CoChalet · Confidential · Attorney-Client Privileged · For Me Michel Lebeuf and the TCJ Securities Group

CoChalet Finance — Structural Brief

Companion document to the 2026-05-15 followup email · Pioneer 01 lending vehicle setup

Prepared for
Me Michel Lebeuf · Therrien Couture Joli-Coeur LLP · Chair of the Securities Group (with Cc privilege circle)
Prepared by
Justin Kausel · Founder & CEO · CoChalet · for Halo Industries Inc.
Date
2026-05-15
Engagement
Phase 1 ratification (~22 May) · Phase 2 supplemental setup engagement (post-Phase-1)
Status
Structural brief · companion to followup email · pre-Phase-1 setup correspondence

A lending vehicle, separate from the property-side SPV LPs, that originates mortgage-style loans to CoChalet co-owners — financing the 70% loan-to-value portion of their deeded-fraction subscriptions. Funded by family-office capital. Pioneer 01 sizing: a $1.5M facility covering the first 9 co-owner subscriptions across the first 3 chalets.

This brief lays out what is settled on the CoChalet side, what is the working default subject to counsel review, and what counsel guidance is sought before the setup call (~22 May+).

1 · Functional model

A co-owner subscribing to a deeded fraction in a Pioneer 01 chalet does not, today, have a financing path for the equity portion of the subscription. The Desjardins commercial mortgage sits at the property-level SPV LP and finances 50% of the property cost; accredited LP capital finances the other 50%; the co-owner pays the deeded-fraction equity (10% of property value) plus an upfront pre-sale fee and ongoing monthly holding fee out of pocket.

CoChalet Finance closes that gap. The vehicle originates a mortgage-style loan to the co-owner for 70% of the deeded-fraction equity amount. The co-owner brings 30% in cash at closing. The loan is secured by a hypothec on the co-owner's deeded fractional interest, ranking junior to the Desjardins first hypothec at the property level (Desjardins on the SPV LP's portion; CoChalet Finance on the individual co-owner's fractional interest).

The vehicle is funded by family-office capital. The mechanics of family-office participation (lender vs. equity holder; specific instrument shape; security pool structure) are the substantive legal-structural question put to TCJ in this brief.

Capital architecture

┌──────────────────────────────────┐ │ Family-Office Capital Partners │ │ (instrument form TBD by TCJ) │ └────────────┬─────────────────────┘ │ funding ▼ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ CoChalet Finance (lending vehicle) │ │ │ │ • Originates mortgage-style loans to COs (in-house) │ │ • Underwrites COs on dual-bureau credit (in-house) │ │ • Owns relationship with CO (in-house) │ │ • Outsources back-office servicing to QC servicer │ │ • Bears credit risk + retains net spread │ │ • Vehicle form TBD by TCJ recommendation │ └────────────────────┬─────────────────────────────────────┘ │ 70% LTV loan ▼ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Individual Co-Owner (deeded-fraction subscriber) │ │ │ │ • Brings 30% cash down │ │ • Receives 70% loan financing │ │ • Pledges hypothec on deeded fractional interest │ │ (junior to Desjardins first hypothec at SPV-LP) │ │ • Pays monthly P&I + monthly holding fee (separate) │ │ • Receives deeded fractional ownership + 37 nights/yr │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ (Property-side capital stack — separate from above — sits at the SPV LP: 50% Desjardins debt · 50% accredited-LP equity · CoChalet GP $0 sponsorship)

2 · CoChalet decisions (settled)

Settled on the CoChalet side · informational for counsel
The following decisions are settled on the CoChalet side. They define the functional requirements TCJ's structural recommendation must accommodate.
ElementDecisionRationale
Vehicle nameCoChalet FinanceDistinct from CoChalet Holdings (IP / brand apex), CoChalet GP / Management Entity (CCQ 2098 service entity), CoChalet Hospitality (CITQ permits + STR ops), and per-property SPV LPs
Funding sourceFamily-office capitalFirst close targets a defined pool of accredited family-office capital partners; identities and instrument structure subject to counsel review
BorrowerIndividual co-owner (natural person or personal trust / HoldCo)The deeded-fraction subscriber is the borrower. CoChalet Finance (proposed new E-5 lending-vehicle bracket in the entity stack) is the lender, originator, and in-house relationship servicer. The other CoChalet entities — CoChalet Holdings Inc. (E-1 · IP / brand apex), CoChalet GP / Management Entity Inc. (E-2 · CCQ 2098 service entity), CoChalet Hospitality Inc. (E-3 · CITQ permits + STR ops), and the per-property CoChalet Real-Estate SPV LPs (E-4) — are not parties to the loan
Loan-to-value (LTV)70% of co-owner's equity stake (i.e., 70% of the deeded-fraction value)Aligns with prime-residential mortgage convention in Canada
Cash down payment30% of co-owner's equity stakeStandard residential mortgage equity threshold
Term20 yearsStandard residential mortgage term length
Rate range8% to 12%Tiered by co-owner credit profile
Credit-underwriting basisDual-bureau pull (Equifax Canada + TransUnion Canada) · lower of the two scores governsConservative + industry-standard for Canadian mortgage underwriting
Rate-tier structure5 bands · 760+ → 8.0% · 720-759 → 9.0% · 680-719 → 10.0% · 640-679 → 11.0% · 600-639 → 12.0% · <600 declinedStandard prime-residential band structure adapted to specialty-lender pricing
Servicing modelHybrid — CoChalet Finance owns origination + relationship + default-decision authority; back-office (payment collection, statements, escrow, regulatory filings) outsourced to a Québec-based mortgage servicing partnerBrand control + operational scale; common for early-stage specialty lenders

3 · Pioneer 01 sizing

ItemAmount
Facility (initial)$1,500,000
Borrowers (Pioneer 01)9 co-owners
Chalets (Pioneer 01)3 (304 Cardinal Base · 370 MLT Junior · third TBD)
CO equity stake (per CO · 10% model)$132,500 (304 Cardinal Base) · $100,000 (370 MLT Junior) · ~$130,000 estimated (third chalet TBD)
Loan-amount-per-CO (70% LTV)$92,750 (304 Cardinal Base) · $70,000 (370 MLT Junior) · ~$91,000 estimated (third chalet)
Cash-down-per-CO (30%)$39,750 (304 Cardinal Base) · $30,000 (370 MLT Junior) · ~$39,000 estimated (third chalet)
Estimated facility drawdown (9 COs)~$735,000 – $945,000 depending on third-chalet sizing
Facility headroom~38–51% above drawdown — accommodates third-chalet cost adjustments, partial-cash co-owners, late-stage subscriptions, or working-capital at the lender level

The Pioneer 01 sizing is the launch case. The vehicle is intended to scale across subsequent acquisition waves; the structural design should accommodate scaling from ~10 loans (Pioneer 01) to ~30 (Wave 2), ~90 (Wave 3), and beyond without re-papering the foundation.

4 · Working defaults (subject to counsel review)

Set as working default · TCJ to confirm or adjust
Where a CoChalet-side decision touches consumer-protection law, securities law, regulatory licensing, or tax treatment, we set a working default for the brief but defer the binding choice to TCJ's recommendation in the setup call.
Decision areaWorking defaultWhy deferred
Loan-product shapeStandard amortizing P&I · closed for first 5 years · open thereafter · monthly P&I payments over 20-year termLPC art. 11.4 consumer-protection compliance may shape the loan-product mechanics if co-owners are characterized as consumer borrowers
Cure period + default mechanicsStandard 30-day notice + 30-day cure · acceleration on uncured default · forced-sale provision activates facilitated-resale mechanismConsumer-protection compliance + Québec hypothecary-loan default-procedure norms (CCQ 2761 et seq.)
Geographic scopeQuébec-resident borrowers, Pioneer 01 launchCross-jurisdictional extension is the substance of Q13 supplement item; Québec-only at launch keeps regulatory complexity bounded
Prepayment termsClosed first 5 years (3-month-interest prepayment penalty); open thereafterStandard Canadian mortgage product; specific penalty mechanics subject to LPC art. 11.4 review

5 · Counsel guidance sought · open questions for TCJ

The substantive legal-structural decisions · TCJ recommendation sought
The following items are the substantive legal-structural decisions that govern CoChalet Finance's design. We seek TCJ's recommendation on each at the post-Phase-1 setup call.

5.1 — Vehicle legal form

Four candidate structures considered (non-exhaustive):

(a) Inc. balance-sheet lender — CoChalet Finance as a private Québec corporation. Family-office capital comes in as senior secured debt to the corporation. The corporation lends to co-owners and keeps the spread. Family offices are creditors of CoChalet Finance, ranking senior to CoChalet's equity.

(b) Société en commandite lending fund — CoChalet Finance as an LP fund. Family offices subscribe as limited partners. Fund originates loans to co-owners. Returns flow through as fund distributions pro-rata to LP interest.

(c) CoChalet Holdings subsidiary — CoChalet Finance as a wholly-owned subsidiary of CoChalet Holdings Inc. Capitalized by a broader Pioneer round into CoChalet Holdings; capital flows down as equity into CoChalet Finance. Family offices invest at the Holdings level (debt or equity) and benefit from the broader CoChalet venture, not solely the lending spread.

(d) Hybrid — CoChalet provides initial equity to CoChalet Finance; family-office capital comes in as senior secured debt on top. Family offices get fixed return; CoChalet retains residual spread and equity upside.

Recommendation sought: which form best accommodates (i) family-office investor needs (return profile, security, liquidity, reporting) and (ii) Québec regulatory regime (mortgage-lender licensing, AMF jurisdiction, securities-law treatment of family-office interests).

5.2 — Family-office compensation model

Tied to the vehicle form. Whether family-office participants are:

The family-office side has been informally framed as expecting a commercial-default-risk-priced return profile (per Q12 in the May 13 supplement items). TCJ's view on which compensation model best fits a Québec-regulated family-office lending vehicle is sought.

5.3 — Regulatory licensing

Whether CoChalet Finance requires Québec mortgage-lender licensing, or qualifies under a commercial-loan exemption, or sits within another regulated category.

If the vehicle is a société en commandite fund (5.1.b), securities-law treatment of LP units (NI 45-106 exemption pathway) is the parallel question.

5.4 — Loan-product shape confirmation

Working default: standard amortizing P&I, closed first 5 years, open thereafter, monthly payments over 20-year term, 8–12% rate tiered by credit score.

LPC art. 11.4 may dictate specific consumer-protection compliance elements if co-owners are characterized as consumer borrowers under Québec consumer law. TCJ's confirmation or adjustment of the working default is sought.

5.5 — Hypothec mechanics

Security: hypothec on the co-owner's deeded fractional interest, registered at the Registre foncier.

Open: ranking vs. Desjardins first hypothec on the SPV LP; recourse perimeter (limited to the fractional interest, or extending to other co-owner assets / personal guarantee); cross-default with co-owner's monthly holding-fee obligations to the CoChalet GP / Management Entity.

5.6 — Tax structure

Interest income to family-office lender; interest deductibility for the co-owner borrower (depending on whether the deeded fraction is characterized as personal-use property, investment property, or principal residence for the co-owner); partnership-tax pass-through if structured as an LP fund; withholding-tax considerations for non-Québec or non-Canadian family-office participants.

5.7 — Consumer-protection compliance

LPC art. 11.4 — applicability to a private hypothecary loan from CoChalet Finance to an individual co-owner; required disclosures; cooling-off provisions; cure-period mechanics.

6 · Phase 1 vs Phase 2 placement

The May 13 post-call minutes identified five new supplement items folded into the Phase 1 docket: Q11 (buyback architecture), Q12 (family-office commercial-default risk), Q13 (cross-jurisdictional extension), Q14 (IP strategy referral), Q15 (independent personal-counsel referral).

CoChalet Finance squarely intersects with Q12 (the family-office side of the lending vehicle) but extends substantively beyond Q12 into vehicle design, regulatory licensing, and consumer-protection compliance. We propose that CoChalet Finance be treated as its own line item alongside Q11–Q15 — call it Q16 — for engagement-letter-mechanics scoping, rather than absorbed into Q12 in a way that may understate the breadth of structural review required.

TCJ's call on the Phase 1 vs Phase 2 placement of CoChalet Finance is also sought. Working assumption: CoChalet Finance is Phase 2 in substance (the legal opinion + vehicle setup operate on a longer arc than the May 22 Phase 1 target) but Phase 1 in scope-confirmation (we want the question of "is there a path" answered in the Phase 1 opinion's accredited-investor-LP and securities-characterization analysis so the vehicle setup work is not blocked).

7 · Next steps

ItemOwnerTiming
TCJ review of this briefMe Michel LebeufPre-setup call
Setup call (60 minutes)Justin Kausel + Me Michel Lebeuf + (optionally Me Jody Belly)Post-Phase-1-opinion delivery (~22 May+)
Engagement-letter scoping for CoChalet Finance vehicle setup as parallel TCJ engagementMe Michel LebeufFollowing the setup call
Family-office subscription documentation draftingTCJ + CoChaletAfter vehicle-form ratification
Co-owner loan-form template drafting (incl. LPC art. 11.4 compliance shape)TCJ + CoChaletAfter loan-product shape ratification
First Pioneer 01 loan originationCoChalet Finance · post-vehicle-incorporationConcurrent with first CO subscription closings, post-Phase-1-opinion

8 · Companion documents (privilege-circle reference set)