A lady saved money and was able to regain her financial freedom…https://globalnews-ca.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/globalnews.ca/news/3975675/credit-card-debt-tips/amp/
Re Tanchak (2014), 2014 SKQB 151
Mr.Tanchak applied to be discharged from bankruptcy in 2005. He was opposed by his Trustee. He declared assets of $2,800.00 and unsecured debt of $34,717.50. Nine years later, he applied to be discharged again. When he declared, he omitted to declare to the trustee that previous to declaring bankruptcy, only days before, he had entered into an agreement to sell his shares in a company and direct the proceeds to his father. No creditor or the trustee pursued the father, but the Trustee submitted that the integrity of the system was challenged by this. The registar agreed with the Trustee, and identified that the bankrupt had failed in his duty to disclose all property disposed of, and to account for any losses of assets. The court ruled that because of this, the court didn’t have the authority to grant an absolute discharge even though it had been 9 years. The court agreed that he would be discharged by paying $3,600 in monthly payments of $150.
A couple of quick case notes which I thought would be interesting to Trustees and Debtors alike…
Avery’s Trucking Inc. (Re), 2013 NSSC 302
A Trustee in this case acting in its capacity as receiver, sought to enforce its fees in priority to those of not only the unsecured creditors, but also all the creditors including the secured creditors and the crown trusts. The court did a thorough review of when it is acceptable for the Trustee to do so, including citing a couple of Ontario Superior Court actions. However, the court decided that the funds had to be released to the secured creditors, not subject to the trustee’s remuneration. There was no creditor resolution, no direction from the secured creditors to the Trustee to act in a certain manner (such as maintaining heat, collecting rent etc.). It also specifically mentions that the secured creditors property is not considered property of the bankrupt, and therefore would not be subject unless there were specific circumstances.
Witiluk v Gosselin 2013 Canlii 44808 (ON SC)
This is a case in which a person loaned money to another. While the facts aren’t that important, the judge in this case reviewed the requirements for Fraudulent Transactions under the 178(1)(e) of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. The idea behind it being “false pretences” and “fraudulent misrepresentation” are virtually the same, and that each rests, on deceit. There are four required elements 1.) the bankrupt made a representation 2.) the representation was false 3.) the representation was made knowingly, without belief in its truth, or recklessly indifferent to whether it was false 4.) the creditor relied upon the representation in turning over property. It must also be done at the time of the bankruptcy, or before, not after the client had declared bankruptcy. The onus is on the person that was defrauded.
I recently had an issue in which I went to check my credit score to apply for a mortgage. When I saw my credit score, it said that I had purchased a motorcycle about a year earlier, and I was making payments on it. Knowing that my girlfriend would kill me if I did that, and that I lived in Australia while I apparently bought this bike, I was a bit shocked. Luckily for me, the bike was bought by a family member, and the payments were being made, I was only mad that it was inaccurate. It could have been a lot worse.
Imagine it was a negative report – A credit card company reported that I don’t pay my bills- or something else. There are lots of reasons why these types of things can happen, but the problem is that they do.
Small Claims Court is a great place to make up for this type of problem. If you were denied a loan, or you have taken a loan on a high interest rate simply because there was an inaccurate credit report, then you may have a very good case against the credit bureaus.
Small Claims Court judges will give out punitive damages to plaintiffs who have been effected by these giants credit bureaus. They are responsible, the power imbalance is huge!
Check out this article about a man who was effected by this:
Equifax and Transunion offer credit checks through the mail for free, and over the internet for a small fee. You’ll find their links on my website.
If you have this problem, please contact me. I would be happy to discuss how I can help.
So you’ve been sued? Things happen to good and bad people. You can be sued even if you don’t deserve it. However, banks and credit unions don’t care about why you’re being sued, or who is suing you. The only thing that they care about is that you are or have been sued, and the results. This can throw your credit into turmoil, and cause you to have parts of your wages seized. You need to be careful, and make sure that if you owe money for whatever reason, and someone comes after you, that you take actions to avoid these things.
You don’t pay your bills, owe money to someone, or for some reason someone believes so.
After sending you a demand letter or sending it to a collection agency, they initiate a law suit in Small Claims Court. (this is under the assumption that you owe less than $25,000. If you owe more, then they can go to Superior Court and then the costs are higher)
You are served – either through registered mail, personal service, through the mail etc.
You can then respond through a defence ==> This is the problematic area. Once you are served, you have 20 days to file a defence. People need to understand this step. You can’t be embarrassed. At this point, regardless of what your status is – you should see a lawyer.
If no defence is filed, your creditor can file for a default judgment from the Court.
Once they have a judgment, they can use the enforcement remedies available: such as freeze your bank account, seize parts of your wages, or take other actions against your property.
So, what to do when you are in this situation:
You need to file a defence. This defence can say why you are not guilty of the alleged act, or why you don’t owe the money. Otherwise, it can say that you owe the money, and that you propose a payment plan.
The problem with the payment plan is that the creditor must still accept it. However, it does give you more time.Interest does still collect though.
If you fail to file a defence, and the 20 days elapses, and the creditors get a judgment, there are still steps that can be taken to get rid of this and defend. It just requires more. This is why you should speak with a lawyer.
There are other options… we can speak with the creditors, negotiate, arrange for a payment plan, use other laws to protect you, but this is why you should always speak to a lawyer.
If this happens to you, call my office, and we will arrange for a consultation at no cost.
Probation – what does this mean? Well according to the current Employment Law in Ontario, an employer can have a 3 month ‘probation’ period in which they can dismiss an employee with no pay in lieu of notice. Is this absolute?
A recent SMALL CLAIMS COURT decision has said that this is not absolute. In a recent case Cao v SBLR LLP an accounting firm hired an employee to work on tax returns, and to qualify for her Certified General Accountant designation. About a month into her job, they called her in for a review, stated that she was not performing her job well, and that she would not qualify for the designation by the summer. She was terminated, and given no pay.
A deputy judge stated refused the just cause allegations, and stated that she was not hired on the basis of her finishing by the summer. It was also delayed because of the course offerings. Ms. Cao was entitled to be treated fairly and with reasonable diligence. Even though it was during the notice period, she was entitled to pay of $20,000.
If this situation happens to you, contact a lawyer asap to review your options!