ARTICLE
13 November 2017

Practically Perfect - Errors In Financing Statements

AB
Aird & Berlis LLP

Contributor

Aird & Berlis LLP is a leading Canadian law firm, serving clients across Canada and globally. With strong national and international expertise, the firm’s lawyers and business advisors provide strategic legal advice across all areas of business law to clients ranging from entrepreneurs to multinational corporations.
On September 14, 2017, Bill 154, Cutting Unnecessary Red Tape Act, 2017 (the "Bill"), passed its first reading in the provincial legislature.
Canada Finance and Banking
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

On September 14, 2017, Bill 154, Cutting Unnecessary Red Tape Act, 2017 (the "Bill"), passed its first reading in the provincial legislature.

Among other things, the Bill proposes to amend the Personal Property Security Act ("PPSA") and the Repair and Storage Liens Act ("RSLA"), aligning them with current Ontario case law regarding errors and omissions in financing statements or financing change statements.

If the Bill becomes law, this would be good news for enterprises that finance, lease or store motor vehicles. The proposed changes will increase certainty as to whether clerical errors in their registrations will invalidate their security interests.

Registering an interest in a motor vehicle under either of these statutes requires a secured creditor to provide, among other things, the vehicle identification number ("VIN"), the debtor's name and, if the debtor is an individual, their birthdate. Under the current versions of the PPSA and RSLA, an error in any of this information that is "likely to materially mislead" a reasonable person results in the security interest remaining unperfected.1 Since an unperfected interest is subordinate to perfected secured creditors and trustees in bankruptcy, these seemingly-minor clerical errors can lead to large, unexpected losses.

This concept of "materially misleading" appears subjective and ambiguous. Happily for lenders, Ontario courts have clarified the concept, providing that a reasonable person would do two searches: one against the VIN and another against the debtor, such that the secured party's interest would be discovered even if the debtor's name or date of birth was erroneously registered. As such, an incorrect name would not "materially mislead" the reasonable searcher if the VIN is accurate, and the security interest would remain perfected notwithstanding the error.2

The Bill proposes to align both statutes with the existing common law treatment of erroneous registrations. If the VIN is accurate and listed in the designated place, and the statement includes the name of at least one debtor and has all other required fields filled in, the Bill provides that an error in the debtor's name or birthdate will not invalidate the registration.

Secured creditors must continue to be cautious when listing a vehicle's VIN. Where the VIN is (i) not included (if the vehicle is classified as a consumer good); (ii) included in the wrong place; or (iii) incorrect, the error will leave the security interest unperfected.

Footnotes

* Sean Green is a 2017-2018 articling student at Aird & Berlis LLP

1. PPSA, s. 46(4); RSLA, s. 9(2).

2. The leading case is Re Lambert (1994), 20 OR (3d) 108, 119 DLR (4th) 93 (Ont. C.A.); leave to S.C.C. refused. 123 DLR (4th) vii.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More