Reading a General Security Agreement Before Signing It

The situation

Khalil worked as a grocery clerk. Tarek worked as a bookkeeper for a small accounting practice. On evenings and weekends, the two of them ran a side business out of a rented commercial kitchen in Pickering, portioning and delivering pre-made meal kits to a handful of local customers. What started as a way to earn extra money on the side had, over about eighteen months, grown into something closer to a real business, with annual revenue approaching $100,000.

The turning point came when a regional grocery distributor offered them a wholesale supply contract, provided they could deliver in bulk on a weekly schedule. Meeting that volume meant buying a used refrigerated van and a walk-in cooler unit, together costing about $40,000. Neither Khalil nor Tarek had that kind of cash sitting in the business, and a traditional bank loan was out of reach for a business with only eighteen months of financial history and no real estate to offer as collateral.

Khalil mentioned the problem to Sana, a family friend who had recently sold a property and had cash to invest. Sana agreed to lend the business $40,000 at a modest fixed interest rate, repayable over three years. But Sana, sensibly, wanted the loan secured rather than handed over on a handshake. Her accountant drafted a document called a general security agreement and sent it over for signature. Khalil and Tarek read the first page, understood almost none of it, and came to Treadstone Law before signing anything.

What the agreement actually said

A general security agreement, often called a GSA, is a contract that gives a lender a security interest in some or all of a borrower's personal property — meaning, in this context, business assets rather than real estate. If the borrower defaults, the lender can seize and sell the secured assets to recover what is owed, generally without needing to go through a full court process first. In Ontario, these security interests are governed by the Personal Property Security Act and become enforceable against other creditors once properly registered on the Personal Property Security Registry, a public database searchable by anyone extending credit to a business.

The draft Sana's accountant had prepared was a broad, boilerplate GSA of the kind lenders use for almost any secured loan. As written, it secured the $40,000 loan against all of the business's present and after-acquired personal property — not just the van and cooler being financed, but every piece of kitchen equipment, all inventory, all accounts receivable, and anything the business might ever acquire in the future. It also included a broad default clause that let Sana demand immediate repayment of the full loan on almost any missed step, not just missed payments, and gave her the right to appoint someone to take control of the business's assets without going to court first.

None of this made Sana a villain. Her accountant had simply pulled a standard-form template, the kind used for institutional lending, without tailoring it to a $40,000 loan between family friends financing two specific pieces of equipment. But if Khalil and Tarek later wanted to finance a second van, lease new kitchen equipment, or bring on an investor, a blanket claim over all present and future assets would sit in the way of every one of those moves. Any future lender doing a standard search of the registry would see Sana's registration covering everything the business owned, and most would refuse to extend credit behind it.

What we did

1. Explained the document in plain terms before touching it. Our first conversation with Khalil and Tarek was not about redlines — it was about what a general security agreement does, what registration on the Personal Property Security Registry means for future borrowing, and what could actually happen if the business missed a payment. Both partners needed to understand the mechanics before they could decide what to push back on.
2. Narrowed the collateral to what the loan actually financed. We proposed limiting the security interest to the specific van and cooler being purchased with Sana's money — sometimes called a purchase-money security interest when the loan directly funds the asset — rather than a blanket claim over the whole business. This kept Sana's loan properly secured against the equipment it paid for, without tying up inventory, receivables, or future equipment the partners might finance separately.
3. Tightened the default provisions. We rewrote the default clause so that missing a scheduled payment, after a short notice-and-cure period allowing the partners to fix a late payment before it became a default, would be the trigger — not a catch-all list of minor technical breaches. We also removed the clause letting Sana appoint someone to seize control of assets without any court involvement, replacing it with a standard right to enforce her security interest through the normal legal process if a real default occurred.
4. Added a subordination and further-financing clause. Because the partners hoped to grow the wholesale contract into a bigger operation, we built in language allowing them to grant a purchase-money security interest to a future equipment lender on new assets, without needing Sana's consent each time, so long as her existing collateral was left untouched.
5. Reviewed the registration itself. Once the terms were settled, we confirmed that Sana's registration on the Personal Property Security Registry described the collateral accurately and matched the narrowed agreement, since a registration that overreaches the underlying contract can create confusion for anyone searching it later.

The outcome

The revised agreement took about a week and a half to finalize, most of it spent on a few calls between our team and Sana's accountant working through the collateral description and the notice-and-cure period. Sana was receptive once she understood that a scoped agreement still fully protected her $40,000 — it simply didn't reach further than the loan justified. Khalil and Tarek signed a general security agreement covering the van and cooler specifically, with a fair default process and room to finance future equipment without going back to Sana each time.

The wholesale contract went ahead. Within a year, the business's revenue had grown well past the original $100,000 mark, and the partners financed a second delivery van through an equipment lender without any conflict with Sana's existing security interest, because the registry search came back clean on everything but the original van and cooler. Sana was repaid on schedule and, notably, remained on good terms with both partners — the kind of outcome that matters when the lender is also a family friend.

What made this a clean result was timing. Khalil and Tarek brought the document in before signing, while every term was still negotiable. Once a general security agreement is signed and registered, unwinding an overly broad one means going back to the lender and asking them to voluntarily give up rights they already hold — a much harder conversation than shaping the terms the first time around.

What you can learn from this