By Joseph Richer

The Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) is a modern regulator, and modern regulation is all about preventing problems from occurring in the first place. RECO can’t oversee every single transaction, so one prevention strategy is to educate consumers and real estate professionals about their rights and responsibilities.



RECO communicates with its registrants through several channels, such as the monthly For the RECOrd newsletter, Registrar’s bulletins, e-blasts, online webinar and articles in REM, to name a few. But there’s no substitute for an in-person conversation. Last fall, my colleagues and I continued the momentum of our successful 2017 Town Hall tour by visiting seven communities for a new round of constructive Town Hall dialogues with industry leaders. RECO staff also attended six real estate industry shows and delivered 15 informative RECO Update presentations to local boards in 2018. These outreach initiatives generated over 3,200 face-to-face interactions with registrants.

RECO reaches out to registrants for three key reasons:

Real estate salespeople and brokers let us know what’s happening in the marketplace.

RECO’s administrative agreement requires it to keep the Government of Ontario updated on conditions in the real estate marketplace, and as many of you know, you can learn a great deal by grabbing a coffee and really talking to people who make their living within that marketplace. The industry leaders I’ve met are strongly committed to RECO’s consumer protection mandate, and they apprise my colleagues and me of issues and problems when they emerge.

In a sense, salespeople and brokers are RECO’s eyes and ears; on an annual basis, 25 to 30 per cent of the complaints it receives come from salespeople and brokers. These individuals contact RECO because they take pride in their profession and they care about how it is perceived by the public. In fact, many of the industry leaders who attended RECO’s 2017 and 2018 Town Hall events called for tougher standards and stricter penalties for registrants who break the rules.

Real estate salespeople and brokers understand that consumer protection is a shared responsibility between RECO and the industry.

Whenever I meet with industry leaders, we always agree that strong public trust in the profession can only be maintained by continually raising the bar on professional standards. That job starts with brokers of record making it clear to their employees that unethical and unprofessional conduct won’t be tolerated within their brokerage.

Industry self-policing is a necessary first step to maintaining strong public trust in the profession, but it can’t replace independent public oversight of the sector by RECO. Ultimately, consumer protection is a shared responsibility between RECO and the industry, which means we must talk and work together.

The industry wants RECO’s help, which is why RECO’s staff created social media infographics, videos and informational documents in an online Registrant Toolkit that brokerages can download, customize and share with their clients to provide valuable information.

Real estate salespeople and brokers provide RECO with valuable feedback.

Communication is a two-way street. My colleagues and I regularly contact registrants in order to help them better understand their legal and ethical obligations, but we also value their feedback.

RECO’s registrants remind us that serving the public interest means listening to the industry and making sure necessary regulation to protect consumers doesn’t turn into overly burdensome or unnecessary red tape that results in minimal consumer protection. They also provide RECO’s staff with many good ideas. The Knowledge Management System, a searchable database of checklists, guides and other resources that will be available to all registrants once the Real Estate Salesperson Program launches, was developed largely in response to registrant interest in such a resource.

If you have a great idea to enhance consumer protection or raise the bar of professionalism in the industry, please share it with RECO. My colleagues and I would love to hear it.

In my last column, I discussed some of the highlights of RECO’s review of its Mandatory Continuing Education (MCE) program. The final report and RECO’s response to its key points are now available on the RECO website. I encourage all of you to read the highlights.

45 COMMENTS

  1. How about the insurance program. Payment of $465 must be paid by mid August for a policy that kicks in in October. I am not sure of the exact number of registrants but let’s say 75,000 registrants. That means RECO collects over $34,000,000 for premiums that are not due until October. I assume they are making over 1 million in interest on registrants insurance payments.

  2. FINES COLLECTED BY REAL ESTATE COUNSEL OF ONTARIO (RECO): The fines collected by the Real Estate Counsel of Ontario for Code of Ethic Breaches…why does RECO pocket this money?

    The fines collected by RECO…should the monies not be distributed to the Ontario consumers who sustained damages?

    Why can’t the fines collected be put towards a victim compensation fund?

    Would that not bolster RECO as a regulatory body protecting Ontario consumers?

    Just seems strange how a regulatory body receives monetary gain from registrants who agree to Statement of Facts for Code of Ethic breaches and agree to pay a fine. Why would RECO not pass along this money to the actual party who sustained a loss? Almost like a victim compensation fund.

    RECO profits. The Ontario consumer is left without.

  3. Here is the issue, not double ending or electronic lock boxes. After almost twenty years RECO has not got it yet. The industry is worse then ever. RECO has failed. The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled RECO was in “Abuse of Power ” in one case. They recently let this realtor off with a slap on the wrist. They have charged hundreds if not thousands of registrants for not reporting they had a part time job. Which is in violation to one of the sections of the Act. A section that is open to interpretation and RECO interpretation is one that favors RECO. They maintain expensive prime commercial space in Etobicoke and answer to no one. Forget re-writing REBBA , it may be time to re-work RECO.

  4. Dual agency, particularly with one agent is wrong. I have done it but am very careful. I have had it with another agent in my brokerage, who I had never met. Less of a concern for me. As one broker said to me, “you can’t suck and blow at the same time”. That says it all. I was with a friend (not as an agent) buying a house and the broker did not know that she was acting as dual agent. REALLY!

  5. Comrade RECO. Do you actually suggest, that as “eyes and ears”, we spy on fellow Realtors? The best way to promote ethical behaviors, apart from booting out those that break ethics, is to actually enact some tougher rules around unethical behavior, especially around ADVERTISING CLAIMS. A member can get their asses kicked if they screw up a simple flyer but can make marketing claims with impunity! Why can one loaf claim to use “Industry leading marketing strategies” when there are no standardized strategies? Why can a Realtor promise to “buy your listing if it does not sell” without having to notify PROMINENTLY in the advertising that the purchase price may be substantially lower than the asking price? It’s this kind of nonsense that causes problems for ethical Realtors and consumers. But then again, those that go to those “become a millionaire realtor” seminars have to get something out of it and the above samples are exactly what is taught. Clean up the rules.

  6. Ryan Green: It is easy to see why consumers don’t trust Realtors if your answer to “TRUST” is to pass along buyers to a Team member, how is that arms length and independent advise? The only way to truly provide trust is to sever your relationship 100% and advise the Buyer to go to a different Brokerage not referred by you. No persuasion of the public would be needed if this was the regulation.

  7. All RECO has to do to clean up the industry is have secret shoppers that asses the ethics of a Realtors. Start handing out big fines, suspensions and revocations of licences. This will cost revenue to RECO and the Boards in the short term but it will ensure Realtors survive the upcoming disruption to the Industry. If they don’t RECO and Boards will become obsolete.

  8. My family experienced something very similar with the Real Estate Council of Ontario.

    The difference is my family’s claim was not high profile.

    This is how RECO treated my family.

    My family purchased a new home. The builder used a realtor. The realtor had a long standing relationship with the builder since 2000. The realtor produced many videos marketing subdivisions and homes for the builder. My family throughout the real estate transaction never met the builder. Everything was conducted through the realtor.

    We purchased a home on a pie lot. The dimensions in our contract was the following, Front property line 44 feet, side 109 feet, back 98 feet and side 129 feet.

    The lot delivered to us was front property line 32 feet, side 103 feet, back 98 feet and side 129 feet. Our front yard on our new home is 12 feet less in width.

    This became apparent when the corner lot foundation was being dug out and poured.

    I later learned this issue also involved 4 other homes on our court.

    My family moved into our home June 2015. When I conducted my own investigation afterwards, I learned the subdivision was certified and all lot dimensions were known October 2014. The realtor had access to the certified plan of subdivision and surveys for 8 months to identify this issue.

    The marketing materials were wrong for our phase. This was presented to the realtor and the builder. The marketing materials for phase 2 were then corrected to demonstrate the correct lot dimensions.

    RECO complaints were filed in May 2016. RECO conducted its own investigation and found no evidence of wrong doing against the realtor. In October 2016 RECO’s investigator came to the following conclusion, “it was reasonable for you to rely on the accuracy of the marketing materials and lot dimensions provided by the builder and/or the design company”. RECO closed it’s file.

    I wrote to the CEO of RECO Kate Murray and provided documents contained in my own investigation. My investigation included 29 videos of the realtor marketing past subdivisions and virtual tours for the builder. Social media documents of the realtor holding titles of director of marketing. I provided past RECO decisions and case law that contradicted RECO’s investigation and findings. A realtor is responsible to ensure accuracy of any materials they are relying upon.

    After investing a significant amount of time, RECO reopened their file. After 1,001 days the realtor agreed to the statement of facts in February 2019 for various Code of Ethic breaches in his failure to ensuring accuracy.

    The realtor also agreed to pay a $20,000 fine.

    It took 3 years for a relatively simple case to be concluded. I refer to Lutz v. 1020618 Alberta Ltd., 2010 ABPC 15

    A claim was presented to RECO’s Insurance Program. The program promoted by RECO that protects Ontario consumers when a mistake is made by realtor.

    After our claim was tendered to RECO’s Insurance Program, approximately 2 months later my family received a letter from a law firm flat out denying our claim and taking the position there is no liability on the realtor.

    At no time did any representative of RECO’s Insurance Program contact my family, take statements, conduct a visit to our lot, take measurements, request further documents or have any dialogue.

    Just a flat out denial. RECO’s Insurance Program does not see any liability of the realtor for the shortfall of the property my family received. The Insurance Program doesn’t see any damages either for receiving a much smaller lot. This was communicated to my family in writing.

    RECO’s management is aware of my family’s matter. Michael Beard the CEO and their general counsel Logan Atkinson are aware of how my family was and is currently being treated.

    The realtor agreed to a Statement of Facts to 6 breaches of the Code of Ethics.

    RECO will receive payment of a $20,000 fine by August.

    I am confused. How has RECO protected my family?

    Am I missing something?

    By the way, the handling of my family’s matter involved 3 other family’s with the exact same complaint. Their claims were also denied too until I took a stand for all of us.

    Perhaps a good starting point for RECO is to provide a response to the comments being posted REM Magazine as opposed to remaining silent

    Anyone agree?

    • I agree completely. RECO is useless. It makes the sitting government look like it is standing up for the little guy. You probably should have not closed on the purchase in the first place. Getting something done after the fact is difficult. RECO needs to bar these agents who don’t do their job properly. We have too many agents that don’t follow the rules. Most just want their commission cheque and that is part of the problem.
      Someone complained to RECO about my sign. The size of the names was not correct. The sign was done by a man who did most of the signs in the area. My Broker looked at signs by other agents in the area and found that most did not meet the rules. I changed my sign and RECO was happy. Maybe they looked at other signs and realized how busy they could be with complaints.
      Good luck.

    • Sean:

      I agree.

      I suspect that no one from RECO will respond to your post herein. RECO’s lawyers will instruct RECO to remain silent. “Let it die down and it will all go away” is the tried-and-true strategy of bureaucracies under fire in these cases. RECO does not want to establish a precedent in this case…because…there are plenty of other misrepresentations by builders’ marketers and entangled negligent Realtors out there that are never followed up on due to apathetic purchasers who fall victim to the stonewalling tactics as employed by RECO in your case.

      If the Statute of Limitations timeframe has not expired, you have a good case for a successful law suit in my opinion. Small claims court might be the way to go (an inexpensive potential remedy) as I have mentioned previously via another thread herein. You have the documentation and the backbone to see a court case through in my opinion. Perhaps send a registered letter to RECO advising them that your next steps will be litigation (if still possible) AND media exposure, not necessarily in that order. I am sure that the media (national in scope) will treat your story seriously. You have truth on your side, not to mention the fact that RECO absorbed a $20,000. payment from the offending Realtor, leaving one with the impression that RECO benefits from Realtors’ wrongdoings, whilst their victims suffer the consequences.

      Remember, lawyers are ‘not’ in the business of pursuing and effecting justice; they are in the business of winning…for their side…in exchange for the extraction of big fees. It’s all about the money, as usual.

      I once worked as a national warranty advisor for an insurance company, and I can tell you that insurance companies do not like negative publicity via the media. They will avoid it like the plague if they only have to finally make a payment to shut a complainant up. They will have you sign a non-disclosure agreement as a caveat to securing payment, and they will call the payment a goof-faith public relations gesture, saying that the payment is in no way an admission of any wrongdoing on their part.

      Go for the media attention my friend. REM is a good start. Keep it going. Don’t let the bastards beat you.

      Note: I went through a battle royale with the City of Oshawa and its legal counsel many years ago…and I won, without spending a dime. I also forced the city to rescind the offending eleven-year-old by-law that was being cited to extract monies from me that had already extracted thousands of dollars from taxpayers via what I deduced to be an unconstitutional law. I accused the city of extortion, told the city lawyer that my next step was media exposure, that he, the lawyer, was doing what he was doing just because he could (to which he actually, reluctantly agreed with me) and I won. The mayor at the time, Nancy Diamond, actually invited my wife and I to the council meeting wherein it was announced publicly that I did not have to pay the “cash in lieu of parkland” fee, and further, that the by-law in question was being rescinded, effective 11:59 that evening. The follow up story was in the local paper next day, making the mayor a hero instead of a villain. I must add that Nancy was not in office when the by-law was put in place eleven years earlier, but the lawyer was, and he was very pissed off with me…because he was the money-grubber who initiated the by-law in the first place.

      Moral of the story? Don’t take no shit from no slip-and-fall lawyer.

      • Correction: Re the above post: “goof-faith” should read “good-faith”.

        What a great Freudian slip.

  9. There is no point in creating new rules if they don’t enforce them. Having rules that are not enforced penalizes the conscientious rule abiding Realtors by putting them at a competitive disadvantage.

  10. RECO doesn’t stand by realtors. They say they want to know when their is unethical behaviour, yet when you call or email in they don’t seem to care. There is only some much the Real Estate boards can do, and they advise us to call RECO. If you want to make this industry better for the consumer then start standing behind realtors and listen to what we have to say.

  11. This is kinda funny really.

    RECO today has convicted sex offenders, assault artists, openly unethical sales reps (cbc marketplace) to drive women to showings without being required to warn the women of their convictions.

    Now imagine it’s 2019 and with the world being connected as it is? How long can these truths be hidden from the public? Who is being protected by hiding them?

  12. The board where I am registered has too many wrong things happen all the time. I have complained to the board and they don’t want to hear about it. I came from a larger board and if I did something wrong my broker would straighten me out. My broker here would say oh don’t bother complaining. eg We had to post conditional sales within 48 hours with my former board, while hear they are never posted. So, I do nothing.

    • I Googled; I read; I judged. Can you spell C-O-V-E-R U-P?

      My initial post was much longer and much more accusatory in nature regarding Bailey’s shenanigans. I guess Jim the-editor-guy did not want a lawsuit on his hands. Can’t say that I blame him. But the payment of a fine on Bailey’s part is likely not fine with some folks who know first-hand about this Bailey high-flyer-guy.

      Seems like the golden-boy received favoured-status treatment (a cash payment in lieu of being publicly kicked to the curb) at the hands of RECO, something his alleged victims did not receive. Unlike Terry Paranych, Bailey did not have to go before a tribunal and have his deeds exposed publicly. Whereas Paranych might not have been a favoured son by his regulator, it appears that maybe Bailey was/is.

      Maybe I’m wrong…but maybe I’m not.

      • and, on top of which you gotta love the sanitized version of his reasons for resigning the board – business and family reasons.

        • Bizarre! What does someone have to do to get the boot? Talk about a train wreck once derailed and put back on the tracks again with still defective brakes and an engineer who needs constant bureaucratic oversight! RECO bends over backward, sideways and upside down for this disaster-with-a-license-to-screw-you but kicks innocent consumers to the curb.

          The guy is supposed to tell RECO when he effs again up so that RECO can deal with him again? Seriously? How can they spend so much time with a delinquent? He is just one of thousands of registrants out there. Will the system die if he is kicked out?

          This what happens when regulators live in a bubble.

          I think I’m losing even more respect for the RECOcrats. Remove the “c” and there you have what some who have been victimized by them think of them.

          I used to be a supporter. Now? Not so much.

    • That is disgusting! Not only that, even though a private deal was struck, his profile on RECo is washed cleaned of any such agreement. It would appear to anyone unfamiliar with him that he’s unblemished.

      That RECO can determine that a deal struck privately and never to be disclosed to the public is serving the best interests of the public, is illogical and a farce. This is enabled because RECO’s board is over-populated by Realtors and especially a certain handful of Realtors who make a career of jumping from association to association to reap the perks of serving on the board. – and that needs to change.

      The two citizen complainers should bring this to the attention of the media as in CTV or CBC or file a civil suit if possible.

      • I have lost all respect for RECO after the decision that was made in this case. It sure hurt a little extra when I paid my bill 2 weeks ago….lol

        • Sabine

          Likewise there is no reply button for your comment.

          If memory serves me well, RLP Reg VP David Higgins (Oakville area) was instrumental in getting RECO up and running. I vividly recall speaking with him at the first RECO meeting. We shared many conversations although I was in the region adjacent to his. He always appeared the consummate professional.

          I don’t think this current overseer government controlled system as a whole is what David had in mind initially. Twenty years passes quickly. Who knows what the next twenty will bring.

          REALTORS® often fail to realize there is no one there to protect the registrants’ position. Or to speak on their behalf. Brokerages and absentee broker owners can run rip-shod over their agents (office rent collectors) as Nelson has often pointed out, and there is no governor on the fulcrum to keep a strong balance on the pivot. That never was and isn’t the initial mission statement or purpose of the council. Often we only hear one side of the story.

          Certainly there are absolutely astute and wonderful owner/brokers and my comment certainly isn’t intended to tar and feather everyone with the same brush. But monitoring and controlling what goes on one on one between licensees/registrants and the public and each office is a little like the expression trying to herd cats.

          Nothing in the industry is uniform; no contiguous footprint to follow across the country as a whole, and with so many BORS in each province, each functioning within their own municipal jurisdictional rules and regs, in-committee processes are often simply pushed “up the ladder.”

          No one really knows anymore how to make a decision, as in “it’s not my department.” Having said that, perhaps the time has come for BORS, since they are local and absolutely not province-wide, to take back the reins of (local) control? They would know their local membership better than anyone else; having said that, if local boards collected fines, where would that money go? Any suggestions? And only go to council in extraneous circumstances?

          If it’s true that council is overworked and underpaid, understaffed operating in high/end priced bricks and mortar, a question might be asked what exactly happens to funds such as the 20k fine currently in conversation? (It’s needed to pay the fixed costs: leases, staff; computer IT related variables costs? And the perhaps hundreds of thousands collected annually (multiplied by all the years council has been collecting; (and we’re not even talking about all the mirrored multiple fees and memberships, etc.)

          Many of us don’t know anything about how non-profits work exactly. Several years ago I made a conscientious decision no longer to work on board committees after many years participating, as over all the years I discovered nothing much ever got decided, much of which just got referred up the ladder to the council.

          I was once asked on behalf of the local board to do an investigation regarding a who was owed commission on a transaction, ( a commission dispute between one franchise rep and another,

          I interviewed those appropriate, collected research material related. Made copies for all concerned; segmented and tabbed, dated, cross-referenced, numbered various breakdowns to make it easy for the board committee to review the investigation contents, perhaps thirty pages, complete with Table of Contents, and submitted to the Board to have ready ahead of the upcoming meeting. Meeting called. I attended.

          The chair started the meeting by addressing me, saying something to this effect: “if you think anyone read this volume report you should not be surprised to know they didn’t. It was professionally prepared. Didn’t anyone tell you to do a one-page report?”
          Clearly I had followed the Board instruction I had been given as a volunteer committee rep. No one had ever instructed keep it to one page.

          It was a difficult and awkward investigation. And someone’s commission was depending on my review. I take business seriously.

          This slap in the face was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I declined to participate in any further Board involvement and never sat another committee. That was in the mid-1990s.

          The industry doesn’t want people who pay attention to detail. Yet I caught one council investigator who spent 14 hours reading website material looking to find trouble and couldn’t, when the complaint had been a one year old dishwasher didn’t work and the buyer was furious.

          Carolyne L 🍁

          • ….lol. In that case I would just buy a new dishwasher. Years ago I had clients remove 2 TV brackets (fixed wall etc) when they shouldn’t have (in the days when they were still really expensive). I sold their property and helped them buy a new one. I just dropped off a cheque for the cost at the new buyers’ house and the problem was solved. To this day my clients never knew…..

          • My point was that the investigator spent 14 hours on the website, trying to find a problem. When clearly he had more important things to do.

            And a subset topic (my fault – I should have been more clear)
            A relo seller (my listing) went to Montreal and the agent’s buyer discovered a non-working dishwasher. I never knew. Buyer had contacted manager who – and I quote, said to me: “you earn more money than the agent who brought the offer; just spend $800 and buy that agent’s buyer a new dishwasher.” I wrote a cheque. No one had even told me. It was all decided behind my back.

            My real comment-post point was the Board committee commission investigation situation I was asked to investigate, and how it was handled at board level.

  13. Alberta has had regulations in place for several years which allows for consumers to decide if they wish to proceed with a “double end deal” or as we call it, agreement to represent both seller and seller. We always have to keep in mind that we have to have our clients best interests ahead of everything else and not having the ability to represent either party in a transaction can be a very complicated transaction. Passing off to a team member does not cut it as it is implied that as a member of the team you would have access to all of the information that the listing agent does. It works here and it let’s the most important person in the transaction “THE CONSUMER” decide on how they would like to be represented in their real estate transaction.

    • Disallowing “double ending” within a brokerage seriously deflates the brokerage’s ability to claim they “have more agents to help you get the best price…” tactic that is so commonly used. So, require a brokerage representing the buyer and seller to heavily discount the commission charged and let the buyer decide if they want to proceed or move on to another brokerage. Chances are, 1: the seller will say “keep them” as they will save some fees. 2: The brokerage will prefer to keep the buyer and help their stats, seeing as they will lose that buyer anyway. Simple solution.

      • If consumers truly understood how they were disadvantaged in a dual agency situation many would choose to find a new agent to represent their best interests. Realtors on the other hand do understand that dual agency is not in the consumers best interests. Few consumers understand that they are giving up their rights for proper representation by signing forms consenting to dual agency. If the sellers and buyers are not represented 100% in the sale or purchase of a property then both the sellers and buyers are / could be disadvantaged. Reducing the fees does not solve the problem of DUAL AGENCY. One solution to dual agency is to have the buyer consumers directly negotiate their own fees with their EXCLUSIVE buyer agent and pay the fees directly to the buyer broker through their lawyer on closing. The sellers should ONLY set the fees for their listing broker. Changing the way fees are set by the sellers and buyers WOULD SAVE real estate consumers thousands of dollars per real estate transaction. RECO I’m sure could make a new form to cover this situation and help consumers save money and protect their rights. However, the best solution is to make DUAL AGENCY illegal. There are few WIN WIN situations with dual agency.

  14. Yes there are Buyer Brokerages in the U.S and B.C has regulations in place but I do not know the details. I only read a report that stated it was not working and was failing in British Columbia. But this article was about RECO seemingly slapping the hand on serious infractions. Lack of transparency and backroom deals made with favourable registrants. How is that building consumer confidence within the industry. I have had first hand experience with RECO response to complaints. On three occasions they first attempt to sweep it under the table in the hopes that the complaint will loose interest. I had a client that filed a complaint only to have RECO state they had no jurisdiction. This client followed up citing the sections of the Act that were violated. Only then did RECO follow through.

    • Funny Tim is fighting for that right as of today. Better yet he wants the commission checks to be able to go into the same bank account when the two reps are paid.

      End Dual Agency at the Brokerage Level Today and save the profession.

  15. The issue with the Realt Estate profession stems from a long standing problem of the way it is regulated and the percenption that there is a difference in knowledge between a listing agent and buyers agent. REBBA and it’s accompanying regulations try to be a “one size fits all” solution. The fact that the Code of Ethics for Realtors requires both listing and selling registrants to “Act in the Best Interests” of their clients, yet leaves that “best interest” to the subjective view of the Realtor is almost impossible to enforce.

    For example, in the case of a Home Inspection. It is common knowledge that in principle, ‘caveat emptor’ protects the seller. It is the buyer’s obligation to ensure they make themselves aware of the condition and facts around the house BEFORE they buy. Their representative will often tell them to get a Home Inspection, but in the same breath (or almost) tell them if they do they might not get the property. What part of that is “in the client’s best interest”? Certainly not the latter.

    On the listing side, we now have Realtor’s telling their clients not to accept offers that include Home Inspections. This prevents the buyer from doing their due diligence.

    To offset any criticism, the listing agent is resorting to pre-listing inspections. This would be all well and good if the inspection was performed to a high standard and the liability for the inspection was transferrable from between the seller and inspector, to the buyer and inspector. Too often, listing agents are referring (or even selecting) Inspectors who perform limited scope inspections. These do not provide a full service with respect to determining the condition of the home.

    When asked, RECO responded that there was nothing they could do, because the Home Inspection profession was not regulated, and nor was the standard. Listing Realtors could choose what they thought were best. But a listing realtor is working in the ‘best interests of the vendor’.

    RECO’s response to this was that a buyer should get their own Inspection, but assuming a Buying Realtors knowledge is the same as the Listing Realtors knowledge, then referring an inspector who works to a higher standard is not guaranteed.

    Except, it transpires that when a Realtor sis buying a Home for themselves, they always manage to seek out the most professional Inspector, who uses the highest standards and provides the most detailed reports. Funny that!

    In this case, what’s good for the goose, is not necesarily good for the gander.

    There’s an easy fix. Follow through with the regulation of the Home Inspection Professon in Ontario. The Home Inspection Act, 2017 already has Royal Assent, money was set aside for the development of a way forward. The CMRAO was identified as the DAA that could take on the extra workload with a net zero budget after the implementation period.

    Provide a set standard that ALL Ontario Inspectors MUST follow. Then, perhaps, RECO will be able to inform Realtors and Brokers, that anything less than this standard is not acceptable with respect to protecting consumers.

    This is an all round win for the Government, Home Inspection Profession, Consumers and yes, dare I say it Realtors and their regulator.

    So far, we are at Minister #3 of this government and Minister #7 since the idea of regulating the Home Inspection Profession finally got off the ground in 2012. If Mr Ford and his government really want to do something for the voters of Ontario, pull the trigger and complete tohe process of regulating the Home Inspection Profession. It will at the same time give confidence to the Consumers and provide RECO with the guidelines to use the rounded teeth it seems to have acquired.

    Without this, the Realtors are always going to find loopholes in the two-faced regulations under REBBA and the public is going to be continually fleeced into believe that all Realtors are equal and all Realtors are indeed working in the best interests of their clients, and not of the Realtors own pockets.

  16. If there are rules, they must be enforced in order to be effective otherwise the rules become a distraction and the lack of enforcement becomes a licence to continue the bad behaviour. If appointment no-shows were fined $500 for each offence and salespeople giving lockbox codes to buyer resulted in a 6 month licence suspension and a $5000 fine, this behaviour would be dramatically reduced very quickly. If RECO is serious about policing bad behavior the complaints process needs to be streamlined and consequences have to be meaningful and quick.

  17. Reco should make it a rule that all realtors who show a property MUST leave their business card.
    I would estimate that over 50% of realtors showing one of Our listings do not leave a business card.
    Not leaving a card frustrates the Seller as they do not really know if that realtor even showed up or not to show their home.
    Why is it so difficult for realtors Not to leave their business card?
    Why are realtors showing up late or Not showing up at all to appointments and they feel that it is Not their duty to notify the Listing Broker?
    We have too many unprofessional realtors in this industry!!
    They are the ones that are giving the industry a bad name!
    Why are realtors leaving front and back doors unlocked after a showing?
    Why is it Not mandatory that a realtors cell number be listed on the MLS?
    Is it a lack of teaching By Our instructors or a lack of not having these issues addressed by Reco in the course material?
    Reco needs to set Rules and By-Laws to ensure that the issues above do not continue to happen.
    We have no riles about leaving a business card which I find mind boggling!
    These are some of the reasons why Our industry is not perceived as professional.
    Lets get with it and start cleaning up the industry.

    • Many of your concerns can be taken care of by electronic lock boxes. We have switched to them in Waterloo region and it give you all the data you want ad then some.

      • We hope Waterloo REALTORs have taken the training and education needed to even attempt to explain the PIPEDIA isssues when using ELBXs.

          • I ran into them when I was showing houses in Ottawa. I don’t use a smart phone so the agents need to open the houses for me. I don’t want the if for no other reason than I would have to replace the ones that I have.

          • Steve Bach . For some reason I can’t respond to your comment. As to the electronic lock boxes, you don’t have to have a smart phone. You can get a card that can be inserted into the LB and it works just the same.

  18. The inherit problem with Brokerages being the front line of ethical business practises is that most of today’s Brokerages are not in the real estate business. They are in the business of selling services and renting space to sales representatives. Is a Brokerage going to turn in a paying customer? Some of these real estate teams within Brokerages are valuable to a brokerage and the last thing a brokerage wants is to do something to cause these sales people to pack up and leave for another brokerage. Which is easy to do. Maybe RECO should be focusing the ” Stiffer Fines” model directly at the Brokerage. I believe then we will see Brokerages raise the bar.

  19. Remove the ability to double end. You cannot serve to masters.Matthew 6:24 King James Version (KJV)

    24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

    • Perfect my Brother! That’s the exact reason I do not do it, I pass the buyer off to my team member so I can continue to represent my seller properly, and in-turn the Buyer be confidentially represented.
      But unfortunately no matter how much we try to emphasize this to the public, they don’t trust us the “realtor” and it make the good REALTORS(R) look bad.

Leave a Reply