You may want to do something about those debts but you aren’t sure what to do.

If you have any debts they can be overwhelming because they are so much money and you don’t know how to deal with them. There are various debt management plans available that can help you reduce the amount of money you owe and help you deal with your debts.

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.

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 coronavirus 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.

Tags accredited credit counselling, Can a Trustee do a debt management plan, Consumer Proposal, credit cards, credit counsellor, debt management, debt management in Ontario, debt management plan, debt management plan vs consumer proposal, debt management program credit counselling, debt repayment program, debt settlement, Do I have to give up my credit cards in debt management in Ontario Program, Does debt management in Ontario hurt your credit, financial crisis, How long can you legally be chased for debt in Ontario, licensed insolvency trustees, monthly payment, non-profit credit counselling agencies, non-profit credit counselling agency, payments to creditors, personal bankruptcy, proof of claim, regular payment, repayment plan, secured credit card, ull-time or part-time student, unscrupulous debt settlement companies, unsecured creditors, what is debt management in ontario, What to consider before you sign up for debt management, Will creditors continue to contact me while I'm on a Debt Management Plan

Brandon Blog Post

FALSE PRETENCES: OUR STEP-BY-STEP NEW APPROACH CREDITORS MUST TAKE FOR THEIR CLAIM TO SURVIVE A BANKRUPTCY

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date April 12, 2021

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this coronavirus 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 this Brandon Blog’s audio version, please scroll to the very bottom and click play on the podcast.

False pretences and bankruptcy introduction

Just because you have filed for bankruptcy, doesn’t mean you are free and clear of your debts. In fact, some debts, such as those obtained with the use of false pretences, may not be discharged through bankruptcy at all.

A creditor can file a form 31 proof of claim for a debt incurred by false pretences. However, it takes more than just stating it in a proof of claim. A court must have made that determination. If not, the debt can be ruled as dischargeable through bankruptcy. But if the court has made that determination and it is the basis of the claim, that debt will not be discharged upon the bankrupt receiving his or her bankruptcy discharge.

I have discussed the topic of false pretences and bankruptcy before, but based on a recent Ontario court decision, I need to break down the basics of this type of debt and how it relates to a person’s bankruptcy.

What is a false pretence?

A false pretence is a false claim or statement made to induce a person to part with property or to give some valuable thing or advantage. It is a criminal offence in Canada. False pretences are the main element of the crime. The essence of this common law offence is that a person knowingly makes a false statement of fact, intending to induce the victim to act on it to his/her detriment. The reason why the false pretence is punished is that it is a fraud on the public.

Some people choose to give false information when they apply for credit or an extension of credit to make their financial situation look better. This is often done by people who have no intention of repaying the debt and therefore use certain fake information with the intent of deliberately misleading the creditor. They are hoping that the potential creditor will not verify all the information. They can get away with this when they are not required to prove false information with the creditor.

Crimes of Dishonesty: What is the criminal offence of false pretences?

The offence of false pretences is a criminal offence that occurs when a person obtains property from another person by deceiving or defrauding the other person. This can be done either by a false representation of existing facts or by a false promise. The person must intend to defraud and in doing so possess the intent to commit an offence. This is a fairly complex offence under paragraph 362(1) of the Canadian Criminal Code and includes a wide variety of possible scenarios. More often than not, it involves obtaining personal property under false pretences.

Section 362(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada states:

“Every one commits an offence who

(a) by a false pretence, whether directly or through the medium of a contract obtained by a false pretence, obtains anything in respect of which the offence of theft may be committed or causes it to be delivered to another person;…”

If you have been charged with a criminal offence under subsection 362(1)(a) of false pretence in Canada, you need to ensure you have a good defence. Sometimes, it is a difficult offence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The only thing the Crown really needs to prove is that you made a false representation to obtain the property of another and that the other person believed you (and was therefore defrauded). It is up to you to ensure that you have a good defence.

But I am not writing this Brandon Blog to focus on criminal behaviour. Rather, I want to discuss this concept from the perspective of someone who might file an assignment into bankruptcy.

Debt arising from false pretences not released by the bankrupt’s discharge

Section 178 (1)(e) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) states that an order of discharge does not release the bankrupt from any type of financial obligation or liability arising from obtaining property or services by false pretences or fraudulent misrepresentation other than a debt or liability that arises from an equity claim.

In the past, it was quite customary for a creditor seeking judgment for recovery of a debt who is alleging that the debt arises from circumstances caught by section 178(1)(e) of the BIA to also seek both the civil judgment for the money and also a declaration in the judgment that the debt is one of the debts that falls into the category of not being released just because the bankrupt received his or her bankruptcy discharge. This relief was sought even though the defendant was not involved in any bankruptcy proceeding.

In the past, the courts have provided such relief where the evidence before the court substantiated it, notwithstanding the defendant was not an undischarged bankrupt. There are now two cases in Ontario that say such a dual judgment, both the civil award of money plus the BIA debt declaration will not be made anymore where there is not an actual bankruptcy proceeding.

The most recent false pretences released decision in Ontario – *Bank of Montreal v. Mathivannan, 2021 ONSC 2538***

On April 6, 2021, the Honourable Justice Kurz of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice released his decision in this case. The Bank of Montreal (BMO) was attempting to get a summary judgment against a defendant for $35,723.71 plus pre as well as post-judgment interest as a result of an unpaid conditional sales contract.

BMO alleged in its statement of claim that the claim arose because the defendant had fraudulent intent by purposely misrepresenting her employment and employment income in her application for credit, being a statement in writing, under a conditional sales agreement for an automobile. The false document application was made to the dealership for financing to purchase a vehicle from it. The conditional sales agreement was then assigned to BMO as a normal financing business practice that is used.

The defendant was noted in default. Under the rules, when noted in default, it is as if the defendant admitted the allegations of fact contained in the statement of claim. However, the opposite is not true. The plaintiff is not necessarily entitled to a judgment merely because the allegations of fact are deemed to have been admitted. They actually must be proven.

The deemed admissions of fact that come from the statement of claim are that:

Defendant made certain representations as to her employment and her employment income.
BMO relied on those representations and provided the defendant credit.
Those details supplied by the defendant were false.
That false information was created solely for the objective of defrauding BMO to advance credit for the purchase of the vehicle.
BMO gave the credit based on those representations.

The court’s decision regarding the false statements in the credit application document

The court determined that BMO’s statement of claim:

Falls short to state how the false statements meet the test for false pretences or fraudulent misrepresentation.
It did not say whether they were significant or not.
The affidavit evidence used to support the statement of the claim simply offers the verdict that they were false and illegal.
With those non-inclusions, the pleadings in the claim do not support a finding of fraudulent misrepresentation or false pretences.

The court had no problem in giving BMO judgment for the civil claim for money, being the $35K plus pre and post-judgment interest. Where the court had a problem was in the evidence of the fraud. Therefore, the request for the additional relief of stating that the debt is one not released by the defendant’s discharge when she obtains her discharge from bankruptcy has not yet taken place.

The court did not grant the additional relief to protect this claim in the event the defendant ever declared bankruptcy. But there is another, and in my view, deeper reason, which all plaintiffs finding themselves in the position of BMO and seeking the same kind of two-phase relief must keep in mind.

The court should not issue hypothetical decisions even with deceitful conduct

The court did not doubt that the defendant made the false statement. What the court said, following the decision of the trial judge in Royal Bank of Canada v. Elsioufi, the Honourable Mr. Justice Dunphy, that there was not an essential legal basis to determine fraud to approve the civil monetary judgment requested. Justice Kurz followed the thinking of Justice Dunphy by stating that even if a positive finding of fraud were called for to release a judgment, he would certainly refrain from doing so.

That is because it would stand for a theoretical declaration applicable to a bankruptcy case before that proceeding beginning. Justice Kurz also concurred with Justice Dunphy that courts ought to make decisions based on examined evidence and not only based on admissions or even on consent.

So the old-fashioned method in Ontario of bringing to court the request for not only a civil monetary judgment, but also a declaration that the debt falls under s.178(1) of the BIA and therefore not discharged upon the discharge of the bankrupt is over. In the words of Justice Dunphy:

“I am moved to issue this brief endorsement for publication purposes as I have noticed a growing practice of some to request such declarations on a routine basis. I may even have signed one or two before giving the matter further thought and research and I have concluded that the practice is to be discouraged.”

Justice Kurz refused to grant BMO any sort of special costs in its motion, as it did not need to make that kind of motion merely to get the civil monetary claim in a judgment.

***False pretences*: A new creditor blueprint is needed**

Now that at least in Ontario, if the old way will not work anymore, what is a creditor to do now? It is not only for a claim falling under false pretenses or fraudulent misrepresentation but potentially many other of the classes of debts falling under section 178(1) of the BIA including false pretences or fraudulent misrepresentation.

The above-noted court decisions can be instructive. First, if a plaintiff believes that the debt was incurred because of a type of fraud, including false pretences or fraudulent misrepresentation, hard evidence should be provided to the court. Proof using genuine documents, a copy of original documents proving breach of trust, is evidence that should be included.

It should not merely be a deponent’s or plaintiff’s conclusion given the known facts being deposed. It should support a finding of the fraud, even though the court may refrain from making a finding of fraud to deliver a civil monetary judgment in favour of the plaintiff. Providing this evidence will be important later on.

Next, there must be an actual bankruptcy. Either the person must have recognized their financial condition of insolvency and filed an assignment in bankruptcy or a creditor have the court issue a Bankruptcy Order against the person. It could even be the judgment creditor able to prove that the person ought to be adjudged bankrupt.

Third, once bankrupt, the judgment creditor should file a proof of claim with the licensed insolvency trustee administering the bankruptcy estate. Proof of the debt would be the judgment which would be attached to the proof of claim and marked as “Schedule A”.

Fourth, does the plaintiff continue to believe that the claim falls under one of section 178(1) of the BIA exclusions and would survive the person’s discharge from bankruptcy, such as false pretences? If so, then the creditor can make an application to the bankruptcy court to lift the stay of proceedings against the bankrupt, for the creditor to attempt to obtain a judgment from the court that the claim of that creditor is not released by the discharge of the bankrupt.

Fifth and final, the creditor having obtained such leave, can then make a new application to the court for the specific finding that the court refused to make in both of the cases I discussed above. The original evidence supplied by the creditor in its original application will now become very important for the court to review. That is why I said it should be pleaded, with evidence when the civil monetary judgment was sought so that it could be relied upon now.

False pretences summary

I hope you enjoyed the false pretences Brandon Blog post. 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.

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.

Tags Bank of Montreal v. Mathivannan, bankruptcy and insolvency act canada, common law offence, crimes of dishonesty, false pretence, false pretences, false pretences and bankruptcy, false statements, form 31 proof of claim, fraudulent intent, fraudulent misrepresentationi, licensed insolvency trustee, personal property, proof of claim, Royal Bank of Canada v. Elsioufi, Section 178 (1), what is a false pretence, what is the criminal offence of false pretences

Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCIES IN ONTARIO: OUR EXCLUSIVE 6 THINGS LIST CREDITORS MUST KNOW ABOUT CANADIAN BANKRUPTCY

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date June 3, 2020

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

Stay healthy, well balanced and safe and secure everyone.

Bankruptcies in Ontario -Introduction

Much of the insolvency chatter developing from the COVID-19 pandemic world in which we find ourselves is now concentrating on the waterfall of brand-new bankruptcies in Ontario that are predicted to arrive. I have previously written about some of the big-name US retailers that have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Businesses shut down, job losses, government funding for people and businesses to try to hang on through this coronavirus are all in the headlines. What our “new normal” will look like and which companies and jobs will survive, right now, is anybody’s guess.

In this Brandon’s Blog, I want to highlight things creditors must know about canadian bankruptcy and bankruptcies in Ontario. By being well-versed, creditors will hopefully be able to better understand what is in store for them and for the debtors.

1. Bankruptcies in Ontario – the automatic stay of proceedings

In Canadian insolvency matters, an automatic stay of proceedings happens when a company or person files under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) for either:

The stay of proceedings is automatic under the BIA. Other than in one specific situation which I will touch on in a minute, absent proof that some sort of fraud is being committed on the court, a judge will not interfere with the automatic stay provisions. So an unsecured creditor will not be able to start or continue any action for collecting on a debt.

The one exception is in a restructuring where the major secured creditor goes to court and provides evidence that no matter what the restructuring may look like, they will never support it. The secured creditor would at the same time be requesting the court to lift the stay of proceedings so that they can enforce on their security.

Absent a restructuring proposal that promises to pay out that secured creditor 100% PLUS proof that the company or person has a realistic chance of refinancing to take out that secured creditor. Even in that situation, the court could give the debtor some time to pull it off, but it will be a very short lease. Otherwise, the secured creditor will probably get their wish and the restructuring effort will end.

In the case of a privately appointed receiver, there is no automatic stay of proceedings. This is notwithstanding that the conduct of the receiver in a private receivership is also governed by the BIA. The reason there is no automatic stay of proceedings is that a private receivership is not a filing under the BIA.

In either a court-appointed receivership or a corporate restructuring under the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (Canada) (CCAA), the stay of proceedings authority does not come from statute per se. The respective statutes allow for the judge to order a stay of proceedings. That language is then incorporated into the court order appointing the receiver or authorizing the bankruptcy protection CCAA filing. In these cases, the court is available for anyone to make an application to lift the stay if they can prove that they are being prejudiced. Again, normally only secured creditors will be able to show prejudice.

2. Bankruptcies in Ontario – **Know whether, when, and where proof of claim needs to be submitted**

For bankruptcies in Ontario and restructurings, it is important to know what kind of insolvency proceeding is taking place. The notice you receive from the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (Trustee) will tell you what kind of proceeding it is. It will also provide a proof of claim form to be completed. The notice will provide all the details.

It is important that you know:

The details.
How to complete a proof of claim form.
Where to send it into.
What timelines there may be.

Some creditors wish to file a proof of claim only so that if a dividend is declared they will get one. In that case, you can complete and file the proof of claim any time before the Trustee issues a final dividend. The Trustee must send a final notice to all named creditors who have not yet filed a proof of claim before issuing a final dividend.

Some creditors wish to actively participate in the insolvency process. They may wish to attend the meeting of creditors, vote on a restructuring proposal under the BIA. If creditors wish to actively participate in bankruptcies in Ontario, they should complete and file the proof of claim with the Trustee within the time-frame indicated in the notice accompanying the proof of claim form.

In a receivership, there will only be a need to file a proof of claim if the receiver has realized enough money from the sale of assets to pay out the trust claims and secured creditor claims in full and now has money for the unsecured creditors. This is very rare. In that situation, the receiver will conduct a claims bar process later on in the administration. That is when a notice with a blank proof of claim form will be sent out to the known creditors.

In a restructuring under the CCAA, first, the restructuring plan, called the Plan of Arrangement, is finalized. Then the Trustee will send out notices and blank proof of claim forms for creditors to complete and submit. Filling out the form at that stage will allow creditors to actively participate in the meeting and voting on the plan, as well as be in line to receive a payment.

3. Bankruptcies in Ontario – Obtaining a preference repayment from a future bankrupt debtor is not illegal or unethical, but you may have to give it back

If a customer of yours offers to pay you money, even if it turns out to be on the eve of an insolvency filing, take it! Always take the money; stress over any claim for it by a Trustee later.

The premise of the BIA is that all unsecured creditors will be treated equally. So, if certain unsecured creditors receive partial or full payment on the eve of filing, and then the debtor goes bankrupt, there is a presumption of a preference. The onus is on the creditor who received payment to rebut the presumption of a preference. If the Trustee is successful in attacking such a transaction, then the creditor must pay over the money to the Trustee. The creditor will also have spent money on its own legal fees. There will also probably be a cost award for all or a portion of the Trustee’s legal costs also.

Notwithstanding all this, it is better to have the money than not. Perhaps the Trustee will not knock on your door. Or, maybe you can avoid a lot of heartache by agreeing to and paying over a settlement amount that is less than 100% of what you received. Finally, there is a very limited number of defences to rebut the presumption of a preference. Perhaps your situation falls under one of them.

Taking the money is not immoral, unethical or illegal. You just may not be able to keep it if your customer files for bankruptcy after making the payment to you.

4. Bankruptcies in Ontario – review the Trustee’s Report very carefully and ask questions

The Trustee’s report outlines issues of importance regarding the conduct of the debtor both pre and post-filing. Sometimes, there may be an action that the Trustee could take to enhance the recovery of an asset, but lacks the funding to do so.

In those cases, a creditor or a group of creditors can choose to either:

Fund the Trustee to take the action for the general benefit of all unsecured creditors.
Get court approval to take the action in their own name under s.38 of the BIA.

It would be unusual for creditors to fund the Trustee. The simple reason is that they would be responsible for 100% of the costs but have to share any recovery with all the other unsecured creditors on a pro-rata basis. For this reason, it is not done.

Many times a creditor or group of creditors will choose to obtain court permission to take on the action in their own name. The court will insist that the creditor group make the opportunity to all creditors. However, a “buy-in” will be set. Most of the time other creditors won’t pony up to join in. Either they are not sophisticated enough to realize the potential benefit or they feel it is not worth their spending money in that way.

Under an s.38 action, if successful, the creditor can first pay back all its costs in doing the action. Next, they are entitled to keep up to the full amount of their claim. If any funds are left over, they must be paid over to the Trustee.

I am administering a bankruptcy file right now where there was foreign real estate. I did my investigation and determined that although saleable, the properties would take many years to sell and then to repatriate the money back to Canada. The major unsecured creditor wished to take control of the sales process. So, her lawyer got court approval for her to do so under s.38 of the BIA. No other creditor joined in with her. The properties are now sold, we have so far received a six-figure payment from the surplus sitting in her Canadian lawyer’s trust account after she was fully repaid all of her costs and the amount of her claim.

There is another six-figure amount sitting in a foreign country. We have retained legal counsel in that country now to get the rest of the funds repatriated into our trust account. Once received, we will finalize our vetting of all proofs of claim and make a distribution to the unsecured creditors.

5. A discharge from personal bankruptcies in Ontario ends the debtor’s liability for pretty well all debts

Unless the Trustee of a bankrupt corporation raises enough money for all of the creditors to be paid off in full, with interest, a corporation is never discharged from bankruptcy. In personal bankruptcy, the debtor is eventually entitled to an absolute discharge. The absolute discharge can be:

Received straight away when the debtor is able to be discharged.
Given once the bankrupt fulfills all of the conditions of discharge.

There are only a handful of claims that are not discharged upon the discharge of the bankrupt. Those are:

Trust claims.
Secured claims.
Those claims which fall under s.178 of the BIA.

If a debtor wishes to get out of a liability where the creditor holds security, such as vehicle financing, the debtor needs to trigger a default prior to filing for bankruptcy. So continuing with the vehicle example, the debtor could tell the lender that it cannot afford to make any more payments. The debtor would then give the vehicle and the keys to the lender.

The debtor should then wait for notice from the lender that the vehicle has been sold, the lender has suffered a shortfall and demands payment for the shortfall. The shortfall is an unsecured claim. The debtor now files for bankruptcy after the shortfall claim has crystallized. There now is no longer a secured claim for this debt.

If the debtor does not wait for the shortfall notice from the lender, they run the risk that the shortfall occurs after the date of bankruptcy. In that case, the shortfall unsecured claim will not be a debt discharged by the bankrupt’s discharge.

I have previously written about the s.178 claims. You can read about them in my blog.

Lacking affirmative action by a debtor or Trustee, all secured claims go through the bankruptcy unaffected. It is incumbent on the Trustee to get a lawyer’s security opinion on the validity of any secured creditor’s security as against the Trustee. I have a corporate bankruptcy file now where the legal opinion was that the security was not valid. I advised the creditor who did not object. I guess they already knew!

6. Bankruptcies in Ontario – A fully completed restructuring also discharges most debts

The most essential element of reorganization situations under the BIA and CCAA that creditors need to know is about how debts get discharged in a restructuring. Similar to a personal bankruptcies in Ontario, in a successfully completed corporate restructuring, the debtor’s debts are discharged. Again, except for trust claims and secured creditor claims, the ordinary unsecured debts of a corporation are fully discharged when a restructuring plan that has been accepted by the creditors and approved by the court is fully completed. When the payout is made to the creditors and the company has successfully completed it, there are no pre-filing debts remaining.

So what is the significance to creditors? Well, if you are a director of the company, any debts that would have been a director liability, other than for a trust claim, vanishes. As there is no debt left, there is nothing left for the director to be responsible for.

Likewise, if someone personally guaranteed a premises lease to the landlord, if the lease is disclaimed as part of the restructuring, then the landlord has an unsecured claim. Once that claim is fully discharged in the restructuring, there is no debt left for the guarantor to be responsible for.

Creditors should also know that a company in a restructuring, may come to you to renegotiate your agreement with the company. If you refuse, the company could disclaim the agreement and any claim you have will be an unsecured claim in the restructuring.

7. Bankruptcies in Ontario bonus tip

It is better to get professional advice about extending credit to a customer and the best way to do it before you approve the credit. Getting professional advice after they have filed for bankruptcy limits your options.

Bankruptcies in Ontario – Summary

I hope you have found this bankruptcies in Ontario Brandon’s Blog helpful.

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

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

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

Revenue and cash flow shortages are critical issues facing entrepreneurs and their companies and businesses. This is especially true these days.

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

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

Stay healthy, well balanced and safe and secure everyone.

Tags bankrptcy and insolvency act, bankruptcies in ontario, bankruptcy trustee, BIA, CCAA, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, Consumer Proposal, corporate restructuring, Court-appointed receivership, covid-19, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, plan of arrangement, privately appointed receiver, proof of claim, restructuring proposal, trustee

Brandon Blog Post

TRUSTEE COMPANY RESPONSIBILITY IN REVIEWING BANKRUPTCY PROOF OF CLAIM

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 25, 2019

Introduction

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

The case

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

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

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

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

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

The appeal

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

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

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

The Trustee did not handle its investigation properly

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

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

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

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

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

The review of the claim and the Trustee’s disallowance

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

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

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

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

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

Trustee company summary

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

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

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

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

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

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

Brandon Blog Post

BANKRUPTCY EXPERTS WEIGH IN ON US & CDN SMALL BIZ RESTRUCTURING

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 11, 2019

Introduction

Small and medium-sized businesses play a vital role in all worldwide economies. Bankruptcy experts in the USA identified problems. The Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection process for these companies was not working. It is pricey, usually ineffective and impractical. So, many businesses in the USA in need of restructuring could not have access to the US insolvency system.

On July 23, 2019, the US Congress passed the Small Business Reorganization Act (SBRA). On August 1, 2019, the Senate passed the Bill. On August 23, 2019, President Donald Trump signed it to enact it.

The purpose of the SBRA is to make business bankruptcy protection much less troublesome for small and medium-size ventures. The result is Chapter 11, subchapter V of the US Bankruptcy Code (Titled: Small Business Debtor Reorganization). The aim is to make it more affordable and will serve to save otherwise viable owner-managed businesses.

The purpose of this Brandon’s Blog is to discuss the new US legislation. I will also comment on an approach for the Canadian insolvency system. Can we streamline restructuring under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) for small business?

Changes made by the SBRA

A small company is defined in the SBRA as a person or company whose non-contingent debts (leaving out financial obligations to affiliates or people not dealing at arms’-length) are $2,725,625 or less and which chooses to be dealt with under the SBRA. The Act includes a new subchapter V to Chapter 11 of the US Bankruptcy Code. The purpose of this new approach is to make it simpler and more economical for small companies to efficiently restructure.

The main thrust of the Act is:

A creditor cannot lodge a Chapter 11 restructuring plan that it is prepared to support. Just the business can. The company’s plan must be filed within 90 days of the day it filed its bankruptcy protection application, other than in specific conditions.
A trustee comparable to those selected in a personal restructuring (Chapter 13) situations will be selected to manage each case.
A creditors committee will not be developed.
The Chapter 11 plan can change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the mortgage/funding secured by the home was used in the person’s business and was not financing used to purchase the property.
The Court can approve a small business’ restructuring plan without the approval of any class of creditors. The Court must be satisfied that the restructuring plan treats all creditors fairly and does not prejudice any creditor class.
To be fair and equitable, the restructuring plan must offer that all earnings received throughout the term of the restructuring plan will available to fund the restructuring for a duration of 3 to 5 years.

So the onus is on the creditors to carefully review all cases filed under the SBRA. Creditors will need to retain bankruptcy experts to advise them. Their role will be to make certain that Courts appropriately examine restructuring cases for fairness and that they treat all creditors equitably. This will be especially true for those that do not have the support of the creditors.

It will be very interesting to see if this new legislation accomplishes its goal of making it simpler and less costly for small businesses to restructure and continue.

The Canadian business restructuring landscape

There are two federal statutes that legislate business restructuring in Canada. They are the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36) (CCAA) and the Part III Division I of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA).

To qualify for restructuring under the CCAA, the insolvent corporation must owe at least $5 million. The CCAA is only for insolvent companies or income trusts to restructure. It is not for:

proprietors or partnerships
banks
telegraph companies (do people still send telegrams?)
insurance companies
companies to which the Trust and Loan Companies Act applies

Proceedings under the CCAA are a very heavily Court-driven process.

Restructurings under the Part III Division I proposal provisions of the BIA are available to both companies, proprietors and partnerships. It is also available to people who owe $250,000 or more, not including any mortgages or loans secured by the person’s principal residence.

For people who owe less than $250,000, a more streamlined restructuring process is available under Part III Division II of the BIA. These are called consumer proposals.

Restructuring under the proposal provisions of the BIA is not a heavily Court-driven process like the CCAA. Under consumer proposals, if all goes smoothly there is never a Court application.

So we have a simpler and streamlined version for people who have a smaller debt level but are still in need of restructuring their financial affairs. The same is also true for people with fewer or no assets that need to start over through the bankruptcy process. However, there is no equivalent streamlined version in Canada for small to medium-size businesses.

Could such a streamlined business restructuring model be developed? Not only do I think it could be, as one of the bankruptcy experts in Canada holding the designation of licensed insolvency trustee, I think it must be.

The statute for a streamlined Canadian business restructuring model

The CCAA is designed for large corporations. As I already stated, it is a heavily Court-driven process. Therefore, I think this eliminates the CCAA from developing a more streamlined version. It is not the case that it could not be done. It is just that a new section designed for simpler and more cost-effective CCAA proceedings goes somewhat against the purpose of the CCAA.

Therefore, I propose that CCAA legislation should remain available only to larger companies. Especially because the BIA, another federal statute, already includes restructuring provisions. It already has a streamlined version for bankruptcy and restructuring to avoid bankruptcy. So, why not a streamlined business restructuring section?

What would BIA streamlined business restructuring look like?

You might ask, why is this even necessary? Many small and medium-sized businesses are family-owned. There are even very large family-owned businesses. The Financial Post reports that “Family businesses own a bigger chunk of Canada’s economy than you think — way bigger”. They report it is a significant business sector contributing 35 percent of Canada’s real gross domestic product.

So with such an important business sector, it would make sense to allow those businesses on the smaller scale to qualify to have a simpler and more cost-effective way to restructure when they hit a financial bump in the road. If the viable parts of the business can be saved, it will continue to employ people, allow families to have a good quality of life and contribute to Canada’s GDP. It does not make sense to essentially kill off these smaller businesses because the cost of the restructuring will use up all the resources necessary to run the business.

I am not talking about family-owned businesses Bombardier Inc. and Loblaw Cos. Ltd. Rather, I am talking about the majority of Canadian entrepreneurial companies in the mid to small size range.

So here is what I propose for a streamlined restructuring process for small and medium-sized businesses. I will call it a new Part III Division III of the BIA. I will call it the General Scheme for Small Business Proposals (SBP) section of the BIA.

Size matters

The new SBP should be available to corporations, proprietorships and partnerships that are set up to conduct business. Their total debt should not be more than $1.5 million. There is nothing scientific about this number.

Statistics Canada could do an analysis as to the average debt load of Canadian businesses and an appropriate debt level could be picked based on it. For purposes of this Brandon’s Blog, I will use the $1.5 million amount.

I would not exclude loans from affiliates or people not dealing at arms’-length such as in the US legislation. In Canada, it is normal for the first funding of a company to come from the owners. Our chartered banks want to see a commitment from the owners before they will lend. Owners have sacrificed their own money to get the company off the ground. Just because that is how they had to finance the company, I would not preclude that debt from counting in the calculation.

The Canadian business landscape is different from that in the USA. Our numbers are generally smaller. In order to exclude non-arms’-length debt, you would probably have to lower the debt threshold I have mentioned. So, let us keep that debt threshold for discussion purposes and include all debt; secured or unsecured, arms’-length or related parties and owners.

If a person is not conducting business in his or her name, then this new SBP would not be for them. They would fall under either Division I or Divison II restructuring proposals.

Administration of restructurings under the SBP

Currently, only a licensed insolvency trustee (formerly called a bankruptcy trustee) (LIT) can administer restructuring proposals. Under Division I Proposals, the LIT is called the Proposal Trustee. Under consumer proposals, Division II personal restructurings, the LIT is called the Administrator.

So, for the new SBP, I will call the LIT the Small Business Administrator. It makes it obvious that it is the restructuring of a business qualifying under the new Division III. The use of the word “administrator” ties nicely into the word chosen already by Parliament for consumer proposals. So again, it makes it obvious that the LIT is administering a small business streamlined restructuring.

Since we are not talking about personal restructuring that falls under the consumer proposal provisions in this Brandon’s Blog, my suggestions for a streamlined business restructuring applies only to Part III Division I of the BIA Proposal restructurings to avoid bankruptcy.

Time to restructure

Under a Division I Proposal restructuring, the company or person can begin the restructuring process by filing either a Notice of Intention To Make A Proposal (NOI) or the Proposal itself. Under either filing, the debtor then has 10 days to file its cash-flow statement reviewed and approved by both the company or person and the LIT. Under an NOI filing, the company or person then has an additional 20 days (30 days after the NOI filing date) to file a Proposal (unless the time is extended by Court Order).

Most times with small to medium-sized businesses, the debtor is not current in all of its filings with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). This includes payroll remittances, HST and perhaps even income tax returns. In any restructuring where CRA is a creditor, they need to have the most current information from the debtor’s business filings, to be able to know the full amount owing by the business. They will not be able to properly assess the Proposal until they know the proper amount owing to them.

Also in any Proposal restructuring, we want to have a provisional income tax return prepared by the external accountant for the business. The provisional return is to show if any further tax liability exists for the fiscal year up to and including the date of filing of the Proposal.

Books and records will first have to be brought up to date. Then the accountant will need time to prepare and file the income tax return. There is a reason for this. We want CRA to know if there is a further liability.

Although there is no statutory provision allowing for this, CRA so far on an administrative level will allow for a split tax year in a restructuring. The liability for the fiscal year up to and including the Proposal date will be included as a debt in the restructuring. This is to the company’s or person’s advantage in the business.

Once the Proposal is filed, the meeting of creditors has to take place within 21 days of the Proposal date. In my experience, there is never enough time for the business to do all the necessary filings for CRA that I just mentioned. So, CRA always requests an adjournment of the meeting until such time as all the filings are up to date.

So, in my proposed streamlined version, I would propose to extend the filing of a Proposal after the filing of an NOI from 30 days to 90 days, without the need for the expense of going to Court seeking an extension. This should give enough time for the business to get all of its filings up to date and hopefully avoid the need for an adjournment of the meeting of creditors.

Creditors

There really is nothing that needs to be changed on how creditors file their claims. The same is true for the rules of how the LIT must assess all claims. I do like the idea in the new Chapter 11 subchapter V. That is the ability to change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the mortgage/funding secured by the home was used in the person’s business and was not financing used to purchase the property.

In Canada, it is very rare, if not unheard of, for an entrepreneurial business to get a bank loan without the owner giving a personal guarantee. Many times the personal guarantee has to be backed by a hard asset, such as a pledge of the personal residence. If the secured debt can be restructured, shouldn’t the pledge agreement on a personal asset also be part of that restructuring?

So, I propose that in the new SBP, there should be the ability to change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the funds were used for the business or if the pledge was in support of a personal guarantee for funds borrowed by the business.

The types of changes to the security pledge will be unique to the individual restructuring. It has to make business sense and common sense. It is always up to the secured lender to vote against the plan if they don’t like it. In that case, the restructuring will fail. There will be great pressure on the business to bring forward the best possible restructuring plan and not go crazy on what changes the owner wants to make to the pledge of security.

Deemed acceptance and approval

Without going into all the rules, under the current consumer proposal legislation, there is the concept of deemed creditor approval and deemed Court approval. Unless creditors holding 25% in value of the proven claims request it, there is no need to hold a meeting of creditors. Creditors are asked to vote by way of voting letters when they file their proof of claim. If no obligation to call a meeting arises, then the consumer proposal is deemed accepted.

If a consumer proposal is either accepted or deemed accepted by the creditors, then there is probably never going to be a need for the LIT administrator to formally seek approval by the Court. The BIA reads that after the acceptance or deemed acceptance, the consumer proposal is deemed accepted by the Court unless the Official Receiver or “other interest party” requests it within 15 days after the date of (deemed) acceptance.

Currently, under a Division I Part III restructuring Proposal there are no deeming provisions for either creditor acceptance or Court approval. I would like to see in the new SBP section, that similar deeming provisions for both creditor acceptance and Court approval be implemented. This will save time and cost thereby being much more efficient.

No deemed bankruptcy

In a Division I Proposal, if the creditors do not accept the restructuring, or the Court does not approve it, then the debtor is automatically deemed to have filed an assignment in bankruptcy. There is not a similar provision for consumer proposals.

If the creditors do not accept a consumer proposal, then it just dies then and there and the debtor goes back to their normal unprotected state.

My proposal for the new SBP is that if the creditors do not accept or the Court will not approve the restructuring plan, that does not produce a corporate or personal bankruptcy. Rather, the debtor just goes back to their normal unprotected insolvent state and they have to fend off their creditors as best as possible.

It may lead to bankruptcy, but that will not be automatic. In some corporate situations, the cost of a bankruptcy proceeding just does not make sense. This is especially true if a chartered bank has security over all of the assets and will be enforcing its security through a receivership.

Directors/Owners

Right now a corporate restructuring Proposal allows for Directors to be released from debts that arise prior to the date of filing the Proposal. The kinds of debts that a Director can be released from are those solely resulting from their role as a Director. In other words, generally statutory claims they would be legally liable for.

As I already mentioned, more often than not, the only way a small or medium-sized company can get a bank loan is if the entrepreneur personally guarantees the debt. There are times where a corporate restructuring can be done, but the secured debt arrangements will have to be amended. If the lender is not willing to amend the personal guarantee security arrangements in place, then, the corporate restructuring does not make sense.

So in my dream of the SBP, if a secured lender agrees to a restructuring of their debt, then the Director(s) who may be personally liable will now be responsible for the revised secured lending arrangement. This would also go hand in hand with my proposed change to the ability to change the legal rights of a lender registered against an individual’s primary home if the mortgage/funding secured by the home was used in the person’s business and was not financing used to purchase the property.

Bankruptcy experts summary

So there you have it. The US government saw fit to add to its Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection statute to allow smaller companies to restructure. My vision for a Canadian version is the SBP section to form a new Part I Division III for the BIA.

To summarize, the changes to allow for a more efficient and less costly way to restructure smaller businesses would include:

The brand-new SBP will be offered to companies, proprietorships and partnerships that are established to run a business. It will be available to businesses with any kind of debt not greater than $1.5 million.
A LIT who will be called a Small Business Administrator, will oversee and be responsible for the business restructuring.
The time for the filing of a Proposal after the filing of an NOI will be extended from the current 30 days to 90 days. This will be without the need and cost of a Court application.
There ought to be the capability to transform the rights of a lending institution who has taken an entrepreneur’s home as security for a business loan or personal guarantee of such financing and the funds were put into the business.
Deeming provisions for both creditor acceptance and Court approval be implemented. It is already done in consumer proposals, so why not in streamlined business proposals? This will result in more efficient and less costly restructuring.
If the creditors’ decline or the Court will not approve the restructuring, that will not generate a corporate or personal bankruptcy. Instead, the debtor simply returns to their vulnerable financially troubled state and they will need to deal with their creditors as best as possible. In some cases it may lead to either bankruptcy or just a closing down of the business. Where there is a secured creditor, it will lead to the enforcement of their security. Either way, it won’t be an automatic bankruptcy.
A Director of a corporation can be released not only from statutory obligations arising from their office of Director. That person, or any other person, can have their guarantee of a debt to a lender be amended if the related business debt is amended in the restructuring.

There no doubt will be other areas that would need amending once all the relevant sections of the BIA were looked at. These are my ideas of the major amendments that could be made to the BIA, to allow for a more streamlined and cost-efficient restructuring for small and mid-sized businesses.

What about your business?

The financial restructuring process for either a large or small business is complex. The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a complex corporate restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur. You are worried because your company is facing significant financial challenges. Your business provides income not only for your family. Many other families rely on you and your company for their well-being.

The stress placed upon you due to your company’s financial challenges is enormous. We understand your pain points. We look at your entire situation and devise a strategy that is as unique as you and your company’s problems; financial and emotional. The way we dealt with this problem and devised a corporate restructuring plan, we know that we can help you and your company too.

We know that companies facing financial problems need realistic lifeline. There is no “one solution fits all” approach with the Ira Smith Team. That is why we can develop a company restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain it is facing. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious in finding a solution, contact the Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. team today.

Call us now for a free consultation. We will get your company back on the road to healthy stress-free operations and recover from the pain points in your life, Starting Over, Starting Now.

Tags Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, bankruptcy experts, BIA, business restructuring proposal, Canada Revenue Agency, CCAA, chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, consumer proposals, CRA, Debt, Division I Proposal, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, notice of intention to make a proposal, proof of claim, restructuring, Small Business Reorganization Act

Brandon Blog Post

FORM 31 PROOF OF CLAIM: HOW TO PROPERLY COMPLETE THE PROOF OF CLAIM

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date October 3, 2018

Form 31 proof of claim: Introduction

In last week’s vlog, I reviewed why it is important to complete a form 31 proof of claim truthfully, and the penalties for filing a false claim. For both personal and corporate insolvency files, creditors call asking how to complete the document. I discuss in this vlog why it needs to be completed properly. I also provide a link in this blog that you can click on to see how to properly complete the form step by step.

The reference to “form 31” is merely the number of the form given to the form 31 proof of claim form under the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (“BIA”).

What is the form 31 proof of claim form?

Completing and returning form 31 is the second phase in the bankruptcy process. They are included with the notice of bankruptcy documents mailed out by the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) (the “Trustee”) to formally notify the creditors of the bankruptcy.

When properly completed and filed by each creditor, they are what a Trustee uses to compare the debt as listed on the debtor’s bankruptcy sworn Statement of Affairs. The amount claimed by a creditor is normally different than the amount of the debt listed on the bankruptcy schedules. The reason for this is normally because the creditor’s records are accurate to the penny, while the bankrupt’s records are usually not up to date.

The process is the same whether you are filing a secured claim, an ordinary unsecured claim or a priority claim, which is also unsecured, under s.138 of the BIA. What is important is that you need to have a provable claim.

If the Trustee determines that you have either an unliquidated claim or a contingent claim, there will be additional steps you will need to take for the Trustee to be able to ascribe a value and for you to have a properly proved claim.

Form 31 proof of claim: Form 31

In every:

the Trustee will supply to all creditors form 31 document. If the debtor who intends to restructure first files a Notice of Intention To Make a Proposal, a claim form is not sent out at that stage. It will be sent with the actual restructuring proposal and other related documents.

The same document contains both where you can make your claim as well as complete the proxy form, if applicable. Creditors may experience difficulty completing the document. So, the Trustee provides instructions on how to complete the claim form and proxy. That is also why I have provided a step-by-step instruction sheet from the link below so you can follow exactly how to complete the form.

form 31 proof of claim

***Form 31 proof of claim*: Acceptability of proof of claim**

It is important to properly complete the document. It must be completed fully and properly. The claim must include all necessary details called for under the BIA. Below is a link to an example on how to properly complete the form 31 proof of claim. A Trustee is required to review all proofs of claim received.

The purpose of this is to know what claims are acceptable to be admitted for voting at the First Meeting of Creditors. Also, all proofs received either before or after the creditors’ meeting must also be reviewed carefully to make sure that they are acceptable if there is a dividend to be paid on the claims in the insolvency proceeding.

The Chair of the creditors meeting has the power to admit or disallow claims for the purpose of voting at the meeting. The Trustee has the same power for the proofs of claim for dividend purposes. Most times the Trustee will also be the Chair at the meeting of creditors.

It is incumbent on the Trustee to communicate with creditors whose claims the Trustee believes to be deficient. The purpose is to obtain additional information to make a final determination. The Trustee has to decide whether to admit or disallow a specific claim.

As you can see, completing the document properly is essential.

Does a creditor have to file a claim?

Nobody will force a creditor to file a claim in a bankruptcy estate. A creditor’s claim becomes valid when the creditor files it and the Trustee accepts it. . When a creditor files a claim against a bankruptcy estate, the creditor is making a claim that the Trustee should record and count their claim so that the creditor will be entitled to receive their pro-rata share of any dividend payments that may be made.

The Trustee will issue the maximum payment each creditor is entitled to when the bankruptcy estate is liquidated. When a creditor files a claim, the creditor also becomes an interested party in the bankruptcy case. An interested party is a person who has a vested interest in the bankruptcy case. If the claim is filed before the First Meeting of Creditors in bankruptcy, then the creditor has the right to participate in and vote at the meeting.

Form 31 proof of claim: My example

CLICK HERE TO SEE AND DOWNLOAD PROPERLY COMPLETED

FORM 31 PROOF OF CLAIM

Can I file a proof of claim after the deadline?

There are really only two important deadlines when it comes to filing a claim. The first is before the First Meeting of Creditors. As mentioned above, if you wish to participate in that meeting, then you need to have filed a properly completed valid claim before the start of the meeting. However, if you don’t file it by then, although you won’t be able to vote at the meeting, you have not lost out on anything else.

Once all the realization of assets of the bankrupt has been completed, being both the current assets, fixed assets, and possibly even intangible assets, if the Trustee has sufficient funds to issue a dividend payment, then the Trustee has to review all the claims filed. The Trustee also has to compare the claims register containing all of the creditor claims filed against the names and amounts listed in the bankrupt’s sworn Statement of Affairs.

If any creditors have not yet filed, and there will be a payment made to the unsecured creditors, the Trustee has to send a specific notice pursuant to the requirements of the BIA to each such creditor. The notice in writing says that a dividend will be paid, and if you don’t file your claim by a specific date, then you will be barred from receiving any payment.

How do I object to a form 31 proof of claim?

First, you have to be a creditor with a proven claim accepted by the Trustee. The BIA states that any creditor can inspect the claims filed. So if you have personal knowledge that a party listed on the sworn Statement of Affairs is really not a creditor, then you would be assisting the Trustee by reviewing the claims filed and pointing out any claims you believe are invalid, and why. However, it is very unusual for a creditor to take the time to do so.

The next opportunity and really the only time it matters, for a creditor to object to a claim filed by a creditor is if a dividend distribution is going to be made and the Trustee sends out the Final Dividend Sheet. If you think there are errors, then you can object to the approval of the Trustee’s Final Statement of Receipts and Disbursements and the Dividend Sheet.

Reasons that you may feel one or more claims are incorrect could be:

You do not believe that someone that has filed as a secured creditor can provide adequate proof of security with their claim.
You feel that the compromise of claims being proposed is improper.
There may be details of payments received by a creditor are missing and therefore their claim is overvalued.
The priority of claims listed is improper.
The priority of payment as listed in the Trustee’s Final Statement is incorrect.
Some of the more complicated claims, such as the claim of lessor, a claim by wage earner, claim by farmer or another claim for employees have been incorrectly calculated by the Trustee.

If you have any concern that there is an error with the amounts being claimed, or if you believe that there are circumstances where one or more claims are not valid, you should immediately communicate this to the Trustee.

Keep in mind that once the Trustee issues the Final Statement with Dividend Sheet and has the intention of making a payment to all creditors with valid claims, you have to file your own objection within 30 days of the date on which the notice was issued.

Form 31 proof of claim: Do you need help?

Do you or your company have too much debt? Is a financial restructuring or debt settlement plan necessary but you just don’t know where to start? If so, then you need the help of a professional trustee.

The Ira Smith Team has years of experience of helping individuals and companies successfully complete their restructuring proposal debt settlement plans. Our approach for each file is to create an end result where Starting Over, Starting Now takes place. This starts the minute you are at our door.

You’re simply one phone call away from taking the necessary steps to get back to leading a healthy, balanced hassle-free life, recover your money and move on to the next investment opportunity. Call us today for your free consultation.

Tags Bankruptcy, bankruptcy trustee, Consumer Proposal, Corporate Bankruptcy, debt settlement, financial restructuring, First Meeting of Creditors, form 31 proof of claim, how to complete form 31 proof of claim, insolvency, Ira Smith Trustee, licensed insolvency trustee, personal bankruptcy, proof of claim, proof of claim form, proxy, restructuring proposal, trustee

Brandon Blog Post

PROOF OF CLAIM BANKRUPTCY CANADA: TRUTHFUL CLAIM COMPLETION REQUIRED

Post author By Brandon Smith
Post date September 26, 2018

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: Introduction

On September 24, 2018, the US Department of Justice Trustee Program (USTP) that it reached a $5 million settlement with Citibank. As described below, it had to do with the improper preparation and filing of bankruptcy proofs of claim. The purpose of this blog is to explain the issues and discuss what it means when completing a proof of claim bankruptcy Canada.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: The settlement requires Court approval

The USTP participated in a nationwide negotiation arrangement with Citibank N.A. (Citibank), Department Stores National Bank (DSNB) (jointly Citi), as well as FDS Bank. Citi will pay $5 million to remediate robo-signed evidence of proofs of claim submitted in more than 71,000 consumer bankruptcy files involving Macy’s charge card accounts.

Moreover, the suggested agreement has been submitted to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia, where it is subject to court authorization. FDS Bank serviced the accounts and retained certain bankruptcy-related services to outside vendors.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: The Robo-signing debacle

Between 2012 and 2015, tens of thousands of proofs of claim were filed in bankruptcy files throughout the USA for DSNB. These proofs of claim were incorrectly signed, under the penalty of perjury, by employees of an outside vendor who had not reviewed the respective file and proof of claim and/or lacked knowledge of the contents of the proof of claim.

In some cases, the electronic credentials of the vendor’s staff were used to file proofs of claim without being reviewed by that or any other person. These improper practices were identified when Citibank took over the servicing of the accounts in late 2015 from the third parties. Citi self-reported the errors to the USTP.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: The USTP comments

“I am pleased that Citi has acted responsibly by self-reporting these deficient bankruptcy practices and agreeing to remediate affected borrowers to address the errors,” said USTP Director White. “I am also encouraged that Citi has instituted internal bankruptcy procedures to ensure that the vendor’s errors should not be repeated. When creditors fail to comply with the bankruptcy laws and rules, they must be held accountable. The U.S. Trustee Program remains diligent in its effort to ensure that creditors, as well as debtors who disregard the law, will be held accountable for their actions.”

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: How to complete form 31 proof of claim

In completing a proof of claim form, for either a personal bankruptcy or corporate bankruptcy in Canada, the person completing the form must state that:

“I have knowledge of all the circumstances connected with the claim referred to in this form.”

A fully completed proof of claim must include details on:

who the creditor is;
the amount of the claim;
what type of claim it is; and
all contact details.

A proof of claim needs sufficient documentation attached in order for the Trustee to verify the claim.

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: What will happen if a false or unsubstantiated claim is made

Section 201(1) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) states:

“201 (1) Where a creditor, or a person claiming to be a creditor, in any proceedings under this Act, wilfully and with intent to defraud makes any false claim or any proof, declaration or statement of account that is untrue in any material particular, the creditor or person is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year, or to both.”

The BIA provides for penalties in Canada also. A robo-signing exercise like in the Citi case, in my opinion, is an offence under this section of the BIA. Any false proof of claim will be disallowed, in whole or in part.

I am not aware of any court decisions in Canada on this section of the BIA. Perhaps Canadians as a whole are more truthful than those involved in the Citi matter!

Proof of claim bankruptcy Canada: Are claims being made against you or your company?

Are you or your company experiencing financial difficulties? If yes, call the Ira Smith Team. Our approach for each file is to create an end result where Starting Over, Starting Now takes place. This starts the minute you are in the door.

The earlier you contact us, the more options we will have to implement. Whether it is a corporate restructuring or personal debt settlement through a consumer proposal, the goal is to avoid bankruptcy. However, if bankruptcy turns out to be the best option, we can assist there too.

You’re simply one phone call away from taking the necessary steps to get back to leading a healthy, balanced hassle-free life, recover your money and move on to the next investment opportunity.

Tags Bankruptcy, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, bankruptcy canada, bankruptcy trustee, BIA, certain bankruptcy-related services, Citibank N.A., Department Stores National Bank, FDS Bank, insolvency, Ira Smith Trustee, proof of claim, proof of claim bankruptcy canada, proof of claim form, robo-signing, U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia, U.S. Trustee, US Department of Justice

Form 31 Proof of Claim Introduction

Background Information on Form 31 Proof of Claim

Purpose of Form 31 Proof of Claim

Importance of Properly Completing Form 31

Section 1: Understanding the Basics of Form 31 Proof of Claim

Definition of Provable Claim

Difference Between Provable and Unliquidated Claims

Identifying False Claims

Section 2: Required Information for Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim

Personal Details of the Creditor

Details of the Claim

Priority of the Claim

Section 3: Additional Considerations for Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim

A Claim of Lessor For Disclaimer of a Lease

Valuing a Secured Claim

Claim by Farmer, Fisherman or Aquaculturist

Claim by Pension Plan for the unpaid amount

Claims Against Directors

Claim of a Customer of a Bankrupt Securities Firm

Complicated or Contingent Claims

Section 4: Procedural Requirements for Submitting Form 31 Proof of Claim

Deadline for Submitting Proof of Claim

Properly Filing the Form 31

Notice of IntentionTo Make A Proposal

Notice of Bankruptcy Process

Section 5: Ensuring Accuracy in Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim – A Step-by-Step Guide to Filing a Proof of Claim

Step 1: Gather Required Information

Step 2: Complete the Header Information

Step 3: Furnish Creditor Details

Step 4: Specify the Debt

Step 5: Provide Supporting Documentation

Step 6: Sign and Date the Form

Step 7: File the Form

Additional Tips and Reminders

Section 6: Common Mistakes to Avoid when Completing Form 31 Proof of Claim

Section 7: Form 31 Proof of Claim FAQs

Conclusion

What is in the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act?

What is the purpose of the Canadian Bankruptcy & Insolvency Act?

What options are available under the Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act?

Consumer proposal

Commercial proposal

Receivers and Secured Creditors

Bankruptcy

Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act: Can bankruptcy protect you from creditors?

A word on cross-border insolvencies

Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act: Personal bankruptcy

Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act summary

What is debt management in Ontario?

What is debt management in Ontario plan?

What to consider before you sign up for debt management in Ontario

Will creditors continue to contact me while I’m on a Debt Management Plan?

Does debt management in Ontario hurt your credit?

Do I have to give up my credit cards in debt management in Ontario Program?

What to do during your debt management plan

What are the disadvantages of debt management in Ontario plan?

How long can you legally be chased for debt in Ontario?

Can a Trustee do a debt management plan?

Which is better? A debt management plan In Ontario vs consumer proposal

Debt management in Ontario summary

False pretences and bankruptcy introduction

What is a false pretence?

Crimes of Dishonesty: What is the criminal offence of false pretences?

Debt arising from false pretences not released by the bankrupt’s discharge

The most recent false pretences released decision in Ontario – Bank of Montreal v. Mathivannan, 2021 ONSC 2538

The court’s decision regarding the false statements in the credit application document

The court should not issue hypothetical decisions even with deceitful conduct

False pretences: A new creditor blueprint is needed

False pretences summary

Bankruptcies in Ontario -Introduction

1. Bankruptcies in Ontario – the automatic stay of proceedings

2. Bankruptcies in Ontario – Know whether, when, and where proof of claim needs to be submitted

3. Bankruptcies in Ontario – Obtaining a preference repayment from a future bankrupt debtor is not illegal or unethical, but you may have to give it back

4. Bankruptcies in Ontario – review the Trustee’s Report very carefully and ask questions

5. A discharge from personal bankruptcies in Ontario ends the debtor’s liability for pretty well all debts

6. Bankruptcies in Ontario – A fully completed restructuring also discharges most debts

7. Bankruptcies in Ontario bonus tip

Bankruptcies in Ontario – Summary

Introduction

The case

*Claim by Farmer**, Fisherman or Aquaculturist*

*Notice of Intention**To Make A Proposal*

**What is debt management in Ontario plan?**

The most recent false pretences released decision in Ontario – *Bank of Montreal v. Mathivannan, 2021 ONSC 2538***

***False pretences*: A new creditor blueprint is needed**

2. Bankruptcies in Ontario – **Know whether, when, and where proof of claim needs to be submitted**

***Form 31 proof of claim*: Acceptability of proof of claim**