Rethink Campaigns

Defamation Claim DISMISSED

Good news!

The defamation claim brought against me, the author of this blog, has been dismissed following a court hearing in Vancouver on May 13 & 14, 2024. To read the reasons for judgement by Justice Kevin Loo, click here.

This goes back almost three years to when Scott Cousens, a Vancouver business person, filed a defamation claim against me because of a series of letters that I wrote to the City of Burnaby. My letters warned the City to do more due diligence before paying $26 million to Fortius Foundation, a charity of which Cousens claims to be the founder.

Fortius Foundation built and owned Fortius Sport & Health Centre until it was sold to the City of Burnaby for $26 million in the spring of 2021. It has since been renamed The Christine Sinclair Community Centre.

My main concerns with regards to Cousens and Fortius are:

1) Cousens claimed that he made a $23 million gift to build the sports centre but when one looks as a whole at all the transactions involved, there was no $23 million gift. Instead, there was a loan, not a true gift.

2) Fortius received a "gift" of $74 million from Charitable Impact Foundation ("CHIMP") but the $74 million just went in circles and back to CHIMP via Fortius and other charities, all run by the same people. Again, the $74 million was not a true gift. This concerns me because when that $74 million "gift" was reported in CHIMP's tax returns, it was the single largest in B.C. history, and one of the largest in Canadian history.

Unbeknownst to me at the time, when Cousens sued me, he had been just been informed that CRA intended to revoke the charitable status of Foundation Foundation. Not only that, CRA warned Cousens that Fortius could be assessed a penalty of nearly $13 million.

According to a CRA audit report, Fortius and Cousens' for-profit business, Fortius Institute, had an unwritten expense sharing agreement. Payroll-related expenses at the business were being paid via the charity.

CRA also found that Fortius Foundation "leased" the sports centre to Cousens' for-profit business, Fortius Institute, but failed to collect any rent owed. The outstanding amount over seven years was $21 million, according to financial statements.

Blaming me for having motivated CRA to audit and revoke the charitable status of Fortius Foundation, Cousens applied to the Federal Court of Appeal for an injunction against CRA. His application was dismissed. He then applied to the Supreme Court of Canada and was again dismissed. Despite his charity having been revoked, and despite having lost in both the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada, Cousens pursued legal action against me for nearly three years. In response, I retained Dan Burnett, K.C. at Owen Bird Law Corp. and filed a motion for dismissal under the Protection of Public Participation Act. After two postponements, my motion was finally heard by Justice Kevin Loo.  

For my dismissal motion to succeed in court, I needed to show that the comments about which I am being sued are a matter of public interest. I succeeded.

Justice Loo wrote, "I am of the view that it is in the public interest to consider whether someone is illegitimately taking funds from the public purse. Further, I note that the Letters were all published in the context of the sale of the Fortius Centre to the City. In my view, it is in the public interest to know whether an asset sold by a charitable foundation to a municipality for $25.8 million was funded by charitable donations or otherwise. Finally, it is in the public interest to know whether a person has legitimately taken public credit for a donation to build a recreational facility for the community."

The $23 Million

With regards to Scott Cousens' alleged $23 million gift, Justice Loo wrote:

“Mr. Cousens concedes that he did not donate the funds used to build the Fortius Centre directly to Fortius, but he asserts that he chose to structure his contribution to the Fortius Centre as loans from NDF (New Dimensions Foundation) and Imladris for ‘a variety of valid reasons.’

In my view, whether Mr. Cousens arranged this transaction for ‘valid reasons’ is not the point, at least with respect to justifying this particular defamatory statement. The point is that in public materials, Mr. Cousens stated that he made a $23 million donation 'to create' the Fortius Centre, and this statement appears to have been untrue based on the admitted facts.”

The $74 Million

With regards to the $74 million transaction between CHIMP and Fortius, Justice Loo wrote:

“In particular, CHIMP – a charity created by Mr. Bromley – made a gift of $74.7 million to Fortius, which in turn used the money to repay debts it owed to five different Bromley-created charities, including the debt to Imladris (which became $29 million with interest). But then all five of those charities made gifts back to CHIMP in the same or slightly greater amounts.”

Justice Loo concluded, “While it is beyond the scope of this application to make any conclusive findings regarding whether these transactions occurred as Ms. Krause alleges, or whether the transactions had some legitimate purpose, I note that Mr. Cousens does not appear to deny the basic facts underlying Ms. Krause’s allegations.”

This case is important because it raises troubling questions about CRA oversight. What does it say about CRA that some of the largest so-called "gifts" in Canadian history were not true gift? Furthermore, the so-called $74 million "gift" was made six years ago. Why is it taking CRA so long to audit and address this? Its not as if CRA isn't aware. It has been more than three years since I first wrote to CRA about this.

To read the reasons for judgement of Justice Kevin Lee, click here.

Quick Links to Recent Posts

Quest University

1. The Sabotage of Quest University: An Overview
2. How CRA Kept Quest In The Dark 21 Years
3. Letters to Blake Bromley, Stewart Blusson & Others
4. "No Desire to Revive Quest University," Stewart & Marilyn Blusson
5. Letter to Quest Alumni & Friends, September 14, 2023
6. Red Flags: The Case for Legal Counsel Regarding Quest
7. Letters to Ian Worland
8. The Bromley Charities: Tax Returns, Financial Statements & Other Documents
9. 19 Bromley Charities Revoked by CRA Since July 2022: CRA Audit Reports
10. CRA Audit of Eden Glen Foundation: Stewart Blusson's Ownership of Lot 12
11. Quest Alumni Urge Immediate Pause in Capilano University to Purchase of Quest
12. CHIMP Paid $79 Million to Business of Charity's President & Father (2011-2023)

Litigation Against Vivian Krause & Motion for Dismissal

1. Why Vivian Krause Is Being Sued - And Filed for Dismissal
2. Fortius Foundation: Revoked by CRA
3. Scott Cousens Defeated in Federal Court of Appeal
4. Tax-Receipted, Large NON-CASH Gifts: A Call for Audit, Starting With CHIMP
5. Legal Action Against Vivian Krause: Request for Dismissal (SLAPP)
6. Vivian Krause Affidavits #2 & #3 November 16, 2023 & January 15, 2023

CHIMP Paid $79 Million to Business of Charity's President & Father (2011-2023)

Charitable Impact Foundation, known as "CHIMP" claims that it is the "fastest growing" giving network in Canada. CHIMP says that 197,000 people have used CHIMP's website to donate $1.4 billion to 14,000 charities. If CHIMP truly has funded a billion dollars worth of charity, that's fantastic! The problem is, CHIMP has more red flags than a Chinese military parade. This post is about on of these red flags, the payments that CHIMP has made for a total of $79 million paid to a private company run by CHIMP's president and his father.

Since CHIMP began, CHIMP has been paying a private company called Chimp Technology Inc. ("Chimp Tech") to provide CHIMP with technology, human resources and business services. The striking thing about CHIMP's payments to Chimp Tech is how they have soared, as follows:

2011 $           50,522

2012 $          81,429
2013 $        158,540
2014 $         681,701
2015 $      2,573,169
2016 $      3,573,722
2017 $      3,484,139
2018 $    12,773,997
2019 $     7,202,359
2020 $   10,118,606
2021 $    13,641,648
2022 $   13,632,500
2023 $    11,640,965
Total $ 79,613,297

The second thing to note is that Chimp Technology Inc. is a for-profit company run by John Bromley and Blake Bromley. John Bromley is CHIMP's CEO. Blake Bromley is John's father. This means is that CHIMP has paid $79 million to a for-profit company run by the charity's president and his dad. This is unusual and warrants explanation.

Lets be clear: There's nothing wrong with a charity paying for services from a private company. What's important is that the services are paid for at fair market value.

The third thing that is troubling here is the unexplained origin of the $79 million.

The main service that CHIMP provides is a website that enables donations to any charity in Canada. CHIMP says that this service is "free" to use.

Obviously, CHIMP didn't generate $79 million by providing a "free" service.

On securities and charitable investments, CHIMP charges a fee of 0.5%. Even if CHIMP had charged 0.5% on the entire $886 Million that CHIMP has reported as tax-receipted donations since CHIMP began, that's only $4 million, not $79 million.

So where did CHIMP get the $79 million? 

In a long series of lettrs, John Bromley and Blake Bromley have been asked about the origin of the funds that CHIMP pays to their private company and other questions. A year ago, I wrote to John Bromley specifically about CHIMP's payments to Chimp Tech. No reply. At that point, CHIMP had paid $68 million to CHIMP Tech. Add in last year's payments and the total is now $79 million.

In the absence of any explanation from the Bromley's, I wrote to CRA, requesting a CRA audit.

The Sabotage of Quest University: OVERVIEW

Academic Success

Located in Squamish, B.C., the now defunct Quest university (“Quest”) was Canada’s first, independent university, similar to the Liberal Arts colleges across the U.S.

Quest began as a legacy project of the late Dr. David Strangway, a geophysicist who was referred to affectionately as "the moon rocks guy" because of his role in research on the surface of the moon. Strangway was the Chief Geophysicist at NASA, responsible for the Apollo 17 Missions that put men on the moon. Strangway is also a former president of both the University of Toronto and UBC.

As part of his legacy, Strangway wanted to create a new, alternative type of university that specialized in top calibre, undergraduate education. In this regard, Quest became a great success, consistently ranking higher than any other Canadian University in terms of student engagement.

Quest's faculty, hired initially by Strangway, was excellent. Glen van Brummelen and Richard Hoshino, for example, won prestigious prizes for teaching math. 

But behind the scenes, Strangway's plucky, promising university was in trouble from the start because of financial shenanigans.

Strangway left Quest's Board of Governors shortly after the university opened in 2007. He wrote about his disappointments, especially with Quest's fundraiser, in an oped published by Macleans magazine.

Quest's Birthright: 240 Acres

Quest began in 2001 with the purchase of 240 acres of land which The District of Squamish re-zoned to allow the construction of 960 housing units. According to a Covenant put on the land, real estate development was to support and endow the university. 

By 2006, about 100 acres had been sold to developers for approximately $35 million. This appears to have been put towards the costs of campus construction.

One of the crucial issues in Quest's financial history is the true cost of the construction of Quest's original campus and how this was paid for. From publicly available information, this is not entirely clear. Financial statements for Quest indicate that initial campus construction costs appear to have been somewhere between $21 million and $31 million, possibly as high as $47 million. This is significant because it means that most or perhaps all of the initial construction costs may have been covered by the proceeds from land sales. Put another way, the construction of Quest's campus appears to have been paid for with funds raised mostly from selling Quest's land, not from charitable donations.

Dubious Donations

Fundraising for Quest's start-up was handled by Blake Bromley, a lawyer with a reputation for tax planning arrangements that involve dubious charitable donations. In 2004, in a matter unrelated to Quest, Bromley was charged with 23 counts of tax evasion and making false of deceptive statements. While Bromley was acquitted, the judge found that Bromley had set up an elaborate series of transactions where no real money changed hands.

Bromley was a member of Quest's Board of Governors and so he had fiduciary duty to the university. A CRA audit report found that Bromley and others failed to fulfill their fiduciary responsibility with regards to one of the charities that Bromley set up in support of Quest, Association for the Advancement of Scholarship. CRA revoked its charitable status in 2023 following an audit that was completed 11 years earlier, in 2012.

Only now, years after Quest's campus was sold in 2020, Bromley's shenanigans, and those of others, are finally coming to light. One of the reasons this has taken so long is because the release of the CRA audit reports that reveal the truth has been delayed by an average of ten years. In one case, there was a delay of 21 years between the issuance of a tax receipt for $30 million and the closure of one of the charities involved, HSEF Renaissance Academy, in 2022.

Stewart Blusson

In addition to funds raised via land sales, Quest was to benefit from a gift of $100 million from Stewart Blusson, a pioneer of diamond mining in northern Canada. Blusson was a client of Bromley. Blusson's mining companies received tax receipts for at least $195 million. Sad to say, CRA audits eventually found that most or all of Blusson’s so-called gifts were not true charitable gifts. 

For a gift to be a true charitable gift, worthy of a tax receipt, specific criteria must be met. Firstly, there must be a genuine intent to benefit the recipient ("donative intent"). Secondly, there must be a true transfer of property which generally impoverishes the donor. Thirdly, the gift must be made without the expectation of something in return.

CRA audit reports, not released until after years Quest was sold, reveal that Blusson’s gifts to Quest do not meet these criteria. Instead, via a complex series of pre-planned transactions, Blusson got back the shares that he claimed to have "donated." In one case, Blusson got back shares of his mining company, valued at $30 million, via a series of transactions that spanned five years. In another case, one of the charities that was supposed to support Quest lost nearly $8 million by buying shares of Blusson's mining company, according to CRA.

CRA audit reports and other sources indicate that Blusson’s purported gifts were part of a tax plan that ran afoul of CRA. This fatally flawed tax plan involved tax receipts issued by four of Bromley's charities for $195 million. But since these transactions were not true charitable gifts, Blusson got in trouble with CRA, resulting in a CRA judgement against Blusson’s personal residence for $8.6 million. But none of this became publicly known. Instead, it was all kept quiet.

72 Acres: Parcel A & Lot 12

Quest's campus accounts for 60 acres of the original 240 acres. After the initial land sales of about 100 acres, roughly 80 acres remained.

Over the same years that the Bromley's tax plan for Blusson ran afoul of CRA, Blusson obtained the ownership of nearly all of Quest’s undeveloped land, a total of 72 acres. This was only discovered in December of 2023. The 72 acres consists of two sections of land known as Parcel A (60 acres) and Lot 12 (12 acres).

A CRA audit found that the transfer of Lot 12 to one of Blusson's companies, 1012986 B.C. Ltd., was not a proper sale. As a result, the charity involved lost its charitable status - but not until five years after the sale took place.

Parcel A was transferred from Quest to Blusson's private foundation and then to Global Charity Fund which remains the registered owner. The problem, is Parcel A was transferred from Quest to Blusson's private foundation for only $1 and the "forgiveness" of a questionable debt. In the absence of any explanation from Blusson or his lawyer despite repeated requests for more than a year, this calls for investigation.

Quest's $75 Million "Debt"

Early on, another problem that Quest faced is that as soon as campus construction was completed, Bromley and another member of Quest’s Board of Governors, Peter Ufford, signed a mortgage loan which indebted Quest to the tune of $75 million to one of Bromley's charities. In hindsight, it seems highly unlikely that the $75 million debt could ever have been paid without selling Quest. This raises concern that from the outset, plans were laid to sell the university before it had even opened. Indeed, as far back as 2011, tentative plans were already in writing to close Quest if ambitious enrolment and financial criteria were not met. This gives the impression that from the beginning, Bromley appears to have set Quest up to be sold and to benefit from Quest's eventual sale. And as we now know, this appears to be exactly what eventually occurred, as explained in detail at this blog.

To most of us, it wouldn't even cross our minds to sign a mortgage and then not get any cash but that appears to be exactly what happened in Quest's case. Quest's financial statements do not appear to show any loan proceeds received as a result of the $75 million mortgage. So what was the point?

The $75 million mortgage that Bromley put on Quest was secured against Quest’s entire campus. This meant that if Quest defaulted, Bromley could force the sale of the entire university. The $75 million mortgage also meant that effectively, Quest had negative equity even though its campus had been paid for by the sale of much of Quest’s land. Also, Quest could not get loans through normal banking channels because the $75 million mortgage hung around Quest’s neck like a millstone. 

Quest grew quickly but as to be expected, the university needed supplementary funding while enrolment grew. Unable to borrow from anywhere else, Quest was effectively cornered into taking loans from Bromley’s charities at high interest rates that he set.

According to the terms of a Funding Agreement, the funds initially advanced via Bromley’s charities were supposed to be gifts, not loans. But ultimately, these terms were not followed. In circumstances that are not entirely clear, Quest ended up in deep debt to Bromley’s charities, the same charities that received hundreds of millions of dollars in tax-receipted donations ostensibly in the name of supporting the university. Two of Bromley's charities that made loans to Quest issued tax receipts for $100 million.

In 2014, Quest’s loans were bundled into another mortgage loan secured against the entire campus (not part of the $75 million mortgage but a separate mortgage loan). When Quest defaulted, Bromley forced Quest into creditor protection and Quest was sold to pay a debt to one of Bromley's charities, Vanchorverve Foundation. Then, as soon as Vanchorverve received $25 million from Quest's sale, Vanchorverve transferred $24.5 million to a charity run by Bromley's son, Charitable Impact Foundation, known as "CHIMP."

The $24.5 million that CHIMP received from Quest's sale is part of a larger picture of $145 million that CHIMP has received over the past 20 years from a dozen charities involved in Quest's financial history. The $145 million includes the proceeds of the sale of Quest's land as well as the proceeds from land sales, the lease and sale of a student residence, royalty income, interest on loans and more. Over the same years, CHIMP has paid $79 million to a private company owned by Blake Bromley and John Bromley.

Under the shocking financial circumstances described here, Quest nonetheless delivered an extraordinary undergraduate education to approximately 1,000 students from across Canada and around the world. That's the Quest legacy of which David Strangway and all involved can be very proud. It is an outrage that such a worthy endeavour to improve post-secondary education was brought down by a few unscrupulous tax lawyers running circles around CRA.

"No Desire to Revive Quest University," Stewart & Marilyn Blusson

Stewart Blusson has long been celebrated as the charitable donor who made possible the establishment of the now defunct, Quest University, located in Squamish, B.C.

In 2016, when Blusson was inducted into the Canadian Mining Hall of Fame, he was specifically credited for having donated $100 million towards Quest University. Likewise, when Blusson was awarded the Order of Canada, he was credited with having made a significant gift towards Quest (then known as Sea to Sky University).

In December of 2023, when it was discovered that Stewart Blusson is the beneficial owner of two large sections of Quest's original land  (Parcel A & Lot 12), letters were written to Mr. & Mrs. Blussons in order to request a meeting with them to discuss the possibility of a donation of the land towards the re-start of Quest or a similar program that would advance the innovative academic model that Quest had pioneered.

Letters were sent to the Blussons by Ralph Sultan, Peter Gordon and Vivian Krause.  

• Ralph Sultan is the former, long-time Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia, representing the riding of West Vancouver-Capilano. Prior to serving as MLA, Ralph was Professor at the Harvard University School of Business Administration and subsequently a Senior Vice-President of the Royal Bank of Canada. In 2001, working with Dr. David Strangway, then the President of the University of British Columbia, Ralph introduced the Sea to Sky Act which created the legislative framework for Quest and gave the university the right to confer degrees. 
• Peter Gordon is a long-time resident of Squamish and principal of Cascadia Consulting Ltd. As an active member of the Squamish community, Peter attended some of the original community meetings (2001-2007) at which the start-up of the university was discussed. Peter has served Squamish as a former coroner and as a member of several committees on issues ranging from the hospital to seniors housing.
• Vivian Krause is the author of this blog.

Much to our surprise, Mr. & Mrs. Blusson replied, through their lawyer, that they have "no desire to revive Quest University." Coming from Mr. Blusson who supposedly donated $100 million towards Quest, this response was quite the shock. This prompted me to dig deeper to try to figure out why Mr. Blusson would have no interest in supporting something to which he had supposedly given $100 million.

For a copies of all letters sent to Dr. & Mrs. Blusson and the reply from their lawyer, Marilyn Yiu, and other documents pertaining to this post, click here.

Letters to Ian Worland, Tax Lawyer & Former Chair of the Board of Governors of Quest University

 Ian Worland, a tax lawyer, based in Vancouver, was the Chair of the Board of Governors of Quest University over a period of nine years, from 2008 until 2017.

While Chair of Quest's board, Mr. Worland signed several documents that are crucial to Quest's financial history. Among these are:

• 2008 Transfer of Parcel A to Stewart & Marilyn Blusson Foundation
• 2011 Global Charity Fund Funding Agreement
• 2012 $65 Million Debt to Stewart Blusson (Mortgage Loan)
• 2014 Consolidation of Loans from Global Charity Fund into a $20 Million Mortgage Loan from Foundation for Public Good
• 2016 Transfer of Mortgage Loan from Foundation for Public Good to CHIMP

These documents and the transactions that they pertain to raise a series of questions about the debt and mortgage loan on which Quest defaulted, leading ultimately to the sale and closure of the university.

Since Quest was sold in 2020, and subsequently closed, several CRA audit reports have been released (AAS, EDF, HSEF,  HSSF & Timothy Foundation). These CRA reports provide previously unavailable information that raises questions about the loans that led to Quest's downfall. In particular, these audit reports reveal that Stewart Blusson, Quest's purported benefactor, never did make true charitable gifts for $100 million towards Quest, nor did he make true gifts for anywhere near that amount.  Instead, in a complex series of transactions, Blusson got back the shares in his mining companies that he had supposedly "donated" without paying to buy them back. For an example of CRA's explanation of these transactions, click here.

During 2020, I tried to unsuccessfully to contact Ian Worland. In 2023, when Quest announced that it was closing, I tried again to contact Mr. Worland via LinkedIn.

In February of 2024, once I had learned that Stewart Blusson is the beneficial owner of most of the remaining sections of Quest's original land, I sent a detailed letter to Mr. Worland.

Among my key questions to Mr. Worland are the following:

1. Purported $100 Million from Stewart Blusson

• • When, if ever, did Quest’s Board of Governors become aware that Stewart Blusson’s purported gift of $100 million was not a true gift? Once aware, what steps, if any, did the Board of Governors take to inform students, staff, and the general public that the story that had been told about Blusson’s purported $100 million gift was not true?

2. Parcel A & Lot 12

• • Why did Quest’s purported benefactor, Stewart Blusson, end up with the beneficial ownership of Parcel A and Lot 12?

•  3. $24.5 Million Paid to CHIMP 
  • Why did Charitable Impact Foundation ("CHIMP"), a charity run by Blake Bromley’s son, end up with $24.5 million from Quest’s sale?
  • CHIMP has paid $79 million (2011-2023) to CHIMP Technology Inc., a private company owned by Blake & John Bromley. Does the $79 million include the $24.5 million from Quest's sale, or part of it? If so, this would mean that money from Quest's sale, potentially millions of dollars, ended up in a private company owned by Quest’s fundraiser, a former member of Quest’s Board of Governors, and his son. If true, this warrants explanation.

4. Global Charity Fund Loans

In 2011, Quest began to take loans from Global Charity Fund (“GCF”), a charity run by Blake Bromley, Quest's original fundraiser. By 2014, Quest had eight loans from GCF for a total of $15,450,000 at interest rates of between 5% and 9%. These loans were consolidated into a mortgage loan on which Quest ultimately defaulted, resulting in Quest's sale and eventual closure.

• • Loans, not Gifts - In 2011, GCF reported tax-receipted gifts for $70 million. If GCF truly received $70 million, why did Quest get high-interest loans? If GCF truly received $70 million, why didn't Quest receive gifts?
  • Bank or Credit Union - With steadily increasing revenue, why didn’t Quest get a loan from a bank? Of all the possible lenders, why Global Charity Fund?
  • Origin of Loan Money - What is the origin of the loan money that Quest received via Global Charity Fund? Was it effectively Stewart Blusson’s money that was loaned to Quest, enabling Blusson to earn millions of dollars of interest from Quest?

            NOTE: One of the funny things about the "gift" of $70,000,000 to Global Charity Fund is that it is recorded in CRA's digital database as $70,000, not $70,000,000. This is one of at least ten cases in which large gifts made by the Bromley charities are recorded incorrectly in CRA's digital database. In all cases, the error is the same; the last three digits are missing such that a very large gift, in the millions, is recorded as being only in the thousands.

5. Association for the Advancement of Scholarship (“AAS”)

AAS was founded by the late Dr. David Strangway, Quest’s founder, and purportedly received $30 million from Stewart Blusson. However, it is important to note that before AAS issued the tax receipt to Blusson for $30 million, Dr. Strangway had left AAS's board of directors.

In a letter to Macleans magazine, Dr. Strangway expressed that he felt let down by how Quest's start-up had been handled. He appears to have been especially disappointed by Quest's fundraiser, Blake Bromley who apparently charged an 8 percent fee.

During 2014 and 2015, AAS made gifts to CHIMP and other Bromley charities for a total of $15,450,000, precisely the same amount of Quest's loans to that point.

• • Why did AAS make gifts to CHIMP and Bromley’s other charities rather than to Quest?
  • Is it just a coincidence that the amounts match? Did AAS’s gifts consist of notes receivable on Quest’s loans?
  • In 2014, AAS paid a commission for $3 million. To whom was this paid and why?

CRA Audit of Eden Glen Foundation: Stewart Blusson's Ownership of Lot 12

Effective July 27 2023, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA), revoked the charitable status of Eden Glen Foundation ("Eden Glen"), a public foundation based in Vancouver. According to its application for registration, Eden Glen was set up by a law firm located at 1250-1500 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, B.C. This is the address of the former office of Benefic Group, a law firm run by Blake Bromley.

Well known in Vancouver for his "aggressive" approach, Bromley specializes in tax plans that involve obtaining large tax receipts via registered charities. Mr. Bromley claims that over the course of his career, he set up 650 charities that handled $2 billion. The largest of the charities set up by Bromley is Charitable Impact Foundation, known as "CHIMP," run by Bromley's son, John Bromley. CHIMP claims that it has made $1.4 billion in donations and that it is the "fastest growing" giving network in Canada. 

The fact that Eden Glen Foundation was registered by Bromley tells me that Eden Glen is one of hundreds of charities that is part of a Bromley's large network.

In its audit report on Eden Glen Foundation, CRA explained that Eden Glen was shut down because it misused a gift of land that Eden Glen received from Foundation for Public Good, another one of Bromley's charities. The land gifted to Eden Glen consisted of two sections known as Lot 12 and Lot 58, transferred to Eden Glen in 2016.

The two properties had a combined fair market value (FMV) of $17 million:

Lot 58:   $   11,360,000
Lot 12:   $     5,750,000
Total:   $  17,110,000

This land, located in Squamish, B.C., is part of a large section of 240 acres that was originally purchased for Quest University, back in 2001. 

CRA found that EGF sold Lot 58 for $10.5 million and transferred the proceeds to CHIMP, run by Bromley's son.

CRA determined that the transfer of land from Foundation for Public Good to Eden Glen was a non-arm's length transaction that was mishandled and that, therefore, Eden Glen could be subject to a penalty of 110% of the amount of the gift, a total of $19 million.

CRA found that in 2018, EGF sold the beneficial ownership interest in Lot 12 to a private company, 1012986 B.C. Ltd., a private, for-profit corporation, for $2 million in accordance with a bare trust agreement.

Records show that 1012986 B.C. Ltd is a private company owned by Stewart Blusson.

CRA’s audit found that the sale of Lot 12 was paid for with a promissory note which remained outstanding as of 2019. In plain language, this means that Stewart Blusson's company obtained beneficial ownership of Lot 12 without actually paying for it. CRA found that, according to the bare trust agreement, Eden Glen maintains ownership of the legal title of Lot 12. CRA’s audit report notes that legal title without beneficial owhership holds no value. In other words, Eden Glen had effectively given away Lot 12.

One of CRA's significant comments is that CRA found that the sale of Lot 12 was of no benefit to the public. "At no point was EGF able to identify to CRA how a public benefit resulted from this sale," the audit report says.

CRA conducted an appraisal of Lot 12 and found that the appraised value of Lot 12 was $6,475,000. This means that at the time that Lot 12 was sold to Stewart Blusson’s company, the difference between the FMV of Lot 12 and the sale price was $4,475,000. CRA concluded this to mean that Eden Glen, a charity, gave Stewart Blusson’s company a gift of $4,475,000.

CRA concluded that that $4,475,000 constitutes a private benefit that was neither necessary, reasonable, nor proportionate and that this private benefit was, therefore, unacceptable.

As a consequence of having conferred an undue benefit, CRA warned Eden Glen that it could be subject to a penalty equal to 105% of the undue benefit that was conferred, a penalty of $4.7 million.

Adding together the $19 million for the mishandling of the transfer of Lot 58 and the $4.7 million for the undue benefit provided to Stewart Blusson, CRA determined that Eden Glen Foundation could be subject to total penalties of nearly $24 million. However, in the end, CRA decided to revoke the charitable status of Eden Glen Foundation in lieu of penalties, not in addition to charging penalties. As such, Eden Glen Foundation appears to have been charged no penalties (sanctions) at all despite CRA itself finding that Eden Glen Foundation could have been charged as much as $24 million.

Vivian Krause Affidavits #2 & #3 November 16, 2023 & January 15, 2023

Affidavit #2 - November 16, 2023

• Vivian Krause Affidavit #2 November 16, 2023

Stewart Irvine Affidavit - November 17, 2023

• Stewart Irvine Affidavit Nov 17, 2023
• Vivian Krause Affidavit & Exhibits Nov 16 2023(292 pgs)

For Affidavit #1, click here.

Exhibits:

• A Analysis of Alleged Defamatory Statements
• B Fortius application to the Federal Court of Appeal - dismissed with costs
• C Scott Cousens Affidavit Aug17 2022
• D Reasons for Order Justice Donald J. Rennie
• E Dismissal from Supreme Court of Canada
• F Revocation of Fortius Foundation July 29 2023
• G CRA Notice of Intent to Revoke Fortius July 21 2022
• H CRA Audit of Fortius Sept 7 2021
• I Homestead on the HIll Foundation NOTICE Sept. 22, 2022
• J Association for the Advancement of Scholarship revoked March 25, 2023
• K CRA Audit letter to AAS July 3 2012
• L CRA Notice of Intent to Revoke Aug 2, 2013
• M e-mail from CRA RE AAS April 4 2023
• N Global Charity Fund Gifts (2011-2013)
• O Balance Sheets of Almoner FPG & Homestead on the Hill Foundation
• P The $74 Million Gift
• Q Global Charity Fund Application for Registration
• R Global Charity Fund Annual Returns
• S Global Charity Fund Tax Return (2011)
• T CHIMP $1.2 BILLION
• U Articles about the "merchant bank for charity"
• V Loans Reported by The Bromley Charities
• W CHIMP Tax Return (2022)
• X CHIMP Financial Statements (2022)
• Y CHIMP Overview (2009-2022)
• Z Losses on FMV & Disposal
• AA Distribution of CHIMP Gifts
• BB CHIMP Fees
• CC AAS Revoked March 25 2023
• DD CRA Audit of Timothy Foundation Aug 31 2021
• EE CHIMP 34 Properties $38 Million
• FF 188 Real Estate Properties $289 Million
• GG The Redekop Transactions
• HH CRA Audit of HSEF Renaissance Academy Oct 25 2018
• II Globe & Mail April e-mail 26 2023
• JJ text from Alissa Thibault
• KK The Vancouver Sun May 25 2023

Affidavit #3 - January 15, 2024

• Vivian Krause Affidavit #3 (2024-01-15)
• A Financial statements showing Scott Cousens' signature 
• B  CRA audit of Headwaters Foundation
• C Gifts from Imladris Foundation
• D $2M gift, CHIMP to Imladris, & Delicate Balance $7.8M gift
• E CRA Judgement against Stewart Blusson: $8,672,834
• F Direction to Pay after Sale of Fortius sports centre
• G e-mail from Mayor Mike Hurley

Why Vivian Krause Is Being Sued - And Filed for Dismissal

Dear Friends,

This is to explain why I am being sued for defamation and why I have filed for dismissal.

Over the years, as I have been following the funding of various causes, I have exposed the fact that some of the largest "charitable gifts" in Canadian history are a sham. As The Globe & Mail reported, in some cases, the donor got a tax receipt and got their donated shares back too. That's not a true gift so doesn't deserve a tax receipt.

Here's a few examples of large so-called "gifts" that weren't true in the sense that the "donor" got back "donated" shares, or a tax receipt was issued far in excess of  true value:

1. $ 15,000,000
2. $ 23,000,000
3. $ 30,000,000 
4. $ 30,560,060
5. $ 45,175,000
6. $ 70,000,000
7. $ 74,711,535

That's seven gifts for $288 million.

The above amounts were towards a sports centre and a university:

• Fortius Sport & Health Centre (total gifts: $106 M)
• Quest University Canada (total gifts: $425 M)

Despite half a billion dollars in charitable gifts, both Fortius and Quest ended up in deep debt and were sold. The funny thing is, the "debts" were to the same charities that made the "gifts."

The so-called "gifts" for $23 million and $74 million went to Fortius Foundation.

In 2021, I wrote letters to warn the City of Burnaby against paying $26 million in cold hard cash to Fortius Foundation for the sale of its sports centre. At the very least, I urged the City to do more due diligence. Later that year, a defamation claim against me was filed by Fortius's founder. What I didn't know then is that Fortius was under a four-year CRA audit. The very same week that I was sued, CRA sent a letter to Fortius saying that its charitable status would be revoked - but I didn't learn that until two years later.

Fast forward to this year and CRA has now revoked Fortius because of egregious violations (as of July 29 2023). The person who is suing me applied for an injunction against CRA from the Federal Court of Appeal. When that was denied, he applied to the Supreme Court of Canada. Both courts dismissed the matter.  Nonetheless, I am still being sued.

I have filed a motion for dismissal. Court is scheduled for December 7 & 8, 2023.

Below, here's some background and more details ...

BACKGROUND

The charity at the centre of this is "Charitable Impact Foundation," originally called "CHIMP Foundation," and known as CHIMP.

CHIMP says that it has received $1.2 billion and claims to be the "fastest-growing" charity in Canada. But, as I have said umpteen times at this blog, there are many signs of monkey business at CHIMP. For example, a few years ago, Deloitte, CHIMP's independent auditor, warned that it could not vouch for $193 million of CHIMP's unlisted securities.

One of the reasons I followed CHIMP is that it is part of a large network of charities, all set up by the same person, Blake Bromley, a tax lawyer, now retired.

Blake Bromley claims to have set up 650 charities that handled $2 billion.

One of the reasons that I am concerned about the Bromley charities is that some of them issue tax receipts for huge amounts. For example, last year, a charity that was originally set up by Bromley issued tax receipts for $512 million for real estate properties. That was the single largest amount of non-cash, tax-receipted gifts made by any charity in Canada last year. 

Its not only the Bromley charities that receive gifts of real estate. Last year, another charity issued tax receipts for $139 million for real estate properties. These very large gifts of real estate warrant more scrutiny.

Over the years, I found so many red flags that during 2021 and 2022, I wrote letters to CRA requesting audits of the Bromley charities, including CHIMP.

Since last year, 19 charitied handled by Bromley have been revoked. Most of those were under audit well before I wrote to CRA.

CHIMP and Tides Canada (Makeway)

More than ten years ago, CHIMP first came on my radar because it funded Tides Canada (now called Makeway). The funny thing was, CHIMP’s first gift to Tides Canada was only $9 (nine dollars). Surely that was a typo, I thought, until I dug up CHIMP's tax return and found that CHIMP makes very small gifts to thousands of charities. In fact, CHIMP has made more than 10,000 gifts for $97 or less. More about this in a subsequent post.

My concerns about Tides Canada were two-fold: I was concerned about its activism and its Exchange Fund.  While the activism funding got media attention, the Exchange Fund didn’t. 

TIDES CANADA EXCHANGE FUND

The Exchange Fund was the first case of circuitous "gifts" that I noticed. The problem with such "gifts" is that they enable a donor to get a tax receipt without making a true gift. Charities should not engage in this at all.

In 2016, I wrote a paper about Tides Canada’s Exchange Fund and presented it to a Senate Committee as part of my testimony on the funding of activism against Canadian pipelines to export Alberta oil. Within weeks, there was an announcement that the Exchange Fund had been closed.

My concern about Tides Canada's Exchange Fund is that some of its transactions were circuitous. For example, an American company based in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, set up a registered charity in Mississauga. The charity issued tax receipts to the Pawtucket company for about $3.5 million and then transferred the entire amount to Tides Canada in Vancouver. If Tides Canada had spent that money on charity in Canada, that would have been great! But that’s not what happened. Instead, Tides Canada forwarded the money back to Pawticket via The Tides Foundation in San Francisco, using the Exchange Fund as the conduit. The American company’s donations did end up in two charities in Pawtucket. However, it does not seem right to me that the company got tax credits which could have reduced its taxes in Canada but then the "donations" went straight back to the US.

Another charity, Sentry Foundation was revoked solely for using Tides Canada's Exchange Fund and yet Tides Canada itself was not revoked. Seems inconsistent to me. 

Around the same time as the Alberta Inquiry, I noticed several changes in the funding of activism. One of the top-funded organizations, Sisu Institute, simply closed. As for Tides Canada, it became the #1 top recipient of funds from CHIMP.

TIDES CANADA: CHIMP"s #1 TOP RECIPIENT

Last year, Tides Canada received more funds from CHIMP than any other organization, a total of $8.1 million (including $193,075 for Hollyhock).  In total, Tides Canada has received $10.8 million from CHIMP, tax returns show.

Before I go any further, let me be very clear: I do not allege that Tides Canada is part of CHIMP’s monkey business.

But here the thing: If CHIMP wasn’t funding a large number of diverse organizations, the suspicious gifts that CHIMP makes would stick out like a sore thumb, like for example, CHIMP's $74 million gift to Fortius Foundation.

And now, finally, this bring me to why I am being sued…

CHIMP'S $74 MILLION GIFT

In 2019, when I noticed CHIMP’s $74 million gift, I wrote to Fortius Foundation, the recipient, and asked, hey, what’s the $74 million for? Pretty big gift. What are you doing with the money? No reply.

In 2020, Fortius Foundation announced that "pandemic pressures" forced the foundation to sell its sports centre. Huh? I couldn’t believe it. How could they be in any financial trouble having received $74 million just two years earlier? I obtained financial statements for Fortius Foundation and found out that, in fact, by 2017, long before COVID, Fortius already had a "debt" of $94 million. So no, it wasn't COVID that got Fortius into big trouble.

I tried and tried to contact the founder of Fortius Foundation. No response from him nor CHIMP so I wrote to the Mayor & Council of the City of Burnaby and urged them to do more due diligence before giving Fortius Foundation $26 million in cold hard cash for its sports centre. I also went to the RCMP – and I made no secret of that.

In an abundance of transparency, I made it publicly known (in my letter to Burnaby's Mayor & Council) that I had gone to the RCMP. My intention was to give the founder of Fortius every opportunity to correct me if I had said or written anything that was factually incorrect.

In September of 2021, the founder of Fortius filed a defamation claim against me.

THE $23 MILLION TRANSACTION

The founder of Fortius has claimed that he made a gift of $23 million for the sports centre. He told The Globe & Mail that he gave away "most of his personal fortune," including the inheritance of his wife & sons in order to make what Fortius called "the single largest" gift in Canadian sports history. But financial statements tell a dramatically different story.

According to financial records, Fortius started not with a gift but a debt of $23 million on a high interest loan (initially at an interest rate of 20 percent). The founder's family had a private foundation and it had a promissory note (that's like an "I.O.U.") for $23 million. So no, as I see it, there was never any true gift of $23 million.

As for the purported "gift" of $74 million, it is, in my words, a circular, self-cancelling transaction whereby the entire "gift" of $74 million was effectively unwound and the donor charity, CHIMP, got back the entire $74 million.

At the end of May of 2022, the Burnaby RCMP completed and forwarded its report to CRA. Also at the end of May of 2022, my legal counsel filed, on my behalf, a motion for dismissal of the claim against me on the grounds that it is without merit. Also filed, an affidavit (600 pages of exhibits). Not too long after that, on July 21, 2022, CRA notified Fortius that it would be revoked.

CRA AUDIT OF FORTIUS

According to CRA's audit, Fortius Foundation provided undue benefits to its founder’s for-profit business, in two ways: 1) there was an "unwritten expense sharing agreement" whereby the salaries at a for-profit company of the charity's president were being paid for by the charitable foundation, and 2) the foundation effectively provided the sports centre to the for-profit business on a rent-free basis. According to CRA, rent was not collected for six years in a row. CRA calculated that the undue benefits total $12.3 million and characterized Fortius 's violations as "egregious."

CRA audited Fortius Foundation but strangely enough, CRA did not audit Fortius for 2018 when it received the $74 million gift from CHIMP. However, CRA did audit and revoke Homestead on the Hill Foundation, one of the seven charities involved in effectively unwinding CHIMP's $74 million gift. CRA found that Homestead's gift to CHIMP, the only gift that Homestead made over eight years, was part of  "a series of pre-determined transactions used to artificially inflate tax benefits for certain corporations and/or individuals and to allow other charitable entities to falsely meet its disbursement quote so that they may avoid revocation." So there we have it.

Never again should any one of the largest “charitable gifts” in Canadian history be a sham.

Tax-Receipted, Large NON-CASH Gifts: A Call for Audit, Starting With CHIMP

Pushing our national debt to $1.2 trillion, the federal government's deficit for 2022 was $35.3-billion. Next year, it is forecasted to be about the same. As one of many measures needed to reduce our daunting deficit, here’s an offbeat idea:

CRA should audit the issuance of tax receipts for large, non-cash donations, especially real estate properties, life insurance premiums, cryptocurrency and so on.  These tax receipts are issued charities, a small number of which are anything but charitable. These should not be allowed to stain the reputation of charity in general.

Of course, charity audits won’t close a billion-dollar budget gap. But stopping the tax dodgers would increase government revenue. Every bit helps. The fairness & integrity of our tax system would also improve.

Under Stephen Harper, almost 800 charities were audited per year. Since 2015, that number has fallen. Only 182 audits were completed last year.  By CRA’s own admission, audits account for only 3 percent of the compliance-related activity conducted by the Charities Directorate.

To be clear, I’m not calling for audits of small charities. I call for audits of the big ones, those that issue tax receipts for hundreds of millions of dollars. I arrive at this idea based on three years of intensive research involving more than 50 requests for information from CRA and my review of the CRA audit reports on 19 charities who have had their status revoked by CRA for serious non-compliance. 

After the controversy over the political activity of charities, a decade ago, another call for charity audits (especially from me!) is bound to draw groans, moans and eye rolls. But hear me out…

Most of my research and my correspondence with CRA has been about 200 charities set up by a single person, a tax lawyer, now retired.

Over the past year, CRA has revoked (read: closed) a total of 19 charities handled by the same tax lawyer whom I’ve been following for many years.   It is important to note that the 19 charities are not typical.  Their bad behaviour must not tarnish Canadian charities as a whole.

What is important here is what the 19 CRA audits reveal about CRA.

$21 BILLION

For 2021, charities issued tax receipts for $21 billion (CRA e-mail & Excel spreadsheet).  Most of that gets issued by relatively few charities that issue tax receipts for BILLIONS of dollars. The part that concerns me is the NON-CASH gifts because the valuation of these gifts is so open to abuse.

For 2021 and 2022, as few as 20 charities issue tax receipts for non-cash gifts for about $1.7 billion per year. Some of these are not well-known charities, most people have never heard of them. Last year, one foundation alone issued tax receipts for $512 million including $505 million for real estate properties.

Tax receipts translate into billions of dollars in tax credit. That’s revenue that government doesn’t collect in order to incentivize charitable giving.  To the extent that charities benefit the public and that these benefits justify the lost revenue, the tax credits make sense.

But here’s the problem:

A growing body of evidence, including CRA audit reports, shows that some of the largest tax-receipted gifts in Canadian history were not true gifts. These gifts are a sham and, therefore, not deserving of a tax receipt.

For a gift to merit a tax receipt, it must be a true gift. In technical terms, this means that the donor must not get any benefit nor advantage from having made the gift. Most certainly, the donor is not supposed to get a tax receipt and then get their gift back too.

As I mentioned earlier, CRA has revoked 19 charities handled by the same guy. I could say his name but lets leave that out for now. Lets focus instead on the CRA’s handling of his charities.

The 19 CRA audit reports, provided to me upon request, indicate that most of the revocations were because of complex schemes that conferred undue tax benefits.

In one case, tax receipts were issued for $32 million for donated shares and then the same shares were returned to their donor via 19 transactions spanning seven years.

In a second case, a charity issued a tax-receipt for (14) $30 million ($30 560 060) for donated shares, also returned to their donor. Two of the three charities involved have been revoked by CRA. One of these is HSEF Renaissance Academy (“HSEF”).

In a third case, the Association for the Advancement of Scholarship (“AAS”) also issued a tax receipt for $30,000,000 and again, the donor got back the donated shares.

TEN YEAR DELAY, ON AVERAGE

The timeline on CRA’s revocation of the 19 charities is appalling.

On average, my research finds that there was a ten year delay between the audited transactions and revocation. In the case of HSEF, the delay was 21 years. The shares were donated in 2001 and HSEF was finally revoked last fall.

For AAS, the audit report was finalized in 2012. CRA sent the notice of intent in 2013 but then it took another 10 years before revocation as of March 25, 2023.

A fourth, more recent case, involves a charity whose founder claimed that he made "the single largest philanthropic gift in Canadian sports history.” This foundation built a sports centre and owned it until the centre was sold to the municipal government, the City of Burnaby. The name of it is Fortius.

As The Vancouver Sun reporter, Dan Fumano has reported, Fortius had an "unwritten expense sharing agreement" whereby it paid the salaries of staff at a for-profit business owned by Fortius Foundation's president. A CRA audit discovered that Fortius leased its sports centre to the for-profit business but then didn’t collect any rent for six years in a row. Effectively, the business got almost $12 million worth of free rent, according to CRA. In CRA’s terminology, this is called “undue benefits.”

LEGAL ACTION

Now, full disclosure:

Two years ago, Fortius’ founder filed a defamation claim against me after I tried to warn the City of Burnaby against paying $26.6 million in cold hard cash for the purchase of the sports centre. Under the Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation Act (“SLAPP”), I have filed a motion for dismissal, along with an affidavit and 600 pages of exhibits. Court is scheduled for December.

On the grounds that CRA had allegedly been "influenced" by me, an application was filed with the Federal Court of Appeal for an injunction to stop CRA. That request was dismissed. An application was also made to the Supreme Court of Canada and again, it was dismissed.

My main concern with Fortius is that it got one of the biggest gifts in Canadian history, a gift of $74 million. The problem is, this so-called “gift” was effectively unwound or reversed. In the end, the donor charity wasn’t out by a dime.

CHIMP'S $74 MILLION "GIFT"

This part is a bit complicated so bear with my will I try to explain…

As I have shown with the exhibits that accompany my affidavit, the entire $74 million and more was returned under the banner of the payment of “loans” involving seven, affiliated charities. Three of the seven have recently been revoked by CRA (Fortius, AAS & Homestead) meanwhile the charity that made the $74 million gift, CHIMP, and three more remain active.

One of the revoked charities is Homestead on the Hill Foundation (“Homestead”). A CRA audit of Homestead found that “a gift made by the Foundation (Homestead) to CHIMP for the 2018 fiscal period was not a gift made to a qualified donee in support of its charitable activities but rather a series of predetermined transactions used to artificially inflate tax benefits for certain corporations and/or individuals to allow other charitable entities to falsely meet its disbursement quota so that they may avoid revocation.”  So there we have it.

The charity that made the $74 million gift is Charitable Impact Foundation, known as “CHIMP.”

Its not as if CHIMP is a small charity run by volunteers. CHIMP boasts that it is the“fastest-growing" charity in Canada. CHIMP claims that it has received $1.2 BILLION in donations. Tax returns show that CHIMP has issued tax-receipts for $800 million. Last year alone, CHIMP issued tax receipts for $196 million.

RED FLAGS

Its not as if there have been no red flags. Three years ago, Deloitte, CHIMP’s independent auditor, warned that Deloitte could not vouch for $193 million of CHIMP’s unlisted securities. Shortly after that, CHIMP’s entire board resigned.

For 2021, CHIMP ranked 11th out of all 86,000 Canadian charities in terms of tax-receipted gifts, according to CRA.  For non-cash, CHIMP ranked 5th.

FIFTH. Think about that.

Surely such a large charity is on CRA’s radar… or is it?

What does it tell us about CRA that by CRA’s own admission, a $74 million gift, one of the largest in Canadian history, was a sham, and yet, six years later, the charity that made that sham gift is issuing tax receipts for hundreds of millions of dollars? In fact, since 2018, CHIMP has issued tax receipts for $700 million.

Its time for proper investigation of this monkey business.

Letter to Quest Alumni & Friends

 

Dear Alumni & Friends of Quest,

As we know, Quest's campus has been sold to Capilano University.

While I wish Capilano the very best, I am sad (and angry) about what happened to Quest and would like to see Quest's program revived.

Personally, I have never had any involvement with Quest but I have done a lot of digging into its financial history.

My heart goes out to all the students, especially the international students, who have now lost their alma mater.

As I've been wondering what to do next, I got thinking about Newfoundland.

Newfoundland used to be a nation but because of  WWI and mismanagement, Newfoundland got in deep debt. In the 1930s, they had to give up their nationhood and go under the wing of the United Kingdom. It took almost 20 years before Newfoundland got back on its feet again as a province of Canada.

This got me thinking ... maybe Quest could come back as Quest Institute at Capilano. This would provide Quest with the benefits of being part of an established university. Capilano would also benefit from Quest's innovative approach to teaching and learning, and a trail-blazing, international alumni of dynamic young people from 40 countries around the world. Sounds like a win win to me. To be clear, I have not spoken with anyone at Cap.

But how on earth could Quest get on its feet again?

Here's my initial thoughts, but first, a bit of background:

On July 29, 2023, just days before Quest’s sale was announced (August 16), CRA revoked Eden Glen Foundation, one of the many charities involved in the sale of Quest’s original land. Upon request, I received CRA’s audit report on August 4, 2023. To my surprise, CRA’s audit report reveals that beneficial ownership of Lot 12 (about 12 acres) is currently held by Stewart Blusson, Quest’s original benefactor.

On August 14, 2023, I spoke with Mr. Blusson. He confirmed that he holds beneficial ownership to Lot 12 and also Parcel A, a large section of land. Together, Parcel A and Lot 12 are worth somewhere around $30 million.

Seems to me that Mr. Blusson could be offered a proposal for how this land could be used to fulfil his original dream, which was to help start in Canada, a university like the one that he attended in the U.S. where he learned the skills he later used to pioneer the diamond industry in northern Canada.

Over the years, based on my digging into Quest’s financial history, it has become clear to me that Quest is a victim of a massive tax scam and a miscarriage of justice. As for Mr. Blusson's philanthropy per se, he hasn't been heard from yet, at least, not officially.

I can see why Mr. Blusson would not have wanted Parcel A and Lot 12 in the hands of Quest during the years that Blake Bromley and others were involved. But that has now changed.

The first step, in my view, is to get proper legal counsel. This is why I support the GoFundMe to cover legal fees, started by Quest alumni in early August. To those who are able to chip in, here's the link:

• GoFundMe to Save Quest

Here's a document that I hope will help get legal counsel up to speed, once it is retained:

• Red Flags: The Case for Legal Counsel

More here: Quest: Victim of a Massive Scam & Miscarriage of Justice

Looking forward to hearing your thoughts. I'd love to hear from you. You can comment here or shoot me an e-mail at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Vivian