Remember our fictional members going through the complaint process? This week, we’re continuing the story.
If you're just tuning in, read our previous articles from the "From frustration to resolution: Dealing with the realities of real estate” series.
Trey has admitted to soliciting clients in the case of Scooping Sellers, and Ryerson has finished his hearing in his supervision shortage case and is waiting for his decision.
Supervision shortage
CREB® has received the decision in Ryerson’s case. He allegedly left a home inspector alone without the seller’s permission. As a next step, CREB® will be sending the decision letter to all the parties involved
- The applicants (the member who filed the complaint): Marren and her broker, Evelynn.
- The respondents (the members whom the complaint was about): Ryerson and his broker, Quinn,
The decision letter includes this high-level information:
- Ryerson was found to have violated CREB® Rule Part 8.01(d) because he gave his assistant permission to access the key and then gave it to the home inspector to lock up when he was done.
- Ryerson was found to violate CREB® Rule Part 7.04 because Marren proved the seller didn’t permit a home inspector to be left alone in her home. Ryerson could not provide any information that he had permission to leave the home inspector alone on the property.
- The hearing panel determined that Ryerson’s conduct deserves a penalty.
- The reasons why the hearing panel made their decision.
- Details on what will happen next.
Scooping Sellers
Earlier in the story, Trey sent a letter to Syed’s client to try to get them to use him as their agent.
Trey and his broker, Aron, are sitting in the CREB® atrium waiting for their hearing to start when they see someone approach them; it’s the recording secretary for the hearing, and she brings them into the hearing room. After seeing their name cards, they sit down and wait for the hearing to start.
Three panel members introduce themselves; these are the people who will be deciding if he gets any penalty. The chairperson walks them through how the hearing will happen, which matches the information he was given before the hearing. Trey’s surprised at how the room is set up; it’s nothing like a courtroom he’s seen in the movies. Instead, it’s a large table in a bright room; everyone seems calm and kind, so he starts to relax.
When the time comes, Trey starts sharing his story about why he sent the letter to the sellers. He brought up the email his mentor sent him that shows it wasn’t Trey’s idea to send the letter; this is the best he could do because his mentor, Thalie, didn’t have time to come to the hearing. When the chairperson sees him reading the email, the chair asks for copies of the email if Trey would like the panel to consider this email as evidence. Trey knew this could happen, so he came ready with his copies and handed them out.
After Trey shared his story and the email, the panel asked him some questions, such as:
- How long he’s been a REALTOR®.
- Whether he talked to his broker about this idea.
- If his mentor has real estate experience in Alberta.
- Why he followed the mentor’s advice.
- When he started sending these letters.
- What penalty he thinks may be appropriate.
After the questions, Trey was asked if he wanted to make a final summary. He shared that he felt the pressure to be successful and didn’t think that something his mentor told him would turn out to be against the rules. He was sorry for not checking with his broker first and said he wouldn’t send any more letters. He’s also asked Thalie to let her other clients know that sending letters is against the rules.
What penalties would you consider if you were on either of these hearing panels? The Professional Standards Assurance Team can:
|
Penalty |
What is it? |
|
Issue no penalty |
The violation doesn’t warrant a penalty. |
|
Forward to any governing, regulator and policing bodies |
There’s a better department or organization to deal with it (e.g., RECA). |
|
Advisory letter |
A letter telling the member not to do something again doesn’t stay on the member's file. |
|
Letter of reprimand |
A letter that records the violation and stays on the member’s file. |
|
Order to attend any educational course |
If there’s an opportunity for the member to learn skills to prevent future violations. |
|
Assess costs |
Pay any expenses related to an investigation or hearing posted to the member’s account. |
|
Fine to a maximum of $30,000 |
A monetary penalty will be posted to the member’s account. |
|
Suspension from CREB® |
A temporary restriction on accessing member resources. |
|
Expel from CREB® |
Removal from CREB® membership. |
Did you know?
A lot of work goes into deciding whether a member violated a rule. Then, if a member has violated a rule, they have to think about penalties, but they’re not arbitrarily chosen. Hearing panels think about questions to consider the most appropriate penalty(s). Interested in those questions and considerations? Check them out here. This is one of the reasons that hearing panels are given 20 business days to make and deliver their decision.
What about an appeal?
Members have the right to appeal a hearing panel decision. Next week, we’ll learn if Trey or Ryerson accept the decisions or appeal them. Stay tuned!
{ 0 comments…}