If you do not meet the conditions of an indulgence agreement, you can lead to bankruptcy, litigation or both, so you need to take the time to check whether the conditions your lender wants to impose on you are fair and realistic. For example, if your bank wants you to sell one of your properties, does the leniency period give you enough time to find buyers who have to pay a fair price or extend the leniency period? Some lawyers distinguish between “indulgence agreements” and so-called “status quo” agreements. In this context, leniency is an agreement not to impose debt claims, while the lender, if it intends to impose immediate security upon the expiry or cancellation of the contract, is declared on pause. Most current authorities no longer make this distinction and whether or not the agreement refrains from imposing requirements during the agreed period to enforce safety is considered a tolerance agreement.  In this bankruptcy and insolvency document- 2016, the authors outline both terms and issues of consideration for leniency agreements and guarantees. Once the lender and debtor have achieved a mutually acceptable plan or approach, the more specific terms of leniency can be addressed. While the nature and extent of the terms of leniency can only be limited by the imagination of the parties, most agreements understand that perhaps the first question should be whether or not an leniency agreement is appropriate in the present circumstances. If, in principle, the debtor is in good health and needs only time to resume acceptable business activities, the lender should consider amending existing loan contracts. If the objective is to “start” the client and his prospects of setting up a replacement lender, a single notice of transfer may be required. However, in the event of materialized failures, appropriate leniency conditions must be formalized. In accordance with an assignment with a bond dated December 2, 2011, the Bank of Montreal transferred to Callidus all its rights, securities and shares in and on certain direct and indirect debts and obligations owed to it by Cheese Factory, as well as certain guarantees. Callidus` total debt was approximately $3.5 million. Under a Leniency Agreement of December 2, 2011 (“the Leniency Agreement”), Callidus agreed to refrain from applying the BMO agreements, subject to the terms of the leniency agreement.
In accordance with the leniency agreement, Callidus also agreed to extend certain on-demand credit facilities to Cheese Factory (and other debtors), which changes the credit facilities granted by BMO. The transition from potato farming to carrot farming proved catastrophic: Orville lost its crop and had no crop insurance. The Credit Union has issued its statements of intent on the implementation of security, the parties went through farm debt mediation without success. Finally, the Credit Union and the Lewis Company entered into a leniency agreement and Ms. Ella Lewis received independent legal advice prior to executing the documents.