Archive for December, 2006

Consumer Affairs Funded Report on the Study of the Credit Counselling Industry

Monday, December 18th, 2006

Consumer Affairs Funded Report on the Study of the Credit Counselling Industry.

Themis

We reported in our blog of June 5, 2006 that Canada’s Office of Consumer Affairs was undertaking the funding of a study on Credit Counsellors in order to ensure that consumers are well served and to reduce the risk of fraud or conflict of interest. Consumer Affairs was prompted to take this step by the widespread abuses of the credit counselling industry in the United States.

The report on credit counsellors was issued on November 20, 2006 by L’Union des consommateurs. The report raises concerns about poorly trained credit counsellors and the conflict of interest “non profit” credit counsellors have because they are funded by credit grantors.

L’Union des consommateurs 257 page report was issued in French only on November 20, 2006. The report covers non profit and for profit credit counselling companies. The report notes that the Credit Counselling Industry is unregulated and raised concerns that there are no standards of expertise and experience required of the people counselling consumers. The report observes that anyone can claim to be an expert, duly qualified to advise consumers—whatever the training and experience he or she may (or may not) possess, thus leaving consumers vulnerable.

The report was also very concerned with the conflict of interest that “non-profit” credit counsellors have since a significant part of their funding comes from creditors. The report recited the following warning on page 54 of its Conclusions:

Is Credit Counselling a Good Idea? Investigate BEFORE You Act:

Consider that the alternative, bankruptcy, may well permit you to recover a good credit rating much faster than credit counselling. Negative credit items remain on your credit report for up to seven years. This would include the records of your credit counselling and a list of your “bad debts.” Bankruptcy will also remain on your record for up to seven years, but you may well be able to reestablish credit after a couple years. Think about that.

You might consider a credit counselling program now which will stop creditors from harassing you. You can then investigate bankruptcy.

While credit counselling services are generally presented as not-for-profit, unbiased, consumer debt counselling services, they are also often franchises and collect a fee from your creditors for collecting your payments. Not-for-profit credit counselling services may be receiving secret commissions or generous financial support from creditors, the Government, United Way and industry at large. Not for profit does not mean that the employees and/or operators of many of these services are not collecting salaries and growing a business.

The report observed in its Executive Summary that as experience in the U.S. has shown, potential exists for grave abuses at the expense of consumers. Hence the importance and urgency of examining regulating the practices and ethics of budget counselling in Canada to ensure that consumers enjoy an adequate level of protection in this sector.

The report’s conclusions include the following:

1. Lack of regulation of the industry make consumers vulnerable to receiving poor advice from untrained or poorly qualified counsellors; it seems obvious that, to work in this field, one requires appropriate training.
2. Legislative guidelines on the training of certain consultants (e.g. financial advisors) and making it illegal for those without the required training to suggest that they are qualified to offer such services would certainly be steps in the right direction, if we are to provide the public with assurances that what assistance is on offer shall be provided by qualified actors.
3. Some non-profits may advise only those solutions that bring in funding via commissions or donations from creditors;
4. Questions need to be clarified with respect to the nature and scope of the funding structures of organizations offering budget counselling.
5. Organizations offering budget counselling may face a difficult balancing act as they seek to maintain complete independence vis-à-vis creditors and the need for funding, which could quite logically come from creditors who benefit, directly and indirectly, from the results of effective budget counselling. The right balance remains to be found.

The 257 page report was completed on November 20, 2006. It is expected to be available on the L’Union des consommateurs website in January of 2007. We were issued a copy of the full report (in French) and an Executive Summary in English.

Bankruptcy Reform is Not Dead Yet.

Tuesday, December 12th, 2006

Bankruptcy Reform is Not Dead Yet.

ThemisThe Minister of Labour, Jean-Pierre Blackburn introduced a ways and means motion on December 11, 2006, to introduce an Act to amend the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, the Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act, the Wage Earner Protection Program Act and chapter 47 of the Statutes of Canada, 2005.

The next step is a vote on the motion and introduction of the actual bill.

The bankruptcy reform legislation is not without controversy. The Legislation was rushed into law to beat the non confidence vote held on November 28, 2005. The Senate committee expressed its disappointment in the “fast tracking” of the legislation that did not allow it to hear the many groups that were scheduled to make representations. As a result the Senate Committee received assurances that there would be the opportunity for the Senate Committee to review the legislation in early 2006 and that the legislation would not come into force until June 30, 2006 at the earliest. The Minister of Industry, David L. Emerson, confirmed this in a letter dated November 24, 2005.

A report to the Senate, prepared by insolvency experts and stakeholders after many months of work, was largely ignored in the legislation.

The Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professions (CAIRP) supports the new laws but is suggesting some changes.

Many trustees across Canada are unhappy with the new laws because it takes discretion away from trustees and makes the process more formula based. Also, what has been a tenet in Canadian bankruptcy, that an unfortunate but honest debtor deserves a fresh financial start, is being eroded.

On the whole bankruptcies are going to be more costly to debtors and it’s going to take longer to get a discharge.

For more about bankruptcy reform please refer to these blogs.

CRA’s Proposal Policy in Chaos

Monday, December 4th, 2006

CRA’s Proposal Policy in Chaos.

2005 Bankruptcy Statistics

Many of the CRA (formally Revenue Canada) offices have recently advised trustees that CRA’s new policy on Proposals is that they will vote “NO” to accepting a proposal unless it calls for payment to CRA of 100 cents on the dollar.

Many trustees are now refusing to process proposals where the CRA debt is significant enough that a NO vote by CRA will cause the proposal to fail.

The trustee on line discussion group has been burning up with comments. Some trustees are saying that that is really not CRA’s position; it is just a negotiating position with their opening position being that they want 100 cents on the dollar and that CRA will vote to accept proposals from “honest but unfortunate” debtors but that conversely, CRA will vote against acceptance of a proposal where the debtor’s history demonstrates a continued history of disregarding their tax responsibilities.

We state on the BankruptcyCanada.com website the following:

It is our experience that CRA will support a Proposal so long as it has merit.

An October, 2004 Bulletin from the Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professional (CAIRP) reported on a meeting with senior officials of CRA and the CRA policy regarding Proposals as follows:

• CRA will either reject or accept proposals based on common sense and a practical assessment of what the debtor can pay.

• The only exception to this policy is in the case of a strategic insolvency or the debtor has been supporting an extravagant lifestyle and has made no attempt to meet his or her tax obligations. In this case, CRA may opt for a more punitive route by bankrupting the debtor, even if the proposal appears to be more favourable, and opposing the bankrupt’s discharge to attempt to obtain a higher recovery.

It appears that the above policy is in jeopardy or at the very least CRA management is not communicating its proposal policy to its offices in a clear and coherent way.

This writer, and I am sure every trustee in Canada, knows of instances where CRA has voted against proposals to “punish” the person and then not followed up by opposing the bankrupt’s discharge. All this accomplishes is leaving “money on the table” that should be in the tax coffers and harming CRA’s credibility.

CRA should clarify its proposal policy immediately or else be faced with the following ramifications:

Possibly Judicial Scrutiny: The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act, is a federal law designed to provide relief for debtors, while on the other hand the same federal government under the guise of “policy” is denying the relief available under the Act to some debtors by making arbitrary and moral decisions as a creditor.

Costing the tax payer money: CRA’s “100 percent” policy is costing the tax payer money. As stated above there are many instances where CRA has voted against proposals to “punish” the person and then not followed up by opposing the bankrupt’s discharge.

Harming CRA’s Credibility: The inconsistency in the policy; not following up a “NO” vote with an opposition to the bankrupt’s discharge and making moral rather than business decisions on the merits of a proposal all harm CRA’s credibility.

Undermining the Integrity of the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act: The proposal process as set out in the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act assumes creditors will act in a sensible business like way to maximize their collections when voting on proposals. CRA’s arbitrary and inconsistent policy and its attempt to impose its morality on debtors all go to undermine the integrity of the Act.

The Canadian Association of Insolvency and Restructuring Professional (CAIRP), are trying to set up meetings with CRA officials to clarify CRA’s proposal policy. The result of that meeting will be posted on this website.

Canadian Bankruptcies Rise Slightly in October, 2006

Friday, December 1st, 2006

Bankruptcies Rise Slightly in October, 2006.

2005 Bankruptcy StatisticsThe latest bankruptcy statistics for October, 2006 were released on the internet by Industry Canada on December 1, 2006.

Consumer bankruptcies fell 1.4% (6,947/7,046);

Business bankruptcies rose 1.4% (588/580);

Proposals rose 10.8% (1,895/1,711);

Overall, Insolvencies rose 1.0% (9,430/9,336).

Year to date:

Consumer bankruptcies were down 6.0%

Business bankruptcy were down 10.6%

Proposals were up 5.3%

Total insolvencies were down 4.3%.

For more information and more detailed analysis please refer to this site.