Embed Doc
Copy Link
Readcast
Collections

CommentGo Back

Page 1 of 5

IN THE MATTER OF A DISCIPLINE HEARING HELD PURSUANTTO BY-LAW NO. 10 OF THE REAL ESTATE COUNCIL OF ONTARIOHELENE AMYOTTE / JACQUES BEDARD /J.B. MAXIMUM REALTY LTD.o/s PRUDENTIAL MAXIMUM REALTYRespondentsDATE OF DECISION: January 28, 2004FINDINGS:H. Amyotte: In violation of Rules 1(2), 1(5), 10, 21of the RECO Code of EthicsJ. Bedard: In violation of Rule 43of the RECO Code of EthicsPrudential Maximum: In violation of Rules 10, 21, 23 & 43of the RECO Code of EthicsPENALTY:H. Amyotte: Administrative penalty of $3000 payable to RECOwithin 90 days of sending this decision.J. Bedard: Administrative penalty of $500 payable to RECO within90 days of this decision.Prudential Maximum: Administrative penalty of $500 payable to RECO within90 days of this decision.COSTS AND EXPENSES: Costs of $1000 to be paid jointly and severally within 30days of sending this decision.REASONS FOR DECISION

This matter proceeded to the Discipline Committee of the Real Estate Council of Ontario(“RECO”) on an agreed statement of facts. There is also a joint submission as to penalty.

Page 2 of 5The following are the agreed statement of facts with respect to this matter.1. Ms. Helene Amyotte (“Ms. Amyotte”) is a Member of RECO and a salespersonregistered under the

Real Estate and Business Brokers Act

R.S.O. 1990, Chapter R-4. (the“

REBBA

”). J.B. Maximum Realty Ltd. o/a Prudential Maximum Realty (“Maximum Realty”) isalso a Member of RECO and a broker registered under the

REBBA

. At all material times, Ms.Amyotte was an employee of, and conducted business on behalf of Maximum Realty.2. Registrant A (the “Complainant”) is a Member of RECO and a broker registered under the

REBBA

. Broker A is a Member of RECO and a broker registered under the

REBBA

. At allmaterial times, the Complainant was an employee of Broker A.3. On or about February 18, 2003, RECO received a complaint from the Complainant (the“February 18, 2003 Complaint”). The February 18, 2003 Complaint was in relation to theadvertising activities of Maximum Realty and Ms. Amyotte. Enclosed with the February 18,2003 Complaint was a copy of a pamphlet advertisement (the “Pamphlet Ad”) of MaximumRealty and Ms. Amyotte.A review of the Pamphlet Ad disclosed that:a) Ms. Amyotte’s name is considerably larger than the name of Maximum Realty; b) The Pamphlet Ad did not contain the address or phone numbers of Maximum Realty.4. The Pamphlet Ad also contained the following information:“As you are probably aware, my group and I have sold countless homes inCentrepoint we always obtain excellent prices and end up with extremely happy buyers and sellers …”I know how much it is of interest to you to know what houses in your area have been selling for in the recent past, and so I am attaching a list of homes that weagents sold in Centrepoint in the last several months . . .” [Emphasis added]5.

Attached to the Pamphlet Ad, was a printed page entitled Residential Listings (the ResidentialListings”). The Residential Listings contained a list of 29 properties (the “29 Properties”),together with details about the 29 Properties. At the bottom of the Pamphlet Ad were thewords:“ © Copyright, Ottawa HELEN AMYOTTE - the Amyotte group”6.

Some of the pertinent information on the Residential Listings contained the municipal addressof various properties together with the listing brokerage name (only) and the selling brokeragename (only) for each of the properties listed.7.

None of the 29 Properties in the Residential Listings were either listed or sold by MaximumRealty, Ms. Amyotte or Amyotte group.

Page 3 of 5A. Accordingly, Ms. Amyotte acted unprofessionally when she:i. Ran an advertisement in which her name was more prominent than the nameof Maximum Realty;ii. Ran an advertisement in which she did not include the address or the phonenumber of Maximum Realty;iii. Ran a misleading advertisement headed “Helen Amyotte Group We’ve justsold” and then attaching a list of 29 Properties to the Pamphlet Ad, when noneof the 29 properties were either listed or sold by Ms. Amyotte or the Amyottegroup.Thereby breaching the following Rules of the RECO Code of Ethics:

Rule 1(2) - Ethical Behaviour

- A Member shall endeavour to protect the public from fraud,misrepresentation or unethical practice in connection with real estate transactions.

Rule 1(5) - Ethical Behaviour

- A Member shall deal fairly, honestly and with integrity with the public, other Members and third parties.

Rule 10 - Misrepresentation or Falsification

- A Member shall not make any statement or participate in the creation of any document or statement that the Member knows or ought toknow is false or misleading.

Rule 21 - Advertising

- A Member shall ensure that all advertising and promotion by or on behalf of the Member, including for Properties and services, is not false, misleading or deceptive.B. Accordingly Mr. Jacques Bedard, as the Principal Broker and the operating mind of Maximum Realty, acted unprofessionally when he:i. Permitted Maximum Realty and Ms. Amyotte to place a Pamphlet Ad in whichMs. Amyotte’s name was more prominent than the name of Maximum Realty;ii. Permitted Maximum Realty and Ms. Amyotte to disseminate false and misleadinginformation by attaching the list of 29 Properties to the Pamphlet Ad, when noneof the 29 Properties was either listed or sold by Maximum Realty or Ms. Amyotteor her group ;iii. Permitted Maximum Realty and Ms. Amyotte to place a Pamphlet Ad that did notcontain the address or phone number of Maximum Realty.Thereby breaching the following Rules of the RECO Code of Ethics:

Rule 43 - Broker Responsibility

- A broker shall be responsible for the professional conductand professional actions of those Members registered with that broker.