Real Estate Council Of Ontario Regulatory Digest Issue 2: July September 2013
The Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) administers and enforces the Real Estate and Business Brokers Act, 2002 (REBBA 2002) and its regulations on behalf of the Ontario government. REBBA 2002 requires registered real estate professionals to conduct themselves and their businesses in a manner that protects consumers in real estate transactions. Failure to do so could lead to regulatory action. Further, with few exceptions, anyone who trades in real estate must be registered under REBBA 2002. Trading in real estate without the benefit of registration or an exemption could lead to prosecution under REBBA 2002. RECO s legal library RECO s mission is excellence in the delivery of regulatory services that protect the public interest and enhance consumer confidence in the real estate profession. RECO s vision is public trust and confidence in Ontario s real estate profession. Contact us at: 3300 Bloor Street West West Tower, Suite 1200 Toronto, ON M8X 2X2 Tel: 416-207-4800 Toll Free: 1-800-245-6910 Fax: 416-207-4820 www.reco.on.ca regulatorydigest@reco.on.ca Twitter: @RECOhelps YouTube: RECOhelps RECO s enforcement of REBBA 2002 helps to ensure public trust and confidence in Ontario s real estate profession. The Regulatory Digest is an online resource that summarizes RECO s regulatory actions involving: the Registrar issuing a Notice of Proposal to revoke, suspend, refuse to renew, or apply conditions to a registration; offences related to REBBA 2002 and its regulations resulting in prosecution in the Provincial Offences Courts; breaches of the Code of Ethics that are referred to a hearing in front of the Discipline Committee or Appeals Committee; and mediation of complaints to a resolution agreeable to all parties. Decisions are not published until the appeal period has expired or the appeal has been heard or abandoned. For the latest decisions, visit RECO s website (www.reco.on.ca). Page 1 of 10
Licence Appeal Tribunal A registrant may appeal a Registrar s proposal to the Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT). The Tribunal handles appeals under several statutes that deal with both licences and registrations. A registrant seeking an appeal must provide written notice within 15 days of the proposal. Jaswant S. Sekhon (also known as Jas Sekhon), Salesperson Brampton, ON Date decision released: July 23, 2013 Type: Revocation of Registration Past conduct afforded reasonable grounds for belief that Mr. Sekhon would not carry on business in accordance with law and with integrity and honesty. Mr. Sekhon requested a hearing before LAT. After a hearing, his registration was revoked. Page 2 of 10
Provincial Offences Act Offences under REBBA 2002, other than violations of the Code of Ethics, may be prosecuted in the Ontario Provincial Offences Court. Individuals convicted of offences are subject to fines of up to $50,000 and/or prison terms of up to two years less a day. Corporations are subject to fines of up to $250,000. In addition to specified fines, convicted parties are also subject to a victim surcharge. The surcharge is collected by the Court for the Victims Justice Fund. Davinder Singh Gill (also known as Dave Gill), Broker Mississauga, ON Date of conviction: July 17, 2013 Date of sentencing: July 17, 2013 Furnished false information on an application for registration regarding education by falsely reporting the completion of required continuing education courses. Mr. Gill pleaded guilty to one count of furnishing false information in an application for registration. He was fined $5,000. Scott Macinnes, Unregistered Date of conviction: July 25, 2013 Date of sentencing: July 25, 2013 Unregistered trading in real estate. Mr. Macinnes pleaded guilty to one count of performing the functions of a broker or salesperson while not registered under REBBA 2002. He was fined $5,000. Paramjit Singh Birdi, Broker Mississauga, ON Date of conviction: June 13, 2013 Date of sentencing: September 12, 2013 Falsified information relating to a trade in real estate. Furnished false information or documents relating to a trade in real estate. Mr. Birdi was found guilty on two counts of falsifying information relating to a trade in real estate and two counts of furnishing false information or documents relating to a trade in real estate. He was fined $6,000. Page 3 of 10
Discipline Committee & Appeals Committee Matters that involve alleged breaches of the Code of Ethics may be referred to the Discipline Committee for a hearing. Individuals found in violation may be ordered to take educational courses, pay a fine of up to $25,000, and may be required to pay fixed or imposed costs. Keywords are provided for each summary to help readers locate similar Discipline and Appeals decisions using the search feature available on RECO s website under Complaints & Enforcement. Daniel Plowman (also known as Dan Plowman), Salesperson Whitby, ON Date decision released: July 2, 2013 Failed to clearly and prominently disclose, or disclose at all, on a website the name in which he was registered and the brokerage that employed him. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Mr. Plowman was ordered to pay a fine of $5,000 by November 29, 2013. Advertising Kenneth Priestman (also known as Ken Priestman), Salesperson Toronto, ON Date decision released: July 2, 2013 Failed to inform another registrant before the property sold that his brokerage was representing both the buyer and seller in the transaction. Failed to inform another registrant before or during the offer presentation that he agreed to reduce his commission to facilitate the sale. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Mr. Priestman was ordered to pay a fine of $13,000 and to successfully complete the Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA) Real Property Law course by December 31, 2013. Competing / Multiple Offers, Disclosure General, Disclosure Role, Multiple Representation, Negotiations, Representation (commission), Unprofessional Conduct Page 4 of 10
Erik Turski, Broker Mississauga, ON Date decision released: August 20, 2013 Failed to notify the seller, further to his client s instruction and within the time prescribed in the financing condition, that his client was unable to secure financing and wished to be released from the agreement. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Mr. Turski was ordered to pay a fine of $10,000 and to successfully complete the Real Estate Institute of Canada s Ethics and Business Practice course by July 18, 2014. Conscientious and Competent Service, Duty to Client, Mortgage Issues, Unprofessional Conduct Shoreh Forjani (also known as Sherry Forjani), Broker Toronto, ON Date decision released: August 20, 2013 Provided inappropriate guidance on how to properly terminate the tenancy of the property. Failed to advise the complainants to obtain the services of another person with respect to properly terminating the tenancy of the property. Failed to adequately negotiate the selling price proposed by the complainants (seller). Failed to ensure that the transaction documents were correct and that all appropriate disclosures regarding multiple representation were made. Communicated proposed elements of an amendment to other parties during negotiations, without permission from the complainants. Failed to reimburse the complainants for the extra legal fees incurred after promising to do so. Failed to disclose that the brokerage proposed to represent both the sellers and the buyers. Failed to disclose the difference between the obligations the brokerage would have had if it only represented the complainants and the obligations the brokerage had in representing both the complainants and the buyers. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Ms. Forjani was ordered to pay a fine of $11,000 by July 17, 2014. Page 5 of 10
Conscientious and Competent Service, Duty to Client, Duty to Ensure Compliance Broker of Record, Disclosure Offers, Multiple Representation, Services from Others / Outside Professional Advice, Unprofessional Conduct Moira Elizabeth Sargalis, Salesperson Timmins, ON Date decision released: August 20, 2013 Erroneously advised the seller that it is possible to keep an offer alive without accepting it by extending the irrevocable date of the offer and signing it and further advised that by doing so, they would be able to keep the offer on the table and still accept other potential offers. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Ms. Sargalis was ordered to pay a fine of $7,000 by October 15, 2013. Conscientious and Competent Service, Misrepresentation (negligence), Presentation of Offers Roberta F. Toner, Broker South Porcupine, ON Date decision released: August 20, 2013 Failed to ensure that a registrant employed by the brokerage did not provide misleading information to a seller. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Ms. Toner was ordered to pay a fine of $5,000 by October 15, 2013. Duty to Ensure Compliance Broker of Record Page 6 of 10
Amarjot Lamba (also known as AJ Lamba), Broker Mississauga, ON Date decision released: September 6, 2013 Provided false and/or misleading information to the public by removing For Sale and/or Sold signs belonging to the listing brokerage (not his brokerage), without their knowledge or authorization, and replacing it with his brokerage s signs. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Mr. Lamba was ordered to pay a fine of $12,500 and to successfully complete REIC s Ethics and Business Practice course by August 19, 2014. Dealing with Registrants / Third Parties, Making/Furnishing False Information/Documentation, Unprofessional Conduct Branko Krstev, Salesperson Toronto, ON Date decision released: September 6, 2013 Failed to disclose in the MLS listing, or explain to the buyer, that the sellers made no representations or warranties as to the legality of the basement apartments, the alterations to the property or the property s compliance with municipal by-laws and provincial legislation. Failed to correct the offer, which identified the property as a Single Family Residence, or include appropriate clauses in the offer regarding the apartments. the Chair of the Discipline Committee, Mr. Krstev was ordered to pay a fine of $8,000 and to successfully complete OREA s Real Property Law course by February 24, 2014. Discovery of Facts, Duty to Client, Incorrect Information on a Listing, Maintain Current Knowledge, Misrepresentation (negligence), Unprofessional Conduct Page 7 of 10
Mediation of Complaints Under certain circumstances, the Registrar may attempt to mediate or resolve a complaint. RECO does not have the authority to impose a resolution to monetary or contractual disputes, or to assess or award damages. Any exchange of money mentioned in the following summaries was agreed upon voluntarily by the complainant and respondent. Complainant: Buyer Respondent: Buyer s Representative Date of release: July 11, 2013 The buyer s representative agreed to give the buyer a $10,000 rebate upon the closing of the transaction for a new condominium. The buyer, believing the transaction was complete and commission paid, contacted the representative to get his rebate. His calls were not returned. The disbursement had not been made because the property was not registered, meaning the deal had not closed. The representative had explained the closing process, but there was still some confusion on the part of the buyer. The buyer contacted his lawyer to confirm that the transaction had not closed. The representative agreed to send the buyer information about the closing process and advise the buyer when the money would be disbursed. Complainant: Seller Respondent: Seller s Representative Date of release: August 28, 2013 After the seller listed his property, he was not happy with the service provided by the seller s representative. The seller s representative agreed to transfer the listing to another brokerage, conditional on the seller s representative being paid a referral fee by the new brokerage. The seller did not want the listing representative to be paid any referral fee because the new representative would be doing all the work. After the parties discussed the matter further, the seller signed the form to transfer the listing and for the listing representative to be paid a referral fee. Page 8 of 10
Complainant: Seller Respondent: Seller s Representative Date of release: September 5, 2013 The complainant and respondent had been personal friends for many years. They had a listing agreement in place and subsequently the complainant s wife took ill. When the complainant asked to have the listing cancelled the respondent left an unprofessional message on the complainant s voicemail. They also sent a similarly unprofessional text message. Both the respondent and the brokerage manager apologized to the complainant. The listing agreement was suspended. Complainant: Buyer Respondent: Buyer s Representative Date of release: September 5, 2013 The buyer signed a Buyer Representation Agreement (BRA) with a brokerage, in the belief that the sales representative could obtain quick approval of a mortgage for the buyer. After several unsuccessful attempts to purchase different properties without mortgage approval, the buyer requested that the brokerage cancel her BRA so she could work with another registrant, who guaranteed her mortgage approval. After reassessing her circumstances, the Buyer agreed to honour the BRA. Page 9 of 10
Complainant: Brokerage Y Respondent: Brokerage X Date of release: September 5, 2013 Brokerage X was refusing to allow its salespeople to accept the printed Schedule B (which outlines how the brokerage will handle a deposit, privacy, advertising, etc.) provided by Brokerage Y. Brokerage X claimed that the other brokerage was not allowed to indicate to a consumer that their deposit was being placed in an interestbearing trust account. In fact, REBBA 2002 requires brokerages to disclose in writing to persons depositing money, the interest rate the brokerage receives on the money, and what they will pay out in circumstances when deposits are held in an interest bearing Real Estate Trust Account. The brokerages worked with the local real estate board to ensure the correct and consistent interpretation of the relevant provisions of REBBA 2002. Complainant: Buyer s Representative Respondent: Seller s Representative Date of release: September 10, 2013 The buyer s offer was accepted by the seller, but the signatures on the Agreement of Purchase and Sale (APS) appeared to be initials, not a proper signature. When asked to have the APS signed, the listing representative refused, claiming it was signed and was valid as is. The buyer decided not to proceed with the transaction because of the dispute over the APS signatures and a Mutual Release was sent to the listing brokerage, but the deposit was not released 10 days later. There had been a delay in acquiring the signatures of multiple sellers on the Mutual Release because they lived in different locations. The listing brokerage released the deposit to the buyer once it had all the seller signatures. Page 10 of 10