Uncertainty Over the Scope of Borrower Protections in Mortgage Enforcement Proceedings in Alberta: The Problems and Potential Solutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyzes the complex legal framework surrounding protections for borrowers in mortgage enforcement proceedings in Alberta. It examines two statutory protections — default redemption periods and protection from deficiency judgments — as well as the applicability of non-recourse protection to non-purchase money loans and how Crown immunity has previously curtailed the protections. Homeowners are often unable to navigate the system due to its complexity and the power imbalance between lenders and borrowers. The article advances several possible solutions to this issue, including education initiatives aimed at borrowers, enhanced disclosure obligations for lenders, and reforms to the scope of the borrower protections. These changes aim to assist homeowners in claiming the protections they are legally entitled to and to ensure that Albertans are not needlessly unhoused.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.058 | 0.108 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".