The entire story in a nutshell. The owner of a company got scammed for $250,000. He borrowed this money from a friend.
As a result of this loss, I agreed to defer my programming fees so the revenue could pay for this loss.
I did start to receive payments, but then the company ran into hard times in 2009. As a result, I agreed not to litigate so the company could keep going.
I stayed in touch with the oner on a regular basis (at least once per year). I thought this satified the new statute of limitations of acknowledging the debt.
On October 30,2011, the owner left a message on my answering machine that things were picking up. I think this constitutes acknowledgement of debt when he says ".... I owe you".
I thought this would start the two years again from that date. I really did not NEED the money at the time and he seemed to be progressing with the company in a positive way.
This past June 2013 I sent him 2 emails and made 3 phone cals without any response.
On August 30, 2013 I discovered that Industry Canada had dissolved the company on August 18, 2013 due to no compliance (not filing the annual returns for two consecutive years).
The agreement was my fees would help pay for the payments on the full understanding that my fees would be paid after the payments to this person was paid.
What I need to know is how far back can a trustee reclaim excessive payments?
According to what I have read it is up to five years. Is this correct?
I found this judgement:
That is my view. There was two counts of fraud
(1) The first fraud was againt the company and the owner by an outside party.
(2) The second fraud was by the owner of the company since he gave company money to pay off the losses to a preferred creditor. And thus made the company unviable.
And he is now trying to walk away from the whole situation and leave me without payments for my debt.
The person who lent the owner $250,000 is very wealthy and I have met her.
It is my intention to approach her and propoe that she invests in a new venture with me. This way it would be a win-win-win for everyone.
I would get my money to use ( I need it at this time), she would win because she would not lose the money she was paid back and she would probably receive a nice dividend from the investment. and the owner would not have to go bankrupt.
I may need comments/advise as I move forward this week. on this approach.