Jump to content

      













Photo
- - - - -

Traveller's Inn bankruptcy


  • Please log in to reply
468 replies to this topic

#61 DockDancer

DockDancer
  • Member
  • 4 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 11:58 AM

It only takes ADP two days to fix new banking information once you send it to them. Providing you do send the CORRECT information. Since ADP requires your correct LEGAL COMPANY NAME, and if its different than what company is producing the cheque, it could be a hassle for ADP to do your payroll. I've heard that this is the case too, since one of my cheques was a manual back in April as well!

But yes, if you change bank accounts twice a year it creates a big hassle for all parties involved.

I sure hope that employees find a job that can pay them on a regular basis.

#62 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 01:22 PM

If an employee leave because of this, is it a sufficient special circumstance that they will qualify for EI? Normally if you leave a job voluntarily, you do not qualify, but if you aren't getting paid properly, and staying on because you feel you will get nothing if you leave, it seems like a lousy situation to be in.

#63 Bob Fugger

Bob Fugger

    Chief Factor

  • Member
  • 3,176 posts
  • LocationSouth Central CSV

Posted 09 July 2009 - 02:17 PM

If an employee leave because of this, is it a sufficient special circumstance that they will qualify for EI? Normally if you leave a job voluntarily, you do not qualify, but if you aren't getting paid properly, and staying on because you feel you will get nothing if you leave, it seems like a lousy situation to be in.


While 95% of folks who 'quit' or leave a job 'voluntarily', they are SOL when it comes to EI benefits. Same with being fired. But it's not a hard and fast rule. I've found in the recent past that HRDC is actually quite reasonable when it comes to cases like this. Given the media coverage and the pile of complaints at Employment Standards, the case for EI benefits shouldn't be too hard to make.

#64 Jill

Jill
  • Member
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 04:30 PM

The government seems to change the rules regarding EI whenever it suits them, but I've known of people who have been able to quit jobs and collect EI because they convinced HRDC (or whatever it's called these days) that they left under duress or were experiencing such significant personal stress that they could no longer perform their job effectively.

#65 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 11,546 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 06:55 PM

If you quit work because you haven't been paid for a month then you will not have a problem collecting EI. Call Service Canada in advance and state you case and they will let you know the process to follow.

#66 Jill

Jill
  • Member
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 07:08 PM

Quote from today's TC article:

"Asfar said this week that he has made a number of attempts to settle the matter and make payments but has repeatedly been rebuffed."

Because when you owe money to the CRA, the last thing they want you to do is to pay them.

#67 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 11,546 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 08:27 PM

Quote from today's TC article:

"Asfar said this week that he has made a number of attempts to settle the matter and make payments but has repeatedly been rebuffed."

Because when you owe money to the CRA, the last thing they want you to do is to pay them.


Based on my own experience with people who owe me money, "settling the matter" most often means offering 50% (or less) on the dollar and calling it a day.

In cases where a business owes the CRA GST they really have no choice in how to respond. The money was collected on behalf of the federal Government and 100% of the funds collected are due.

#68 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 09:01 PM

Most paycheques cleared today from what I understand. But natural gas service and cable TV was cut off to two hotels.

#69 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 09 July 2009 - 09:02 PM

Mi

#70 Jill

Jill
  • Member
  • 1,039 posts

Posted 10 July 2009 - 07:49 AM

Based on my own experience with people who owe me money, "settling the matter" most often means offering 50% (or less) on the dollar and calling it a day.

In cases where a business owes the CRA GST they really have no choice in how to respond. The money was collected on behalf of the federal Government and 100% of the funds collected are due.


Exactly. Here is Asfar presenting himself as the poor victim of this heartless government agency, and the TC not bothering to extract the key information that he was able to collect 100 percent of the GST from his customers but hoping to get away with passing only a fraction of that on to the government. Kind of like him making CRA out to be the ones making his employees suffer, when I've heard for years that paycheques bounced and staff find that their EI and income tax were deducted but not paid.

I've no doubt that CRA can be extremely unpleasant to deal with and treats everyone like a crook. But sometimes they get it right.

#71 Bob Fugger

Bob Fugger

    Chief Factor

  • Member
  • 3,176 posts
  • LocationSouth Central CSV

Posted 10 July 2009 - 07:52 AM

Exactly. Here is Asfar presenting himself as the poor victim of this heartless government agency, and the TC not bothering to extract the key information that he was able to collect 100 percent of the GST from his customers but hoping to get away with passing only a fraction of that on to the government. Kind of like him making CRA out to be the ones making his employees suffer, when I've heard for years that paycheques bounced and staff find that their EI and income tax were deducted but not paid.

I've no doubt that CRA can be extremely unpleasant to deal with and treats everyone like a crook. But sometimes they get it right.


I wonder if Asfar is using the same lawyer as Catalyst Paper?

#72 rjag

rjag
  • Member
  • 5,179 posts
  • LocationSi vis pacem para bellum

Posted 10 July 2009 - 08:41 AM

This is strangely similar to another hotelier/nightclub owner in town, paycheques bouncing, trades not being paid, unpaid property taxes etc and yet somehow managing to stay in business for a long time.

Karma gods caught up to him and it sounds like the Karma gods are catching up to this one as well

#73 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan
  • Suspended User
  • 52,121 posts

Posted 10 July 2009 - 08:44 AM

This is strangely similar to another hotelier/nightclub owner in town, paycheques bouncing, trades not being paid, unpaid property taxes etc and yet somehow managing to stay in business for a long time.

Karma gods caught up to him and it sounds like the Karma gods are catching up to this one as well


Just let it be known John Asfar does not own any food and beverage operations in any of his hotels, except Cowichan Bay. So he is a hotelier, but not a nightclub or restaurant owner.

#74 spanky123

spanky123
  • Member
  • 11,546 posts

Posted 10 July 2009 - 03:17 PM

Bottom line is that this is more than a "flesh wound" for Mr. Asfar. In the past (I am told) creditors went to John's father and he bailed out his son. I suspect that this time may be a little different.

I have no axe to grind with John but I know many people who have claimed that they have been treated unfairly in business with him. I imagine that he does not have many friends to turn to.

#75 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 49,811 posts

Posted 10 July 2009 - 03:23 PM

This is strangely similar to another hotelier/nightclub owner in town, paycheques bouncing, trades not being paid, unpaid property taxes etc and yet somehow managing to stay in business for a long time.

Karma gods caught up to him and it sounds like the Karma gods are catching up to this one as well


Are you referring to the owner of Boom Boom Room?

Know it all.
Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.


#76 martini

martini
  • Member
  • 2,485 posts

Posted 11 July 2009 - 12:14 PM

http://www.timescolo...1814/story.html

Traveller's faces Monday deadline

City hotel chain trustee says cash flow must be analyzed

By Carla Wilson, Times Colonist
July 11, 2009



The trustee for the Victoria-based Traveller's Inn chain says he will know next week if there's enough cash flow to keep operating while a proposal to creditors is being developed.

The end of day Monday is the deadline for filing that information with the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada, Ken Glover of Glover-Drennan in Victoria said yesterday.

Traveller's Inn group is made up of 21 companies. Glover is in the process of examining those companies' cash flow to see if the group can continue operating without incurring further debt.

If so, a proposal will go to creditors for a vote at a date not yet set. The amount owed to creditors is not yet known, Glover said.

On July 3, the companies filed an intention to make a proposal to creditors, he said. Those intentions were submitted to the Superintendent of Bankruptcy's office.

Traveller's Inn is a local chain of hotels and motels owned and operated by John Asfar. Its blue-and-white signs are visible in several locations in Victoria, including a number on Douglas Street.

A dispute between the Traveller's Inn group and Canada Revenue Agency saw the federal body garnishee company accounts, including those used for staff paycheques. As a result, Asfar said, he lost employees.

Asfar said he has been unsuccessful in attempts to resolve the dispute with the agency. Canada Revenue Agency does not comment on individual cases.

Glover said the federal agency has lifted its garnishees on payroll accounts and cash flow from hotels. The agency continues to garnishee residential property rents, and rents from longer-term regular stays at the hotel-motel chain, he said.

cjwilson@tc.canwest.com
© Copyright © The Victoria Times Colonist

#77 VicDuck

VicDuck

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 409 posts

Posted 11 July 2009 - 10:47 PM

Just tare the place down and build a hotel/condo project with ground floor retail once the market turns around.

#78 aastra

aastra
  • Member
  • 14,793 posts

Posted 11 July 2009 - 11:11 PM

Which one?

#79 VicDuck

VicDuck

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 409 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 07:10 AM

The one on Douglas.

#80 G-Man

G-Man

    Senior Case Officer

  • Moderator
  • 12,783 posts

Posted 12 July 2009 - 07:17 AM

which one?

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users