Archive for January, 2006

RCMP lay Bankruptcy Charges - Bankruptcy Canada Blog

Thursday, January 26th, 2006

RCMP lay Bankruptcy Charges. “…The objective is to maintain confidence in the integrity of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Process.”

RCMP LogoTORONTO, Jan. 26 /CNW/ - The Royal Canadian Mounted Police – Greater Toronto Area Commercial Crime Section, in partnership with the Toronto Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy, recently completed a number of investigations involving offences contrary to the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. In these particular investigations it is alleged that property obtained by credit was disposed of to the detriment of creditors, credit was obtained fraudulently, the bankrupts failed to perform their duties as required by statute, the bankrupts refused or neglected to answer truthfully questions put to them during an examination and obtaining credit while an undischarged bankrupt.

The investigations resulted in the following two persons being charged separately as follows:

Mohammed Asghar THANVI, 43, of Havelock Drive, Brampton, with disposing of property obtained by credit, obtaining credit by false representations, fraudulently disposing of property and failing to perform the duties of a bankrupt.

Syed Kamal HOSSEINI-KAMALABADI, 50, of Ballyronan Road, Toronto, with disposing of property obtained on credit, failing to answer fully and truthfully questions at an examination, making a material omission in a statement of affairs, obtaining credit while an undischarged bankrupt and failing to perform the duties of a bankrupt.

An ongoing joint three year pilot project between the RCMP and the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy continues to investigate a number of allegations involving breaches of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. “This partnership will continue to focus its efforts on undertaking criminal investigations where evidence of wrong doing exists. The objective is to maintain confidence in the integrity of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Process,” stated Inspector Brian Verheul of the RCMP Commercial Crime Unit.

The accused are scheduled to appear in court on January 27th, 2006 at Old City Hall in Toronto.

For further information: Cpl. Michele Paradis, NCO i/c Corporate
Communications and Media Relations, RCMP “O” Division, Cellular:
(416) 992-4409, pager: (416) 715-2375

Canadian Bankruptcy Reform: Student Loans – Bankruptcy Canada Blog.

Tuesday, January 24th, 2006

Canadian Bankruptcy Reform: Student Loans: The disgrace of Canadian bankruptcy law.

Themis The new bankruptcy laws, which were rushed into law on November 25, 2005, just before the defeat of the Liberal government on November 28, 2005, will not come into force until June 30, 2006 at the earliest. The Senate was promised the opportunity to review the legislation and hear the scores of experts and special interest groups who were scheduled to make submissions. There is the hope that this flawed legislation will not be enacted without significant changes.

The new law, which passed on November 25, 2005, states that student loans will be eligible to be written off in a bankruptcy if the student has terminated his studies seven or more years ago. This is a decrease from the current ten-year wait. In cases of undue hardship, a bankrupt may apply to court to obtain a discharge of the student loans after five years.

I am opposed to this law for three main reasons:

1. The law is discriminatory and draconian. It is also in violation of one the major tenets of Canadian bankruptcy - that an honest but unfortunate debtor deserves a fresh financial start. Students are the only people who go into bankruptcy and cannot get their dischargeable debt erased in 9 months like all other debt. A person can owe CRA tens of thousands of dollars because of a failed business or because they didn’t pay their income tax. These people are eligible to have their debt erased in nine months but not students for their debt.

2. The law penalizes students for youthful mistakes. Most people think students should pay a severe price for not paying back their students loans because they think the student has now got a good education and can earn significantly more money because of their education. If this were the case I too would want stringent penalties placed on these students.

The reality is quite different. In my practice the vast majority of students who wanted their student loans erased in a bankruptcy were students who did not get a good education that would earn them significantly more money. They either got degrees like a BA which did not qualify them for any additional monies or more commonly they did not finish their studies. Many of the people I saw took hair dressing courses and courses to work in the hospitality industry. This qualified them for jobs paying minimum wages.

Did these students make mistakes? Yes, they did. Perhaps they were too optimistic about their job prospects. Perhaps they didn’t work hard enough to pass their studies. Perhaps they didn’t stop to think that when the course was finished they would only be qualified to make minimum wages. They made mistakes but isn’t that what youth is all about? As young people we have all made mistakes but we learned by our mistakes and moved on.

3. The penalty for students is too severe. It is a legal maxim that the punishment should fit the crime. The vast majority of people with hardship student loans don’t have the income to pay back their student loans. These people are hounded by bill collectors and are under threat to have their wages garnisheed.
Some are forced to work in the underground economy where they do not pay income taxes. Some had to leave the country to find work where they would not be harassed by bill collectors. Many never get the chance to build a financial life and build for their future.

I favour the recommendation of the Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professionals; CAIRP, that calls for the court to have the authority, at the discharge hearing to grant full or partial relief.

The Report of the Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce November, 2003, recommended that the wait before student loan debt could be discharged in a bankruptcy be reduced, to five years following the conclusion of full or part time studies.

Canadian Personal Bankruptcy Risk Rating: Bankruptcy Canada Blog.

Monday, January 23rd, 2006

Bankruptcy Risk Rating has been around for almost twenty years and is used by credit reporting agencies to rate consumers for lenders.

Personal Bankruptcy Risk Rating
The bankruptcy scores could enable lenders potentially to lower their bad-debt reserves because they can more accurately assess and hence narrow potential risk. - Karen Gross, director of the New York Law School Economic Literacy Coalition

You’ve heard of Credit Bureau ratings like R2 and R9. You may even have heard of FICO® scores. Now there is another one you should know about; Bankruptcy Risk Rating. Bankruptcy Risk Rating has been around for almost twenty years and is used by credit reporting agencies to rate consumers for lenders. We seldom hear about this rating system because the credit bureaus do not advertise its existence. This may all change as Experian in the US is considering making its score available to consumers.

For more information please refer to: Seattle Times article; The News Station.

You can also look at the Bankruptcy Canada Bankruptcy Predictor.

Consumer Proposals: Bankruptcy Canada Blog.

Monday, January 16th, 2006

Consumer Proposals: Vastly inferior to Division I personal proposals.

Themis There are two types of personal proposal a person can file. One is a Consumer Proposal which is a simplified form of Proposal available to debtors owing only consumer debt amounting to less than $75,000, excluding a mortgage on the principal residence. The other one is a Division I Proposal which can be for personal or business debt. There is no dollar limit on the amount of debt. More information on these two types of proposal can be found here. There is also a good discussion of consumer and division I proposals in an article in the December, 2004 issue of the National Debtor Creditor Review. The article is by Scott W. Nettie and Dennis Kish.

When I had my practice we fixed our fees in a Division I Proposal to make the fees comparable with the fees in a Consumer Proposal. This was done when the proposal was for an individual with consumer debt only. We explained the differences between the two types of personal proposal to all debtors who had the capacity to make a proposal and gave them the choice of which type of proposal to file. They overwhelmingly chose a Division I Proposal over the Consumer Proposal. I personally did scores of personal proposals and only had one person select a Consumer Proposal over a Division I Proposal.

In my opinion the Division I Proposal is vastly superior to a consumer proposal for the following reasons:
• Costs are the same;
• Funds distributed to the creditors are the same;
• Will conclusively deal with the person’s financial problem as either the proposal will be accepted or the person will be in bankruptcy;
• Will let the creditors know the debtor is serious about the proposal terms since if the creditors vote against the proposal the person will be in bankruptcy;
• Will ensure the continuity of the Stay of Proceedings. There is the danger that once a consumer proposal is voted down and the stay is thereby lifted that creditors such as CRA could place a lien against an asset;
• The person is not required to take two counselling sessions under a Division I proposal;
• Will allow the person to file the proposal with a minimum payment since the trustee’s fees are more protected in a Division I Proposal. A prudent trustee in a consumer proposal should protect his fees by getting an “up front” payment of at least $952.50 ($750.00 plus the $50.00 court fee and the OR fee of $100.00 plus GST of $52.50)
• The result is known quicker in a Division I Proposal; 21 days vs. 45 days, at the soonest, for a deemed acceptance in a Consumer Proposal. Creditors can request a creditors’ meeting in a consumer proposal, which can bring the time before the debtor knows if his consumer proposal is accepted to more than 66 days.

Huge Disparity between Canadian and US Bankruptcy Rates. Bankruptcy Canada Blog.

Tuesday, January 10th, 2006

Bankruptcy Rates in the Canada and the US – The huge disparity is because of the health care system.

Canadian and US Flags
The US bankruptcy rate (6.9 per thousand) for the year 2004 is more than twice as high as the Canadian bankruptcy rate (2.6 per thousand). The main reason for the huge disparity in bankruptcy rates in Canada and the US is because of the different health care systems in the two countries.

Canada has universal health care for all citizens paid for out of taxes. The US system is based on private enterprise mainly provided by insurance companies.

A Harvard Study reported that half of US bankruptcies were caused by medical Bills (MSNBC) & (ABC News). The study was published online in February of 2005 by Health Affairs. The Harvard study concluded that illness and medical bills caused half (50.4 percent) of the 1,458,000 personal bankruptcies in 2001. The study estimates that medical bankruptcies affect about 2 million Americans annually — counting debtors and their dependents, including about 700,000 children.

Most of the medical bankruptcy filers were middle class; 56 percent owned a home and the same number had attended college. In many cases, illness forced breadwinners to take time off from work — losing income and job-based health insurance precisely when families needed it most. Families in bankruptcy suffered many privations — 30 percent had a utility cut off and 61 percent went without needed medical care.

The research, carried out jointly by researchers at Harvard Law School and Harvard Medical School, is the first in-depth study of medical causes of bankruptcy. With the cooperation of bankruptcy judges in five Federal districts (in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Texas) they administered questionnaires to bankruptcy filers and reviewed their court records.

Canadian Bankruptcy Statistics - November, 2005. Bankruptcy Canada Blog.

Friday, January 6th, 2006

Canadian Bankruptcies Rise Slightly in November, 2005.

2004 Bankruptcy Statistics

The latest bankruptcy statistics for November, 2005 were released on the internet by Industry Canada on January 6, 2005. Bankruptcies remain high despite Canada’s very strong economy and it appears that personal bankruptcies and personal proposals will again exceed 100,000 for 2005. Business bankruptcies carry on with a downward trend started more than a decade ago with a November YTD decline of 7 %.

Total bankruptcies for November, 2005 were up by 1.5% compared with the previous year. Consumer bankruptcies rose by 3.0% (7,580/7,359). Business bankruptcies dropped by 14.6% (581/680).

Year to date bankruptcies were flat (85,697/85,746). Consumer bankruptcies rose only by 0.6% (78,739/78,285). Business bankruptcies fell 6.7% (6,958/7,461) .

More information can be found here.

Canadian Bankruptcy Reform: Bankruptcy Canada Blog.

Thursday, January 5th, 2006

The true story of why Canadian bankruptcy reform was rushed into law.

Buzz Hargrove; Jack Layton; Paul Martin; Steven Harper & Gilles Duceppe

It was apparent at the beginning of November, 2005 that the Liberal minority government was going to be defeated as it had lost the support of the NDP party. We at the Bankruptcy Canada Blog, felt that the proposed changes to bankruptcy legislation would be postponed as there were months of hearings from scores of experts and stakeholders still to be heard by the Senate Committee. We were shocked when we found out that Bankruptcy Reform had been rushed into law on November 25, 2005.

What could have caused such unseemly haste we wondered? Fortunately, we have an exclusive insider report from top Canadian investigative reporter Goldie La Press.

The Inside Report: Rushing Bankruptcy Reform into law.

Goldie La Press
By GOLDIE LA PRESS
Ottawa, January 5, 2006.
Bankruptcy Canada Blog

In order to get some insight into the pre election political process I took a position as a waitress at the House of Commons Food Services. I was assigned to serve refreshments at a November 22, 2005, 10:00 am meeting attended by Paul Martin, Jack Layton, Steven Harper and Gilles Duceppe.

After serving them Beluga Caviar and Champagne I waited in a corner of the room. The following is what transpired:

Jack Layton spoke first.

“I called this meeting because of a telephone call I received late last night from Buzz Hargrove,” Layton haughtily announced. “Yes, that’s right. Buzz Hargrove, the head of the CAW, called me personally,” Layton gloated.

As Layton spoke these words both he and Paul Martin clutched at their forelocks in an involuntary show of subservience and respect. Steven Harper looked envious and could be heard to mutter in a whiney voice, “Buzz never calls me.” Gilles Duceppe just looked on in awe.

“Well,” Layton continued. “Buzz is upset because he knows the government’s going to be defeated on November 28th and he wants the Wage Earner Protection Program passed into law before then because he promised his guys it would be done.”

“There’s not enough time,” Paul Martin interjected.

“Paul, how many times have I told you that I don’t like being interrupted by you when I’m speaking,” Layton said crossly, casting a withering look at Paul Martin.

“I’m sorry, Jack,” Martin said in a contrite tone of voice.

“Just don’t let it happen again,” Layton scolded. “Now, does anyone have any serious objections to this?”

“We can’t do that because the proposed legislation as it stands is flawed,” Gilles Duceppe pointed out. “It requires many changes which I think we all recognize. I’ll give just one example. The way the law treats student debt is unconscionable, unfair and discriminatory because students are the only group that cannot wipe out their debt in a bankruptcy in the time afforded all other dischargeable debt, and that includes income tax debt too! It is also in violation of one of the major tenets of Canadian bankruptcy - that an honest but unfortunate debtor deserves a fresh financial start. Why, we have students in the same category as deadbeat dads who have not made their alimony or maintenance payments, people who obtain assets by misrepresentation and awards of damages by a court for intentionally inflicting bodily harm or sexual assault. The new proposed legislation requires a wait of seven years before student loan debt can be erased in a bankruptcy.”

“Gilles, students and young people in general don’t vote,” Layton pointed out. “Duuh!”

Martin and Harper nodded in agreement at these words.

“What about the Senate? They have to have a sober second look at this legislation,” Duceppe said in a final attempt to win the other three over to his point of view.

This comment was greeted by uproarious laughter from the three. “Sober second look,” someone called out. “Not if it’s in the afternoon after their lunch, wine and cocktails.” This was greeted by more laughter to which Duceppe joined in too.

“Don’t worry about the Senate,” Martin said. “They’ll do what we tell them to do.”

“OK guys. It’s decided then. We pass the bill into law before the government is defeated. Right,” Layton said.

The other three agreed.

“Can I call Buzz and tell him the good news?” Martin pleaded. “Can I, Jack?”

“No Paul. You can’t do that. Buzz called me first so I’m going to call him back. Not you,” Layton said firmly.

As they got up to leave Steven Harper noticed that there was still lots of caviar and Champagne left over. “What are we going to do with all of this?”

“Don’t worry Steven,” Paul Martin said. “We’re going to donate this to a food bank so we can help the poor people.”

“Good idea! Super thing to do for the poor people,” they all agreed.

Layton was overcome with emotion at the thought of the good they were doing for the poor people and wiped a tear from his eye as he and the others left the meeting room.

email address for Goldie La Press

Bankruptcy Quote of the Year - (2005). Bankruptcy Canada Blog.

Sunday, January 1st, 2006

“..AmeriDebt has served more as an anchor than a life preserver for many consumers.”

AmeriDebt Logo

“…AmeriDebt has served more as an anchor than a life preserver for many consumers.”
Attorney General Jay Nixon

The Bankruptcy Canada Blog has chosen this quote as Bankruptcy Quote of the Year. The quote is by Attorney General Jay Nixon, of Missouri in announcing the lawsuit, filed in St. Louis Circuit Court against non-profit credit counselor AmeriDebt. AmeriDebt filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2004. AmeriDebt, as part of a settlement agreement in 2005, agreed to shut down operations.

We had many contenders in 2005 for the Bankruptcy Canada Blog’s Bankruptcy Quote of the Year. The three runners up were:

1. “I mean, the company had a lot of strong cash flows when it went into bankruptcy.”
Kenneth Lay, about Enron.

2. “Unless you’re Bill Gates you’re just one serious illness away from bankruptcy. “
Dr. David Himmelstein, the lead author of the, Harvard Study: Half of U.S. Bankruptcies Caused by Medical Bills, and an Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard.

3. “The bank phoned to say I have nothing left in my account, but how can that be when I still have cheques in my cheque book?”
Ken Glover, trustee in bankruptcy, quoting a person in extreme financial difficulty. (Saanich News)