A Lien Landed on a House Huong Had Already Sold

The situation

By the time Huong called our office, she had already tried twice to sort out the letter that had thrown her closing into doubt, and twice she had come away with nothing but a case number and a promise that someone would call back. The first attempt had been through the general CRA phone line, where the agent she reached could confirm a lien existed but could not explain why it named a property she had sold months earlier. The second had been a letter Huong wrote herself, in English that was still new to her, laying out as plainly as she could that she no longer owned the house in question and asking that the lien be removed. It went unanswered for weeks.

Huong had arrived in Canada a few years before this, and the tax return she filed that season was her first. She worked seasonally on a farm outside the city and had also begun selling baked goods informally to neighbours and through word of mouth, a small side income she reported as best she could without much guidance on how to keep the kind of records the CRA expects. Her filing, done with help from a community volunteer who was generous with time but not a tax professional, understated her income for that year -- not through any dishonesty, but because months of cash transactions from the baking had never been tracked in any consistent way.

The CRA's response, when it eventually reviewed the return, was to raise an assessment based on an estimate of what her income likely was, built from indirect methods rather than actual records, since actual records were largely what was missing. That estimate came in considerably higher than what Huong's real income had been, and the resulting tax debt, left unpaid while the letters went unanswered, led the CRA to register a lien to secure it against real property in her name.

The complication was that the property named in the lien was a small house Huong had co-owned with her cousin Fatmir, and the two of them had sold it to a buyer named Azadeh several months before the lien was registered. The sale had closed, the proceeds had been distributed, and Huong no longer had any ownership interest in the property at all. Azadeh, preparing to refinance, was the one who discovered the lien during a routine title search, and it was that discovery, threading its way back through Fatmir to Huong, that finally pushed the matter to us.

What the other side was relying on

The CRA's registration of the lien rested on two separate pieces, and each one, taken alone, looked defensible from its side of the file. The first was the estimated assessment itself. When a taxpayer's actual income cannot be verified from records, the CRA is entitled to assess based on an estimate built from available indicators -- deposits, lifestyle indicators, comparable figures -- and that estimate stands unless and until the taxpayer provides real records showing it is wrong. Huong had not provided records at the point the estimate was raised, because she did not yet have any records worth calling that. The CRA's number, however inflated it turned out to be, was not unreasonable given what it had to work with.

The second piece was the property registration itself, and here the CRA's system had simply not caught up to the sale. A lien is typically registered against property that is on title in the debtor's name according to the land registry records the CRA's system checks at the time it processes the registration. There is a lag, sometimes a period of months, between when a property sale closes and when every government system reflects the change fully, and the CRA's registration had gone through during that gap, naming a property Huong technically still appeared to own in the records the system consulted, even though the actual sale had already closed.

Neither of Huong's earlier attempts to fix this had engaged with either piece properly. The phone call could confirm the lien existed but could not adjust an assessment or correct a land registration -- that requires a different process entirely, working through different parts of the CRA's system. Her letter, meanwhile, asserted that she no longer owned the property but did not include anything that would let the CRA verify the sale -- no closing documents, no reference to the specific transaction, nothing beyond her own statement. From the CRA's side, an unsupported letter claiming a change of ownership is not something it can act on without documentation, particularly once a debt and a registration are already in the system.

Underneath both pieces sat the real problem, which was that nobody had yet done the work of rebuilding Huong's actual income for the year in question. Until that existed in a form the CRA could review, there was no real assessment to compare the estimate against, and the lien -- whatever its technical defect regarding the property sale -- was still standing on top of a debt that, for all anyone could show, might have been entirely accurate.

What we did

1. Obtained the sale documentation from the property closing. We contacted the lawyer who had handled the sale to Azadeh and secured the closing statement, the transfer documents, and confirmation of the date the sale completed, giving us the specific, dated paperwork the CRA needed to verify that Huong's ownership had ended months before the lien was registered against her.
2. Filed a request to correct the property registration. With the closing documents in hand, we submitted a formal request that the CRA correct its records to reflect that the named property had already changed ownership at the time of registration, and asked that the lien against that specific property be discharged since it no longer secured anything Huong owned.
3. Rebuilt Huong's actual income for the assessed year from scratch. Rather than arguing about the estimate in the abstract, we worked with Huong over several sessions to reconstruct her real income -- farm wages from her pay records, and baking income pieced together from whatever bank deposits, notebooks and customer messages she still had, producing an honest accounting that was far more modest than the CRA's estimate.
4. Compared the rebuilt numbers against the CRA's estimate line by line. Once the real accounting existed, we could show specifically where the CRA's indirect method had overstated things -- treating some deposits as income that were actually repayments from Fatmir related to shared household costs, for instance -- rather than simply asserting the estimate was too high.
5. Submitted a request to adjust the underlying assessment. With the rebuilt accounting as support, we filed to have the assessment revised to reflect Huong's actual income rather than the CRA's estimate, attaching the line-by-line comparison so the reviewing officer could see exactly where the indirect method had gone wrong. This was the step that had to happen before any lien tied to that debt could be meaningfully reduced rather than merely relocated to a smaller number.
6. Negotiated the balance that remained after adjustment. Even with the rebuilt numbers, a genuine gap remained between what Huong had originally reported and what her records now showed she had actually earned, since some income had simply gone unreported in the confusion of a first filing. We negotiated a revised debt reflecting that real, smaller gap rather than the original estimate.
7. Confirmed the lien's release once the property issue and the debt were both resolved. Once the CRA accepted both the corrected property registration and the reduced assessment, we followed up to confirm the lien was formally discharged from the title, and provided Azadeh's lawyer with documentation for the refinancing file so the discovery that started this would not resurface later.
8. Set up a payment arrangement for the remaining balance. Once the adjusted debt was confirmed, we worked with the CRA's collections division to arrange manageable monthly payments based on Huong's actual income rather than her seasonal peak earnings, avoiding a lump-sum demand that her modest farm wages and baking income could not have absorbed without real hardship. We also confirmed the arrangement would not trigger a fresh collections action while payments stayed current.

The outcome

The lien against the property was released once the CRA accepted that Huong's ownership had ended before the registration was made. That part of the problem, which had been the most urgent because of Azadeh's pending refinancing, resolved cleanly and did not require any negotiation once the closing documents were in front of the right part of the CRA's system.

The underlying debt was a different matter. The rebuilt accounting brought the amount owing down substantially from the CRA's original estimate, but it did not bring it to zero. Some of Huong's baking income genuinely had gone unreported in that first, confusing filing, and the honest number that emerged, while far smaller than the CRA's assessment, still left a real balance in the low thousands, comfortably under the roughly $15,000 total the dispute had involved from the start. The CRA accepted a payment arrangement for that remaining amount rather than requiring it in full, which mattered given how limited Huong's income still was.

Fatmir and Azadeh, though never central to the tax dispute itself, both needed to see the resolution documented for their own purposes -- Fatmir because the lien had briefly clouded his own credit given the shared ownership history, and Azadeh because his lender required proof the title was clear before the refinancing could proceed. For Huong, the lasting change was less about the money than about the record-keeping habit she built out of necessity: a simple ledger for the baking income, kept from that point forward, that she said made the next year's filing the first one that did not keep her up at night.

The payment arrangement for the remaining balance was set at an amount Huong could manage around her seasonal farm income, spread over a period of time rather than demanded all at once, which the CRA's collections division agreed to once the file showed a clear, documented picture of what she actually earned rather than an estimate. Fatmir and Azadeh both confirmed, once the title issue closed, that neither had suffered any lasting effect on their own credit or financing, though both said the weeks of uncertainty before the lien was traced back to its source were more stressful than the eventual fix turned out to be.

What you can learn from this