Dave and Betty Wilder arranged a loan for their company, Wilder Enterprises Ltd., and personally guaranteed the loan. Janson was the manager of their bank branch and told them that he thought he could get authorization from his regional office for a fixed term at a fixed rate of interest. However, the loan documents showed a loan repayable on demand with a floating interest rate. When the company experienced financial difficulty, the Wilders negotiated an arrangement whereby the bank increased its credit to the company, agreed to honour the company’s cheques, and agreed to refrain from demanding payment for a specified time. In return, the Wilders gave more security. Without warning, the bank stopped honouring cheques and appointed a receiver. Wilder Enterprises went bankrupt, and the bank called the guarantees, all of which permitted the bank to “deal with the customer as the bank may see fit”. Will the Wilders be obligated on their guarantees? How sympathetic are the courts likely to be? Could the Wilders have structured their affairs differently to avoid high personal risk for the escalating debts of their failing business?