The SID CCAA Record

The CBC "Misappropriated" Article, and the Record

On June 14, 2024, three days after the Monitor filed its Fourth Report, CBC News published an article about Robert (Robby) Clark and the SID companies under the headline "Ontario landlords who owe investors $144M 'misappropriated' funds for 'extravagant' expenses: court report". The article's own subheading says the findings were disputed. This page sets its main statements beside the public record.

The short answer

The "court report" was the Monitor's report, not a finding of the court. It was unaudited, it was never tested by cross-examination, and no approval of it was sought. No court has found that Mr. Clark or the companies misappropriated funds.

Fourth Report of the Monitor, redacted (Jun 11, 2024), s.3.0 para 3; Endorsement of Justice Osborne (Jun 24, 2024), para 13; Endorsement of Justice Osborne (Jun 25, 2024), paras 2 and 8

What the article says, and what the record shows

What the article saysWhat the record shows
Its source is described in the headline as a "court report".The report is the Monitor's Fourth Report of June 11, 2024. It is a document the Monitor filed with the court, not a decision of the court. The report says it "appears" funds were "diverted, misused or misappropriated", and states that the Monitor "has not audited, or otherwise attempted to verify" the financial information. Ten days after the article, on June 24, 2024, the court held that the companies were entitled to cross-examine on the report. The matter was resolved on consent the next day. The report was never tested, and no approval of it was sought.Fourth Report of the Monitor, redacted (Jun 11, 2024), s.2.4 para 6, s.3.0 para 3; Endorsement of Justice Osborne (Jun 24, 2024), para 13; Endorsement of Justice Osborne (Jun 25, 2024), paras 2 and 8
As the business was failing, millions of dollars of investors' money went on extravagant expenses, including a vacation home in Hawaii and private jets.The Monitor's own figure is "in excess of $1 million", out of $69.7 million of disbursements it reviewed over five years. That review left out about $81.5 million of mortgage proceeds paid directly to real estate lawyers. Counting both, the figure is about two thirds of 1 per cent of the money that moved through the companies. The "private jets" item is a payment of $42,174.66 that the report describes as "a private jet rental". The report dates the jet rental and the luxury rentals to three weeks between December 29, 2021 and January 18, 2022, about four months before the companies closed a $75.85 million sale. It dates the Hawaii payments to April 4 and 7, 2022, a month before that sale closed, and it places the depletion of the sale proceeds "on or around November 2022". The article itself reports the companies' statement that the purchases related to company retreats and capital raising and were a small part of overall expenses. The percentage is this site's arithmetic.Fourth Report of the Monitor, redacted (Jun 11, 2024), s.2.1 para 3 and note 4, s.2.5 para 1, s.5.3.2 para 9 and s.5.3.5 paras 2 and 4; Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Exhibit O, items A.3 and A.12; CBC News, Jun 14, 2024
The landlords flaunted a lavish lifestyle throughout 2022.The article cites CBC's own report of February 2024 for this. That report dates its footage to 2021 and March 2022. In May 2022 the companies closed the sale of 223 homes for $75,850,443, which left $11.6 million for the sellers after the lenders were repaid. The February article, and the dates.CBC News, Feb 9, 2024; Fourth Report of the Monitor, redacted (Jun 11, 2024), s.4.5 para 1; Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Exhibit O, item A.12
The companies failed to pay back more than $144 million borrowed from investors.$144 million was the debt figure at filing: about $90.1 million of mortgages and $54.2 million of promissory notes. The Monitor's own pre-filing report put the estimated appraised value of the homes at about $173 million. The Monitor later described the $54.2 million as "the amount initially provided by Ms. Drage", the broker, and reported that a reconciliation "has not been completed". The companies' own reconciliation puts the promissory note debt at about $22.06 million.Third Report of the Monitor (Apr 2024), s.2.0; Pre-Filing Report of the Proposed Monitor (Jan 2024), s.2.0 paras 3 to 4; Eleventh Report of the Monitor (Feb 20, 2025), s.2 para 3; Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Clark affidavit para 21(h)
More than $21 million was transferred to personal accounts, credit cards and unrelated corporations, including close to $1 million by Mr. Clark.The Monitor's own table puts gross payments to all related parties at $20,287,708. Of that, $14,107,854 went to related companies, not to personal accounts, and $6,861,071 came back, leaving a net figure of $13,426,637. Its line for Mr. Clark shows $959,435 paid and $163,917 received back, a net of $795,518 over five years. The companies' evidence is that about $4.4 million of the roughly $6 million paid to the four principals reimbursed business expenses charged to personal cards, a practice that continued under the Monitor's oversight without objection. The Monitor's report accepts that purchases at Home Depot and from contractors "may be legitimate business expenses". The article itself reports the companies' statement that the vast majority of the payments were reimbursements for business expenses such as renovations and utilities.Fourth Report of the Monitor, redacted (Jun 11, 2024), s.2.5 paras 1 and 2, s.5.2 para 6 and Appendix 2; Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Exhibit O, items A.1, A.3, A.4 and A.5; CBC News, Jun 14, 2024
Investors believed their money was going to a specific property, and more than $12 million moved between corporations without their knowledge.The companies' sworn evidence is that the applicants "operate collectively as an integrated company", that the notes carried no restrictions on the use of funds, and that the companies did not deal with the lenders directly: the broker's firms prepared the notes and the marketing.Application Record, Vol. 1, including the first affidavit of Robert Clark (Jan 23, 2024), first affidavit para 17; Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Clark affidavit para 72(b)(i) and (v); Factum of the Applicants (Jun 23, 2024), para 5
The broker's investor presentations were found to be misleading, and did not convey the amount of debt.The presentations were the broker's. In December 2025 the Ontario Securities Commission settlement recorded that her statements to investors were "false and misleading" and that the borrowers "had little to no communication with the Investors". Shown one of the broker's investor documents by the Monitor's counsel on April 26, 2024, a director answered: "I have never personally seen this document". No borrower was a respondent in the regulator's proceeding.OSC Settlement Agreement, Claire Drage et al. (Dec 16, 2025), paras 17, 39 and 52; Monitor's Brief of Documents to the Fourth Report, Vol. 2 (Jul 5, 2024), including the interview transcript of a second director (Apr 26, 2024), transcript qq. 174 and 193
The broker said she did not know how the loans were being used.In December 2025 the broker admitted to fraud in a settlement with the Ontario Securities Commission. The Capital Markets Tribunal found that "Drage committed a large-scale fraud". In March 2026 Ontario's financial services regulator imposed $600,000 in penalties.OSC Settlement Agreement, Claire Drage et al. (Dec 16, 2025), para 52; Capital Markets Tribunal reasons, 2026 ONCMT 1 (Jan 16, 2026), para 8; FSRA announcement: $600,000 penalties (Mar 2026)
Loans were renewed on a property that had been sold and on one that had burned down.The companies' response is that these were renewals of existing notes, prepared by the broker's firm and sent for signature, that they produced no new money, and that the broker's firm had been told of the fire and had access to a live record of property sales.Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Exhibit O, items B.8 and B.9

What happened after the article

The companies send the Monitor a letter identifying more than 30 issues with the report and ask for a revised report. Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Clark affidavit para 70, Exhibit O

The companies file sworn evidence in response. Motion Record of the Applicants (Jun 20, 2024), including the affidavit of Robert Clark, Clark affidavit para 72

The Monitor files a supplement. It records that a draft of the Fourth Report "was not provided to any party (including the Applicants) prior to it being filed with the Court". It acknowledges additional materials and clarifications and says they "do not change the principal conclusions" of the report. Supplement to the Fifth Report (Jun 23, 2024), s.2.0 paras 1 and 2

The court holds that the companies are entitled to cross-examine on the report. Endorsement of Justice Osborne (Jun 24, 2024), para 13

The motions are resolved on consent without a contested hearing. No approval of the Fourth Report is sought. Endorsement of Justice Osborne (Jun 25, 2024), paras 2 and 8

The broker who raised the investor money admits to fraud before the Ontario Securities Commission. OSC Settlement Agreement, Claire Drage et al. (Dec 16, 2025), para 52

What was reported, and what the record shows · The June 2024 report · Item by item response · Questions and answers

What cuts the other way