Defendant’s Payment Terms Outright Rejected and Debtor Ordered to Pay Full Debt Immediately. The Defendant in this Small Claims Court action got a rude awakening when they thought their proposed payment terms ($500 per month) would be accepted as a matter of right. The presiding judge ruled that proposed payment terms in general are just that – proposals, and not binding on the parties or the court. In this instance, after hearing evidence from both sides during this Terms of Payment Hearing under Rule 9.03 of the Rules of the Small Claims Court, O. Reg 258/98., the court ruled that the only “just” result was for the Defendant to pay the entire amount in one lump sum. The Defendant did not satisfy the presiding judge that they were impecunious, and unable to pay the full amount.
Conley v Cochrane, 2022 CanLII 1999
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onscsm/doc/2022/2022canlii1999/2022canlii1999.html