Suspect #1: Dellen Millard *Charged* 1st Deg Murder 15 May 2013 #2

[Blomquist]

You can, and DM could have transferred to MB for $1 as she is his mother, but he didnt appear to do so. He transferred to her in her capacity as a trustee, not as his mother.

Yes...its a good move....

 

[Juballee]

I am certain that they had legal advice before they did anything, but the $1 is called consideration. All contracts must have something in consideration, you cannot just give it away for nothing, the $1 is just to keep the contract legal, each side must give something in consideration for a contract to be binding, a contract cannot be fully one sided, both sides must benefit, even if it is only nominally, ie $1. It has nothing to do with the value of the property or trying to hide it as an asset.

 

[Blomquist]

I am certain that they had legal advice before they did anything, but the $1 is called consideration. All contracts must have something in consideration, you cannot just give it away for nothing, the $1 is just to keep the contract legal, each side must give something in consideration for a contract to be binding, a contract cannot be fully one sided, both sides must benefit, even if it is only nominally, ie $1. It has nothing to do with the value of the property or trying to hide it as an asset.

Yes and I imagine it makes sure that everything is safe and taken care of...especially in the current situation. I agree I expect legal advice was a priority before everything was done. :smile:

 

[swedie]

This is good to know, but I wonder then why the black cat was still there after the police had finished their investigation and the The Star reporter visited. I hate to think the police just left the cat alone in an empty house. If they can search for missing Harley parts to return them to the owner, I would hope they could either let someone collect the cat or make sure it was in a shelter.

JMO

We don't know if DM lived at the house alone. There may have been a buddy or two who crashed quite regularly on his couch/bed. Maybe he had a boarder... I highly doubt LE would abandon the cat. My elder, sick neighbour who owned a dog and cat committed suicide a few years ago and while LE were there investigating, within hours there was an animal control vehicle parked out front, which ended up taking the pets away. JMO.

Well the way I see the whole issue of DM selling his properties off to his mother is very telling. DM knows he won't be needing a house or condo outside of jail for a long, long time (if at all). If he was innocent and had millions, he could have hired someone to take care of his properties until he was released from jail. He could have even rented out his properties. Maybe he has a buddy or two who would have helped a friend in need out by living in the house rent free in exchange for maintaining it for him. To me it appears he needs money to pay for his lawyer and he knows where the road is taking him. MOO.

 

[MsSherlock]

Do you have a different link that states he "sold" the property to his mother? Because the one I linked says that he "transferred" them to his mother and when she took title they were placed in trust. I would think the $1 is the nominal cost to have the documents notarized. What I'm saying is that, if he is the beneficial owner of the proceeds of the Trust, those proceeds would come under the principal residence rule.

Yes, the property would be transferred to the Trust and recorded at the current fair market value. For example, you have a cottage and you place it in Trust to go to your child upon your death to perhaps avoid probate. If your child does not have a principle residence to claim, he/she can use the principal residence rule to avoid capital gains tax. However, if the child does have a principal residence and wants to sell the cottage, the sooner he/she sells it the better, because the capital gains would be calculated on the difference between the value at the time the Trust was set up and the value when the cottage was sold. Using the same logic, even if DM didn't claim the principal residence rule, the capital gains tax would be based on the difference between the value of the property when it was transferred to the Trust and the amount that it sold for (again, IF he maintained beneficial ownership).

Hope this helps explain my reasoning.

I don't think his reasons given for the Trust will be to avoid capital gains taxes. I think it will be because he's in jail and can't look after completing the procedures himself.

JMO

Thanks Alethia, however, it still does not explain why all of this would be necessary. It's reasonable to assume that DM has given someone Power of Attorney for his day to day financial affairs. A Power of Attorney could also be given to look after acquiring or disposing of any real estate, investing the proceeds etc. MB could receive as much direction from DM as necessary. It is simple, legal and done everyday. DM wouldn't have had to sign anything once the Power of Attorney was given. Maple Gate has already been sold and closed. Why would there be a need for a complex trust system? Is there a protective element to the trust?

 

[Alethea Dice]

Thanks Alethia, however, it still does not explain why all of this would be necessary. It's reasonable to assume that DM has given someone Power of Attorney for his day to day financial affairs. A Power of Attorney could also be given to look after acquiring or disposing of any real estate, investing the proceeds etc. MB could receive as much direction from DM as necessary. It is simple, legal and done everyday. DM wouldn't have had to sign anything once the Power of Attorney was given. Maple Gate has already been sold and closed. Why would there be a need for a complex trust system? Is there a protective element to the trust?

Maybe because he only wanted to transfer those three properties to the Trust. I haven't been able to find anything more specific, but these links sound like if you appoint a Power of Attorney, they can make decisions regarding all of your personally owned property. If transferred to a Trust, the Trustee can only make decisions of the property that is held by the Trust.

Power of Attorney

A power of attorney is a legal authorization that you, the Principal, give to somebody else, called the Agent or Attorney in Fact. The Agent is authorized to make decisions regarding the Principal's personally-owned property.

Trustee

If you create a trust then you are called the beneficiary, and in your trust document you will appoint a trustee and convey property to the trust. The trustee has authority to manage, invest, sell, and disburse any of the property held by the trust, but the trustee has no authority in your personally-owned property.

http://www.ehow.com/facts_5787304_power-attorney-vs_-trustee.html

The following link is specific to Ontario.

You can give someone a Power of Attorney for Property if you want them to help you manage your finances, or you are worried about becoming unable to manage them. You can also give a Power of Attorney for Property for a limited time. For example, if you plan to be out of the country for a while, you might want someone else to manage your property only while you are away. "Property" includes your money, your home if you own one, and anything else you own.

http://www.cleo.on.ca/en/publications/continuing#full

If you can find something more specific regarding whether a Power of Attorney can be assigned for only a select property in Ontario, please post it and then we'll know.

If he has given Power of Attorney to someone for his day to day finances, he could have limited it to only handling those personal finances and not given them the ability to make decisions on buying or selling any of his property. According to that second Ontario link, without limiting the attorney's authority, they can do everything except change/make your will and give a new POA.

JMO

 

[Snoofo]

If you can find something more specific regarding whether a Power of Attorney can be assigned for only a select property in Ontario, please post it and then we'll know.

Alethea, this would be set out in the Conditions and Restrictions section of the Continuing POA for property. (i.e.powers limited to dealings with the real properties described as follows: ....). You can create any limitation you want here, even specify it's for one specific property or even specifically exempting a property from the powers granted.

 

[Carli]

Maybe because he only wanted to transfer those three properties to the Trust. I haven't been able to find anything more specific, but these links sound like if you appoint a Power of Attorney, they can make decisions regarding all of your personally owned property. If transferred to a Trust, the Trustee can only make decisions of the property that is held by the Trust.



http://www.ehow.com/facts_5787304_power-attorney-vs_-trustee.html

The following link is specific to Ontario.



http://www.cleo.on.ca/en/publications/continuing#full

If you can find something more specific regarding whether a Power of Attorney can be assigned for only a select property in Ontario, please post it and then we'll know.

If he has given Power of Attorney to someone for his day to day finances, he could have limited it to only handling those personal finances and not given them the ability to make decisions on buying or selling any of his property. According to that second Ontario link, without limiting the attorney's authority, they can do everything except change/make your will and give a new POA.

JMO

The attached link refers to US law presents the basic difference between POA and a trust which is similar, in simplest terms, to the definitions in Canada, too.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_a_power_of_attorney_and_a_trust

You can see how a trust is useful where one or two assets are involved but a power of attorney is far more reaching and would require specified limitations such as might be necessary to reserve the sale, for instance, of particular properties. If DM is found to be guilty of the crimes he's alleged to have committed and potentially looking at an extended prison term, then possibly a POA would be the correct approach for at least the duration of his imprisonment. However, that is not the case at this time and so a properly set up private family trust is the most effective way to deal, in the immediate term, with the sale of a few assets, IMO. MOO. Actually, it's a smart and practical way to deal with the disposition and/or investment of closely held properties quite regardless of whether one is incarcerated.

 

[MsSherlock]

The attached link refers to US law presents the basic difference between POA and a trust which is similar, in simplest terms, to the definitions in Canada, too.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_a_power_of_attorney_and_a_trust

You can see how a trust is useful where one or two assets are involved but a power of attorney is far more reaching and would require specified limitations such as might be necessary to reserve the sale, for instance, of particular properties. If DM is found to be guilty of the crimes he's alleged to have committed and potentially looking at an extended prison term, then possibly a POA would be the correct approach for at least the duration of his imprisonment. However, that is not the case at this time and so a properly set up private family trust is the most effective way to deal, in the immediate term, with the sale of a few assets, IMO. MOO. Actually, it's a smart and practical way to deal with the disposition and/or investment of closely held properties quite regardless of whether one is incarcerated.

Thanks Carli-great article. My thoughts on the whole trust thing is tilted by more of the timing of it. DM is arrested on the 11th and is questioned by HPS for 24 hours.
On May 13 :
"Paradkar said Millard is staying silent until the police complete their investigation. Millard is set to attend a bail hearing Wednesday, but Paradkar said they will hold off on requesting bail until the Crown can provide them with more information on the case."
http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/05/13/hamilton-bosma-mystery.html

IMHO DM didn't say anything to DP on the 13th when he met with him for the first time. DM was going to wait and see what LE was going to find in the short time period before the bail hearing on the 15th. IMO DM soon found out that search warrants were being executed on various properties and TB was found on the 14th. IMHO, that would have shaken DP and a much deeper conversation with DM would have followed seeing that LE now had a body and were executing warrants at the hangar.

IMO, because of client/solicitor privilege and DP's experience, DP was able to extract enough info out of DM to be concerned about certain properties and the possibility of those properties getting seized under Proceeds of Crime legislation. Maple Gate, Woodbridge and Distillery. IMO he came to the conclusion that the farm and the Riverside property were from inheritance or traceable gifting and no "proceeds of crime" connection could ever be made to them. The income from Riverside would be valuable to DM at this point and the hangar is just a building with a land lease.

The fact that they were transferred out of DM's name 6 days (a very busy 6 days) after his arrest is very telling, IMO. Out of those 6 days, 1 day was interrogation by LE and another would have been the day the lawyers closed the deals, so there's really only 4 days. Also, MB, under the stress of having the truck found in her driveway and her son charged with murder would have had to obtain independent legal council as well, but not for a simple POA.

Need to be able to sell properties to free up some cash, look after maintenance & bank accounts-A quick and simple POA would cover that.
Pressure from creditors ie) bank, LOC, perhaps the bank calling in some loans or something? IMO, the bank wouldn't have even known about it yet and it would take months-once again a POA would look after that.

But..fear that LE could...but had not yet, discovered something such as drugs, a large amount of cash, firearms or that any of the properties had been purchased by proceeds of crime would really concern DP, especially if he wants to secure the case for the next couple years. They can't seize assets when you're charged with murder. IMO that's why those 3 properties were immediately put into MB's name for immediate disposal-not to protect DM's assets, because they can still be seized, it will just take much longer, and like DP said, DM is in for the long run and DP wants to be there with him. MOO

http://www.sanderscriminallaw.com/recovery-of-seized-property

 

[Carli]

Thanks Carli-great article. My thoughts on the whole trust thing is tilted by more of the timing of it. DM is arrested on the 11th and is questioned by HPS for 24 hours.
On May 13 :
"Paradkar said Millard is staying silent until the police complete their investigation. Millard is set to attend a bail hearing Wednesday, but Paradkar said they will hold off on requesting bail until the Crown can provide them with more information on the case."
http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/05/13/hamilton-bosma-mystery.html

IMHO DM didn't say anything to DP on the 13th when he met with him for the first time. DM was going to wait and see what LE was going to find in the short time period before the bail hearing on the 15th. IMO DM soon found out that search warrants were being executed on various properties and TB was found on the 14th. IMHO, that would have shaken DP and a much deeper conversation with DM would have followed seeing that LE now had a body and were executing warrants at the hangar.

IMO, because of client/solicitor privilege and DP's experience, DP was able to extract enough info out of DM to be concerned about certain properties and the possibility of those properties getting seized under Proceeds of Crime legislation. Maple Gate, Woodbridge and Distillery. IMO he came to the conclusion that the farm and the Riverside property were from inheritance or traceable gifting and no "proceeds of crime" connection could ever be made to them. The income from Riverside would be valuable to DM at this point and the hangar is just a building with a land lease.

The fact that they were transferred out of DM's name 6 days (a very busy 6 days) after his arrest is very telling, IMO. Out of those 6 days, 1 day was interrogation by LE and another would have been the day the lawyers closed the deals, so there's really only 4 days. Also, MB, under the stress of having the truck found in her driveway and her son charged with murder would have had to obtain independent legal council as well, but not for a simple POA.

Need to be able to sell properties to free up some cash, look after maintenance & bank accounts-A quick and simple POA would cover that.
Pressure from creditors ie) bank, LOC, perhaps the bank calling in some loans or something? IMO, the bank wouldn't have even known about it yet and it would take months-once again a POA would look after that.

But..fear that LE could...but had not yet, discovered something such as drugs, a large amount of cash, firearms or that any of the properties had been purchased by proceeds of crime would really concern DP, especially if he wants to secure the case for the next couple years. They can't seize assets when you're charged with murder. IMO that's why those 3 properties were immediately put into MB's name for immediate disposal-not to protect DM's assets, because they can still be seized, it will just take much longer, and like DP said, DM is in for the long run and DP wants to be there with him. MOO

http://www.sanderscriminallaw.com/recovery-of-seized-property

Oh gosh, forgive me if my eyes cloud over a little at the thought of renewing the discussion about closely held family trust and related structures. As Papa reportedly said when asked to say Grace over the meal of leftovers, "It seems to me I have blessed much of this material before." LOL. That's not to say that the Millard family's financial organization might not be interesting but I'm not sure how it helps prove the case for or against DM nor is it really possible to determine, without firsthand knowledge, if these fairly conventional asset protection arrangements were not already in the works well before DM's arrest, especially given that MillardAir had gone through bankruptcy several years ago and appears to have been edging up to financial challenges again. IMO MOO. I did want to ask about something else in your post, though. Is it your understanding that a bail hearing took place? I was under the impression that DP had not yet made that petition, but I'm not sure about that.

 

[MsSherlock]

The attached link refers to US law presents the basic difference between POA and a trust which is similar, in simplest terms, to the definitions in Canada, too.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_difference_between_a_power_of_attorney_and_a_trust

You can see how a trust is useful where one or two assets are involved but a power of attorney is far more reaching and would require specified limitations such as might be necessary to reserve the sale, for instance, of particular properties. If DM is found to be guilty of the crimes he's alleged to have committed and potentially looking at an extended prison term, then possibly a POA would be the correct approach for at least the duration of his imprisonment. However, that is not the case at this time and so a properly set up private family trust is the most effective way to deal, in the immediate term, with the sale of a few assets, IMO. MOO. Actually, it's a smart and practical way to deal with the disposition and/or investment of closely held properties quite regardless of whether one is incarcerated.

Oh gosh, forgive me if my eyes cloud over a little at the thought of renewing the discussion about closely held family trust and related structures. As Papa reportedly said when asked to say Grace over the meal of leftovers, "It seems to me I have blessed much of this material before." LOL. That's not to say that the Millard family's financial organization might not be interesting but I'm not sure how it helps prove the case for or against DM nor is it really possible to determine, without firsthand knowledge, if these fairly conventional asset protection arrangements were not already in the works well before DM's arrest, especially given that MillardAir had gone through bankruptcy several years ago and appears to have been edging up to financial challenges again. IMO MOO. I did want to ask about something else in your post, though. Is it your understanding that a bail hearing took place? I was under the impression that DP had not yet made that petition, but I'm not sure about that.

Thanks Carli, and yes, I can see how a trust would be beneficial, however, I was questioning the "urgency" considering the complex nature of this type of arrangement. ie) retain a lawyer, receive independent legal council, get all the documents signed, lawyer has to search title, obtain Sheriff's certificate, tax certificate, discharge any liens on any of the properties etc etc. and it's somehow important to do these things within the 6 days following an arrest? JMHO, there was a lot going on in those few days. Search warrants being obtained and executed, the truck was found in MB's driveway, a body was found on the farm, prepping for a court appearance. JMHO, it seems strange to me that thinking about DM's properties was a priority at that point. I could totally understand a quick POA followed by a transfer into a trust sometime after the dust settled. MOO
As far as the bail hearing:
"Millard is set to attend a bail hearing Wednesday, but Paradkar said they will hold off on requesting bail until the Crown can provide them with more information on the case."
http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/05/13/hamilton-bosma-mystery.html

 

[Snoofo]

As attorney without restrictions, MB could do as she wishes with the property without seeking instructions. I cant imagine MB has not obtained independent legal advice (especially since it is reported she has taken over corporate affairs at M.Inc.). Therefore it is possible her own lawyers advised her as to how to best proceed, possibly to protect herself along the way. It may have nothing to do with DP or DM at all (although thats hard to believe, but technically very possible). It's her call.

 

[Snoofo]

Thanks Carli, and yes, I can see how a trust would be beneficial, however, I was questioning the "urgency" considering the complex nature of this type of arrangement. ie) retain a lawyer, receive independent legal council, get all the documents signed, lawyer has to search title, obtain Sheriff's certificate, tax certificate, discharge any liens on any of the properties etc etc. and it's somehow important to do these things within the 6 days following an arrest? JMHO, there was a lot going on in those few days. Search warrants being obtained and executed, the truck was found in MB's driveway, a body was found on the farm, prepping for a court appearance. JMHO, it seems strange to me that thinking about DM's properties was a priority at that point. I could totally understand a quick POA followed by a transfer into a trust sometime after the dust settled. MOO
As far as the bail hearing:
"Millard is set to attend a bail hearing Wednesday, but Paradkar said they will hold off on requesting bail until the Crown can provide them with more information on the case."
http://www.cbc.ca/hamilton/news/story/2013/05/13/hamilton-bosma-mystery.html

Actually he signed yhe POA on the 11th (link below) and five business days is more than enough time to do all that transferring. If its urgent it can be done in one day. The properties may have all been mortgage free, therefore no discharge arrangements, and if they werent, a mortgage that is not discharged is deemed to be assumed by the transferee (which shouldn't be an issue here its his mom). Tax certs not required in a non-arm's length transaction unless there is new financing going on. So without these steps that take control away from the vendor/purchaser solicitor (s), it can be done in an afternoon if need be. Remember its all electronic now. One meeting for DP/DM at jail and one meet for MB and her lawyer.


http://m.thestar.com/#!/news/redirect/549932ff2bca38d256eced943cfe73cf

 

[Snoofo]

Oh gosh, forgive me if my eyes cloud over a little at the thought of renewing the discussion about closely held family trust and related structures. As Papa reportedly said when asked to say Grace over the meal of leftovers, "It seems to me I have blessed much of this material before." LOL. That's not to say that the Millard family's financial organization might not be interesting but I'm not sure how it helps prove the case for or against DM nor is it really possible to determine, without firsthand knowledge, if these fairly conventional asset protection arrangements were not already in the works well before DM's arrest, especially given that MillardAir had gone through bankruptcy several years ago and appears to have been edging up to financial challenges again. IMO MOO. I did want to ask about something else in your post, though. Is it your understanding that a bail hearing took place? I was under the impression that DP had not yet made that petition, but I'm not sure about that.

You are quite correct that the nature of this trust cannot be sleuthed, we can only ever speculate. There are so many different types of trust situations and the only way of knowing what we are dealing with is by viewing the trust agreement (which in itself can go by a variety of names!) but it is not a public document. I don't think the Millards' is a Family Trust though, which is also something different. It used to be that a family trust would appear on title (i.e. "The Millard Children's Family Trust") with trustees signing for it. This was a popular thing in estates planning about ten years back but you don't see it anymore, I think the laws changed and it is either no longer beneficial or no longer legal. (JMO about law changes).

 

[MsSherlock]

You are quite correct that the nature of this trust cannot be sleuthed, we can only ever speculate. There are so many different types of trust situations and the only way of knowing what we are dealing with is by viewing the trust agreement (which in itself can go by a variety of names!) but it is not a public document. I don't think the Millards' is a Family Trust though, which is also something different. It used to be that a family trust would appear on title (i.e. "The Millard Children's Family Trust") with trustees signing for it. This was a popular thing in estates planning about ten years back but you don't see it anymore, I think the laws changed and it is either no longer beneficial or no longer legal. (JMO about law changes).

Thanks for refreshing me on the POA & trust Snoofo. The star article also says

"Legal experts agree the documents show a series of sophisticated –— and curious — transactions for which there is a case to be made against Millard under the provincial Fraudulent Conveyances Act. "
"David Ullman, a partner at Minden Gross who specializes in issues involving creditors — including finding hidden assets — says Millard could have simply given his mother power of attorney to manage his affairs or added her to the property title.

“I think it’s a little strange that it’s being done six days after the power of attorney was appointed,” Ullman said. “My instinct as someone who deals with people who are trying to hide assets from their creditors is that this could be done for that purpose.”

Toronto lawyer Barry Fish called the property transfers “highly unusual.”

“The purpose of doing this is opaque to me,” he said. “[Millard] has not put these three properties out of reach of his creditors. He has only placed an obstacle in their path, which a plaintiff lawyer can circumvent.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/06/05/millard_land_deals_beyond_smelly_experts_say.html

IMO, Members of the legal world found the way this was all handled and the timing very strange as well. MOO

 

[Blomquist]

Thanks for refreshing me on the POA & trust Snoofo. The star article also says

"Legal experts agree the documents show a series of sophisticated –— and curious — transactions for which there is a case to be made against Millard under the provincial Fraudulent Conveyances Act. "
"David Ullman, a partner at Minden Gross who specializes in issues involving creditors — including finding hidden assets — says Millard could have simply given his mother power of attorney to manage his affairs or added her to the property title.

“I think it’s a little strange that it’s being done six days after the power of attorney was appointed,” Ullman said. “My instinct as someone who deals with people who are trying to hide assets from their creditors is that this could be done for that purpose.”

Toronto lawyer Barry Fish called the property transfers “highly unusual.”

“The purpose of doing this is opaque to me,” he said. “[Millard] has not put these three properties out of reach of his creditors. He has only placed an obstacle in their path, which a plaintiff lawyer can circumvent.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/06/05/millard_land_deals_beyond_smelly_experts_say.html

IMO, Members of the legal world found the way this was all handled and the timing very strange as well. MOO

Well IMO if DM is innocent and I believe there is plenty to suggest that he is.....I hope he has worked some magic and slid the assets somewhere where grabbing paws cannot reach it. JMO

I actually dislike how people go grubbing for money when something happens.... money money money..... it's a virus and when they see someone has some they want it.... JMO It's MILLARD money IMO ...... and thats that...IMO JMO

 

[Alethea Dice]

Actually he signed yhe POA on the 11th (link below) and five business days is more than enough time to do all that transferring. If its urgent it can be done in one day. The properties may have all been mortgage free, therefore no discharge arrangements, and if they werent, a mortgage that is not discharged is deemed to be assumed by the transferee (which shouldn't be an issue here its his mom). Tax certs not required in a non-arm's length transaction unless there is new financing going on. So without these steps that take control away from the vendor/purchaser solicitor (s), it can be done in an afternoon if need be. Remember its all electronic now. One meeting for DP/DM at jail and one meet for MB and her lawyer.


http://m.thestar.com/#!/news/redirect/549932ff2bca38d256eced943cfe73cf

Thanks, Snoofo. So he did do a quick POA, followed by a transfer into a trust. According to that article, he was arrested on May 10th, on May 11th he signed over POA to MB, then 6 days later, on May 17th, the three properties were transferred to MB and placed in Trust with MB as the Trustee. I remember questioning at the time about why people would assume DM did the transfer, when MB already had POA at the time. It could possibly have been only what she felt was best.

JMO

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/06/05/millard_land_deals_beyond_smelly_experts_say.html

 

[Blomquist]

Thanks, Snoofo. So he did do a quick POA, followed by a transfer into a trust. According to that article, he was arrested on May 10th, on May 11th he signed over POA to MB, then 6 days later, on May 17th, the three properties were transferred to MB and placed in Trust with MB as the Trustee. I remember questioning at the time about why people would assume DM did the transfer, when MB already had POA at the time. It could possibly have been only what she felt was best.

JMO

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/06/05/millard_land_deals_beyond_smelly_experts_say.html

Precisely...I would have done the same thing.....maybe even quicker !!! ;-p

 

[Alethea Dice]

IMO, because of client/solicitor privilege and DP's experience, DP was able to extract enough info out of DM to be concerned about certain properties and the possibility of those properties getting seized under Proceeds of Crime legislation. Maple Gate, Woodbridge and Distillery. IMO he came to the conclusion that the farm and the Riverside property were from inheritance or traceable gifting and no "proceeds of crime" connection could ever be made to them. The income from Riverside would be valuable to DM at this point and the hangar is just a building with a land lease.

rsbm

I'm sorry, but I don't agree with this part. The Distillery condo could be at risk under the Proceeds of Crime legislation. Less likely, but still maybe possible, the Woodbridge condo, which was purchased back in 2011. But the Maple Gate property was the family home. It was passed down from CM to WM and DM, then down to DM. I don't know how they would tie that to Proceeds of Crime.

The Riverside property was purchased from WM in 2007, so again, no proceeds of crime connection. The farm was also purchased in 2011 so a possibility.

It seems to me he's keeping the two properties that are producing income. And the hangar which is kind of stuck for now. It could produce income depending on what happens with the airport and whether they agree to a sub-lease or different business.

JMO

 

[Snoofo]

Thanks for refreshing me on the POA & trust Snoofo. The star article also says

"Legal experts agree the documents show a series of sophisticated –— and curious — transactions for which there is a case to be made against Millard under the provincial Fraudulent Conveyances Act. "
"David Ullman, a partner at Minden Gross who specializes in issues involving creditors — including finding hidden assets — says Millard could have simply given his mother power of attorney to manage his affairs or added her to the property title.

“I think it’s a little strange that it’s being done six days after the power of attorney was appointed,” Ullman said. “My instinct as someone who deals with people who are trying to hide assets from their creditors is that this could be done for that purpose.”

Toronto lawyer Barry Fish called the property transfers “highly unusual.”

“The purpose of doing this is opaque to me,” he said. “[Millard] has not put these three properties out of reach of his creditors. He has only placed an obstacle in their path, which a plaintiff lawyer can circumvent.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2013/06/05/millard_land_deals_beyond_smelly_experts_say.html

IMO, Members of the legal world found the way this was all handled and the timing very strange as well. MOO

The legal professionals in the articles made the same observations as you did, Ms S.

I agree that seeing this course of events on title would raise flags to someone who looks at title regularly, because people dont do it for absolutely no reason. But, as someone who does look at title regularly, I can tell you that this does not mean for a fact that someone is hiding assets. What it usually means is that something is going on right now with this guilty or innocent person that might threaten their assets. IMO the same course of action would be taken by the innocent who is protecting assets as would be taken by the guilty who is hiding assets. And I would think those same legal professionals would advise their clients to do the same, notwithstanding their belief as to their guilt or innocence. If one of them has a client that is 100% INNOCENT of something but entering a civil action (not even criminal action), they would recommend they transfer out of their names too. MOO. Nobody can guarantee what the judgement will be.

So it's fishy compared to title to the home of someone who has never owned a business or been in a law suit, IMO.