Tag: secured creditor

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

WHAT IS A RECEIVERSHIP? OUR COMPLETE GUIDE TO RECEIVERSHIP SOLUTIONS

what is a receivership?

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.

What is a receivership?

What is a receivership is a question I am asked often. Receivership is a remedy available to secured lenders to recoup as much of their debt as possible. A secured creditor, normally a financial institution, has lent funds to the company or individual under a secured financing transaction. They did it this way so in the event the company or person defaults on its finance payments, they can enforce against the assets subject to the security.

Receivership is a different process than bankruptcy for the sale of the properties of a corporation. In Canada, the secured creditor is typically the Bank as the lender. Normally, when a borrower misses payments, they tend to be insolvent. However, it is possible to have a receivership in Ontario even if the borrower is not insolvent.

In this Brandon Blog, I am going to tell you all about receivership. What is a receivership? How it works. When it can be used? What types of receivership are there?

What is a receivership? Examples of receivership in a sentence

What is a receivership? Receivership is a legal proceeding. Either a secured creditor privately appoints the receiver by instrument or a court appoints a person or company, called a receiver, to collect and manage the assets of a person or business that is unable to manage those assets effectively.

To understand more about the receivership process, we first need to look at the types of receivership. These are:

  • Liquidating receivership – This is a type of receivership that is brought about when a company ceases operations because the management of the company is unable to make it a viable business again. If the business is not viable, then the receiver will not operate it and will find buyers for the assets.
  • Operating receivership – This form of receivership is when parts of the company are viable or must otherwise continue operating under receivership. The business assets have a great deal of value if operating, but if shut down, relatively no value. In this case, the receiver will continue operating the business and the secured creditor will agree to lend funds if the business’s cash flow is insufficient. While operating the business, the receiver will also look for buyers.

The word “receiver” originally meant “a person appointed by a court to manage the affairs of another, especially a bankrupt or insolvent“. The term is now more widely applied and refers to a person placed in temporary charge and control of another person’s assets or a business entity. A receivership is a form of governance used in a wide range of situations. It is particularly common in the fields of law and business.

What is a receivership in a sentence – A receivership is a legal process started by a secured creditor either privately appointing a receiver by instrument or making an application to the court for an order that forces a party to carry out the duties of a receiver over the assets of a company or person.

what is a receivership
what is a receivership?

In Canada, section 243(4) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) dictates that only a licensed insolvency trustee can act as a receiver. From the above, you should now realize that there are two types of receivers: (i) privately appointed receiver; and (ii) court-appointed receiver.

What is a receivership? 10 – Day Notice of Intention to Enforce Security

Section 244 of the BIA relates to a secured creditor who intends to enforce its security against an insolvent debtor, either through private appointment or by making an application to the court. This section states that any secured creditor who intends to enforce against all, or substantially all, of the inventory, accounts receivable or other property used by the insolvent debtor in its business, must give adequate notice. The notice must be in writing by using the form prescribed by the BIA.

The BIA defines adequate as a minimum of 10 days. A secured creditor must send out the 10-day notice of intention to enforce security and cannot enforce its security until the 10 days have expired unless the debtor consents in writing to earlier enforcement. The purpose of giving the 10-day notice is to allow the insolvent debtor a chance to either negotiate some resolution with the secured creditor or otherwise attempt to reorganize its financial affairs. An example of reorganizing would be speaking with new potential lenders, consideration of assets that could be sold to repay or otherwise reduce the indebtedness to the unhappy secured creditor.

The insolvent debtor may also be considering invoking an insolvency process such as a Division I Proposal under the BIA to reorganize all of its debts to implement a financial reorganization strategy. If a proposal or a notice of intention to make a proposal under the BIA is filed by the insolvent debtor before the expiry of the 10 day period, then the enforcement action of the secured creditor has initially stayed.

That secured creditor would have to make an application to the court to show that it has lost total confidence in the insolvent debtor’s abilities and it will not support any reorganization attempt. The application is to lift the automatic stay of proceedings that happened when the insolvent debtor filed, to allow the secured creditor to enforce its security against the assets to try to recover as much of the secured debt as possible through the appointment of a receiver.

Why did 10 days become the official notice period? This was part of amendments to the BIA made in 2009. It arose as a .esult of court decisions over what is reasonable notice. The most famous case is one that insolvency practitioners refer to as Lister v. Dunlop. The case made its way all the way up to the Supreme Court of Canada. The proper name of the case is R.E. Lister Ltd. v. Dunlop Canada Ltd., [1982] 1 S.C.R. 726. The decision was released on May 31, 1982.

The case dealt with a variety of issues, including what is receivership. Another of the issues considered was a reasonable notice to be given when a secured creditor demanded repayment of its demand loan, due to one or more defaults on loan? The most common default is defaulting on making the required loan payments on time. The loan agreement and debenture securing the loan stated that it was a demand loan and that the lender must give reasonable notice when making the demand.

However, in the “old days”, there was never a definition of what reasonable notice was. In fact, in Ontario, the law at the time was that reasonable notice only came into being if the business owner asked for a time to repay the loan. What was reasonable was a matter of discussion and negotiation. In Lister v. Dunlop, it was determined that Dunlop did not provide reasonable notice, based on the specific facts in that case.

Case law evolved and eventually, in 2009, the BIA was amended as part of the new provisions to bring receivership under the BIA and receivers subject to the supervision of the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada. The 10 day notice period was Parliament’s way to try to codify what reasonable notice is.

Court Appointed Receivers vs. Privately Appointed Receivers

As discussed above, receivers are appointed when secured creditors want to recover on their secured loans. Receivership is a remedy for secured creditors. It is not a remedy for unsecured creditors. The intent is for the receiver to take possession of the insolvent company assets subject to the security agreement and conduct a sale of assets. The proceeds of the sale will then be distributed in accordance with the priority of the creditors under the BIA. The secured creditor should want to make sure that it is in the first place to receive the funds from the receiver, for the receivership process they are paying for!

From the above, by now, you have probably realized that a privately appointed receiver is appointed in writing by the secured creditor. The receiver gets properly retained and then is given an appointment letter by the secured creditor after the 10 day notice period has either passed or was waived by the insolvent debtor. The privately appointed receiver gets its powers from the security documents which will outline the approved steps the receiver can take.

Court-appointed receivers, as the term implies, are appointed by the court. The secured creditor properly retains the receiver and makes an application to the court for the appointment of the receiver. The secured creditor is the plaintiff in this litigation. If the court grants the order, then the court-appointed receiver begins the receivership administration. The powers and responsibilities of the court-appointed receiver come from the court order, called the Appointment Order.

The steps the receiver will take in determining what method will realize the most money possible from the sale of assets should be pretty well identical under both a court-appointed receivership and a privately appointed receivership. The analysis of how and the steps to be taken to realize the most money possible from the assets of the company in receivership should be the same, regardless of the form of appointment.

Either way, as stated above, the receiver must be a licensed insolvency trustee who is experienced in acting as a licensed insolvency practitioner.

what is a receivership
what is a receivership

What is a receivership? Duties of a receiver

Receivers are required to act honestly and in good faith. A privately appointed receiver has a duty to the secured creditor who appointed the receiver. A court-appointed receiver has a duty to act in good faith to all creditors.

The main roles of the receiver, whether private or court-appointed, can be summarized as to:

  • Secure all the assets of the insolvent debtor pledged under the security agreement or covered by the Appointment Order.
  • Make sure the receiver has control of property, the assets are conserved and properly insured.
  • Advance the rights of the debtor with the approval of either the secured creditor or the court. This could include continuing or beginning any necessary litigation.
  • Formulate the plan to maximize the realization from the sale of assets. This also involves a decision as to whether or not to operate the business of the company.
  • Offer the assets for sale in a properly advertised public sale.
  • Complete the sale and distribute the net proceeds in accordance with the provisions of the BIA.
  • Make regular reporting to the court and/or the appointing creditor
  • Obtain the approval of the secured creditor, and under a court appointment, approval of the court for all actions to be taken by the receiver.
  • In a court appointment, to obtain the approval of the court for its fee and disbursements and for those of the receiver’s legal counsel.

The Appointment Order generally will give the court-appointed receiver extensive powers.

I want to summarize the difference between company receivership and bankruptcy

I find that many times people will confuse the terms receivership and bankruptcy. What is a receivership is not the same as what is bankruptcy. I want to summarize the difference between company receivership and bankruptcy. There are important differences between bankruptcy and receivership.

The terms bankruptcy and receivership are often mistakenly used; they are not the very same thing. Bankruptcy is a legal process for unsecured creditors. The bankruptcy of a person and that person’s discharge from bankruptcy acts to discharge that person’s unsecured debt. As a company is never discharged from bankruptcy, the bankruptcy process has the effect of ending the company’s business.

What is a receivership? Receivership on the other hand, is a legal process for the benefit of secured creditors that safeguards their security if an insolvent borrower defaults on its secured debt financial obligations.

what is a receivership
what is a receivership?

What is a receivership? Is receivership the right solution for you?

I hope you enjoyed the what is a receivership Brandon Blog post. I have gone to great lengths to describe what is a receivership, the different types of receivership and that it is a remedy for secured creditors. However, many times, if properly handled, it can also assist the business owner. The entrepreneur may be very frustrated that the company can no longer pay all its debts as they come due and is looking for a way out, a way to sell the business or a way to get rid of the sick parts of the business and keep the good parts.

There may be sufficient value to take care of the secured creditor, but nothing for anyone else, including the unsecured creditors. There may be some business units that should not survive, but if cut out, the business will be viable. A receivership might very well accomplish the goals for the entrepreneur also. I have many times structured a receivership process, in order to meet the goals of the entrepreneur, while satisfying the requirements of the secured creditor.

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

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

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

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

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

Call us now for a no-cost consultation.

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

We hope that you and your family are safe, healthy and secure during this 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.

what is a receivership
what is a receivership?
Categories
Brandon Blog Post

COURT APPOINTED RECEIVERSHIPS: THE EASIEST WAY TO AVOID COSTLY MISTAKES

court appointed receiverships
court appointed receiverships

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

If you would prefer to listen to the audio version of this court appointed receiverships Brandon’s Blog, please scroll to the bottom and click play on the podcast.

Court appointed receiverships introduction

I have written several blogs before on receivership, be they court appointed receiverships or private appointments. The purpose of this blog is to discuss a recent court decision involving a big mistake made by a court-appointed receiver and why the court would not let them fix their error. That mistake cost them big time!

Some previous court appointed receiverships blogging

In reviewing the court case, three previous blogs of mine on court appointed receiverships came to mind:

The first one dealt with certain procedural matters in court appointed receiverships when the receiver sells real estate.

The second blog dealt with factors a court-appointed receiver must disclose to the court in seeking court approval for a sale of assets.

The third one was about what happens when a court-appointed receiver applies to the court for some relief without knowing all the details of the story they are telling the court! That is very embarrassing for receivers in court appointed receiverships!

The recent case I will shortly speak about reminded me of these three previous blogs. You will see the connection very soon, I promise.

What happens when a company goes into receivership?

When the company enters into receivership, senior management and the Directors shed most of their authority for decision making. The Directors’ general company obligations of preserving corporate records remain, yet any type of decision-making regarding the running of the business or its assets have vanished.

That is now the role of the receiver. This is true for a privately appointed receiver but it is especially so in court-appointed receiverships. That is because the court is now supervising all the company’s affairs and assets through its court officer, the receiver.

Responsibilities concerning the business in a practical sense stop upon the receiver being appointed. Their recommendations and help are only needed if requested by the receiver. They definitely will not be paid for any kind of initiative unless the receiver concurs in writing to make funds available for them in return for their services.

What are the duties of a receiver?

The receiver’s first task is to take possession of and control all of the assets, properties and undertaking covered by the secured creditor’s security in a private receivership. In court appointed receiverships, the receiver’s powers and actions come from the authority given to it by way of the court order appointing the receiver.

The receiver needs to make a decision whether it can get a greater amount for the assets if it runs the business. Conversely, the receiver may choose that the danger of operating the business is not worth it in terms of any type of upside value that may be gained from running the business.

The receiver after that creates a strategy for the running or the shuttering of the business as well as for the eventual sale of the assets. The kind of receivership appointment and the nature of the business operations and assets will dictate what approach the receiver will take. In the meantime, the receiver must protect and conserve all the assets, including making sure there is sufficient insurance coverage in place.

In a private appointment, the receiver requires to obtain the authorization of the secured creditor who appointed the receiver prior to implementing its plan and taking actions concerning the running of the business and the sale of the assets. In court appointed receiverships, the receiver requires the approval of the court.

The Court appointment case

This court case dealt with some very unique issues. The receiver was originally appointed by the court under the Courts of Justice Act (Ontario) and the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada). The receiver was making a motion for advice and directions about it wanting approval for its fees and disbursements since the last approval order. It also wanted approval to make an interim distribution.

That seems pretty routine. It was the receiver’s fifth report to the court. The motion was opposed by the company whose assets were seized in the receivership. There was only one problem that caused that party to oppose the receiver’s motion. However, it was a humungous problem this receiver caused itself.

The problem is that the receiver obtained approvals from the court based on the information contained in its fourth report to the court and now the receiver was asking for something different!

Court appointed receiverships: A brief history of this court-appointed receivership

The major secured creditor who made a secured loan against a real estate project under both mortgage security and a general security agreement began court proceedings by making an application to the Ontario Superior Court of Justice Commercial List for the court appointment of a receiver. On June 22, 2017, Justice Conway released an Order appointing the receiver in this matter (the Receiver).

The Order followed the model receivership order format and had the usual provisions. Specifically, it mentioned in paragraph 18 that “the Receiver’s Charge shall form a first charge in priority to all security interests, trusts, liens, charges and encumbrances, statutory or otherwise, in favour of any Person….”.

The Receiver performed its duties and filed reports with the court on a timely basis and received the necessary approvals along the way. So far so good with the first three court reports.

The fourth report was OK too

In November 2019 the Receiver brought a motion for Justice Dietrich to approve its Fourth Report and also its Supplementary Fourth Report. The same stakeholder currently opposing the Receiver’s motion for advice and directions also challenged certain of the Receiver’s recommendations contained in its Fourth Report.

It turns out that from the Receiver’s efforts and sale of the real property, there was not only enough money to pay out all the secured creditors, but there were funds left over. This is a very unusual situation. So the Receiver came to court. One of the approvals it was seeking was its proposal to pay the claims of the unsecured creditors. This company opposed that relief claiming the unsecured creditors were statute-barred. The reason the company opposed this is simple. Whatever the unsecured creditors are not entitled to would presumably be available to flow to the shareholders of the company.

Justice Dietrich looked for further written materials on this issue from the parties which were received on March 16 and 31, 2020. Justice Dietrich considered all the material and released her endorsement on this issue on June 19, 2020.

court appointed receiverships
court appointed receiverships

Court appointed receiverships: Justice Dietrich’s decision

Justice Dietrich’s Order approved the Receiver’s Fourth Report and Supplementary Fourth Report (the Fourth Approval Order) as well as payment to the Receiver of its fees of $373,960.75 plus HST plus an accrual of $25,000 plus HST to finish the management of the receivership. The Order additionally authorized the Receiver’s legal fees of $85,218.23 plus HST and an accrual of $15,000 plus HST for concluding the administration of the receivership.

The Fourth Approval Order approved making payment to the unsecured creditors in the amount of $190,800.71. Those payouts were made without delay by the Receiver even prior to the appeal time for appealing the Fourth Approval Order expired. The remaining funds were to be paid out to the company who opposed the motion, or as the company may direct.

The Receiver made all the payments except for one. The funds to be paid to the company involved in the receivership, which was more than $1 million, had not been paid out to the company as of the date the Receiver came to court with its Fifth Report.

Court appointed receiverships: OOPS – We need a fifth report to court

The Fourth Approval Order was settled with the consent of all stakeholders. That order was obtained on the basis that there was not much work left to do and it would be covered off by the approved fee accruals. The Receiver and its lawyer were to finish its work and then file a certificate with the court to advise the work was finished. The Fourth Approval Order also said that when the Receiver files the certificate with the court, that is the trigger that discharges the Receiver and ends the receivership. This is all standard stuff.

There now is only one huge problem. Subsequent to the Fourth Approval Order being issued and entered, the Receiver requested more money for its fee and its legal fees, well above what it told the court already. The further amount it was seeking was pretty close to an extra $100,000.

The Receiver then delivered a Fifth Report laying out the added costs asked for and also documenting an added HST Refund and accumulated interest. The Receiver acknowledged that it made an error. The Receiver also acknowledged that it could have brought this to everyone’s attention before the Fourth Approval Order was settled, issued and entered and the appeal period already has expired.

Personally, I call that more than an error. That is a huge problem. It is a major blow to the firms’ revenue and cash flow. If not resolved in the Receiver’s favour, it will most certainly cause much angst among the partners in the licensed insolvency trustee firm.

Court appointed receiverships: The Fifth Report To Court hearing and what the two parties said

The Receiver’s position was fairly simple. They really didn’t have much they could say at this stage, other than, OOPS! The Receiver submitted that the Receivership Order appointing the Receiver is clear. Unless the Court orders otherwise, the Receiver will obtain its reasonable fees and costs and those of its legal counsel. Those fees and costs are secured by a first ranking charge against the assets being administered in the receivership.

All other amounts come after this first charge. The Receiver went on to say that the Appointment Order and the Fourth Approval Order were therefore in conflict and the Appointment Order must prevail.

The company in opposing the Receiver’s motion had some pretty simple facts on its side. The court agreed with these facts. The court stated that:

  • The Receiver only brought this motion on in response to the company’s attempt to set down a date for its motion to compel the Receiver to make the $1 million-plus payment to it as directed by the Fourth Approval Order.
  • The company agreed to the settling of the Fourth Approval Order based on the Receiver’s submissions to the court that what it put in its Fourth Reports was everything and there was. There was nothing else getting in the way of making all the payments approved in the Fourth Approval Order.
  • The Fourth Approval Order was intended to be final and for that reason
    incorporates the provisions of the Appointment Order. That is, it is open to the court to find that the Receiver has no capacity to request more fees since the clear objective of the Fourth Approval Order is to wrap up all issues including the discontinuation of the receivership.

The Receiver conceded that the details pertaining to the extra fees was known at the time the Fourth Approval Order was being settled and also after that. However, the Receiver took no particular actions to request them prior to the Order being settled and entered. The only action taken by the Receiver was this Motion for Directions supplied in reply to the company’s motion request to get paid what was already approved by the court.

The Commercial List court understood that the Receiver has undoubtedly made an error. The question the court needed to answer was who should pay for it – the Receiver or the company? The court decided that it should not be the company who settled the Fourth Approval Order understanding what its terms were, including, there was nothing standing in the way of it getting its money as already approved by the court.

The easiest way to avoid costly mistakes

Court appointed receiverhips, by their very nature, are complex administrations. Being a receiver or a receiver manager is a tough role. A court-appointed receiver must be fair and neutral to all parties as an officer of the court. Everyone is scrutinizing the decisions being made. Once a court-appointed receiver serves its motion materials, everyone goes through the receiver’s report with a fine-tooth comb. And rightly so.

It is not a good place to be when you make any kind of error in a public document. It is embarrassing and it makes everyone else wonder what other mistakes have you made? It is especially tough when your mistake short changes your firm out of the money that it has earned. These are awful circumstances.

By now you probably realize that you don’t have to be a licensed insolvency trustee to know the easiest way to avoid costly mistakes. Check, double-check and triple-check everything before you sign and release the report. As my carpenter friend says, “measure twice and cut once”.

Court appointed receiverships summary

I hope you have enjoyed this court appointed receiverships Brandon’s Blog. A sick insolvent company’s business might be saved by a debt restructuring.

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

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

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

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

That is why we can develop a restructuring process as unique as the financial problems and pain you are facing. If any of this sounds familiar to you and you are serious 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 Ira Smith Trustee Team is absolutely operational and Ira, in addition to Brandon Smith, is readily available for a telephone consultation or video meeting. We hope that you and your family are safe and healthy

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CONSTRUCTION LIEN ACT: CAN YOU TRUST AN INSOLVENCY PROCEEDING?

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and both Ira, as well as Brandon Smith, are right here for a telephone appointment, conference calls and also virtual meetings.

Stay healthy and safe everybody.

Introduction

Matters involving the Construction Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30 ( formerly known as the Construction Lien Act) is very complex. In this Brandon’s Blog, I will use the term that laypeople are most familiar with, being the former name of the provincial legislation.

Construction law is a specialty unto itself. It gets even more complex when a company involved in construction enters insolvency proceedings. There is normally a conflict in these kinds of files between:

In this Brandon’s Blog, I describe a recent 5 member panel decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario who had to decide whether a trust created under section 9(1) of the provincial Construction Lien Act survives a sale by the Monitor in an insolvency proceeding under the federal Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA).

The case is Urbancorp Cumberland 2 GP Inc. (Re), 2020 ONCA 197 (Urbancorp). The matter was heard on October 3, 2019. The unanimous decision was recently released on March 11, 2020.

Some background matters

Before getting into the actual case, there are two background matters that I should first explain. When I thought of these concepts and then the decision this way, it made it easier for me to understand.

The first issue is the types of insolvency proceedings. There are essentially four types of insolvency proceedings. Some are not mutually exclusive. Each one of them can be used for the assets of the insolvent debtor to be sold. I break down the insolvency proceedings list in this way:

  1. Using the restructuring provisions of either the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (Canada) (BIA) or CCAA.
  2. A bankruptcy administration under the BIA.
  3. A secured creditor taking enforcement proceedings on the assets subject to its security through the security itself by privately appointing a Receiver or Receiver and Manager.
  4. A secured creditor making an application to the Court that it is just or convenient for the Court to appoint a Receiver to act on behalf of all creditors in stabilizing an insolvent debtor situation and to come back to Court with recommendations on how to proceed, including the sale of assets.

The second issue has to do with trust claims under the Construction Lien Act. There are several sections in the legislation dealing with trust claims. As I stated above, it is a very complex topic. So, I am going to only focus on the one that is the subject matter of this case. That is section 9(1) of the Act. That section deals with a trust claim against the vendor of the construction assets. It states:

“9 (1) Where the owner’s interest in a premises is sold by the owner, an amount equal to,

(a) the value of the consideration received by the owner as a result of the sale,

less,

(b) the reasonable expenses arising from the sale and the amount, if any, paid by the vendor to discharge any existing mortgage indebtedness on the premises,

constitutes a trust fund for the benefit of the contractor. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, s. 9 (1); 2017, c. 24, s. 9, 70.

Obligations as trustee

(2) The former owner is the trustee of the trust created by subsection (1), and shall not appropriate or convert any part of the trust property to the former owner’s own use or to any use inconsistent with the trust until the contractor is paid all amounts owed to the contractor that relate to the improvement. R.S.O. 1990, c. C.30, s. 9 (2).”

The distinction here that I want you to keep in mind is the words in the very first line “Where the owner’s interest in a premises is sold by the owner…”(emphasis added).

Now for the case.

The Urbancorp Construction Lien Act case

This case deals with Urbancorp and related companies that developed and was building a residential condominium project. Urbancorp was insolvent and filed first a Notice of Intention to Make A Proposal under the BIA. The proceedings were later converted by the Court into proceedings under the CCAA. The insolvency proceeding was in both cases under a Federal restructuring statue. The Court appointed a Monitor to oversee the insolvency administration. Through various Court applications and court orders, the Monitor was given the authority to market and sell the condominium assets. The Monitor did so.

Now the cash the Monitor received from the sale stood in place of the original condominium assets. Subcontractors brought an application before the lower Court claiming they had a valid trust claim under the Construction Lien Act. The lower court judge carefully reviewed the evidence and prior decided cases and came to the conclusion that the subcontractors did not have a valid trust claim against the assets. The subcontractors appealed the lower court’s decision.

In addition to appealing the lower court’s decision, they also raised with the Court of Appeal a constitutional question that comes up many times. The constitutional question is, does federal law always take priority, or trump (with a small “t”!!) provincial law. This is otherwise known as the concept of paramountcy. Stated slightly differently, the issue can be stated as does section 9 of the Construction Lien Act remain to have application after a bankruptcy or initial order under the CCAA? The Attorney General of Ontario also stepped in on that part of the case.

The Court of Appeal accepted this constitutional question to be decided so there were now two issues before the Court of Appeal; the issue of paramountcy and the trust claim issue.

The constitutional question

The Court of Appeal went through a very thoughtful and careful analysis. It confined the constitutional question to the facts of this case. The court concluded in this case:

  1. The trust created under section 9(1) of the Construction Lien Act is a valid trust under provincial law.
  2. The BIA excludes from property available to the creditors any property held in trust.
  3. Therefore, this provincial trust can be effective when there is an insolvency proceeding under the BIA.
  4. Similarly, with the CCAA legislation, it follows that a section 9(1) provincially created trust might be effective when the insolvency administration is subject to the CCAA.

Now for the actual appeal

The Appeal Court now turned to the lower court judge’s decision that a section 9(1) of the Construction Lien Act trust did not apply in this matter. The five-member panel again went through a careful analysis of the statute and the case law. They spent a lot of time reviewing an earlier Court of Appeal for Ontario decision which the lower court judge relied upon in his decision.

The Court of Appeal highlighted that in that decision the lower court relied upon, the owner, being the insolvent debtor, had no interest in the asset that the subcontractors were claiming a trust claim against. The reasons were:

  1. The asset was part of a package of assets sold.
  2. There was a secured creditor who had security over all of the assets of the developer.
  3. The proceeds less the expenses to produce the sale were less than what was owed to the secured creditor.
  4. The court allowed the cash from the sale to stand in place of the assets.

Using this framework, the Court of Appeal stated that a s.9( 1) trust only arises if the value of the consideration received by the owner from the sale of assets, which have actually been enhanced by the work or materials of the contractor, surpasses the amount of the mortgage debt. A trust will not occur if the value is zero, or if the mortgage debt is equal to or above any kind of sale proceeds.

Therefore, the decision that the lower court relied upon in disallowing the trust claim does not stand for the suggestion that control by a CCAA Monitor of a sales process, or the receipt by the Monitor of the proceeds of the sale by itself, avoids a s.9( 1) trust against the proceeds of the sale of the enhancement are shown to have a positive worth that surpasses the mortgage debt on the asset. That fact pattern was absent from the case relied upon.

The decision

Now, you remember at the beginning of this blog I went through the essentially four types of insolvency proceedings. The Court of Appeal also considered the various types. The court drew a distinction in them as it relates to section 9(1) of the Construction Lien Act. Also remember that from my quotation above of this section, it starts with “Where the owner’s interest in a premises is sold by the owner…”(emphasis added).

In a receivership or bankruptcy, the owner loses control of the assets. The vendor in a sale is either the receiver/receiver and manager or the trustee in bankruptcy, respectively. In those examples, it is not the owner selling its own assets. It is the licensed insolvency trustee (formerly known as a bankruptcy trustee) selling its right, title and interest, if any, in the assets of the debtor. So the vendor is the licensed insolvency trustee in its specific capacity.

The Urbancorp matter started out as a restructuring under the Proposal provisions of the BIA and was then converted by the Court and continued under a different restructuring statute, the CCAA. In an insolvency administration under the restructuring provisions/statue, the owner does not lose control of its assets. True that the Monitor is given court authority to make decisions, market and then sell the assets. However, one of the cornerstones of the appointment of a Monitor is that the owner does not lose control of the assets and the Monitor does not become the owner of the assets.

Rather, the Monitor gets its powers from the court. The Monitor is actually selling the insolvent company’s assets as the company’s representative or agent. So even though it is the Monitor doing the selling, it is doing so on behalf of the owner. This is very different than a sale by a receiver/receiver and manager or trustee in bankruptcy.

In the Urbancorp situation, the value of the consideration received by the owner from the sale of assets, which have actually been enhanced by the work or materials of the contractor, surpasses the amount of the mortgage debt.

Highlighting these distinctions, the Court of Appeal for Ontario overturned the lower court decision and upheld the subcontractors’ trust claim. It substituted the lower court decision with an order that a s.9( 1) trust under the Construction Lien Act applies for the sum of $3,864,429 held in the accounts of the Monitor on account of the Urbancorp companies, for the benefit of the subcontractors, pro-rata in accordance with the amount owing to each of them.

Summary

I hope you found this case review helpful. It should be of particular interest to contractors, developers and builders in Ontario.

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, 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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Ira Smith Team is absolutely operational and both Ira, as well as Brandon Smith, are right here for a telephone appointment, conference calls and also virtual meetings.

Stay healthy and safe everybody.construction lien act

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

TOP COURT APPOINTED RECEIVER SECRET: DETAILS MATTER

court appointed receiver

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

Introduction

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

What is a court appointed receiver?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Court’s problems

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

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

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

Duties of a court appointed receiver

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

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

The receiver’s problem

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

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

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

The devil is in the details

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

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

Summary

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

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

The Ira Smith Team understands how to do a debt restructuring. However, more importantly, we understand the needs of the entrepreneur or the person who has too much personal debt. You are worried because you are facing significant financial challenges.

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

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

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

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

[monkeytools msnip=”https://monkeyplayr.com/playr.php?u=5173&p=21941″]

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

BUSINESS DEBT ADVICE CANADA: TROUBLE SHOOTING DEBT STRAPPED COMPANIES

business debt advice canada

2

 

Business debt advice Canada: Introduction

When it involves money, timing is everything. Your business is getting closer to the top of its banking line and your banker is asking for more information than usual. This is where your heart starts pounding faster and your stress level increases. This is the moment you can seize to right size your business or else it very well may fail. The purpose of my blog is to give you business debt advice Canada.

Business debt advice Canada: Relationships can become strained

Relationships can become strained with your lender and suppliers when business debts are mounting and your company is facing a cash crisis. However, there are actions a borrower can take to prevent calamity. Reassuringly, most of the time, lenders would rather support you if you have a viable business plan to correct the situation going forward, and not putting you out of business.

I hope the suggestions below shows you that you should look at this as an opportunity to fix your business. I have found that in trying times when a company has mounting debts and insufficient cash, there is no replacement for good management.

A solid business plan showing how the company will turn itself around is what your lender wants to see. Communication with your lender and your suppliers is key. Do not hide from the problem. Face it head on. If your business plan shows you can turn things around, you will feel like you are dealing from a sound platform and not just running scared.

Business debt advice Canada: Take emotion out of the equation

These situations generally become more tense before they become better. You, your lender and your unpaid suppliers all want the same thing. You all want the company to be successful and profitable, and to be able to pay all of its bills in full when due. Your lender and suppliers are not out to get you. However, if they do not: (i) know that you have solid business turnaround plan; and (ii) receive ongoing information to show what steps you are taking to fix the problems, they will have no choice but to turn off the tap.

I have unfortunately seen too many companies fail in their business restructuring efforts due to lack of communication. The turnaround plan may have been sound, but nobody knew. This only creates ill will among the stakeholders and a result that nobody wants.

Business debt advice Canada: Informal and formal turnaround options

I must preface this section by saying do not be afraid to consult with a licensed insolvency trustee (LIT) for business debt advisory services. Trustees’ training makes them expert in assessing troubled business situations and implementing turnaround steps. A LIT does a lot more than just bankruptcy.

You will find it helpful to have a professional trustee assist you in developing your turnaround business plan, implementing it and keeping management focussed and accountable. You will also find it very helpful to have a LIT go with you for meetings with your banker; there will be many of those!

Business debt advice Canada: Troubleshooting

Fully understanding the full current status of the company showing signs of financial trouble is key. Things that I focus on early on when looking at troubled companies are:

  • What are all the different assets of the company and where are they located?
  • Are all the assets properly insured?
  • What is the going-concern value and the estimated liquidation value of the assets?
  • What is the full extent of all liabilities and business debt levels? This includes amounts owing to the government for:
  • What is the status of premises lease(s) for both remaining term and cost?
  • Is the cost of the leased premises above or below current market value?
  • Has anyone personally guaranteed bank debt, the landlord or any other creditor that would affect turnaround decisions to be taken?
  • Has a current crisis cash-flow statement and turnaround business plan been developed and tested for reasonableness?
  • What are the causes of the company’s current financial problems and how likely are those causes to recur?

This list is not meant to be exhaustive. No doubt other questions will arise as answers are found for these first questions. However, this is the information I first want to get before embarking on developing a restructuring plan.

Business debt advice Canada: Informal restructuring and turnaround

If the business problems have been identified early and have not been allowed to fester, then an informal restructuring may very well work. Perhaps all that will be needed is some accommodation from the lender both in time and money. Banks are quite willing to enter into a forbearance agreement with their corporate client allowing the time (and sometimes more money) to see if the turnaround plan will work.

The bank would rather have a successful turnaround than shut you down. The bank needs to know that management has the bench strength to pull off the restructuring. If not, they will expect you to have a lawyer experienced in turnarounds and a LIT active on your team.

Companies that have relatively few trade suppliers may also be able to work out a restructuring of their unsecured debt. The fewer people you have to talk to and get onside, the higher the likelihood of success. Of course, the trust developed from earlier dealings is very important. If there is no trust, or if there are just too many suppliers, an informal restructuring will not work with them.

Business debt advice Canada: Formal restructuring

The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. B-3) (BIA) and the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-36) (CCAA) are the two primary Federal statutes that govern corporate restructuring in Canada. The requirements of each statute and the exact processes themselves are weighty enough to deserve their own blog. However, the takeaways from this blog on formal restructuring are:

  • In a formal restructuring, I still go through the checklist I have identified above of issues to look into.
  • Under the BIA, the restructuring section is Part I Division III of the BIA
  • If a restructuring under the BIA does not receive the necessary creditor AND court approval, the company will automatically be bankrupt
  • In a formal restructuring, the company stays in control of its assets and business operations
  • A formal restructuring invokes a stay of proceedings so no party can begin or continue litigation or enforcement action against the company
  • A company needs to have at least $5 million in debt to restructure under the CCAA
  • A BIA restructuring will be less costly than a CCAA restructuring because the company does not have to go to Court for approval every time it wishes to do something
  • The term “bankruptcy protection” in Canada, refers to a formal restructuring under either the BIA or CCAA.

Business debt advice Canada: What to do if your company has too much debt

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

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

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

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

CANADA BANKRUPTCIES: GRAPHIC & VID – CANADIAN BANKRUPTCY AND INSOLVENCY LAW

Canada bankruptcies: Introduction

The purpose of this infographic, video and blog is to give you Canada bankruptcies information. I want to explain how Canadian bankruptcy and insolvency law works for companies and what the major steps corporate bankruptcy laws in Canada are. So watch the video below and feel free to read in more detail right below the video.

Canada bankruptcies: Video

 

Canada bankruptcies: The 10 standard steps in a voluntary corporate bankruptcy

The actions of a Licensed Insolvency Trustee (Trustee) takes with respect to the assets and the claims of creditors in a corporate bankruptcy may differ from case to case. However, there are 10 standard steps the Trustee takes in each corporate bankruptcy file. These steps are to understand and deal with the nature of the assets and the creditor claims.

Here are the 10 steps I take as a standard process with each corporate bankruptcy.

Step 1 – Initial meeting with Trustee

I meet with the Directors of the company by providing a free consultation. In this meeting, I learn the causes of the company’s insolvency and the nature and extent of the assets and the claims of various creditors. This includes potential trust claimants and secured creditors.

After obtaining the information I need to provide advice specific to that company’s situation, I decide if the company is a candidate for a restructuring, either informally or in a bankruptcy protection mode. If possible, this is preferable, as it will save jobs and allow the company to continue in business. If not, I advise about corporate bankruptcy and what is involved.

Step 2 – Directors meeting

If bankruptcy is the answer, the Directors formally meet and pass a resolution stating that the company is insolvent and must file an assignment in bankruptcy. The resolution also indicates which Director is authorized to sign all documents and be the Designated Officer in the bankruptcy proceedings. The Designated Officer is the person that will attend the First Meeting of Creditors and answer questions about the causes of the company’s insolvency and bankruptcy and how the company conducted business.

Step 3 – Signing all documents

With the signed Directors’ resolution in hand, I prepare all necessary bankruptcy documents. I then meet with the Designated Officer to explain the documents and have them all signed by him or her.

Step 4 – Filing with Official Receiver

The Official Receiver is the local representative and part of the Federal Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy. I electronically file the required documents and wait for the Official Receiver to issue the bankruptcy certificate. The company is not officially bankrupt until the day and time that the Official Receiver issues the bankruptcy certificate. Normally it gets issued on the same day or the next day. So, if the timing of the start of the bankruptcy is important, I need to take a time lag into consideration.

Step 5 – Bankruptcy certificate

The company is not officially bankrupt until the day and time that the Official Receiver issues the bankruptcy certificate. Normally the issuance is on the same day or the next day. So, if the timing of the start of the bankruptcy is important, I need to take a time lag into consideration.

Once the certificate is issued, my firm Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc., is named as the Trustee. This appointment is valid until the First Meeting of Creditors. At the meeting, one of the things the creditors must vote on, is affirming the Trustee’s appointment.

Step 6 – Trustee takes possession

Now that I am the Trustee, I have a duty to take possession of the company’s books and records and the known assets. Taking possession of the assets is subject to the rights and wishes of any trust claimants or secured creditors.

Step 7 – Trustee notifies known creditors

Within 5 days of the date of bankruptcy, I must familiarize myself with the books and records as ot the names and addresses of the creditors. I must also in those same 5 days, set the time and place for the First Meeting of Creditors and mail out the notice to the creditors advising of the bankruptcy, the creditors meeting details and providing a proof of claim form. I must also arrange for a notice of the bankruptcy be placed in a local newspaper so that any unknown creditors are officially on notice.

Step 8 – Trustee safeguards assets

Again subject to the rights of any trust claimants or secured creditors, I must safeguard, insure and store the assets. I can begin formulating a plan for selling the assets if there is equity for the bankruptcy estate. However, I cannot sell any assets before the First Meeting of Creditors without a Court Order. At the creditors meeting is where I seek the approval of the creditors for the plan I have prepared to sell the assets. After obtaining that approval, sales can be completed by the Trustee.

Step 9 – Trustee prepares the report

I prepare my Trustee’s Report To The Creditors On Preliminary Administration. The report is handed out to the creditors present at the First Meeting of Creditors. It is also a public document, so any creditor who could not attend the meeting can receive a copy.

The report covers the following areas:

  • Background information
  • Causes of financial difficulty
  • Description and estimated value of the company’s assets
  • Any trust, secured or property claims against the assets
  • What conservatory and protective measures to safeguard the assets the Trustee has taken to date
  • Books and records of the company
  • What the Trustee’s review to date of the books and records has determined, if anything
  • Did the Trustee retain legal counsel yet and if so, for what reason? If there is a trust, secured or property claims that the Trustee knows about, it would be normal for the Trustee to get a legal opinion on the validity and extent of such claims prior to the creditors meeting. The Trustee would advise the creditors of what the legal opinion says and how it will affect the sale of assets, or if there is even anything for the Trustee to sell.
  • The claims of the creditors identified to date.
  • What the anticipated realization and distribution to the unsecured creditors may be
  • The Trustee’s fee
  • Any other matters

Step 10 – The First Meeting of Creditors

Within 21 days of the date of bankruptcy, I hold the creditors meeting. My report described above is distributed. The Trustee, the Designated Officer and possibly the lawyer hired by the Trustee, attend the creditors meeting. Also attending are any creditors who wish to take part.

The creditors meeting is the place where the creditors can ask questions and find out information about the causes of bankruptcy and the Trustee’s estimate of what the unsecured creditors may receive by way of a distribution.

As mentioned above, the creditors also must approve the actions and activities of the Trustee to date, and approve any steps the Trustee wishes to take in realizing upon assets and dealing with creditors’ claims. The creditors also appoint up to 5 Inspectors. The Inspectors are representatives of the creditors who supervise and assist the Trustee and ultimately must approve the Trustee’s actions.

canada bankruptcies
canada bankruptcies

 

These are the 10 standard steps I take in every voluntary corporate bankruptcy. The exact things I must do to realize upon the assets and deal with the claims of creditors will depend on the assets and claims themselves. When the bankruptcy administration is complete, including any distributions made, the Trustee then obtains a discharge.

Is your company experiencing financial difficulty?

I hope that you have found this information helpful. Bankruptcy is the last thing we try to do for a company in financial difficulty. If caught early enough, we can get involved in a turnaround situation for your company to keep jobs and value.

The Ira Smith Team knows that 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.

Contact the Ira Smith Team today. We know how to solve your company’s financial challenges, remove your pain and put things back on a healthy path. Contact us today for your free consultation so that we can save your company, Starting Over Starting Now.

canada bankruptcies
canada bankruptcies

 

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

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

2

Stalking horse credit bid: Introduction

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

Stalking horse credit bid: Our earlier case studies

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

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

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

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

We did the normal things a Receiver does such as:

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

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

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

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

Stalking horse credit bid: Our stalking horse offer

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

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

Stalking horse credit bid: We galloped off to Court

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

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

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

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

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

ISI 4
stalking horse credit bid

Stalking horse credit bid: The outcome

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

stalking horse credit bid 0
stalking horse credit bid
Call a Trustee Now!