Deceased/Not Found Canada - Alvin, 66, & Kathy Liknes, 53, Nathan O'Brien, 5, Calgary, 30 Jun 2014 - #18

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
sillybilly said:
But if it is a lawyer/purchaser who put the Caveat on (as Lois indicates upthread), then they have made sure that nobody lays claim to the property that was ultimately transferred to same lawyer/caveator/purchaser. IOW, the lawyer/caveator/purchaser removes their own Caveat. Probably would be done at one and the same time that the title is transferred (i.e. discharge of Caveat registered then immediate registration of the Transfer)
Click to expand...

I'm not an expert on this, but it almost seems like a conflict of interest and a breach for a lawyer to act on his own behalf to place a caveat. Without seeing the purchase agreement, it's hard to say...maybe there was an advance of funds to the seller, prior to closing? Buyer and seller can agree to anything, and the dates for advance of funds and closing dates can also be whatever is agreed upon.
That would fit in with the initial story that the L's were renting back the property.
 
sillybilly said:
Am trying to think .. did a lawyer register a Caveat on the property on AL's behalf so that the tax department couldn't put a lien on for the $800,000 in taxes owed by Winter Pet?

IIRC, it was determined that AL was not listed as a Director of Winter. If he had been, he would not be held liable for the corporation's debts or would have had only limited liability. However, if as a shareholder he provided a personal guarantee for its debts, he may have been facing action in that regard. It is possible his (?) lawyer put the Caveat on to stave off any potential action related to the company.
Click to expand...

yep...
 
deugirtni said:
Would be interesting to pull another report from the Registry office. Did I read somewhere that a caveat is for a certain length of time unless it is removed prior to that? And.. did I read somewhere that a caveat can only be placed by the person who has the interest in the property, and not by someone on his/her behalf? Will have to check.
Click to expand...

If I interpret that section of the Act correctly, it would lapse after 60 days notice that it was going to lapse (so not 60 days from the registration of the caveat itself, but 60 days after Notice of Lapse of Caveat, or whatever they might call it):

from:
https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/laws/stat/rsa-2000-c-l-4/#Caveats__235866


Lapse of caveat

138(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section and except in the case of a caveat lodged by the Registrar, as provided in this Act, every caveat lodged against any land, mortgage or encumbrance shall be lapsed by the Registrar on application made after the expiration of 60 days after notice, in the prescribed form, to take proceedings in court on the caveator’s caveat has been either ...
Click to expand...
<bbm>

WRT on AL's behalf, I meant in the capacity of AL's legal representation (i.e. lawyer or possible Power of Attorney to deal with the property)
 
'We' had historically thought it was a lawyer who had 'purchased' the property , but when we now see this caveat, I wondered if instead, that lawyer could simply instead be the lawyer acting on the behalf of a person/corporation whom the L's may have owed monies to, but then I thought I recalled reading something about whoever's name the caveat is in must be the person with the interest in the property (which could then mean it could be anyone at all); wasn't really writing that in response or objection to anything else said here, just thinking out loud.

I recently visited my local Land Registry Office to find out who exactly was listed as the owner of a property because of something that had happened. I was given a printout of everything that had occurred on title for that property over a long period of time, I believe the information contained therein was from even earlier than when the current title-holder became title holder. (ie it gave more details than just who owned the property, but also its encumberances over time). It would be interesting to obtain such a document on this property.
 
Can I load a pdf here? Can someone tell me how I might do that? I will post the Land Title and I have blacked out the names so I believe that would be kosher?

Also, here is another link re: Caveats and Land Titles

http://www.servicealberta.ca/850.cfm

Here it is: I have blacked out names and addresses

Title Report012_Page_1.jpg Page 1

Title Report012_Page_2.jpg Page 2

Title Report012_Page_3.jpg Page 3
 
just a quick note; the other group on the title besides the lawyer is his daughter/mothers holding company. might want to block that out too.
 
I have just uploaded the title. I ended up editing my post upthread so please refer back to that . Post #945
 
LoisLane said:
Here is the Caveat:
View attachment 62685
Click to expand...

Hhmm, so what do you (and other sleuthers) think this all means?

Was AL in worse or better financial shape than we thought? I've been trying to follow, but get a bit confused with the legal jargon. I love law stuff, so interesting....until I have to read it!
 
I would like to ask a question without offending anyone. Can someone tell me, what is the purpose of all this investigation into a caveat on the Ls' home? Does it pertain in some way to the crime? Or a theory of the crime?

I always try to put myself into the shoes of the Ls' and NO's surviving family members, that commentary here is not offensive to them. To me, it seems like so much picking over their bones, so to speak. To be digging through the details of their financial situation and the intricacies of the sale of their home. These people are victims of a horrific crime, and it seems like a further victimization, to snoop through their private details, as though there is something of value to be gleaned from it. Is there?

I just feel it needed to be said, and it is something to consider. The survivors of this mess may well be checking in here. How would it make any of us feel if our murdered parents' financial lives were dug into in this way? I think I personally would hate it.

All this is in my own opinion, and if anyone wants to flame me for it, I am prepared to be flamed.
 
It appears to me that the purchaser is protecting himself against any claim that may have been made against the property. Im not familiar with bankruptcy law in Alberta. What is the timing of this sale with KLs bankruptcy? My feeling is that a house may be kept after filing personal bankruptcy if there is a smaller equity in it? A higher equity may be taken to settle debts?
 
Slebby said:
I would like to ask a question without offending anyone. Can someone tell me, what is the purpose of all this investigation into a caveat on the Ls' home? Does it pertain in some way to the crime? Or a theory of the crime?

I always try to put myself into the shoes of the Ls' and NO's surviving family members, that commentary here is not offensive to them. To me, it seems like so much picking over their bones, so to speak. To be digging through the details of their financial situation and the intricacies of the sale of their home. These people are victims of a horrific crime, and it seems like a further victimization, to snoop through their private details, as though there is something of value to be gleaned from it. Is there?

I just feel it needed to be said, and it is something to consider. The survivors of this mess may well be checking in here. How would it make any of us feel if our murdered parents' financial lives were dug into in this way? I think I personally would hate it.

All this is in my own opinion, and if anyone wants to flame me for it, I am prepared to be flamed.
Click to expand...

I am interested in it because I think the sale of the house was done as part of a sequence of events leading up to the dissolving and speculated bankruptcy of Winter Pet. and that the L's were moving out of the home, possibly to Mexico. It is a piece of the puzzle. If it is not acceptable for us to post it here I will remove it.

If I had just lost my family I would not have an ounce of energy to dig for details and I am sure I would have many questions. I think of it a different way. Possibly the family would find this information helpful.

If I was a victim and was reading something on this forum that I found offensive I would ask that it be deleted and I am sure that it would be.

If it is against the rules what I have posted today I apologize and will remove it.
 
Lalalacasbah said:
Hhmm, so what do you (and other sleuthers) think this all means?

Was AL in worse or better financial shape than we thought? I've been trying to follow, but get a bit confused with the legal jargon. I love law stuff, so interesting....until I have to read it!
Click to expand...

I am not sure. I think we need an expert to weigh in. I think that possibly the L's were very straightforward with the purchaser as to their financial circumstances and pending and past bankruptcies or the buyer was aware of the risk and so the Caveat was put on to protect the both of them. I assume the buyer and seller agreed to it. I hope it would not be considered a conflict of interest.

It does not strike me as a straightforward sale but I don't have any education on the matter. Possibly the buyer who is a lawyer is very careful in transactions and does this will all land purchases. What I do wonder is say I wanted a house and knew that others could bid on it, can I just walk in and order up a Caveat? There must be some sort of protocol and justification.
 
Slebby said:
I would like to ask a question without offending anyone. Can someone tell me, what is the purpose of all this investigation into a caveat on the Ls' home? Does it pertain in some way to the crime? Or a theory of the crime?

I always try to put myself into the shoes of the Ls' and NO's surviving family members, that commentary here is not offensive to them. To me, it seems like so much picking over their bones, so to speak. To be digging through the details of their financial situation and the intricacies of the sale of their home. These people are victims of a horrific crime, and it seems like a further victimization, to snoop through their private details, as though there is something of value to be gleaned from it. Is there?

I just feel it needed to be said, and it is something to consider. The survivors of this mess may well be checking in here. How would it make any of us feel if our murdered parents' financial lives were dug into in this way? I think I personally would hate it.

All this is in my own opinion, and if anyone wants to flame me for it, I am prepared to be flamed.
Click to expand...

It is such a convoluted picture! In sleuthing further and exploring whether there is another person involved( a theory of some) it begs to look at where the money leads...
With the purchaser placing such a caveat, it may be that he( if he was perhaps also acting as the victims lawyer) may have been in the know as to how precarious the Ls financial situation may have been.
 
Slebby said:
I would like to ask a question without offending anyone. Can someone tell me, what is the purpose of all this investigation into a caveat on the Ls' home? Does it pertain in some way to the crime? Or a theory of the crime?

I always try to put myself into the shoes of the Ls' and NO's surviving family members, that commentary here is not offensive to them. To me, it seems like so much picking over their bones, so to speak. To be digging through the details of their financial situation and the intricacies of the sale of their home. These people are victims of a horrific crime, and it seems like a further victimization, to snoop through their private details, as though there is something of value to be gleaned from it. Is there?

I just feel it needed to be said, and it is something to consider. The survivors of this mess may well be checking in here. How would it make any of us feel if our murdered parents' financial lives were dug into in this way? I think I personally would hate it.

All this is in my own opinion, and if anyone wants to flame me for it, I am prepared to be flamed.
Click to expand...

I wrestle with this a lot about my posts on here - crossing boundaries, being disrespectful to victims in my theories and sleuthing. I can only speak for myself and answer...

I guess I'm curious about finances, not to be nosey really, but more to find any links or connections to motives.

I'm pretty boring, I have a mortgage I pay it. I file and pay my taxes. I pay my bills and credit cards off on time and have no debt (because I paid my student loans and cars off) other than my mortgage. I don't live beyond my means, I'm not taking trips I can't afford or buying vehicles and houses I can't afford. I'm personally curious a bit about AL's finances, as I guess it's just so different and foreign from my life and wonder why/how this happens to people...Why the multiple bankruptcies? Why the civil suits? Why companies registered the US and Panama? Okay, I know some of these answers, but I don't think the average joe does or deals with these things on a regular basis, it's not typical for most folks.

I'd like to know why AL made some of his choices. Is it my business? No it's not, but I think we all just want some answers as to why this terrible thing happened. It sure doesn't seem worth it just for money, so sad. It seems LE thinks the motive for the crime was business dealings/money, so I think some of us want to know what was done to drive someone to murder.

I don't think you'll get flamed Slebby, as I don't think there's any fire throwers online today ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 84 more.
Total: 1,553 (members: 85, guests: 1,468)

Online statistics

Members online
85
Guests online
1,468
Total visitors
1,553
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,886
Messages
18,194,270
Members
233,622
Latest member
cassie.ryan18
Back
Top