Lily McDonald, 24, glanced back toward her mother filming from behind the camera before pausing to answer.

“Yeah,” she said, laughing, “I’d say the last few days my life has totally changed on me once again.”

Then came the announcement, delivered with a nervous grin as if she was only beginning to appreciate what she had just done.

“I actually just bought a bakery in Muskoka.”

In the video posted to Instagram and TikTok on May 12, McDonald described quitting her job, buying a car and incorporating a company in preparation to reopen Bala’s long-running Don’s Bakery within weeks.

“And do I know how to bake?” her mother asked from off camera.

“Nope,” McDonald replied, shaking her head with a smirk. “Do I have a baker? No. Do I have employees? Probably, but I haven’t met them yet… this is going to go great!”

Over the following days, McDonald posted videos documenting the rush to prepare for opening day — meeting staff, cleaning the kitchen, organizing equipment and preparing recipes — while online viewers flooded the comments celebrating what many saw as the revival of one of Bala’s most recognizable seasonal businesses.

“This (owning the bakery) is surreal, and it means a lot to me for a lot of reasons. My parents met in the bakery. My cousins worked here. My mom worked here,” McDonald later told the online news outlet Muskoka Region. “So to say that I own it just really makes me feel proud.”

Documents and interviews reviewed by Muskoka411 show the proposed sale agreement for Don’s Bakery included the transfer of equipment, recipes, goodwill, branding and other business assets to McDonald. The deal never closed. On May 15, the bakery reopened under the “Don’s Bakery” name, with public-facing branding that linked the new operation to the bakery’s history, including references to “Don’s way,” “original recipes,” and McDonald as the bakery’s “sixth owner.”

“Nothing was ever purchased, no money changed hands, nothing. They just signed a lease with the landlord and opened the doors,” said a source familiar with the negotiations.

The proposed sale had evolved quickly from an informal inquiry to what Don’s Bakery owners Jana and Bryan Foster believed was an imminent transition.

The Fosters said McDonald, a former Don’s Bakery employee, first contacted them April 17 about purchasing the business ahead of the summer season. McDonald had worked at the bakery in various roles from 2013 to 2021, according to the Fosters, and was already familiar with its operations.

With Victoria Day weekend approaching and the bakery’s seasonal reopening only weeks away, the parties began preparing for a fast handover. A non-disclosure agreement was signed. Lawyers exchanged draft asset purchase agreements. The Fosters provided operational information, equipment lists and recipe materials, and began introducing McDonald to the people she would need if the bakery was going to open on time.

They connected McDonald with the bakery’s landlord, staff and vendors. On April 22, before the sale had closed, Jana Foster sent an email to staff and applicants announcing McDonald as Don’s Bakery’s new owner for the 2026 season.

The transaction, however, was not complete.

By late April, negotiations had become strained amid discussions about the bakery’s liabilities, including tax and lease issues. In a statement to Muskoka411, McDonald’s lawyer later said the proposed transaction failed after it became apparent that “the former owner’s business debts exceeded the representations that had been made.”

On May 8, McDonald texted Foster saying she would “not be proceeding” with the deal on the advice of her lawyer.

Four days later, McDonald posted a video to Instagram and TikTok announcing she had bought a bakery.

Don’s Bakery reopened under McDonald’s operation May 15.

“It felt like a punch in the stomach,” said Jana Foster, who told Muskoka411 she felt blindsided by the news.

Founded in 1947 by Don Lloyd, Don’s Bakery has long been one of Muskoka’s best-known seasonal institutions, drawing generations of tourists and cottagers to Bala for its butter tarts, doughnuts and longstanding place in cottage country culture.

Both the Fosters and McDonald described the bakery as something larger than a business — a community tradition worth preserving.

Jana and Bryan Foster took over Don’s Bakery in 2010 and raised their family around the operation, which they described as central to both their livelihood and family identity.

But in February 2024, the family’s lives changed permanently.

Jana Foster said she was driving behind her husband and children after their son’s hockey game near Vaughan when she watched a pickup truck run a red light, strike their vehicle and push it across the intersection into a hydro pole.

“I witnessed it right in front of me, my whole family getting hit,” Foster said. “I was the first person on the scene.”

Their 12-year-old son was rushed to SickKids Hospital for emergency brain surgery following a brain bleed and facial fractures. Months later, he required a second brain surgery.

Bryan Foster suffered a serious concussion, broken ribs and ongoing psychological trauma. According to Jana, he remembers little of the crash beyond waking up in an ambulance. Their daughter, who was eight years old at the time, escaped with relatively minor physical injuries and remained conscious throughout the collision.

“From that moment on, everything fell onto my shoulders,” Jana Foster wrote in a statement provided to Muskoka411.

Bryan was unable to drive for six months following the crash, while Jana attempted to balance her family’s medical needs with operating both Don’s Bakery in Bala and the family’s wholesale bakery business in Barrie largely on her own.

The family said the bakery’s financial struggles intensified after the collision as staffing shortages, debt and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic mounted. Jana said Bryan had previously handled much of the bakery’s sales work and that business began to decline sharply after the accident.

Eventually, the family decided they could no longer continue operating the business.

Jana Foster said their daughter, who worked behind the counter at Don’s Bakery last summer, was devastated when the family told their children they would need to let the bakery go.

“We hoped this tradition could at least continue in Bala,” Foster said.

That desire to preserve the bakery’s legacy was part of what initially made the proposed sale to McDonald feel hopeful to the family.

“We opened our books, shared our operations and invested thousands in legal fees, all under the belief that we were working toward a legitimate and respectful transition,” the Fosters wrote.

“To then witness the bakery reopen under the Don’s Bakery name, using our recipes, equipment, goodwill and decades-long reputation, without any completed purchase or legal transfer of assets, has been heartbreaking beyond words.”

In a statement to Muskoka411, McDonald’s lawyer confirmed the proposed purchase transaction did not proceed, but said McDonald later entered into a new lease directly with the landlord.

That lease gave McDonald a path to reopen and operate inside the former Don’s Bakery premises, but the bakery’s name, goodwill, equipment, recipes and business identity had been part of the proposed asset purchase agreement that ultimately never closed.

Muskoka411 asked McDonald’s lawyer whether his client maintains she acquired rights to operate under the Don’s Bakery name and identity. We did not receive a response to that question.

After the proposed transaction failed, Don’s Bakery entered bankruptcy. McDonald’s lawyer said she intends to negotiate with the bankruptcy trustee regarding business assets. He said reopening the bakery this summer helped preserve local employment that might otherwise have been lost.

McDonald declined multiple requests for an interview.

The post Don’s Bakery Reopens, But Purchase Deal Never Closed appeared first on Muskoka411.

Ontario Court Justice Philip Brissette delivered the verdict in Midland, ruling that the Crown had not proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Thompson, 65, had pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual assault related to incidents at a cottage in Port Carling involving two women whose identities are protected by a publication ban.

One woman had alleged Thompson touched her inappropriately while applying sunscreen on the dock. The other said he forced her to perform a sexual act in the middle of the night. Both testified that alcohol and marijuana were present throughout the weekend.

Brissette said the complainants and a third female guest testified “in an open and forthright manner” but expressed concerns about their sobriety and ability to reliably recall events, particularly regarding timing, consent, and physical interactions.

“There are too many significant reliability concerns,” the judge said in his decision. He noted one complainant “admitted blackouts in key parts of the sexual assault allegation,” and found Thompson’s account of the events to be “fairly reliable” and unaffected by impairment.

While Thompson denied any sexual misconduct, he acknowledged applying sunscreen with permission and described a later encounter as consensual. Brissette said he believed Thompson’s “firm and clear denial” on the sunscreen allegation, but expressed reservations about some aspects of his testimony, including his claim that none of the women appeared intoxicated.

“I have a hard time accepting that he didn’t see any signs of intoxication,” Brissette said, referring to testimony that Thompson had purchased tequila and observed the women drinking wine after hours in the sun.

Outside court, Thompson said he was relieved. “I had to go through almost three years of hell,” he said. “I just want to get on with my life.”

Thompson also claimed the prosecution was politically motivated, stating, “There are forces, and I am aware as to who they are, who have created this condition and situation.”

Defence lawyer Leora Shemesh said she was “incredibly delighted with the verdict,” calling it “a long, very torturous process.” She added: “I’m glad that he can go home today and believe that the justice system does work and it does work well.”

Thompson has served as a city councillor since 2003 and represents Scarborough Centre (Ward 21). He was re-elected in 2022 after being charged. Asked whether he intends to run again, he said he has not decided.

The Crown had argued Thompson used his status as a public official — then serving as one of Toronto’s deputy mayors — to lure the guests under the guise of a networking opportunity. The defence denied that, characterizing the allegations as “a witch hunt” and suggesting the women’s testimonies were inconsistent and uncorroborated.

Mayor Olivia Chow issued a brief statement following the verdict, saying she “respects the court’s decision.”

The post Michael Thompson Acquitted Of Sexual Assault In Muskoka Cottage Trial appeared first on Muskoka411.

Victoria Gregorio felt it in her bones, soaked and shivering in the driveway as she helped her father get the boat ready for another season on Six Mile Lake. She stepped inside to warm up, peeling off damp clothes, when she saw it — her father’s old Tommy Hilfiger sweater draped over the corner of his bed.

She pulled it on, heavy and warm, the fleece thick with years. Instantly, she was ten years old again, back on the lake, sitting beside her father. She could smell the woodsmoke curling off the campfire, hear the slap of water against the dock, taste the air steeped in pine and gasoline.

She looked down at the sleeve and ran her fingers over a small burn mark near the cuff. A spark from the fire, one summer night long ago. The memory flared: laughter in the dark, the glow of embers, the smell of a burning marshmallow gone too deep into the flames. The sweater carried all of it — every scuff, every fray: a record of summers past. A soft armour against forgetting.

Her father walked in, chuckling when he saw her. “Why are you wearing that old thing?”

Gregorio shrugged. “Because they don’t make anything like this anymore.”

She said it without thinking, but it hung in the air, undeniable. Clothes like this — heavy, built to last, made to be lived in — didn’t seem to exist anymore. Not in a world of stitches made to split and fibres made to fade. This sweater had endured. It had been through something. And somewhere along the way, it had gathered a soul.

Instead, most store racks were filled with fast fashion — made quick, sold quick, discarded quicker still. No story, no character, no longevity. Just profit.

Her father smiled, like he’d been waiting for her to figure it out. “Then make it yourself,” he said.

He had been one of eleven children, raised in a Macedonian household where nothing was wasted and no one waited for help that wasn’t coming. He built his own business that way — with his hands, his grit, and a belief that if something didn’t exist, you built it yourself.

He raised his daughter with that same ethic and a simple creed, now tattooed down her spine: “What you don’t change, you choose.” She wasn’t going to choose disposable clothes or the status quo. She wanted to make something with meaning, made to last — the kind of thing you’d fight to keep.

So she did.

She started working on Uncommon in 2020, spending more than a year developing custom fabric and building relationships with Canadian suppliers. The brand wasn’t built overnight — it was sewn together slowly, from scratch.

She sold her first 100 hoodies at Stackt Market in Toronto — made by hand, with no advertising, no social media, and no brand recognition. They sold out. Then she stepped back — took time to refine the business, the brand, the mission.

Uncommon officially launched to the public on October 15,  2024, on her father’s birthday. It was a full-circle moment — not just for the brand, but for the philosophy behind it.

Uncommon isn’t about chasing trends. It’s about slowing down, buying less, choosing better. It’s about clothes that become part of your life — vessels for memory. “We’ve been taught to buy fast and forget fast,” Gregorio said. “But I wanted to build a brand that asks something different of people. What if you bought one thing you really loved — and never let it go?”

She designed her first hoodie to feel like the sweater that started it all: heavy, soft, structured. “I wanted something that, after five years, would still feel like the one you reach for first,” she said. “Most sweaters don’t even survive the first wash.”

Even the swimwear came from a desire to do things differently — to make pieces that felt tailored, secure, and built to last. “You want your bathing suit to feel comfortable and supportive — something you’re actually excited to put on,” she said.

Gregorio sees Uncommon not just as a business, but a long-term mission: to break the status quo and rebuild consumer values from the ground up. Her philosophy is rooted in her father’s lessons: buy less, buy well, invest in what you love. “He always said, think about cost-per-wear. If it lasts and you love it, it’s worth it.”

When manufacturers told her no, she found a way around it — launching her own production company, Common Ground, to make Uncommon’s pieces the way she wanted. That network now helps other Canadian brands produce high-quality clothing close to home.

Uncommon grew quickly, fuelled by word of mouth and a loyal online following. Customers connected with more than just the fit — they were buying into a philosophy. Clothes made with care, designed to last, from a brand that cared where and how they were made.

“I wanted people to feel good about the clothes and where they came from,” Gregorio said. “Not just the fit, but the story.”

That story included a commitment to keeping production in Canada, supporting local jobs, and insisting on ethical manufacturing. It wasn’t the cheapest way — but it was the right one.

This summer, Gregorio brought Uncommon home. The brand’s first storefront opened in June, above Duke’s in Port Carling, with its windows open to the lake and light spilling across the floor. Inside, it’s raw and restrained — the stainless steel counters rest on stacked cinder blocks, with folded hoodies, swimwear and accessories placed neatly on soft wood tables. There’s a fridge with cold drinks, a breeze off the bay, and just enough room between the racks to let the clothes breathe. Gregorio is there most days, chatting with locals, explaining the brand, swapping stories.

“People ask me what makes us different,” she said. “It’s the idea that you’re not just buying a thing — you’re buying something you’ll live in, that’ll hold memories.”

Her father’s old sweater reminded her what that feels like. And in a way, she’s never really taken it off.

*This article is sponsored by Uncommon, a Canadian clothing brand inspired by the stories we wear.

Want to feature your business on Muskoka411? 

Email taylor@muskoka411.com for more information.

The post Uncommon: A Muskoka Inspired-Clothing Brand with Soul appeared first on Muskoka411.

“They’re such a welcoming community, they’re always willing to help out … and this time they’re the ones who need help,” said Kathryn McNully, who owns and operates Poppys.

Tickets cost $25 and are available online and in-store. The whale, a plush toy by London-based Jellycat, retails for $1,100. McNully said all raffle proceeds, and part of Poppys’ sales, will go to the Community Foundation of Newfoundland and Labrador’s North Shore Fire Recovery Fund, which supports families displaced by the Kingston wildfire.

“I thought what better to do than raffle this whale off, because the whale seems just very appropriate … to represent Newfoundland,” McNully said.

According to the foundation, the fund has raised $26,474.63 toward its $150,000 goal. CFNL, a registered charity, is waiving its cost recovery fees, allowing all donations to go directly to the affected communities.

The Kingston fire began in early August and has grown to more than 8,000 hectares, sweeping through several coastal communities and destroying homes, Cabot Academy elementary school in Western Bay, and local infrastructure.

“It’s devastating … we believe the elementary school is completely wiped out,” McNully said. “We still don’t know the extent of the damage just because it’s still ongoing, and it’s been such an unpredictable fire.”

McNully said her sister and uncle were among those evacuated, while her mother still lives in Small Point. “We believe our house is okay, but the town said that it’s still such a wild and unpredictable fire, we don’t know,” she said.

Small Point has long been a special place for her family. “I spent my summers picking berries with my pop, learning how to fish, learning how to fly fish, spending time with my cousins going up and down to the beach … watching whales on morning walks around the point,” McNully said. “It just feels like such a slice of paradise … it’s just one of a kind.”

She named the store after her grandfather, Vernon Hollett, whom she called Poppy. He is buried in Small Point.

“I just feel like now’s the time that we kind of have to learn from the Newfoundlanders and really give what we can and just do what we can to support this community,” she said.

The post Port Carling Store Raffles Giant Stuffed Whale For Newfoundland Fire Relief appeared first on Muskoka411.

Mark Sethi, 58, appeared by counsel in the Ontario Court of Justice, where his lawyer confirmed there are 13 separate case files — or informations — now active. These include both summary and indictable charges.

Sethi faces a series of sexual assault-related charges, including allegations dating back to 1999 and others connected to an incident in a Muskoka Taxi vehicle in 2023. Police have also laid at least one charge of committing an indecent act.

During Tuesday’s case management session, defence lawyer Domenic Basile said he expects to be able to propose trial dates for most of the matters at the next appearance, following discussions with Crown counsel.

The court scheduled a return appearance for July 21 at 2 p.m. in trial scheduling court. Some of the matters are expected to proceed to the Ontario Superior Court.

The case has remained in case management for several months, in part due to a change in Sethi’s legal representation after his previous lawyer withdrew, citing unpaid fees.

Sethi did not attend the case management proceeding, and the court issued a discretionary bench warrant allowing the matter to continue in his absence. Defence counsel is expected to file a formal designation of representation before the next court date.

At least some of the informations are subject to publication bans under the Criminal Code, which prohibit the release of details that could identify complainants.

Taxi Driver Charged With Sexual Assault In Gravenhurst

The post Muskoka Taxi Owner’s Case Heads To Trial Scheduling Next Month appeared first on Muskoka411.

Thompson, 65, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual assault stemming from allegations by two women who joined him at a Muskoka cottage on Acton Island over the Canada Day weekend in 2022. The trial began in Bracebridge last fall and has since moved through multiple jurisdictions due to scheduling conflicts.

The Crown and defence presented sharply opposing accounts of the events and the credibility of the witnesses. Crown attorney Mareike Newhouse said Thompson molested one complainant while applying sunscreen and sexually assaulted another during a late-night encounter. She said the three Crown witnesses — the two complainants and a third woman who attended the cottage — were credible and consistent enough to support the allegations, despite some variations in their testimony.

Newhouse argued Thompson exaggerated his testimony and prioritized his public image over telling the truth, describing him as “rehearsed,” “robotic,” and “disingenuous.” She said the accused misrepresented the level of intoxication at the cottage and disputed his claim that any sexual contact was consensual. According to the Crown, one complainant had clearly said “no” multiple times during the alleged late-night incident.

Defence lawyer Leora Shemesh countered that the Crown failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. She accused all three women of fabricating their allegations, calling their testimonies inconsistent and unreliable. Shemesh alleged the complainants conspired to misrepresent events and described the case as a “witch hunt” driven by personal motivations.

Shemesh said Thompson provided a straightforward, consistent account of what occurred and denied any wrongdoing. The defence maintained that any sexual activity was consensual and that the Crown failed to establish a motive for Thompson to lie.

Thompson has served on Toronto City Council since 2003, representing Ward 21, Scarborough Centre.

The post Judge To Deliver Verdict In Michael Thompson Sexual Assault Trial In September appeared first on Muskoka411.

But a closer look told a different story. The glass door was shattered. The windows were blackened with soot. Smoke stains curled up from the frames. Yellow police tape flapped in the wind. Inside was charred and empty.

From a distance, the building looked almost presentable. The facade held together. The name above the door still promised business as usual.

For those who knew the company that operated inside — Muskoka Boat Rentals — the image felt familiar: a polished veneer, a hollowed-out core.

A Pattern of Withheld Deposits

Over the course of more than a year, Muskoka411 conducted an in-depth investigation into Muskoka Boat Rentals, drawing on interviews with eight former customers, seven ex-employees, and two marina owners with decades of experience in the region’s boating industry.

Some sources requested anonymity due to concerns about potential reprisals. Muskoka411 granted this condition to encourage open and candid discussion of their experiences with MBR.

Their accounts point to a pattern in which the company wrongfully withheld damage deposits, often by attributing pre-existing or fabricated damage to customers, inflating repair costs, and issuing phony or unverifiable invoices.

Former staff also allege that superficial patch jobs were passed off as full repairs, with renters billed for work that was never properly done.

Muskoka Boat Rentals denies the allegations. Two current managers, Britney Ottobre and Bill Mayhew, defended the company’s practices in separate interviews.

“All Our Customers Are Like Our Family” – Muskoka Boat Rental’s Website

One of those customers was Matt Beck, who rented a wakeboard boat from Muskoka Boat Rentals in September 2019. He had never used the company before.

Beck was staying at a Muskoka cottage with friends and family and had found MBR’s website, where he selected a wakeboard boat for a two-day rental. “Our partnership with our clients is formed through open and candid communication founded on mutual trust, honesty and reliability… All our customers are like our family,” the homepage read.

On the morning of the rental, Beck and his group arrived at the company’s Gravenhurst office. They were asked to complete paperwork and leave a $5,000 damage deposit — standard for boats over 24 feet. The process took nearly an hour. Then the boat was brought in on a trailer.

“That’s when they started to be a little more sketchy,” Beck said. Staff asked them to inspect the boat for existing scratches or damage. There was no formal documentation, only a suggestion to take photos.

“It was basically all on us,” he said. “They were like, ‘I recommend you take photos so that you have a record.’ There were a number of scratches on it, and I was surprised there was not more of a formal way for these scratches to be tracked.”

Beck and his friends photographed every visible mark. “They pointed out even specks of dust,” he said. “At one point, one of my friends said, ‘I don’t know if we should be renting from these guys. This is the most intense thing I’ve ever seen.’”

The launch that followed didn’t inspire confidence. “They didn’t quite have the right trailer for [the boat],” said Beck. “They struggled to get it in the water. My brother and my friend both own boats and were almost laughing — it was the most amateur boat launch they had seen.”

“That was a big red flag. He was trying to charge us for something that clearly wasn’t our fault.”
— Matt Beck

Once in the water, the boat ran fine. They tied it up overnight at their rental cottage dock using proper bumpers, then returned it the next day.

Getting it out of the water was worse. The trailer had no winch, so the staff used a ratchet strap to pull the boat back on.

During the post-inspection, Beck said, a staff member quickly claimed the wakeboard tower was bent. “I was like, ‘That’s impossible. We didn’t even use the tower.’” He was told the tower often bent when customers parked inside a boathouse. “I said, ‘We had no boathouse. Just a dock.’ He said, ‘Well, there’s nothing I can do about it; it’s bent.’”

Beck pulled up photos taken during the initial inspection. After 10 to 15 minutes of back-and-forth, the staffer acknowledged the tower had already been bent. “That was a big red flag,” Beck said. “He was trying to charge us for something that clearly wasn’t our fault.”

The inspection continued. This time, the staffer crawled under the trailer — something Beck said had not been done earlier — and pointed to a scratch on the hull. “He said it was from us,” Beck said. “But we were in deep water the whole time. A lot of us have driven boats for years. If we’d hit something, we would have felt it.”

MBR said the deposit would be held. Beck’s group objected. “We said, maybe you did the damage loading the boat,” he said. “But they were adamant.”

Weeks passed with no response to follow-up emails. “I kind of assumed we were going to lose our deposit,” said Beck.

He contacted several repair shops, which estimated that the scratch could be fixed for a few hundred dollars. MBR charged $1,000 without providing a receipt or invoice and returned the remaining $4,000.

Muskoka Boat Rentals was founded in 2015 by German businessman Roland Hejna. From its location at the Gravenhurst Wharf, the company has become one of the most prominent boat rental providers in Muskoka, with a fleet of more than 80 watercraft and roughly 30 seasonal staff each summer, according to company managers.

On its website, MBR describes itself as “the perfect business that suits your needs,” promising “personalized treatment” and “fun-filled summer vacations” that keep loyal customers coming back each year.

For most renters, the process begins and ends with paperwork, a deposit, and a boat. Few would think to ask who owns the company or what kind of business model sustains it.

But within Muskoka’s marina community, Hejna’s name has long raised eyebrows.

“What’s happening and what [Hejna] has done to people for 20 years and gotten away with in Muskoka is absolutely ludicrous,” said one local marina owner, who has known of Hejna through years of marina acquisitions, lawsuits, and closures.

Public records, court documents, and interviews with former colleagues reveal a pattern of financial collapse and legal disputes that stretches back well before MBR — and, according to critics, mirrors some of the same tactics described by its former customers and employees.

A Business Built on Damage?

Bobby rented a boat from Muskoka Boat Rentals in the summer of 2022. The trip ended without incident. His damage deposit was returned.

Then, in January 2023, nearly six months later, he noticed a new $3,000 charge on his credit card from MBR.

“I saw ‘Muskoka Boat Rentals’ charged for like $3,000, and I was like, ‘What?’” he said in an interview with Muskoka411. “Obviously, I knew something was up.”

He called the company, but the call went to voicemail. He didn’t wait for a response. Instead, he contacted his bank and disputed the charge.

The refund came through immediately. His bank told him it would handle the case from there.

Bobby said he never received an explanation from MBR — no call, no email, no invoice. Just the charge.

David P. rented a boat from MBR in the summer of 2022. On the final day of his trip, while returning to the marina, he accidentally veered to the wrong side of a marker and struck submerged rocks.

“There was some propeller damage, so we knew we were going to be subject to paying for the damages,” he said.

MBR staff inspected the boat and estimated the repair would cost between $500 and $1,000. David was told the balance of his $3,000 damage deposit would be refunded within a week, and that an invoice would follow.

But weeks passed. The refund never came. Nor did the invoice. When he called the company, no one could provide details.

“The communication seemed fishy,” he said. He turned to the internet and found dozens of reviews describing similar issues — withheld deposits, unanswered emails, unexplained charges.

David suspected MBR had curated many of its glowing reviews to obscure real complaints. “It became really evident that they were creating [fake] reviews themselves… and then you start to see all the accurate ones about the damage deposits.”

After two and a half months of follow-up attempts, David finally reached a manager, who told him the repair costs had exceeded the deposit and he wouldn’t be refunded.

“I told [the manager], ‘I figured you would say that. I’m pretty convinced you guys are running a fraudulent organization.’ He cursed at me and hung up the phone.”

David reported the charge to his bank and received a temporary refund. But MBR disputed the claim, submitting an invoice and asserting lost rental revenue. The bank reviewed the documentation and sided with MBR, recharging David the full $3,000.

He also contacted the local police. “They told me they weren’t going to do anything about it,” he said. “They said this was a small claims court matter.”

In the end, David gave up. “It wasn’t worth the energy or the cost to fight it further.”

In an interview with Muskoka411, MBR manager Bill Mayhew dismissed the allegations, saying most complaints arose from disagreements over damages and repair costs.

“The only time we get complaints is when a customer feels like they have not damaged a boat or that we are overcharging for the cost of repairs,” said Mayhew. “But everything is explained to them before, during, and after the rental.”

Mayhew said propeller damage — the most common issue — can be more costly than customers realize. Even a minor chip or bend, he said, can throw the propeller out of balance and affect the drive shaft, which “alone is about $1,200, not including labour.”

He added that lost rental revenue also factors into the bill.

“That’s where the fucking negativity comes from, especially on Google,” he said.

MBR does not shop around for the best deal on repairs, Mayhew added. Instead, the company gives all repair work to a single shop in Bracebridge, though he declined to name it. “I can’t share that information,” he said.

According to a former MBR manager, the deposit disputes were no accident. In an interview with Muskoka411, the ex-employee described what they said was a systematic effort to charge customers for damages they didn’t cause, or for repairs that were never completed.

“We would have a chip on the skeg, or we would have a big chip on a prop and [Hejna] would have a [staff] putty it, sand it all down, and then paint it so it looks brand new,” the former manager said. “The next couple of rounds out, even if you hit a bunch of weeds, it would take that chip out again because it’s just putty.”

They said the repair materials weren’t marine-grade—just resin and cosmetic patchwork. However, customers were charged as if the parts had been fully replaced.

When customers requested invoices, the former manager said that fake ones were often created.

“He would send a bogus invoice because the boats would never leave the property,” they said. “He would say there is travel time from here to the shop. I think we would charge $150 each way. Then he would put a bogus bill together and charge like $1,500 for a prop… even when there was nothing wrong with the shaft.”

Staff sometimes pushed back, but they were selective about how far they could go. “People would complain, but they didn’t want to lose their jobs,” the former manager said.

Another former manager, Ryan Hebb, who worked at MBR from 2016 to 2022, also told Muskoka411 he believed customer deposits were wrongfully withheld.

“Being a manager, I had to deal with all the issues,” Hebb said. “They all had to come through me when I was there, so I had to deal with all the angry customers.”

A separate former manager alleged that Hebb directly participated in the deposit scheme. Hebb denied this, but acknowledged that such practices occurred during his time at the company.

Taken together, the stories from customers and former employees suggest more than a few billing disputes or isolated oversights. They describe a consistent set of practices — undocumented inspections, superficial repairs, and inflated or fabricated invoices — that, according to multiple sources, were central to how Muskoka Boat Rentals operated.

Dozens of online reviews echo those same concerns. Over the past several years, at least 72 publicly posted complaints reference withheld deposits, surprise charges, and unresponsive staff.

And for those familiar with the man behind the company, none of it was a surprise.

Online Reviews of Muskoka Boat Rentals

1 of 83

The Man Behind the Boats

Roland Hejna’s business history predates Muskoka Boat Rentals, and for some, it explains what came next.

Before launching MBR, he ran a sprawling network of marinas and vehicle rental companies in Muskoka. The enterprise collapsed under the weight of more than $59 million in debt and a civil fraud ruling that found Hejna had committed cheque kiting. This banking scheme creates the illusion of available funds by rapidly transferring cheques between accounts.

Hejna, who sometimes goes by his middle name Christopher, immigrated to Canada from Germany, where he had operated a vehicle leasing business near Dresden. His first Ontario company, New Ark Marina, was registered in 2002 and operated on Lake Muskoka. A year later, he launched Muskoka Toy Rentals, offering high-end sports cars for rent. Over the next several years, he expanded aggressively — acquiring or leasing marinas in Innisfil, Port Carling, Fenelon Falls, Huntsville and Minett.

At its peak, Hejna’s businesses employed about 85 people, according to court filings and local media reports. Then, in 2007, everything began to unravel.

That spring, the Royal Bank of Canada sued Hejna, alleging he had engaged in cheque kiting to fraudulently access millions in credit. The court later appointed Grant Thornton Ltd. as receiver, which seized Hejna’s assets and took over operations. As of December 2006, court documents show Hejna’s companies owed more than $59 million to creditors, including $15.3 million to RBC, $8.5 million to GE Commercial Distribution Finance, and another $30 million in outstanding mortgages.

Boats were seized from marinas. Luxury vehicles were towed off the lots. A marina owner recalled: “There were tow trucks everywhere just repossessing everything. People’s boats that were being rented were being repossessed on the water.”

In 2013, Ontario Superior Court Justice Susan E. Healey found Hejna had knowingly engaged in cheque kiting and ordered him to pay $6.4 million to RBC. Because the judgment involved fraud, it could not be discharged through bankruptcy.

“There were tow trucks everywhere just repossessing everything. People’s boats that were being rented were being repossessed on the water.”
— Marina owner

Hejna also faced criticism from the court-appointed receiver and other creditors. In a 2007 affidavit, he denied wrongdoing and rejected the claim that he had misled lenders or misused company funds. “Despite the criticisms levelled by the interim receiver,” he wrote, “there is no evidence that I have ever conducted my affairs in a manner where I absconded or dissipated the companies’ assets for my personal use. Mediocre business management should not be automatically equated with any type of intentional wrongdoing.”

In 2017, Hejna’s name resurfaced in the Paradise Papers — a global leak of offshore financial records that revealed how individuals and companies used tax havens to conceal assets and avoid oversight. Hejna was linked to a Bermuda-based company, CRK Marketing and Development Inc., which had previously been referenced in Ontario court proceedings related to the collapse of his marina businesses.

“Throughout this bankruptcy, Roland Hejna becomes this horrible name associated with Muskoka,” said one local marina owner who knew Hejna during his earlier ventures. “No one wanted a part of him after he had ripped off everybody. But then, all of a sudden, MBR appears. Somehow, he has siphoned out MBR and has continued to operate MBR until today.”

On July 8, 2014, Hejna registered the name Muskoka Boat Rentals. The following winter, he purchased the Gravenhurst Wharf building for $300,000 through a separate corporation. That same year, he secured a contract to operate the waterfront services at Taboo Resort on Lake Muskoka. By the summer of 2015, MBR was renting boats from both locations. Hejna ran the business with his brother-in-law, Arman Simonaya.

Online, the company promised trust, reliability and personalized service. But by 2016, reviews were appearing that told a different story: customers describing unexpected charges, withheld deposits and silence when they asked for receipts.

In 2019, Taboo Resort ended its partnership with Muskoka Boat Rentals.

“Taboo ended their relationship with Muskoka Boat Rentals (MBR) in 2019 as a result of their problems with customer service,” said Ryan Chatwin, director of property management, in a written statement to Muskoka411. “We provided assistance to our guests who were having issues with MBR. Since then, we have had no interaction with MBR or any of their affiliates.”

Chatwin and the resort’s managing director, Nigel Hollidge, declined to be interviewed further and did not respond to additional questions about the nature or frequency of complaints.

“When I was there, I heard that all the time,” said a former MBR employee who worked the waterfront at Taboo as a teenager. “People would come back and say they didn’t get their deposit back.”

A Suspicious Fire

In early 2023, the company drew fresh attention — not from customers or reviewers, but from emergency crews.

Just before 4 a.m. on March 22, a fire was reported at Muskoka Boat Rentals’ building at the Gravenhurst Wharf. Firefighters arrived to find the structure engulfed in flames. The blaze caused an estimated $750,000 in damage.

Investigators deemed the fire “suspicious” and launched a joint probe involving the Gravenhurst Fire Department, the Ontario Fire Marshal and the Ontario Provincial Police. For months, no charges were laid and the cause was not publicly released.

That changed in April 2025, when 30-year-old Carlos Pena-Torrez pleaded guilty to arson. According to court records and media reports, surveillance footage showed him leaving a Toronto residence the night of the fire and arriving at the Wharf around 1:45 a.m. Location data placed him at the scene until shortly after 2:30 a.m., when he returned to Toronto. Gasoline was used to ignite the fire.

Pena-Torrez, who has reported ties to organized crime, was separately sentenced to 12 years for the attempted murder of a reputed Montreal Mafia figure. He received two years for the Gravenhurst arson.

Whether he acted alone or on behalf of someone else remains unclear. Police have not stated whether any connection to Muskoka Boat Rentals or its owner, Hejna, was investigated or ruled out. Muskoka411 reached out to the Ontario Provincial Police to confirm whether Hejna had ever been considered a suspect or whether any link between him and Pena-Torrez was explored. As of publication, no response has been received. Hejna has not been charged with any offence in relation to the fire.

In an interview with Muskoka411, MBR manager Bill Mayhew confirmed that investigators questioned him about his whereabouts the night of the fire.

Several former MBR employees told Muskoka411 they did not believe the blaze was accidental. Some speculated it may have been set to destroy company records, and pointed to the timing, which coincided with the start of this investigation, as suspicious.

None of the allegations have been proven.

Two years later, the office at 165 Steamship Bay Road remains unused.

The windows are still blackened, and the doors are boarded up. The building stands quiet, unchanged. In its place, a shipping container now sits nearby, converted into a makeshift office for Muskoka Boat Rentals.

Long before the fire, renters were already turning to the courts.

Jamie Gilmore rented a pontoon boat from Muskoka Boat Rentals in August 2022. The trip ended without incident — or so he thought.

On the day he returned the boat, MBR staff told him there was no damage and that his $3,000 deposit would be refunded within a few days.

It wasn’t. After nine follow-up calls and a visit to the Wharf office by a friend on his behalf, Gilmore had only received $1,000 back. Staff told him a manager would call. No one did.

On his tenth call, Gilmore changed his approach.

“I figured it would get their attention,” he said. “I’m a lawyer… I’m used to litigation, so why not issue a claim?”

He filed a small claims lawsuit. It cost him $108. Shortly after MBR received the Statement of Claim, the remaining $2,000 was refunded.

Gilmore acknowledged that for most people, filing a claim might not be practical — especially if they had to hire a lawyer. “Unless you know how to do it yourself, it’s probably not worth it,” he said.

Enforcement Gaps Leave Renters on Their Own

Despite years of complaints, no provincial or federal agency has stepped in to investigate Muskoka Boat Rentals or regulate its practices.

Customers attempted to recover their deposits through credit card chargebacks. While some saw results, others had the charges reinstated after MBR submitted invoices or claimed lost revenue.

Others pursued legal remedies through small claims court or contacted police and consumer protection agencies. However, in each case, the issue was treated as a civil dispute, outside the scope of enforcement.

In Ontario, there is no central regulator for boat rental companies and no standard process for resolving deposit disputes. Federal rules govern safety, but financial practices — including how damage is assessed and deposits returned — are left largely unmonitored.

That leaves renters at the mercy of a company’s honesty. And when trust breaks down, there’s little recourse.

According to a former MBR office manager, withholding damage deposits accounted for a significant portion of the company’s daily revenue. On busy days, they said, MBR could bring in $70,000 to $80,000, with up to $20,000 coming from partially or fully withheld deposits.

They estimated that more than half—and possibly up to 75 percent—of customers lost some or all of their deposits.

But the consequences, sources say, go beyond financial loss. They point to a business model that undermines safety, erodes trust in the tourism industry, and puts the region’s reputation at risk.

“When damage becomes the business model, safety gets in the way,” said a longtime marina owner in Muskoka. “They’re renting to anybody, and they’re not giving proper (safety) instructions. They’re looking for damage. The whole goal of their business is damage. They don’t give a fuck about safety. They don’t give a fuck about who they rent to.”

The result, they said, is more accidents, more rescues — and a rental experience that looks nothing like the glossy brochure. “I’ve personally had to save the life of one of their clients,” the marina owner added.

Gravenhurst has long been celebrated as the “Gateway to Muskoka Lakes,” a title rooted in more than 150 years of boating heritage. Since the 1800s, visitors have arrived by train to Muskoka Wharf Station and boarded steamships to explore the region’s vast and scenic waterways. Today, many still begin their trips at the Wharf — and are greeted by Muskoka Boat Rentals.

“People save money all year to bring their family up to Muskoka,” said a former MBR manager. “Then there’s a ‘mishap’ with a prop that was already broken, and they get charged. I love Muskoka. If I were a tourist and that happened to me, I’d never come back. You hurt people. And I’m not into hurting people.”

The former manager eventually resigned over what they described as persistent ethical concerns.

Muskoka Boat Rentals continues to operate in 2025. Its boats still launch from Gravenhurst Wharf.

Owner Roland Hejna did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Muskoka411 attempted to contact him by phone and a hand-delivered letter to the MBR office.

Muskoka411 is continuing to investigate. If you have firsthand knowledge about the 2023 fire at Muskoka Boat Rentals’ Gravenhurst location — or past business dealings involving MBR or its owner, Roland Hejna, including real estate investment disputes — we welcome any information, documents, or accounts that could help clarify unanswered questions. Confidentiality will be respected. Please contact Taylor West at taylor@muskoka411.com.

The post Gravenhurst Boat Rental Company Accused Of Withholding Deposits appeared first on Muskoka411.

“I did not commit any sexual assault that weekend or any other time,” Thompson, 65, testified in a Barrie courtroom.

Thompson has pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual assault involving separate incidents at a cottage on Acton Island. The alleged victims, along with a third woman who is a witness, are protected under a publication ban.

Crown attorney Mareike Newhouse challenged Thompson’s testimony that a sexual encounter with one of the complainants was consensual and initiated by her. She suggested instead that Thompson sought out the woman in the early morning hours, brought her to the basement, and ignored her repeated refusals.

“I’m going to suggest that by the time you got to her room you were all over her physically and she told you ‘no’ — multiple times,” Newhouse said.

“Absolutely not,” Thompson replied.

The complainant has previously testified that she was heavily intoxicated and awoke to Thompson guiding her to a downstairs bedroom, where she said he placed his genitals on her face and ejaculated after she told him she did not want to engage in sexual activity.

Thompson told the court Thursday that he was asleep when the woman, whom he said was not drunk, entered his room naked around 3 a.m. and invited him for a drink. He said the two kissed in the kitchen, then went downstairs where she performed oral sex on him.

He denied trying to initiate intercourse or using force, saying, “She handled herself as she saw fit.”

The Crown also questioned Thompson about the second complainant, who testified earlier that he inappropriately touched her while applying sunscreen. Thompson denied touching her breasts or buttocks, saying she asked him to apply lotion to her back and that he did so briefly and respectfully.

Much of the day’s proceedings focused on Thompson’s conduct toward a university student who attended the cottage weekend as a guest. While she is not a complainant, she previously testified that Thompson encouraged her to drink, made inappropriate suggestions, and tried to impress her.

Newhouse put it to Thompson that he acted with a sexual motive toward the woman. He denied that suggestion, describing himself as a mentor and saying he often helps young people professionally and financially.

“I had no plans to engage in sexual activity with her,” Thompson testified.

His lawyer, Leora Shemesh, objected to the line of questioning, arguing it related to a person not involved in the charges and could amount to inadmissible character evidence. Justice Phillip Brissette allowed the questions, stating they pertained to credibility but expressed caution about their relevance.

The trial is scheduled to resume June 23, when Shemesh will re-examine Thompson before both parties present closing arguments.

The post Thompson Denies Sexual Assault As Crown Completes Cross-Examination appeared first on Muskoka411.

The decision came Friday after defence lawyer Leora Shemesh suggested she might seek a mistrial, citing what she described as a new theory advanced by the Crown late in Thursday’s proceedings.

Ontario Court Justice Phillip Brissette said he was satisfied the Crown’s questioning pertained to credibility and not to introducing new allegations. “I’m certainly satisfied with the direction the Crown wants to go,” he said during a virtual hearing.

The dispute arose during Shemesh’s objection to how Crown attorney Mareike Newhouse questioned Thompson about his interactions with a 22-year-old university student who attended the 2022 Canada Day weekend at a cottage on Acton Island in Muskoka, where the alleged assaults took place.

Thompson, 65, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual assault involving two other women who attended the same gathering. The student is a witness, not a complainant. All three women’s identities are protected under a publication ban.

During Thursday’s cross-examination in Barrie, Newhouse repeatedly questioned Thompson about his intentions toward the student, including why he offered her a ride home from Yorkville and later invited her to the cottage. “You had known her for at most five days, right?” Newhouse asked. “Yes,” Thompson replied.

Newhouse also presented text messages in which Thompson described the weekend as a chance to “unwind at the cottage,” and suggested he shifted the narrative after initially inviting the woman under the impression it was a networking event. Thompson denied misleading her and said the trip was intended for relaxation, not career advancement.

The exchange grew more contentious when Newhouse suggested Thompson had a sexual interest in the woman, stating he had been “trying to get in her pants.” She later referred to the student as a “victim” before correcting the term.

Shemesh objected, arguing the Crown had not raised these implications during the student’s testimony earlier in the trial and that the defence had no chance to address them at the time. “She is a witness,” Shemesh said in court. “Not a complainant.”

The judge paused proceedings Thursday afternoon to allow counsel to consider their positions. On Friday, following clarification from Newhouse, Brissette ruled the Crown could proceed with cross-examination.

The trial will resume on May 29.

Thompson Denies Assault, Says Sexual Contact Was Consensual

The post Judge Allows Crown To Continue Cross-examining Thompson After Mistrial Concern appeared first on Muskoka411.

Testifying in his own defence, Thompson said he did not pressure anyone to drink alcohol, denied any non-consensual physical contact, and maintained that no guests were inebriated. “Absolutely not,” he said. “I had no agenda.”

The 65-year-old Scarborough Centre councillor has pleaded not guilty to two counts of sexual assault. Both complainants’ identities are protected under a publication ban.

Thompson told the Ontario Court of Justice that one of the complainants kissed him, flirted with him throughout the day, and later entered his bedroom naked. He said the woman poured two shots of tequila and led him downstairs, where she performed oral sex on him. Thompson said she stopped partway through, showered, and asked if he had a condom. When he said he didn’t, the encounter ended.

“At any point in your mind, did you believe she was not consenting?” defence lawyer Leora Shemesh asked.

“No,” Thompson replied.

Earlier in the trial, the woman testified that she had been heavily intoxicated, that Thompson woke her up and guided her to another room, and that she repeatedly told him no before he ejaculated on her face and chest.

Addressing the other allegation, Thompson said the complainant had asked him to apply sunscreen on her back while they were on the dock. He said he placed the lotion only on her back and denied touching her buttocks or breasts.

The complainant previously testified that Thompson massaged her under her bathing suit and made her feel uncomfortable, but she said she agreed in the moment to avoid conflict.

Thompson also rejected testimony from another woman, a student who attended the weekend and said he and another guest encouraged her to drink and made inappropriate comments. While she is not one of the complainants, her testimony was used by the Crown to support a pattern of behaviour. Thompson said she became distant after he declined to help her with education expenses and later refused to reimburse her for a concert ticket.

Near the end of the day, Thompson became emotional while recalling the moment he learned about the charges. He said he initially thought it was a prank when contacted by an OPP officer. “I was just literally shocked,” he said, appearing to cry in the witness box.

The judge-alone trial continues today.

The post Thompson Denies Assault, Says Sexual Contact Was Consensual appeared first on Muskoka411.