A former Vancouver Island real estate agent has been penalized $60,000 for failing to disclose that a property she listed was situated on a protected archaeological site. This omission led to significant financial losses for the buyer, who was unaware of the land's heritage status.
Key Takeaways
- A retired B.C. real estate agent was fined $60,000 for professional misconduct.
- The agent concealed the archaeological status of a Vancouver Island property.
- The buyer incurred a loss of approximately $110,000 due to the undisclosed information.
- The B.C. Financial Services Authority (BCFSA) imposed the fine to deter future misconduct.
Concealing Heritage Status
Judy Bood, who had been licensed for three years at the time of the incident in July 2018, failed to disclose that the coastal property was subject to the Heritage Conservation Act. Despite confirming through an archaeological consulting firm that the land was a protected site, the property disclosure statement indicated it was not a heritage site. Bood had previously mentioned the archaeological significance verbally to other potential buyers, but when an offer was made in October 2018, she followed the seller's instruction not to reveal this crucial information.
Buyer's Discovery and Financial Loss
Following the transaction's closure, the new owner began clearing brush and trees on the property, only to be contacted by the provincial Archaeology Branch and ordered to cease work due to its protected status. Unable to proceed with their development plans, the buyer was forced to sell the property for $200,000, resulting in a loss of about $110,000, including associated costs. The BCFSA noted this financial loss as an aggravating factor in their decision.
Regulator's Ruling and Penalty
Hearing officer Andrew Pendray described Bood's actions as deceptive, stating it was a deliberate choice to ensure the transaction proceeded rather than an oversight. Bood, who admitted to the misconduct and cooperated with investigators, cited personal health reasons and a difficult period in her life for her actions. She argued her conduct was not significantly deceptive or fraudulent, but the regulator rejected this, questioning why disclosure would have caused harm if the buyer was indeed a sophisticated developer.
The BCFSA imposed the substantial fine, along with an additional $6,500 for investigation costs, to send a clear message to Bood and other licensees about the importance of disclosing material latent defects. The decision emphasizes that agents must refuse to continue serving clients who instruct them to act outside regulatory rules.
