ERON MORTGAGE INFORMATION WEBSITE
THE ERON LENDER COMMITTEE

MINUTES OF MEETING - OCTOBER 5, 1999
ELC-PROJECTS & LENDERS Monthly Meeting

 Secretary: S. Ripley

1. At 7:00PM James Tindle welcomed the Eron lenders to the meeting, and invited David Church and Andrew Pearson to begin the evening with an update of the class-action lawsuit.


2. D. Church spoke in detail of the steps that had been taken since his last report to the lenders. (See the Camp Church website and the October5/99 Newsletter). He noted that a tentative date for the trial had been set for April 2000, and that the period held aside for the trial was eight weeks.


3. Dave Craig reviewed at length developments pertaining to the Revenue Canada Refiling. (See the Oct.5/99 Newsletter, items #2 & 3). As a result of Justice Tysoe's distribution ruling PWC has taken a further initiative with Revenue Canada and suggested a single, universal refiling process be granted in place of the project by project refiling. This would save time and money for Eron lenders, PWC, and RevCan. PWC has yet to receive a decision from RevCan on this alternative.

Many detailed questions were then asked by lenders of Craig concerning problems the lenders were having in interpreting their particular refiling situations. Some questions were answered satisfactorily and others Craig said he would clarify with PWC.


4. Tindle spoke about Justice Tysoe's Distribution Order. Because the document is lengthy and complex he encouraged lenders to get a copy and review the details themselves. Ripley referred the lenders to the commentary in the Newsletter.

The Distribution discussion eventually turned to the matter of the ELC's problematic relationship with PWC. After a lengthy review and discussion of the conflict, and whether or not legal counsel may be needed to guide the ELC upon PWC's filing an Application to clarify that relationship, the resulting informal consensus amongst the lenders was that they would like to see Tindle and Craig jointly renew efforts to communicate effectively with C. Bushell. Tindle and Craig agreed to pursue this recommendation.


5. Ripley briefly reviewed litigation matters, referring the lenders to the Newsletter and to recent discussions he'd had with R. Pallen of PWC. Ripley had also prepared a synopsis of the BCSC final hearings, and he answered questions on the concluding confrontation of S.Angus and M.Skwarok.


6. No report was given by the Election sub-committee, because both members were ill and not in attendance. Ripley reported that to date only one nomination was confirmed, and he proposed that nominations be permitted to the beginning of the AGM. A show-of-hands vote indicated the lenders agreed unanimously to this extension of the nominating period.


7. Ripley reviewed miscellaneous details reported in the Newsletter, and confirmed the date, time, and location of the AGM. He noted that, in conversation with C. Bushell, he had learned that the Court date for the determination of the Trustee's billing arrangements, with respect to the "holdback" for the costs of the balance of the trusteeship engagement, was set for November 8 & 9, 1999. After Justice Tysoe's decision on this matter a 30-day Appeal period would ensue, and thereafter PWC could begin issuing cheques to those lenders in realized projects - assuming no objections occurred requiring further hearings at Court.

Ripley asked lenders to volunteer to help with the AGM's procedures and he referred them to Wendy Menghi, Coordinator of Volunteers.


8. Tindle adjourned the meeting at 9:35PM, inviting lenders to come to the November 2 / 99 meeting.





BACK