A property was listed on October 11, 2016, at $339,900.00.The MLS information stated that the Property had
- central air conditioning,
- 4.0 private double wide/asphalt, gravel drive.
- October 13, 2016, the Agreement of Purchase and Sale
- purchase price being $382,500.00, and
- a closing date of November 17, 2016
The conditions on financing and home inspection were removed by the Buyer, and subsequently the transaction closed.
March 2, 2018, a Municipal Law Enforcement and Property Standards Officer sent a written Zoning Notice to the Buyer
- stated that a recent inspection of the Property revealed a violation of the By-laws
- the Property was not in compliance.
- the Property was to be brought into compliance before March 16, 2018.
- her failure could result in legal action against her, or
- the City could undertake the work necessary to bring the Property into compliance, at her expense.
So, obviously, the Buyer needed to dig a little deeper and find out what happened.
Apparently, the City Officer had contacted the Listing agent by phone on 24 October 2016. This was after the conditions were removed.
“…. she had informed the Listing agent of the driveway widening issue and requested that he pass the information along to the Buyer.”
Nest Step: SILENCE
Yes, you guessed that right. Absolutely nothing!
The Buyer’s Agent
Upon investigation by RECO, the Buyer’s agent advised that she performed her due diligence regarding the permit by:
- visiting the City website and
- contacting the City by telephone.
The City did not advise of any outstanding deficiencies, non-compliance notices or any outstanding work orders, regarding the driveway or anywhere else on the Property.
The Listing agent failed to comply with the Code of Ethics as follows:
to disclose the Enforcement Officer’s telephone communications with him to the Buyer’s representative, regarding the driveway widening, essentially withholding this information from the Buyer contrary to section 3 and 38 of the Code of Ethics.
3 Fairness, honesty
38 Error, misrepresentation, fraud
RECO assessed a $7,500.00 fine and 180 days to take two RECO Courses on 21 September 2022.
You will appreciate that based on the circumstances, it was the Buyer’s agent’s inquiry to the municipality which likely provoked the review. Then, the caution to the Listing agent, who elected to ignore the situation, followed by enforcement eighteen months later.
Brian Madigan LL.B., Broker