When FTI Consulting Canada Inc. was appointed over Maskeen (Carvolth) Limited Partnership on January 8, 2026, the whole of the estate was an empty field with somebody else's construction equipment parked on it. The receiver's first report sets the asset down without ornament: the company's sole beneficial ownership of undeveloped real property at 20120 86th Avenue in Langley, held in bare trust by Carvolth 86th Avenue Lands Ltd., which on the receivership date was being used by a local developer, Tannin Developments Ltd., as a staging area for the project it was putting up next door, at $6,000 a month plus taxes, per First Report of the Receiver, Aug. 18, 2026, paras. 1–3. Against that field, National Bank of Canada was owed $11,036,164.92 as at August 19, 2025, accruing at $1,943.84 a day, per Petition to the Court, filed Aug. 27, 2025, para. 7.
On August 25, 2026, Madam Justice Fitzpatrick of the Supreme Court of British Columbia approved the sale of that field for $6,400,000, vested it in a numbered company clear of the bank's mortgage, directed the net proceeds to the bank, and discharged the receiver. Both orders were pronounced and entered the same day. The afternoon before, the borrowers had asked her to let them redeem instead.
An interim land loan, and three extensions
The purpose of the loan is stated in the petition in a single line — refinancing in relation to a high-rise project at the property. The bank advanced $10,400,000 on September 8, 2022 as an interim land loan, raised it to $11,000,000 by amending agreements in August and September 2023, and took a mortgage with assignment of rents registered in the New Westminster Land Title Office on September 29, 2022, together with guarantees from Maskeen Homes Ltd. and Maskeen Development Ltd. and from two individuals, Jagdip Singh Sivia and Jatinderpal Singh Gill, per Affidavit #1 of J. Lugo, sworn Aug. 25, 2025, paras. 8, 11, 16.
Repayment was due within eighteen months of drawdown. The borrower asked for and received three extensions — May 9, 2024, August 28, 2024, and January 28, 2025 — the last fixing the outside date at March 31, 2025, per Affidavit #1 of J. Lugo, sworn Aug. 25, 2025, para. 9. That date passed with the principal untouched.
The first affidavit of Julio Lugo, a senior director in the bank's special loans group, sets out what came next. Interest for May, June and July 2025 went unpaid when due and was caught up months late; the annual financial statements never arrived; the 2025 property taxes went unpaid, a default the bank's counsel established only by checking the tax roll independently after asking the borrower's counsel twice and receiving no answer. Omissions of that kind, Lugo deposes, raised additional concerns that the borrower was obscuring or failing to be forthcoming about defaults or other information required under the loan agreement, per Affidavit #1 of J. Lugo, sworn Aug. 25, 2025, paras. 24–26, 31.
Between the demand letter of July 15, 2025 and the petition, the borrower's chief financial officer, Amrinder Cheema, wrote to Lugo. The exchange is Exhibit B:
Following up on our call on Monday, I'm looking to pay down your loan by $1.5 million by the end of September and work towards full repayment before the end of the year. This is likely the best-case scenario for us, given the challenges we are facing from lenders across Canada. It is no longer a housing crisis; it is an economic meltdown with minimal capital available.
Cheema asked that the bank hold off on legal proceedings, which "could jeopardize our other business loans in an already challenging real estate market." Lugo replied the following afternoon asking where the money would come from, and for supporting documentation — "lender term sheets, sale agreements, or other verifiable sources for the proposed plan." Ten minutes later Cheema undertook to follow up with a detailed plan the next week. The affidavit records that on multiple occasions the borrower indicated repayment or financing proposals were forthcoming, and that none were received, per Affidavit #1 of J. Lugo, sworn Aug. 25, 2025, para. 30, Ex. B.
The petition was filed on August 27, 2025 and adjourned that October. Justice Fitzpatrick appointed FTI receiver and manager, without security, by consent, on January 8, 2026, with a receiver's charge ranking ahead of all other security and authority to borrow up to $250,000, per Receivership Order, Jan. 8, 2026, paras. 1, 20, 23.
A database of 1,362, and one formal offer
The receiver ran a request for proposals among three agents and, in consultation with the bank, engaged Avison Young Commercial Real Estate (B.C.) Inc. — for its experience in the Carvolth area and the Willoughby neighbourhood, its competitive commission, and its approach to the Township of Langley's ongoing community planning, which could affect the rezoning and the buildable area. The property was listed on or about April 24, 2026 at $7,000,000, per First Report of the Receiver, Aug. 18, 2026, paras. 13–15.
A launch email went to a database of 1,362 local developers and investors and was opened by 30% of them, of whom 7% clicked; there was a LinkedIn post, two rounds of telephone canvassing, and advertisements in the June and July editions of the Western Investor. Thirteen parties signed confidentiality agreements and entered the data room. Two of them expressed interest at $3 million and $5.5 million and never made a formal offer. One formal offer arrived, per First Report of the Receiver, Aug. 18, 2026, paras. 16–17.
That offer came on June 17, 2026, with a subject removal date of July 15. The day before its own deadline, the purchaser proposed a reduced price on the strength of its due diligence. The receiver let the offer expire rather than accept the cut, negotiated a revised deal closer to the original number, and delivered a counter-offer on July 16 which the purchaser accepted the same day, per First Report of the Receiver, Aug. 18, 2026, para. 18. The resulting agreement with 1489190 B.C. Ltd. carries a purchase price of $6,400,000 and a deposit of $640,000 held by the purchaser's solicitor, is conditional on court approval, and lets the purchaser walk if approval is not obtained within 45 days of July 16, per First Report of the Receiver, Aug. 18, 2026, para. 19. Forty-five days from July 16 is August 30. The hearing was on the twenty-fifth.
The number the report does not carry
Among the receiver's listed activities is one that sits oddly beside everything that followed: it commissioned an appraisal report from Avison Young Valuation & Advisory Services, LP, and the interim statement of receipts and disbursements records appraisal fees among its costs, in a table stated in thousands, per First Report of the Receiver, Aug. 18, 2026, paras. 12(o), 21. What the appraiser concluded is not in the report. No opinion of value appears anywhere in it, and the report does not describe any part of itself as sealed or filed confidentially. The receiver's assessment rests on other grounds: that the process was fair and transparent, that the agreement represents the highest and best price offered, and that the sale is supported by the bank as primary secured creditor, per First Report of the Receiver, Aug. 18, 2026, para. 20.
Continue reading
The rest of this analysis is for subscribers. Every fact in it cites the filing it was read from.
Subscribe