A former Vancouver Island real estate agent has been hit with a substantial $66,500 fine for failing to disclose the archaeological significance of a property she sold. The B.C. Financial Services Authority imposed the penalty on Judy Bood, who has since retired, after she facilitated the sale of a coastal property for $300,000 in 2018 without revealing its protected status.
Key Takeaways
- A former B.C. real estate agent, Judy Bood, was fined $66,500 for failing to disclose a property's archaeological significance.
- The property was sold for $300,000 in 2018, but the buyer later discovered its protected status, leading to a significant financial loss.
- Bood was instructed by her client not to disclose the site's importance, a directive the regulator deemed "significant misconduct."
Failure to Disclose Archaeological Significance
Judy Bood was involved in the sale of a property on Vancouver Island's coast in 2018. According to an agreed statement of facts, her client explicitly instructed her not to disclose that the land was an archaeologically significant site. Properties protected under B.C.'s Heritage Conservation Act require special permits for any significant alterations.
Following the sale, the buyer began clearing trees and brush, only to be informed that the property was protected and could not be developed as planned due to the archaeological site. This discovery resulted in the buyer selling the property for $200,000, incurring a loss of approximately $110,000, including associated costs.
Regulator's Decision and Misconduct
The B.C. Financial Services Authority hearing officer stated that the regulator needed to maintain public confidence in the real estate industry and found Bood's actions to be "significant misconduct." The decision emphasized that licensees are expected to uphold the law and will be held accountable when they do not.
Bood had previously listed the property and verbally informed prospective buyers of its archaeological status. However, for the $300,000 sale, her client described the buyer as a "sophisticated party and developer" familiar with local regulations, an argument Bood found reasonable. Despite this belief, the regulator determined that Bood was still obligated to disclose the property's protected status. The decision concluded that both Bood and her client likely decided against disclosure to avoid jeopardizing the sale.
Mitigating Factors and Aggravating Circumstances
Bood presented mitigating factors to the regulator, including serious health issues that led to her retirement. She stated that the error occurred during a difficult period in her life and that there was no risk of it happening again. However, the regulator found no evidence that her health condition prevented her from making the disclosure, noting that she had disclosed the site's existence to other potential buyers.
The significant financial loss suffered by the eventual buyer was identified as an aggravating factor that contributed to the disciplinary outcome. The article also briefly mentions that B.C.'s Heritage Conservation Act is undergoing reform consultations with various stakeholders.
