Tag: Superintendent of Bankruptcy

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

407 ETR DEBT SETTLEMENT: OUR NEWEST GUILT FREE WAY TO DO IT

407, 407 ETR, 407 ETR debt, 407 ETR debt settlement, Matthew David Moore, bankruptcy, Supreme Court of Canada, SCC, Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, BIA, 407 debt, debt settlement, 407 debt settlement, plate denial, Moore Decision, Highway 407 Act, professional trustee, trustee, trustee in bankruptcy, Superintendent of Bankruptcy, bankruptcy alternative, credit counselling, debt consolidation, consumer proposal, 407 ETR bill, starting over starting now, Ira Smith Trustee407 ETR debt settlement

This 407 ETR debt settlement blog was reviewed earlier this week by Mr. Brian Empey, Partner, Goodmans LLP. We wish to express our thanks to Mr. Empey who made a valuable suggestion which we incorporated.

We have updated this blog for 2018 where 407 ETR has implemented some changes. Check out our blog 407 ETR RATES: THE ONLY 407 ETR RATES DEBT SETTLEMENT PLAN GUARANTEED TO ACTUALLY WORK for the update.

 

In January 2014 in our blog titled 407ETR FAIRNESS-ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL ENSURES FRESH START we described to you the decision of the Court of Appeal for Ontario in 407 ETR Concession Company Limited v. Superintendent of Bankruptcy (In the Matter of the Bankruptcy of Matthew David Moore) (the Moore Decision).

The highway’s owners appealed that decision to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). On Friday, November 13, 2015, the SCC released three decisions all dealing with the same basic issue: does the federal Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) take paramountcy over provincial laws purporting to deal with the issue of debt and bankruptcy in Canada. The SCC answer was a resounding YES!

What did the SCC decide about the provincial law about 407 debt settlement?

The SCC dismissed the appeal of the ETR. The SCC considered whether the plate denial provisions of the Highway 407 Act conflicted with the discharge provisions of the BIA. ETR’s position was that provincial law about plate denial should apply following a person’s discharge from bankruptcy. The Attorneys General for several provinces, including the Province of Ontario, advanced positions in support of the provinces’ jurisdiction to legislate in vehicle licensing.

The SCC’s decision upheld the Moore Decision which found that the discharge provisions of the BIA override the plate denial provisions of the Highway 407 Act.

What is the effect on ETR debt settlement?

The effect of the SCC’s decision is that pre-bankruptcy amounts owed to the ETR are deemed to be provable claims under the BIA and can no longer be collected through plate denial under the Highway 407 Act following a customer’s discharge from bankruptcy. Therefore, 407 etr debt settlement is possible.

Where a person has been discharged from bankruptcy and has pre-bankruptcy amounts in plate denial, which are provable claims under the BIA, 407 ETR will credit these amounts (plus interest and fees incurred on those amounts) on the person’s 407 ETR bill, upon receipt of a Notice of Bankruptcy, and an Order of Discharge or a Certificate of Discharge.

In both cases, once the amount owing is credited, then the person is free to get plate renewal from the Province.

What will 407 ETR do next?

407 ETR must and is abiding by the SCC decision. They will set up a protocol whereby those who have already been discharged from bankruptcy and have been denied a plate renewal will be able to prove they have been discharged, get the 407 ETR debt, including penalty and interest, reversed, and get a plate renewal.

Those who are still in the middle of their bankruptcy proceedings and not yet discharged will be able to apply to have a plate renewal, once they are discharged from bankruptcy and prove it to 407 ETR.

Interestingly enough, there was no evidence whatsoever in any of the Court cases, including this one before the SCC, as to the 407 ETR’s right to deny anyone credit. When you get your transponder, the 407 ETR is actually extending credit to you, in the form of use of the toll highway in return for the toll charges they expect you to pay. It is no different from the bank loaning you money, and expecting you to repay it in full, with interest.

Will 407 ETR deny extending credit to discharged bankrupts? Will they only issue a new transponder to discharged bankrupts who give them a large cash deposit so that use of the 407 ETR will only be on a “cash and carry” basis? We don’t know, they have so far been silent on the issue, but it is still early in the game.

Do you need 407 etr debt settlement and a plan for your other debts too?

Instead of going deeper into debt seek help from a professional trustee, even if you’re not considering bankruptcy at this stage. A trustee in bankruptcy will evaluate your situation and help you to arrive at the best possible solution for your problems, whether that solution is a bankruptcy alternative like credit counselling, debt consolidation or a consumer proposal or bankruptcy. With immediate action and the right plan, the Ira Smith Team can solve your financial problems Starting Over, Starting Now. We’re just a phone call away.

Categories
Brandon Blog Post

407 ETR FAIRNESS-ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL ENSURES 407 ETR FRESH START

consumer proposal bankruptcy alternatives trustee bankruptcy and insolvency act vaughan trustee 407 407ETR bankruptcy ontario Ira Smith trustee Receiver Inc1
consumer proposal bankruptcy alternatives trustee bankruptcy and insolvency act vaughan trustee 407 407ETR bankruptcy ontario Ira Smith trustee Receiver Inc1

 

407 ETR407 ETR found out that bankruptcy law is complicated. It not only deals with the facts, but with the spirit of the law. Canada (Superintendent of Bankruptcy) v. 407 ETR Concession Company Limited, 2013 ONCA 769 (Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act CanLII) is a very interesting case.

It involves Matthew David Moore, a truck driver who owned two vehicles and was a frequent user of this toll highway. Mr. Moore owed the money for usage of the toll Highway which he failed to pay. In March 2005 and December 2006, 407ETR sent notices of his non-payment relating to two separate vehicles to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles for the Province of Ontario (the “Registrar”). As a result, when the vehicle permit for one of the vehicles expired in August 2005, it could not be renewed. However, Mr. Moore continued to use Highway 407 for another 18 months and as of October 2007, he owed $34,977.06.

In November 2007 Mr. Moore made an assignment into bankruptcy. The 407ETR was listed as a creditor but it did not file a proof of claim which would have enabled the 407ETR to make submissions at any hearing into Moore’s discharge from bankruptcy and to share rateably with Moore’s other unsecured creditors in the bankruptcy. After declaring bankruptcy Mr. Moore had an accident and retrained to become a car salesman, which is what he now does for a living. He gave evidence that he needs a vehicle permit in order to do his job and earn a living. In February 2011 Mr. Moore obtained a conditional discharge from bankruptcy. He requested an Ontario Ministry of Transportation (“MTO”) vehicle permit but the MTO refused his request due to his outstanding indebtedness to this Highway concession company. On June 21, 2011, Mr. Moore obtained an absolute discharge from bankruptcy. Even though he was discharged from bankruptcy, the MTO refused to issue Mr. Moore a vehicle permit. The alleged conflict, in this case, is between s. 178(2) of the BIA, which releases the discharged bankrupt from most claims, and s. 22(4) of the 407 Act, which permits 407ETR to initiate a process by which the debtor will be denied a vehicle permit until he or she discharges the debt to 407ETR. A lot of legal wrangling ensued and eventually, this matter went to appeal. The issues on appeal were:

(i) Does s. 22(4) of the 407 Act conflict with the operation of s. 178 (2) of the BIA?

(ii) Does s. 22(4) of the 407 Act conflict with the purpose of the bankruptcy and insolvency system because it (a) thwarts the objective of providing the bankrupt with a fresh start or (b) creates a new class of debt that survives bankruptcy and frustrates Parliament’s intention to treat all unsecured creditors equally?

What was the 407 etr ruling?

“For these reasons, I would allow the appeal and, as requested by the appellant, set aside the order of the motions judge. In its place, I would substitute an order that:

(1) the discharge of Moore dated June 21, 2011, released him from all claims provable in bankruptcy, including the toll highway debt as at November 10, 2007, and

(2) the Ministry of Transportation is hereby directed to issue license plates to Moore upon payment of the usual licensing fees.

Further, I would declare that s. 22(4) of the 407 Act is inoperative to the extent that it thwarts the purpose of providing a discharged bankrupt with a fresh start.”

This decision ensured that bankruptcy did provide Mr. Moore with a fresh start. If you are experiencing serious financial problems and are looking for a fresh start, contact Ira Smith Trustee & Receiver Inc. today. You can even do some self-study with our bankruptcy faqs. Upon review of your situation, we will provide you with a solid plan for moving forward. Starting Over, Starting Now you can get your life back on track and live a happy and productive life.

Call a Trustee Now!