What if Receiver comes in on Sask Pool

[TOM4CWB]

Larry;

Some people snow board, I wheat board!

I had a long night last night, fax fired up, it did the trick too!

Here are some of the CONDO arguments with respect to SWP/Agpro virtual condos:

Farmers do not have any “farmer owned storage” at Agpro. they simply, by paying a sum of money, bought the right to over deliver CWB grains to the Agent, as allowed by Section 24.(3) of the CWB Act. The CWB gave permission and allowed this delivery.

24.(3) The Corporation may, by order, exempt deliveries of grain to an elevator from the requirements of any of paragraphs (1)(a), (c) and (e), but only to the extent that the elevator is owned or leased by a producer.

I note that the CWB Act applies to my SWP/Agpro condo deliveries, that the CWB “MAY” exempt my deliveries from (1)(a),(c) and (e);

Therefore inherent in this clause is the admission that CWB authority over this wheat exists, because....

an exemption would not be required from the CWB.... for which originating CWB Act authority and responsibility did not exist in the first place.

Therefore the CWB gave permission for me to deliver my CWB Wheat in the first event.

Next, Section 112 of the Canada Grain Act protects Condo Primary Elevator Grain Receipts:

CGC Act Section "112. Notwithstanding anything in the Bank Act, no charge on or interest in grain referred to in an elevator receipt that affects the interest of the holder of the receipt may be created by the holder, or by the operator of a licensed elevator who issued the receipt, other than by the endorsement or delivery of the receipt to the person in whose favour the charge or interest is created."

Therefore SWP/Apro have no legal right to put any lien against my Condo stored grain, without my written consent.

With CWB grain, it is even harder for anyone but the farmer who grew the grain originally, or in the second case, the CWB, to own... CWB statutory grades of grain.

#1 and 2CWRS, for instance are only allowed by the CWB Act to be sold to the CWB itself.

Agpro gave me this legal advice, and I may as well pass it along:

"Board Grains

SWP/(AGPRO) does not acquire title of CWB grains when they are delivered to our facility. As a result, SWP's creditors could not claim a security interest in CWB grains even if they are delivered in condo as long as the bin
contains only CWB grains. When grain is delivered on condo it should be designated as board or non-board on the receipt, so it should be a simple
process to determine ownership.

Therefore the board grain condo holders do not have a security issue with SWP's creditors in the event of a filing as
long as the bin contains only board grains."

I actually went and had my grain receipts endorsed with "Canadian Wheat Board Grain" and initialed by the elevator manager.. because Agpro grain receipts don't have CWB grain on them any where.

Hope this helps someone... seek your lawyers advice... if you have any concerns at all!

TRJ

[TOM4CWB]

January 31st, February 01st will be a long long day.

The meeting is not until one oclock

[wedino]

Looks as if it's all over but for the crying!!

SaskPool restructuring plan appears headed for defeat


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Advertisement


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By PATRICK BRETHOUR
Friday, January 31, 2003

Calgary — Saskatchewan Wheat Pool's plan to restructure its debt and stave off a cash crunch appears headed for defeat Friday.

That would push the co-operative to the brink of receivership, imperilling a Saskatchewan institution that has served — and been owned by — Prairie farmers since 1924. Canada's second-largest grain company, SaskPool is also the largest single corporate employer in Saskatchewan, with 1,565 workers as of the end of July, 2002.

A committee representing more than 42 per cent of the holders of medium-term notes says it will vote against the restructuring proposal in a meeting scheduled Friday in Regina.

It's a scenario that SaskPool says would leave it in default of its bank credit agreements, would cut it off from further loans and might even push it into insolvency proceedings.

SaskPool's losses have soared over the past two years as back-to-back droughts cut its revenue sharply and hampered its ability to service its debt.

The Regina-based company has been in technical default on its bank loans for much of January, but the co-operative's bankers said they would not take any action so long as the restructuring proposal was approved Friday. SaskPool also missed an interest payment on $300-million of medium-term notes on Jan. 18.

"We would have had to use the banks' money," spokeswoman Dawn Blaus said.

The company has until Feb. 18 to pay the interest, but it will need fresh financing to do so. SaskPool's plan to restructure its debt would deal with the outstanding interest, among other things.

Under that plan, the $300-million in existing medium-term notes would be replaced by an equal amount of new securities, but with a longer period to expiration. In addition, nine million warrants to purchase SaskPool class B shares would be issued to noteholders.

But the committee of dissident medium-term noteholders opposes the plan, partly because it ranks some bank debt ahead of their securities in the event the company becomes insolvent, said Robert Chadwick, a partner at Goodmans LLP in Toronto, which is representing the committee.

Other items of contention include the amount of interest paid on the new notes and SaskPool's power to convert the new securities into equity in 2008 without the noteholders' consent.

Since the proposal requires two-thirds approval, the noteholders represented by the committee have enough voting clout to defeat the measure, a move that could push SaskPool into receivership.

Mr. Chadwick declined to comment on the likelihood of SaskPool seeking protection from creditors, but he said the committee of noteholders wants to reach a "consensual agreement" with the company so it can continue operations. "We want the pool to be successful," he said.

An analyst at Standard & Poor's Corp. in Toronto said SaskPool will likely be forced to seek court protection, and to sell off some of its assets, if the restructuring proposal is defeated Friday. "I don't know if it could continue to operate," said Don Povilaitis, S&P's director of corporate ratings.


© The Globe and Mail