( addendum Sep 9/19 Status MIS-certifier ex-President Norma ( Jean ) WALTON has now gained such national level "recognition" that this condo topic has been re-titled. It was originally "EQUITABLE CONDO LIEN rejected in creditor v creditor round #1 TREZ v WYNFORD" )

Round # 1 - a ‘creditor v creditor’ contest under under section 243 of Canada's B.I.A. Bankruptcy & Insolvency Act RSC 1985 ch B-3 - is lost by North Toronto commercial condo corporation M.T.C.C. # 1037.

M.T.C.C. # 1037 sought to “equitably” resurrect ( for the same debtors’ unliened historical arrears now claimed at $1.285 M ) a Condominium Act 1998 section 85 super-priority lien status.

This is a creditor v creditor battle, not a Khan-style management looting using bogus borrowing by-laws. Aside from issues of possible fraud & misrepresentation against lenders, central to the condo aspect is a pursuit of distinct private interest by a Board majority to the unlawful detriment of the M.T.C.C. #1037's interests.

It further includes at least one flat-out unlawful declaration within a Status Certificate to induce the loans, a consequence of which further subordinates the condo arrears to the lenders' rights.

Had the condo corporation prevailed in this round, the unliened historical units arrears would queue-jump for the condo corporation ahead of registered mortgages initially totalling almost $10 M. The loans are registered as security against titles to multiple units owned by a defaulting investment group ( the Waltons group ).

Factuals :

Central to each claim is the disturbing role of ousted M.T.C.C. # 1037 ex-condo President & ex-Board Chair, lawyer / realtor Norma Jean Walton.

For only indirectly related matters, she was ordered disbarred by a Law Society Tribunal on Feb 18 2015 http://canlii.ca/t/ggdfl

Her ( multi unit-owning ) borrower Walton group – having gained condo Board majority control & Presidency - switched to more pliable management that did not super-lien the dominating Waltons’ huge current condo arrears.

Her group's (concealed) arrears totalled $ 811 K at date of the March 2013 loan.

As part of lenders' prior diligence TREZ reviewed concurrent Status Certificates signed by condo president Walton herself ! Remember the property management change ?

Those Certificates illegally & falsely failed to disclose in section 5 the Walton portfolio’s common expense arrears at Certification date, a legislated absolute requirement.

The March 2013 Certificates further contained outdated 2 year old financials for 2010 but for no later periods. Walton units were not in arrears in 2010. Now what questions should there have been about financials for the subsequent 2 complete financial years ? ? Did the wordings of these Certificates purport illegally to present a snapshot of Dec 31 2010 ?

The thereafter-approved TREZ loan of $9.85 M to the Waltons, was secured by registration.

However within a year the scenario unravelled, a court-ordered condo Owners Meeting ousted the Waltons’ Board, and current common expense payments were resumed. Historical arrears are unpaid.

Creditor v Creditor Round # 1 however pits the prior registered lender TREZ et al against the condo corporation’s unliened claims to past condos’ arrears now accrued to $1.285M.

Parallel claims are underway with more to come. ( But issues such as : The condo corporation's claim to the historical arrears is otherwise intact, but because un-liened has lost super-priority unless successfully appealed. Without direct theft, is the condo corporation's loss of super-priority addressed by Directoral, Fidelity or other types of insurance ? Presumably not acting in the practice of law as condo President, how could or should Norma Jean Walton trigger law society professional coverage ? At the end of the day, what Walton assets will remain to be targetted by civil claims etc ? . .)

Summary : The registered mortgage lenders TREZ et al here survive an attempt by the condo corporation to talk the courts into "equitably resurrecting" the super-priority which Lien section 85 WOULD HAVE given to the condo corporation had the Walton group’s illegally concealed arrears been properly disclosed & liened.

( delete adjective "Minority" Directors on the ousted Walton-dominated Board are chastised. CORRECTION Sep 6/19 The court chastised the ? three ( arms-length ) Directors for inadequate diligence over then-President Walton & husband then Secretary. Did the Walton arrears magically disappear from scrutiny of financial recording & auditing ? Given the plus $ 800 K Walton arrears scenario, should those non-Walton Directors have insisted on prior scrutiny of Status Certificates ? )

Trez v Wynford 2015 ONSC 2794 issued Dec 10 2015 http://canlii.ca/t/gmh2d


ADDENDUM March 9 2016 This is now subject of Gowlings LLP article by lawyer Jocelyn Duquette http://condoadviser.ca/2016/03/condo-loses-1-3m-with-directors-failing-to-pay-their-condo-fees-and- falsifying-the-status-certificate/condo-law-blog-Ontario

1- Bleak recovery options may be left after lien outrageously trumped by debtor Directors. These are discussed by well respected Ottawa condo lawyer Jim Davidson :
June 14 2016 J Davidson LLB ( Nelligan IO'Btrien payne http://www.condolawnews.ca/e/another-interesting-court-decision-about-condominium-collections.cfm

Not easy to pursue Directors personally, including the issue "which Directors ?"

2 Not here: At HOATalk.com I & other amateurs kick around Derivative Remedy - a corporate veil-piercing shareholder remedy to pursue individual Directors. A Washington state questioner wants to pursue what he describes as 'idiot' Directors who he rages have run his HOA into the ground after he left the Board years ago . . . Doesn't look easy. ( Caution : Neither legal advice nor of Canadian application )

"(Washington state) case study in condo gone wrong"
http://www.hoatalk.com/Forum/tabid/55/forumid/1/postid/214777/view/topic/Default.aspx

1- June 28/17 Divisional Court upholds disbarment appealed by former condo President.

The disbarment grounds are a range of actions sadly consistent with her outrageous misconduct as then-President in concealing ( from lender/investors ) her own assets' arrears contrary to her duty as Status Certifier . . .

Walton v Law Society of Upper Canada, 2017 ONSC 3847
http://canlii.ca/t/h4jjv

2 - What happens within organizations injured BIG TIME - by misgovernance or even by illegal misconduct in the above events - which eventually cost the stakeholders & other creditors BIG TIME ?

For example, a timely question - albeit NOT about dishonesty nor clear misconduct - for the stakeholders of Toronto's Wychwood Park Trust to start considering . . . .

Ontario's Court of Appeal has recently ruled that the Wychwood Park Trustees' basis for a NINE year litigation to seek annual voodoo fees from owners of an OFFSITE home, was in flat out contravention of the MOST BASIC real property covenant law !

The Wychwood Park Trustees' claim to contribution against their target was pursued for almost a decade in flat-out defiance of current period Appeal Court decisions and of a + 130 year old foundation of Building Scheme covenant interpretation.

Maybe worse : on dubious grounds decades of Building Scheme collections have been made against many property owners. Now will the whole Building Scheme collapse ?

( Addendum Aug 17/19 : AWAITING SENTENCE SEPT 3/19. ToStar article updates that disbarred lawyer Norma Jean Walton is awaiting sentence for TWO CRIMINAL CODE CONVICTIONS spring/19 for THEFT OVER $ 5 K but somehow was acquitted of criminal fraud. The lower standard of civil proof has already given her largest victim a civil award of almost $ 70 M "‘One billion, here we come’: How a would-be Toronto real estate empire fell apart in the Bridle Path’ by Betsy Powell https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/08/15/one-billion-here-were-come-how-a-would-be-toronto-real- estate-empire-fell-apart-in-the-bridle-path.html )

( Addendum Sep 8/19 : Sentencing submissions complete, Ms Walton may learn her thefts sentence FRIDAY Sep 13th.

Will it be six years or less for a mere $ 6 M without regard to $ 66 M civil award to her main victim ?

Could the condo corp have faced civil liability to the lenders she hoodwinked with the mis-Certification offence ? Since the condo corp suffered big time loss under her shenanigans, arguably not. See discussions about cross claims between her victims : DeJong Corp. v. DBDC Spadina Ltd. 2019 SCC 30 issued May 14/19 http://canlii.ca/t/j0c7d )

* *

The DECEITFUL CONDO CERTIFICATE turns out to have been comparatively SMALL CHANGE to the WALTON "SHELL GAME" investment manipulators.

( Deposed condo President Walton had managed by 2013 to use investor's funds to acquire majority of the condo units, to next install her underlings as new managers, and then to Status Certify a false "no arrears" reassurance to their victims.

After unseating Walton the condo corporation later loses untimely bid to CONDO LIEN those arrears. )

But far beyond the condo universe the Waltons have left a much wider swath of harmed investors in their wake, many trying to sue each other for whatever's left . . . A disturbingly repeated wider scenario that by 2019 even reached Canada's Supreme Court. ) :

At televised spring 2019 S.C.C. hearings into claims between victim investors, losing counsel cites more than 250 judicial “decisions” issued over 6 years ( including four by ONCA Ontario's Court of Appeal ) triggered by the Waltons’ outrageous judicially-held oppression / shell game / "insolvencies" aftermaths.

Promised to equally match victims' corporate investment . . . in breach of contract invested NONE of their own ( Waltons' )money . . . in breach of contract then leveraged outwards onto new victims using earlier victims' invested funds . . !

( A criminal prosecution is separately underway against disbarred ex-lawyer Norma ( Jean ) Walton. At July 17/19 NO findings of criminal guilt have been publicized by the justice system, and of course may never be so rendered at all. There is a presumption of innocence protecting us all. )

SEE :

S.C.C. Supreme court of Canada outcome reversing ONCA majority. SCC verbatim ultimately adopts the minority dissenting minority appellate reasons of Madam Justice Van Rensburg favouring the DeJong downstream victims against earliest victims' group under "corporate attribution" / "corporate identification" doctrine . ) :

DeJong Corp. v. DBDC Spadina Ltd. 2019 SCC 30 issued May 14/19 http://canlii.ca/t/j0c7d

1- ( updated Sep 27/19 by link to delayed decision imposing sentence. ) :

R v Walton 2019 ONSC 5408 issued Sep 19/19 http://canlii.ca/t/j2jqj : THREE YEARS IMPRISONMENT for Criminal Code THEFT. Such is cited at bottom range of 3 to 5 years. Xcprt : “ . . . [51] In conclusion, the sentence imposed is as follows: three years imprisonment; a fine of $220,286 in lieu of forfeiture, with five years to pay the fine after release from prison, and with two years in prison in default of payment of the fine.”

2 - legal affairs reporter Betsy Powell's TORONTO STAR article Sep 19/19

"Disbarred lawyer, mother of four jailed for theft involving prominent diet doctor” https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/09/13/disbarred-lawyer-mother-of-four-jailed-for-theft- involving-prominent-diet-doctor.html

3 - Same day Mrs. Walton’s blog issued “Statement of Facts, Norma Walton” Written in 3rd person, it's a mea culpa centrally only for alleged personal judgement errors ( ! ) & centrally a denunciation of principal victim Dr Bernstein.

Blogged "Statement" announces intention to appeal. Should the length of the sentence conversely be appealed by the Crown ? https://www.normajeanwalton.com/post/statement-of-facts-norma-walton

4 - Again NONE of the latest appears to DIRECTLY address ex-condo President Walton's deceitful Status Certificate used to induce loans by TREZ. The condo shenanigans apparently got shunted aside / ignored ? - as "small stuff" . Or were among Trez claims litigated separately against the Walton / Bernstein ex-partners see Feb 6/19 para 35 http://canlii.ca/t/j0w2f

5 - But the subtly - worded 3rd party "Statement" ex-culpation at Mrs. Walton's blogsite, obliquely touches on TREZ lenders.

6 - ( Against Certificate - receivers TREZ $ 811 K in condo arrears ( at March 2013 ) would have been invalidated if they later have chosen to sell or foreclose. )

The minority condo owners thereby lost - & presumably have sucked up - any superlien priority for those condo arrears, only a tiny aspect of what was becoming a giant mishigas . . .

Other Board members at the time ( under majority owner Walton's Presidency ) got judicially chastised. ( One early legal article reported that Board membership included the Walton's largest victim Dr Bernstein, an inclusion declared unknown to him but which might have effected majority Board control, dependent numerically. )

Would the minority condo owners themselves bear any blame, having suffered financially but been able to later unseat Mrs Walton ?