Millard Properties: Locations and Ownership

[MsSherlock]

Where does it say the charge was registered October 18 or that any date is given? She doesnt indicate whether the charge is old or new, or am I missing something?

Has anyone considered it is no longer listed because it sold or may be in the process of being sold without actual transfer occuring as yet? Or are we relying on an MLS search? Moo.

Sent using Tapatalk 2

Sorry Snoofo-I went back to verify and you're correct there isn't a date on the AB article. Perhaps it was edited? But then again, it wouldn't be the first time I combined different things I read into a hybrid article! :scared: I know that I've already posted the Riverside details on this thread a while back, so I'm under the impression that this is a new charge on title. When I get a chance I'll hand over the loot and verify myself :angel: And yes, it may have been sold and not registered yet.

 

[Arnie M]

MsSherlock .... thanks for the more accurate monthly rent amounts
You are correct about business owners personal property being protected from creditors of a "Limited Liability" company (such as MAir) ... for example if the company went bankrupt they could seize the assets of the corporation but not anything personally owned by WM (or DM) .... but here is the catch ... it is standard procedure for the charter banks to have a side contract and personal guarantee from WM for any bank loans .... in other words if the corporation went bankrupt WM must still honor his "personal guarantee" ... maybe even pledge an apartment block or something .... otherwise the banks will not lend the money . This is pretty standard within business-banking affairs. . I makes the owners have some skin and blood on the line rather than put all the risk on the bank ..... banks are not in the risk-taking business.

Swedie ... it is not so much robbing Peter to pay Paul .... look at it this way .... pretend you owned your home and it is worth $200k ..... you decide you want to borrow $100k to open a little cafe in the strip mall down the street so you apply for the loan at your bank .

Your banker will start shaking his head before you even finish your sentence .... you sigh and sag your shoulders in disappointment .... then the banker says ... however I can lend you $100k as a mortgage on your house and you can have the money this afternoon. That way the bank is secure regardless of whether your little cafe succeeds or not.

Same as WM needing money for his MRO .... he signs a personal guarantee and the banks have no worry or risk of being paid regardless of whether the MRO succeeds or fails.

 

[robynhood]

MsSherlock .... thanks for the more accurate monthly rent amounts
You are correct about business owners personal property being protected from creditors of a "Limited Liability" company (such as MAir) ... for example if the company went bankrupt they could seize the assets of the corporation but not anything personally owned by WM (or DM) .... but here is the catch ... it is standard procedure for the charter banks to have a side contract and personal guarantee from WM for any bank loans .... in other words if the corporation went bankrupt WM must still honor his "personal guarantee" ... maybe even pledge an apartment block or something .... otherwise the banks will not lend the money . This is pretty standard within business-banking affairs. . I makes the owners have some skin and blood on the line rather than put all the risk on the bank ..... banks are not in the risk-taking business.

Swedie ... it is not so much robbing Peter to pay Paul .... look at it this way .... pretend you owned your home and it is worth $200k ..... you decide you want to borrow $100k to open a little cafe in the strip mall down the street so you apply for the loan at your bank .

Your banker will start shaking his head before you even finish your sentence .... you sigh and sag your shoulders in disappointment .... then the banker says ... however I can lend you $100k as a mortgage on your house and you can have the money this afternoon. That way the bank is secure regardless of whether your little cafe succeeds or not.

Same as WM needing money for his MRO .... he signs a personal guarantee and the banks have no worry or risk of being paid regardless of whether the MRO succeeds or fails.

You are 100 percent correct..as a friend of mine discovered that her ex was NOT paying correct child support for TEN YEARS...he owed 75,000 in back rears as it went to the courts...it was awarded to my GF and there was a 40,000 RRSP that was shown....Unfortunately the DEAD beat dad forgot to say he had a loan and the royal bank seized it even tho she had a FRO case ( Family responsibility case...)! The Royal Bank NEVER admitted to their seizing her child support ...she got the reponse that it was JUST GONE...poof disappeared...FRO told her they would seize it but never admit it!...sad but TRUE story....robynhood....:scared:

 

[MsSherlock]

The farm at 2548 Roseville Rd has sold on February 28/14 for $840,000. New owners are All Exterior Improvement Inc.

 

[Sillybilly]

The farm at 2548 Roseville Rd has sold on February 28/14 for $840,000. New owners are All Exterior Improvement Inc.

LOL ... that's lot of exterior improvement to a barn?

 

[canadiangirl]

The farm at 2548 Roseville Rd has sold on February 28/14 for $840,000. New owners are All Exterior Improvement Inc.

I'm surprised they were allowed to sell it being a part of an ongoing investigation ...

 

[matou]

Maybe the sale what helped with the investigation. Maybe someone found something new. JMO

 

[hopingforjustice]

The farm at 2548 Roseville Rd has sold on February 28/14 for $840,000. New owners are All Exterior Improvement Inc.

That would explain all the cleaning up I have been seeing lately!
(I started noticing it and posted Feb 10)

Maybe the sale what helped with the investigation. Maybe someone found something new. JMO

That could make sense...or just plain and simple had already found all they needed and felt it was safe to sell. (provision may have been made in the sale that it was to remain untouched until trial was complete too--JMO)

This was my first time dual quoting..hope I did it right..Perhaps you can teach a old dog a new trick! hwow:

and as with all my posts...this is JMO

 

[flipflop]

LOL ... that's lot of exterior improvement to a barn?

it is a landscaping company

 

[Archangel7]

it is a landscaping company

Lol. Fitting considering all the fertilizer that has been spread concerning the theories on this case.:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[robynhood]

...but but but,,,,,,,,,,"Dellen millard is innocent "so they said...rolmao..fertilizer was very appropriate..JMHO..robynhood

 

[swedie]

Just heard on CTV tonight the farmland property sold privately at the end of February for $840,000.

The hangar is under MB's name and there are tenants who pay their rent on time. HTH.

 

[Pink Panther]

I'm surprised they were allowed to sell it being a part of an ongoing investigation ...

Was the property in DM's name? Or DM and his mother?

 

[MsSherlock]

Was the property in DM's name? Or DM and his mother?

The property was in DM's name- the sale may have been executed via a power of attorney. MOO

 

[SnooperDuper]

If DM is innocent then why is he liquidating all of his properties?

Is he trying to beat the crown to seizing them as proceeds of crime?

Was he buying properties with drug money?

 

[palisadesk]

If DM is innocent then why is he liquidating all of his properties?

He sold them to his mother nearly a year ago, for a token dollar amount, so he is not liquidating them now.

An innocent explanation could be:
(a) he foresaw a lengthy legal battle regardless of outcome, knew he would not be able to manage the properties or follow through on any plans he might have had for them, so he transferred them to his mother.
(b) his mother is not in a position to do property management, or hire employees to do it, or pay property taxes on them, so she has been selling them off one by one. She may be investing the money elsewhere for him or putting it in trust: we have no information on that score.

Or she may be using the proceeds to fund his defense, hire investigators, whatever.

DM does not appear to be wrongly accused, but if he is, he needs the money for lawyers even more. If he is in fact innocent, a la Morin or Truscott, it will take massive legal and detective resources to exculpate himself. In the light of that fact, liquidating assets is not by itself incriminating.

People who *are* innocent and wrongly accused can bankrupt themselves paying for lawyers. This happened to Morin's parents and they were awarded compensation because they exhausted their retirement savings and assets defending him.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Please check out this chart and let me know how to make it better!

The -$600k is the charge to demolish one of the YYZ hangars, and the $3.8M new mortgage, how do I fit that in the chart?

 

[SnooperDuper]

 

[Variant]

Quite a difference between the assessment and market value of the Riverside property, even allowing for the difference in years. I wish MPAC/Toronto were that low on my assessments - I've had to fight them several times for assessing too high.

 

[SnooperDuper]

Quite a difference between the assessment and market value of the Riverside property, even allowing for the difference in years. I wish MPAC/Toronto were that low on my assessments - I've had to fight them several times for assessing too high.

The assessed value I have there is at the time of the acquisition, I think it was put on the market for $4.1M and then taken off the market after the bank charged $3.8M on it for whatever reasons

Also the distillery condo sold for $710k...making an update...anything to add?