You can see it in the systems we log into, the rules they embed and the rituals that follow. It governs without ever being named; a living document we inherit but no longer author. 

Over the past several years, new technologies, leadership shifts and branding debates have revealed just how far that constitution has drifted from its original intent.  

What follows isn’t a history – it’s an excavation and, I hope, the beginning of a rewrite. 

I. The illusion of control 

Every morning, Realtors log into the systems that decide what they can say, how they can say it and how visible their work will be. 

We call it technology, but it’s governance by another name; a rulebook written in code instead of bylaws. 

This is about power, and how quietly it moved out of reach. 

Each field, validation rule, and search filter enforces policy in ways few members ever see. 

We think we’re entering data; we’re actually performing compliance. 

The platforms we use don’t just reflect the profession; they define it, and somewhere between the first upload and the latest system migration, control slipped. 

Organized real estate still speaks the language of democracy, but its constitution has already been rewritten inside the software. 

II. From representation to ritual 

Boards were never meant to be monuments. They were tools built by practitioners to solve shared problems. But over time, the procedure became the product. 

Today, most boards operate less like professional communities and more like small parliaments. Quorums small enough to fit in a classroom can amend bylaws for tens of thousands of members. Proxy stacking concentrates control. Consultations are staged after decisions are made. 

This isn’t malice; it’s muscle memory. Every cycle inherits the same playbook: stability first, scrutiny second. “Continuity” becomes “competence.” “Dissent” becomes “disloyalty.” 

And soon, the process itself becomes proof of purpose. 

When power becomes insulated, accountability fades. What follows is a ritual in the absence of reform. 

The ritual looks busy: new logos, new task forces, new vendor contracts. 

But motion isn’t evolution.

Outside, the species looks unchanged.  

III. From bylaw to backend 

Governance didn’t die; it migrated into software. 

Every time a listing rejects an input because a field doesn’t exist, that’s regulation. 

Every time Realtor.ca decides which properties rise to the top of a search, that’s policy. 

Every automatic warning, every hard stop, every required field, every “invalid value” message is a digital descendant of a forgotten committee motion. 

But unlike those committees, code doesn’t interpret intent. It enforces outcomes. 

When a provincial prop-tech collective expanded its MLS infrastructure through subscription agreements in 2024 (a shift that brought most Ontario boards into a unified subscription framework), decisions about listing standards and data structure effectively moved from volunteer committees to contract clauses. 

And when its leadership quietly changed earlier this year through an internal governance realignment, oversight of Ontario’s core MLS infrastructure shifted again. 

No member referendum. No public notice. Just a new slate, appointed internally.   

That’s not scandal. It’s system design. 

Governance didn’t fail; it changed medium.   

Realtors still carry the liability for every misstep the system allows or forbids. 

If an input error misrepresents a property, the board doesn’t face the client. The agent does. The brokerage shoulders the risk. Yet neither has meaningful authority over the infrastructure that defines compliance. 

That’s the quiet inversion of power: the governed held accountable for rules they no longer write. 

IV. Paying to be governed

Membership used to buy representation. Now it buys access. 

Realtors pay dues to boards. Boards pay vendors to manage the systems. Vendors, in turn, enforce compliance frameworks that determine how Realtors work. 

It’s a closed loop of authority without ownership. 

At the national level, the same pattern repeats. CREA licenses the trademarks and operates Realtor.ca; the public face of the profession. 

Yet the listings feeding it come from local systems governed by independent contracts, each with its own structure and rules. 

The result is a federation of dependencies: members finance everything but control nothing. 

Sold as modernization, this consolidation resembles enclosure more than efficiency. 

When Realtor.ca was restructured into a for-profit subsidiary, the move was practical but symbolic. 

It marked the moment the profession’s most visible asset became a product. 

Belonging turned into a business model and representation became a side effect. 

We stopped belonging to the system when the system learned to bill us for belonging. 

V. The relevance test: What is a board for? 

If access to data is all we value, then the question isn’t whether boards are broken; it’s whether they’re still necessary at all. 

Only one board in Ontario owns the technology. The rest are tenants, licensing the systems they claim to govern. 

They administer dues, hold meetings, and issue statements, but their primary role is custodial: collecting money on behalf of platforms they don’t control. 

As a couple of writers have recently debated, the Realtor identity itself is under review. 

Some call the name baggage, tied to NAR’s scandals and American dysfunction. 

Others defend it as a badge of honour, a symbol of professionalism and trust hard-won over decades. 

I would argue that both sides miss the point. The word isn’t the issue. The structure beneath it is. 

If governance and accountability collapse, even the most sacred title loses meaning. 

The brand can survive scandal; it cannot survive structural irrelevance. 

The Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA)-led call for Ombudsman oversight of the Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO) exposed that hollowness. 

It sounded bold, but misunderstood the law it invoked. 

The Ombudsman Act excludes self-regulating professions. 

If boards truly want to end self-regulation, they should say so. 

If they don’t, then the campaign misled the very members who fund it. 

Realtors didn’t connect with that letter because it wasn’t written for them. 

It was written to look responsive. It was a performance of relevance, not an act of it. 

VI. The ROI of representation 

If advocacy is the last defense of organized real estate’s layered structure, then it’s fair to ask: what’s the return? 

Every Realtor measures productivity and cost-per-lead.  

But the organizations that preach professionalism can’t quantify their own value. 

OREA’s own disclosures show millions spent annually on advocacy and communications, yet no member-facing metrics explain outcomes or savings. 

In business, unmeasured value isn’t value. It’s overhead. 

The loss of the OREA College exposed that vacuum. 

Education once gave OREA purpose: a tangible service tied to competence. 

When that mandate moved to the regulator, what remained was advocacy without measurement. 

And advocacy without measurement is faith, not strategy. 

Would we, knowing what we know now, voluntarily build a system that compels every Realtor to join an association, fund mandatory insurance and underwrite lobbying whose outcomes we can’t audit? 

If this system didn’t already exist, could you convince anyone to invent it? 

If we built a system today, we would not build this system. 

VII. The case for a controlled burn 

That doesn’t mean demolition. It means renewal. 

The first boards were grassroots cooperatives: small, voluntary networks built on trust and reciprocity. 

They created order before law. Their purpose was cooperation, not control. 

Over time, that cooperative impulse hardened into hierarchy. 

What began as a network of peers became a lattice of dues, committees and closed sessions. 

We now call that professionalism, but is it? 

The future doesn’t need to abolish boards; it needs to release them. 

As one industry commentator recently wrote, even Microsoft now behaves like a startup, forced by AI to relearn how to innovate. 

Real estate could do the same, not by chasing disruption but by rediscovering ownership. 

Innovation without consent isn’t transformation. 

Sunsetting legacy structures isn’t destruction; it’s hygiene. 

A controlled burn clears what it is that protects structure over service. 

The replacement need not be ideological. 

Imagine a platform cooperative: a Realtor-owned, technology-driven utility where brokerages and agents hold real stakes. 

Policy would be ratified by digital referendum. 

Vendor contracts would expire automatically unless renewed by member vote. 

Data standards and governance would be transparent by design. 

Boards that survived such a transformation wouldn’t have to defend their relevance. 

They have already proven it. 

VIII. The constitutional moment 

Every profession has a constitution: an unwritten agreement about who decides what. 

Ours has been rewritten without consent. 

Control migrated from members to boards, from boards to associations, and from associations to vendors. 

Elections continue, meetings occur, minutes are approved, but democracy isn’t procedure. 

It’s consent. 

When governance moves into code, consent becomes a checkbox. 

When advocacy drifts into performance, representation becomes branding. 

When boards mistake data for trust, the profession loses both.   

This isn’t a technical crisis, it’s constitutional.  

The choice ahead is stark but simple:   

1. Continue the drift and let governance consolidate in the hands of those who own the tools. Or;  
2. Reclaim authorship and rebuild from the ground up, guided by the same cooperative instinct that once defined the Realtor. 

If we built organized real estate today, we wouldn’t replicate the layers. 

We’d design a single, accountable, member-governed institution: transparent, data-competent and morally literate. 

IX. The path back to purpose 

Boards were never meant to be monuments. They were instruments built to serve those who work in the field, not to rule over them. 

We still need cooperation. We still need shared data, clear standards and public trust. 

But those don’t require the architecture we’ve inherited. 

They require will, imagination and consent.   

If organized real estate still believes it exists to put members first, it must prove it. Not with statements, but with structure. 

If access is all that defines membership, the public will soon ask what defines the Realtor. 

Our constitution isn’t in Ottawa or Toronto. It lives in the collective consent of those who practice. 

The system won’t rewrite itself. 

Brandon Reay

Brandon Reay brings a multifaceted background in real estate practice, policy, and governance. Before stepping into brokerage leadership, Brandon spent several years in organized real estate, contributing to strategic initiatives and advocacy efforts with CREA and OREA, and various Chambers of Commerce. His work has included shaping housing policy, supporting regulatory reform, and improving REALTOR® engagement across the country.

Brandon’s approach blends hands-on brokerage experience with a systems-level understanding of how policy, market forces, and professional standards intersect. He is known for helping professionals navigate evolving market conditions and advocating for higher standards within the industry. In addition to his leadership role at RE/MAX Hallmark Realty Group, he remains an active REALTOR® focused on agent development, business strategy, and client service.

Brandon regularly contributes commentary on market trends to media outlets and industry publications and has served as a spokesperson on housing issues in Ottawa. He is also a frequent speaker at real estate events, offering data-driven insights on brokerage strategy, professionalism, and the future of the industry.

He holds a Master of Business Administration from the Sprott School of Business. Brandon lives in Ottawa, where he remains closely involved in local policy discussions on housing affordability and real estate governance.

The post Reay: The hidden constitution of real estate appeared first on REM.

The following is a joint statement released on Oct. 27 by members of Ontario’s housing sector, including the Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB) and Ontario Real Estate Association (OREA).

Ontario is facing a housing emergency. Projects are stalling, builders are cancelling developments and families and individuals are being priced out of the market.

As the provincial and federal governments prepare to release their fall economic statement and budget respectively, our message is urgent: bold, coordinated action is needed to boost housing construction, lower costs and bring affordability back within reach for residents.

Housing is more than just shelter; it’s the foundation of our economy and the heart of our communities. Today, Ontario’s housing sector, from builders, Realtors, business groups, trade associations, not-for-profit organizations and rental providers, speaks with one clear voice. Together with governments at all levels, we must move swiftly to unlock housing supply, cut costs, and restore affordability by accelerating ownership and rental housing delivery.

We acknowledge the positive work done so far by the federal, provincial and municipal governments regarding policy developments, zoning reform and funding programs to encourage more housing construction, including the most recent provincial housing bill, Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025, which signals the government’s intention to take further practical steps in cutting red tape, lowering construction costs and restoring confidence and investment in the rental housing market by speeding up slow resolution processes to adjudicate landlord and tenant disputes. Other efforts include the Housing Accelerator Fund, the Apartment Construction Loan Program, Build Canada Homes, the Building Ontario Fund, the Municipal Housing Infrastructure Program, reform to end exclusionary zoning and allow as-of-right construction of multi-plexes on single lots and the Building Faster Fund, among other projects. However, more action is still needed.

We also recognize that potential disruptions impacting the housing ecosystem that are outside the direct control of governments and industry, such as trade wars, geopolitical tensions and economic uncertainty, need to be considered as we navigate an uncertain environment at the macro level. 

Housing remains the backbone of Canada’s economy. It supports over 1.2 million jobs and contributes more than $143 billion in economic activity yearly to Canada’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). However, rising costs, difficult regulatory environments, economic uncertainty and constrained supply have slowed new housing starts and home purchases, putting tens of thousands of skilled trade jobs at risk. This will impact spin-off economic activity in related sectors and push both home ownership and rental housing further out of reach for many residents.

To meet Ontario and Canada’s housing challenge, a united focus on delivery is required. By reducing construction costs, attracting investments and aligning tax policy, zoning and approval systems, governments at all levels can restore confidence, protect jobs and support innovation at the speed and scale Canadians urgently need.

Policy priorities for immediate action

To restore affordability and confidence in the housing market, we are calling on municipal, provincial and federal governments to work collaboratively with the housing sector by adopting the following measures:

1. Position and profile housing as an economic driver: To ensure housing policy is economic policy, recognize housing construction and trade as a core driver of employment and GDP, adopt a framework to preserve the tremendous job creation that the housing industry generates, and acknowledge that housing unaffordability is also affecting our overall economic productivity, especially in the Greater Toronto Hamilton Area (GTHA).

2. Modernize outdated tax rules: Extend the GST/HST exemption on new homes up to $1.5 million for homebuyers, reflecting current market realities, particularly in major urban centres, and encouraging new construction.

3. Cut costs for homebuyers: Align cost recovery with actual service delivery and housing goals to reduce barriers to construction and costs to homebuyers. Municipalities and provinces need to collaborate with industry to modernize the fee structure applied to new housing, which is currently inflating housing costs and constraining new supply.

4. Build faster through innovation in parallel to traditional building: Support the advent, inclusion and expansion of modern construction methods – including panelized systems, modular building, robotics and other emerging technologies that embrace productivity, reduce costs and construction time, and enable homebuilding at scale. These need to be supported by an innovation policy framework created in partnership with the industry that provides incentives for early adopters and customers of new solutions, as well as investments in Canadian companies providing new solutions. Scaling up pioneering methods should be done in addition to supporting the ongoing innovation and productivity of traditional construction techniques.

5. Free up land and end exclusionary zoning: Act decisively to end outdated zoning restrictions to permit gentle density and a wider mix of housing types, especially missing-middle and multi-unit dwellings in more communities.

6. Incentivize private capital: Encourage programs that incentivize private capital, both investment and philanthropic, for both rental and ownership housing to accelerate market and non-market construction. This should include reintroducing the Multiple Unit Residential Building (MURBS) tax incentive.

The housing sector stands ready to partner with every level of government. Together, we can reignite momentum, rebuild confidence, restore affordability through partnership, innovation and investment, and deliver the homes our communities urgently need.

Signed:

John DiMichele, CEO, Toronto Regional Real Estate Board

Luigi Favaro, CEO, Ontario Real Estate Association

Ene Underwood, CEO, Habitat for Humanity GTA

Michael Brooks, CEO, Real Property Association of Canada

George Carras, CEO, R-LABS Canada

Jonathan Nusbaum, CEO, Terra Modular

Marlon Bray, executive vice president, Clark Construction Management

Tony Irwin, president and CEO, Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario/Rental Housing Canada

Daryl Chong, president and CEO, Greater Toronto Apartment Association

Dave Wilkes, president and CEO, Building Industry and Land Development Association

Kathy Hogeveen, chief of operations, Assembly Corp.

Jude Tersigni, vice president of planning and development, Menkes Developments

Richard Lyall, president, Residential Construction Council of Ontario

Roselle Martino, executive vice president, policy and strategic affairs, Toronto Region Board of Trade

Frank Cairo, co-founder and CEO, Caivan Communities

Nhung Nguyen, CEO, Horizon Legacy

The post Ontario housing sector presents united front on supply, affordability appeared first on REM.

He passed away of natural causes on Oct. 17. He and his wife lived in Barrie for the last two years.

St. John, who forged a path in real estate as a trainer before venturing into entrepreneurship, “will be remembered by thousands of agents across Canada for his leadership and his professionalism to our industry,” said his longtime business partner Jamie Johnston.

When the pair met 40 years ago, St. John was the national trainer for Royal LePage. 

“I was trying to hire a National Trainer for Canada Trust. I phoned Roy who was already the preeminent trainer in Canda for a recommendation for someone to interview,” said Johnston. “He said ‘Why not me?’” 

After Canada Trust, they worked together at Employee Relocation Services to set up the first federal government contract to relocate military personnel across Canada and to relocate troops from Europe.

They then started Family Realty and Family Mortgage together, where St. Roy was the senior VP. They built the business from 16 offices to over 60.

Their final venture together was at Re/Max Condos Plus, where St. John was the VP, branch manager and head of training.

“He was also a great salesperson who shared his knowledge to all,” said Johnston.

Roy leaves behind his wife Debi, two children and four grandchildren. 

The post Obituary: Toronto broker Roy St. John appeared first on REM.

It was signed months, maybe even years ago, and the agent was already partially paid. Those funds are long gone, having been used to run their business and their life. Now, the developer is demanding those funds back in full.

It’s a reality more Realtors face in a market experiencing an uptick in failed new construction deals. 

The numbers are dismal: Urban Nation reports 10 projects were cancelled in 2025’s third quarter alone, bringing the year-to-date cancelled total to 18 projects and 4,040 units.  

“Prior to 2022, it was rare to see a deal fall through,” said David Ionico, partner at McHugh Whitmore law firm in Stoney Creek, Ont. “In recent years, it is unfortunately a common occurrence, and I refer failed deals to litigation on what seems like a weekly basis.”

Ionico said that reasons for failed deals vary, but most recently, they have been due to purchaser financing issues.

“Lenders seem to have gotten stricter with their requirements and are more cautious to lend,” Ionico said. “Additionally, appraisals are coming in much lower than expected at the time of purchase, resulting in purchasers not being able to obtain enough funds to close.”

Implications for agents 

Unlike the average confirmation of co-operation form for the sale of existing homes, new developers typically have Realtors sign a document called an “Agreement to Co-operate.”

It’s a schedule outlining conditions for staggered commission payouts. For example, the first commission payment of one per cent is sent upon successful completion of the building’s roof. The second payout of one per cent is sent once the developer receives a mortgage commitment, and so forth. The condition criteria and commission percentages vary from developer to developer.

There is an important clause within this agreement that has become increasingly common: the repayment clause. 

Also called a “clawback clause,” this condition allows developers to rescind commissions previously paid to Realtors should buyers be unable to close. 

A poor understanding of terms may be hurting agents

Sam Hassaan, broker of record at Royal LePage Real Estate Services in Oakville, Ont., agrees that these clauses have become the “industry standard for most major developers.” 

He said agents typically do not raise concerns about the clause – perhaps because they don’t fully comprehend them.

“A significant number of agents do sign these agreements without fully understanding the ramifications and financial risks when the deal does not close,” said Hassaan.

While Realtors may get the short end of the proverbial stick with clawback clauses, developers include this clause for a reason.

“Put simply, a lot of deals aren’t closing and, as with other types of real estate transactions, the expectation is that the non-defaulting party won’t pay any commissions if the deal doesn’t close through no fault of their own,” said Ionico. “These clauses also incentivize co-operating agents to bring purchasers that are likely to close.”

‘Read before you sign’

Hassaan notes that repayment clause enforcement has become prominent in the current market, particularly in areas with high volumes of new development such as the Greater Toronto Area. While Hassaan advises Realtors to try and negotiate this clawback clause, Ionico states negotiating this clause would be dependent on the developer.

“I’m not sure my builder clients would negotiate this, given the higher risk of deals falling through these days,” said Ionico.

And while Ionico has seen agents try to contest repayment clauses, it usually doesn’t go far.

“I’ve seen agents dispute clawback clauses but never with a legal justification to do so. Assuming the clause is properly drafted, its enforceability is undisputable.”

Knowledge is the best defense for Realtors who want to delve into the world of new development sales. While Ontario’s Real Estate Salesperson Program includes sessions on new constructions, some brokerages also offer pre-con training.

As an extra precaution, Royal LePage Real Estate Services also implemented a brokerage policy for pre-construction deals. If multiple commission installments are woven into a deal, their policy is to hold the funds until the deal’s final closing. While this could mean a significant delay in commission payout, it protects the Realtor and brokerage from being unable to pay back the developer if the deal fails to close.

Realtors can take similar measures to protect their finances should their brokerages not have such policies in place. This could be as simple as setting aside your first or second installment in a separate account for safekeeping until the final payout is complete and the deal successfully closed.

For Ionico, the best advice he gives is simple: “Read before you sign,” he said. “If anything is unclear, it’s best to have a lawyer look at it.”

Diana Faria

Having stepped into the world of real estate as a receptionist over a decade ago, Diana worked in the industry at different capacities and climbed the ladder since. She has supported Realtors as a front desk assistant, organized incoming paperwork as a deals admin, and processed closings as a head-office accountant. Working at several brokerages gave her insight into their inner workings, from recruiting, social media marketing, commission payouts, and everything in between.

The face of real estate is often portrayed as a confident Realtor, but the hardworking cogs within the real estate machine — office admins, assistants, receptionists, and clerks — are often forgotten. Using her real estate and journalism experience, Diana sheds light on everything going on behind the scenes, while keeping the machine humming along.

The post Clawback clauses hit hard as pre-con closings collapse appeared first on REM.

Related Posts

Foch: A market in full correction

Nov 5, 2025

October’s TRREB data paints a picture of a housing market still in retreat — where even falling prices can’t lure buyers back

read more

Team spotlight: Q&A with the Rob Golfi Team

Nov 5, 2025

With more than $670 million in sales volume in 2024 and nearly $423 million year-to-date in 2025, the Golfi Team dominates markets across southern Ontario.

read more

The Price Change Playbook: How top agents stay in control when listings stall

Nov 5, 2025

Unlock the secrets of top agents who navigate price changes with confidence and strategy. Learn how to keep control when listings stall and maintain client trust.

read more

« Older Entries

REM Bot

Content by REM Bot has been created with the assistance of AI. Audio and video interviews, conducted by our team with real people, are transcribed and repurposed into text for those who prefer reading. REM Bot articles are reviewed by staff before publication to ensure factual accuracy and maintain editorial standards.

The post How top Realtors stay calm when their listings don’t sell appeared first on REM.

Data from SingleKey shows that around 15 per cent of tenant applications contain falsified documents, a climbing figure as renters struggle with affordability and job insecurity. For Realtors, it’s a business risk that can leave clients and agents facing unpaid rent, legal costs, and property damage that can total tens of thousands of dollars.

Why are rental scams on the rise

Fraudulent documents from fake credit reports, to proof of income, and even fake driver’s licences are common rental scams in Canada, and have become an increasing problem in recent years.

The typical signs of a fraudulent document include:

• Formatting errors from irregular font use to spacing and alignment inconsistencies
• Account summaries not matching account overviews
• Whole numbers after taxes 
• Employer contact info that doesn’t trace to a real company

But now, with AI, these scams are going unnoticed. What used to be a crude Photoshop job has become a sophisticated, fast-moving scam that is easier than ever to execute. Free online templates and AI tools make it easy to generate convincing pay stubs, employment letters and bank statements in seconds. Logos look authentic. Tax deductions appear accurate. Even bank deposits can be simulated with AI tools.

It’s become increasingly difficult for Realtors to spot these fakes with the naked eye, especially when dealing with time-sensitive leases or multiple applications.

An example of a fake paystub. Clues to detect its inauthenticity include fuzzy fonts and an outdated company name for the employer.

The cost of scams for Realtors

Realtors understand the cost of rental scams goes far beyond lost income. It’s months of legal headaches, unpaid rent and the uphill battle of removing a problematic tenant. Once a risky tenant is in, recovering the unit (and the funds) becomes a long, time-consuming and uncertain process.

Beyond income loss, rental scams can be damaging to a Realtor’s reputation. Realtors are market experts, and investors put their trust in Realtors’ judgment when it comes to rental screening. Persistent scams, the toll on mental health, and the headache of the ordeal can cost a Realtor the investor’s trust, and ultimately, their reputation. Realtors need tools that even the playing field and use AI to their advantage. 

AI didn’t create rental scams — it exposed the gap 

AI hasn’t created a new rental scam problem; it’s just exposed an existing one more clearly.

Rental scams persist because Canada’s rental market lacks the standardization and safeguards that protect other major investments. You wouldn’t buy a car or home without insurance; renting should come with its own layer of protection. 

That’s where trust infrastructure comes in. A set of tools and processes that build accountability, increase transparency, and reduce risk for landlords and Realtors alike. And now, it includes AI. 

While AI has made it easier to create fake documents, it’s also being used to detect them, flagging mismatched fonts, suspicious file metadata, irregular pay cycles and other red flags that even experienced agents might miss.

How to put trust infrastructure into practice

AI may have exposed the gaps in rental screening, but it can also help close them. To stay ahead of increasingly sophisticated scams, Realtors must evolve their screening processes, adopt safeguards and leverage AI to build what the industry needs most: trust infrastructure.

This means combining smart tools with consistent, repeatable practices that reduce risk for clients and put trust back into the landlord-tenant relationship.

A few of these practices include: 

• Complete background checks with verified digital channels – Whenever possible, request income verification on platforms connected to Equifax and TransUnion to create a full picture of the potential tenant. 
• AI-powered documentation and income verification – Use AI as the first line of defence, tracking easy-to-hide edits such as mismatched fonts, layout inconsistency and covered information before it reaches you. 
• Pre-screen risk scoring – Leverage AI to support with the initial assessment of tenant documents, from credit scores, pay stubs and existing debts, to empower decision makers to move quicker and weed out high-risk applicants.
• Regular audits of screening outcomes – Technology paired with Realtors’ market expertise creates efficient and knowledgeable systems. Realtors should take the time to review current systems for bias or false positives, to continuously find ways to leverage AI in a way that works best for them.

The bottom line

Fraudulent applications aren’t going away. They’re part of a broader affordability crunch reshaping the rental market and unveiling the cracks in the current process.

Sharp eyes are no longer enough; the rental market needs systems that create accountability and transparency. At SingleKey, we’ve seen these systems in action firsthand: tenants know their information will be verified, and landlords know their income is protected.

When Realtors combine digital verification tools with automated rent collection and rent guarantee, they are not just screening tenants; they are also protecting income and increasing confidence across the board.

Viler Lika

Viler Lika is the founder and CEO of SingleKey, a leading rental risk intelligence platform that helps landlords, property managers, and Realtors verify tenants and protect rental income. Viler holds an MBA and a computer engineering degree, and he has a background in lending and consumer credit risk at Capital One and TD Bank. Viler is now focused on bringing a fairer, data-driven, transparent and more accountable leasing experience to landlords and Realtors to make renting stress-free.

The post AI scams are a growing threat to landlords – here’s how to protect your clients appeared first on REM.

Let me be clear: that line of thinking is not progressive, it’s dismissive.

The word Realtor isn’t a stain. It’s a standard. It’s a title that represents professionalism, accountability and a shared code of ethics that countless dedicated agents have spent decades defending and improving.

Yes, our industry has had its share of bad actors. So has medicine, law and every other respected profession. But you don’t fix integrity by erasing the identity that was built to protect it. You fix it by upholding the principles behind that identity.

When people hear “Realtor,” they should think of someone who knows their market, their clients and their community — not just someone who sells homes, but someone who represents trust in one of life’s biggest decisions.

This isn’t about nostalgia; it’s about credibility.

The Realtor designation wasn’t handed to us, it was earned, through licensing, education, late nights, early mornings, missed recitals, ethics and a commitment to doing right by the public. It’s a mark that separates professionals from opportunists, and that’s something worth defending.

Those of us who have been around long enough to remember when “real estate agent” carried less respect know exactly how much work went into changing that. We fought to clean up the industry, to raise the bar, to ensure that clients knew they were in capable, trustworthy hands when they saw that little ® beside our title.

So, when someone says the word Realtor is “baggage,” I say:

No! It’s the badge of professionalism.

It’s the reason clients come back. It’s the reason the public still believes there’s such a thing as a trusted advisor in this business.

To the next generation of Realtors, learn the history before you try to rewrite it. You’re not starting from scratch; you’re standing on the shoulders of those who worked tirelessly to make this profession respected again. Build on that. Don’t tear it down.

The Realtor name isn’t what’s broken. It’s what keeps us accountable, connected and credible.

And as far as I’m concerned, it still stands for everything that’s right about the profession. 

Jason Steele

Jason Steele is a broker at RE/MAX Four Seasons Realty Limited in Port Elgin, Saugeen Shores and Bruce County.

The post Letter to the Editor: The Realtor name deserves respect – not rebranding appeared first on REM.

Today, the word feels less like a badge of honour and more like a brand you’d whisper about at a cocktail party before someone asks, “Oh, are you one of those?”

A shared word with split reputations

Canada’s real estate professionals use the word Realtor by permission. It is not ours. The trademark is co-owned by the Canadian Real Estate Association (CREA) and the National Association of Realtors (NAR) in the United States. CREA’s financial statements show no money changing hands through their joint company, Realtor Canada Inc., but the symbolic connection is undeniable.

And lately, that connection has been a problem.

Over the past two years, NAR has been mired in scandal, not the petty variety, but the kind that burns trust to the ground. Multiple U.S. class-action lawsuits have accused NAR of price-fixing and collusion around commission structures, culminating in a massive settlement that could reshape how real estate is practiced across America. 

While those legal battles play out, an even darker story has emerged: the sexual harassment and workplace abuse scandal that forced NAR president Kenny Parcell to resign in 2023.

When leadership fails

The New York Times investigation that broke the story read like something out of a corporate horror novel. Former employees described a culture of fear and silence, where senior executives faced repeated accusations of harassment and retaliation. Parcell allegedly sent explicit messages to subordinates, made unwanted advances, and fostered what insiders called a “boys’-club environment.” NAR apologized, launched internal reviews, and promised reform. But the damage was done. The organization built to uphold ethics could not even uphold its own.

For Canadian agents watching from across the border, the embarrassment is hard to ignore. The public does not parse the difference between CREA and NAR. To most consumers, a Realtor is a Realtor. When NAR sinks, the whole fleet lists with it.

When allies walk away

Redfin’s decision to cut ties with NAR in 2023 was a turning point. CEO Glenn Kelman had tried for years to reform the organization from within, pushing for transparency and modernization. Instead, he was met with resistance, outdated commission policies, and, as he said, “a pattern of alleged sexual harassment that betrayed the ideals the association was founded on.”

So Redfin left. Not quietly, not diplomatically, but with a statement that echoed across the industry: “Enough is enough.”

It was not just about money or antitrust risk. It was about integrity. If one of the largest, most visible brokerages in America could no longer stomach the association, what does that say about the health of the brand itself?

Control without independence is not freedom

Here in Canada, CREA controls the trademark rights to the word Realtor, but not the narrative. We carry a name that is not truly ours, tied to an organization in another country that keeps proving it cannot manage its own moral compass.

We do not pay dues to NAR, but we pay something harder to measure — reputational cost. Every time another headline breaks, Canadian agents brace for the fallout. Conversations with clients shift from home values to ethics. The word that once distinguished us now puts us on the defensive.

Who am I to say so?

I am a new agent. My licence cuts me if I turn around too fast. I have not worn off the corners or creased it into the soft parchment that comes with a dozen years in the field. I came into this industry through being an assistant in the aughts, then a real estate photographer in this decade. Three generations of my family have worked in real estate. My grandfather was a bit of a shark in the Lower Mainland, back when women did not do this job.

I debated getting my licence for a long time because, to be honest, this profession has baggage. Maybe it was getting licensed through the NAR lawsuit era, or maybe it was the public perception of what we do, but it gave me pause. 

I’m passionate about finding people homes, but I’m not passionate about the wince that sometimes comes with the word Realtor. You will not find Realtor in my branding, and I do not use it with clients. That is my choice. I am not asking every agent to redo their signs and billboards — that expense in this market!? But what I want to do is plant a seed.

It is time to build our own brand

The easy answer is to say “it is just a word.” But language matters. Words carry reputation, and reputation builds trust or erodes it. When the word Realtor drags behind it lawsuits, harassment scandals, and tone-deaf apologies, maybe it is time to ask if we still need it. The word Realtor ties us to NAR’s shenanigans, and if 2025 has taught us anything, it is that a strong Canadian identity is important.

Imagine rebranding the profession under a distinctly Canadian identity — one that does not require shared custody with an organization still trying to find its moral footing. A name that signals independence, modern ethics, and national pride. Something that says, “We represent our clients and our communities, not another country’s baggage.”

The word Realtor once stood for something bigger. But words can lose their meaning. Maybe the most professional thing we can do now is outgrow it.

After all, integrity is not trademarked. And maybe, finally, it’s time Canadians stopped renting their professional identity from the United States of America.

Lauren Towers

Lauren has lived in Canada, Germany, Italy, France, Mexico, Belize and Thailand—an eclectic résumé that includes time as a frustrated architectural photographer and a business English educator (really… the intellectual equivalent of a ski instructor). Now based in the South Okanagan, she channels her lifelong curiosity and eye for design into real estate, helping clients see the beauty and potential in every property. She loves alternative forms of housing, and even more, helping people with furry friends find the perfect place. Equal parts pragmatist and dreamer, she believes that finding the right home isn’t just a transaction—it’s an act of translation between space and soul.

The post OPINION: Does the word ‘Realtor’ still belong in Canada? appeared first on REM.

That downturn lasted longer than anyone hoped. From 2015 to 2021, Edmonton was a buyer’s market as prices slid thousands of dollars, inventory stacked up, and apartment-style condos got the shortest end of the stick. The market was rough, and there were 40 per cent fewer transactions for any agent; many left the industry or picked up day jobs. I felt the pressure and now I know how pressure makes diamonds.

In the first six months of 2015, I sold 10 houses a month (60 transactions in six months) because I was forced to learn that markets don’t create or remove opportunities; they just shift where the opportunities live. Here are the lessons that stuck with me.

Decode your market

It’s not just a buyer’s market; the impact varies by price point, and it hits people who bought last year differently than those who bought five years ago. Using tools like a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis, we saw that owners who bought five years earlier were in a stronger equity position than those who bought the year before. We also saw that condo and townhouse owners were more affected, as they tended to be less established, and luxury was more affected due to fewer qualified move-up buyers at higher ranges. By understanding the spectrum of impact, we could see who was positioned to win.

Visualize the wins

When the market is hot, wins are plentiful and visible — more like checkers. In a down market, the wins take multiple moves — more like chess. Buyers have the advantage in a buyer’s market, and when someone is selling and buying, the buy can outweigh the sell. Every upgrader was likely to save more on the higher-priced purchase than they would lose on the lower-priced sale. At the top end, thinner buyer pools can widen that spread, which is why calm, evidence-based guidance is a differentiator.

It turns out the challenge wasn’t math; it was fear. People were scared of what they’d heard about the market and what friends would think if they sold in a downturn. What they needed most was a knowledgeable guide to help them see that the down market offered opportunities for those with equity.

Selling in a market that doesn’t want to buy

To unlock the win on the purchase, we had to sell the first property. That meant understanding the market appetite and guiding sellers to solve the market for the highest price. Again, it started with analysis.

If the market had one buyer for every three sellers, you couldn’t be second or third — let alone fifth — in a field crowded with inventory. Most competing listings started five per cent over market, then reduced slowly over a two-month period. Any property that sat more than 60 days without a price change was irrelevant to buyers.

Our clients made better decisions out of the gate, set better prices and had better outcomes. Buyers responded more readily to a listing priced to sell on opening weekend, rather than one that inched down over weeks.

We laid out worst-case scenarios up front, set clear goals and helped people with unrealistic expectations see that this market wasn’t for them.

Spoiled for choice

Once the sale property went pending, we moved to the buy — a better position, with its own challenges. Buyers saw options everywhere, looked for big discounts and had plenty of leverage. The market looked full of deals, but they were harder to find. The risks were decision paralysis and overpaying.

Through testing, we found buyers did better with strong reference points before the first showing. We created a blueprint meeting to build a blueprint for success. It showed the true frequency of opportunities that matched what they wanted — replacing the myth that “thousands of listings” meant unlimited choice. It’s not a game of selection; it’s a game of elimination. You eliminate all but the best option.

We also played the long game. When a listing was new and overpriced, we waited through the price adjustments — and a little longer — to let the seller see the market wasn’t responding. Using time well was a key factor in successful negotiations.

It wasn’t rocket science. It was patience, pattern recognition, and a refusal to get distracted by the noise.

The bigger picture

If you can’t see the wins available in your market, it’s hard to be valuable to people in your marketplace. We can’t look at the market like an ocean with giant waves and stay on the beach. We have to adapt. If there’s wind, we sail; if there are waves, we surf — but we accept we’re getting wet either way.

Taylor Hack

Taylor Hack is an international keynote speaker, cohost of The Leads are $hit Podcast, and leader of HACK&CO at RE/MAX River City; the highest-reviewed team in the Greater Edmonton Area on RankMyAgent.com. Most of Taylor’s 20-year industry experience has been in the top 1 per cent of RE/MAX globally, whether his market has been hot or cold. Taylor is a devoted girl dad, Formula One fanatic, and he believes you miss 100 per cent of the dogs you don’t pet.

The post Pressure makes diamonds: Selling through a market downturn appeared first on REM.

The month also broke with seasonal tradition. Sales declined by 1.7 per cent from August to September, a reversal that is unusual for a period when activity typically accelerates. Major markets, including Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Ottawa and Montreal, all saw slower sales, with Toronto and Winnipeg as the exceptions. Rather than marking the beginning of renewed momentum, the September figures suggest a market struggling to generate even the modest lift that normally accompanies the fall season.

Supply, demand and the tilt toward buyers

What ultimately governs market direction is the relationship between supply and demand. While sales volumes were up 5.2 per cent from last year, listings increased at a faster clip. Active listings stood at nearly 200,000 properties in September, a 7.5 per cent rise year-over-year and roughly consistent with long-term averages. In contrast, sales remain well below those averages.

This divergence matters. A housing market bends toward whichever side expands more quickly. At present, listings are outpacing sales, forcing sellers to adjust downward to meet buyer bids. 

CREA’s sales-to-new listings ratio fell to 50.7 per cent, below the long-run mean of 54.9 per cent. Months of inventory sat at 4.4, slightly under the historical benchmark of five. According to traditional definitions, these readings still describe a balanced market. Yet these conventions are increasingly outdated in an era when technology accelerates transactions and shortens days on market. By older standards, the market appears stable. By contemporary dynamics, it leans distinctly toward buyers.

Prices flat, confidence fragile

On the surface, prices appear steady. The MLS Home Price Index was effectively unchanged in September, slipping just one-tenth of a percentage point from August. Year-over-year, the decline was 3.4 per cent. Such stability suggests the violent correction of 2022 and 2023 has given way to a slower grind. But stability in the numbers does not equal stability in sentiment.

The Canadian labour market has begun to fray. The closure of Stellantis operations in Brampton erased 3,000 jobs. Manufacturing layoffs ripple through Ontario. Unemployment rates are rising across most cities, with Alberta as a notable exception. GDP growth and job creation have been flattered by public sector hiring and fiscal spending, but households know that secure employment is what enables the confidence to purchase a home. Without conviction about income, families hesitate to assume long-term debt even if mortgage rates edge lower.

The fragility of confidence is why CREA’s invocation of “three years of pent-up demand” rings hollow. Demand is only meaningful if it is actionable. The desire to own does not translate into transactions when affordability remains out of reach. Wages must rise, rates must fall further, or prices must adjust downward before demand can be considered real.

The policy backdrop and political void

For years, population growth was the bedrock of housing demand. Immigration targets sustained a bullish narrative even when affordability eroded. That tailwind has now slackened. Political appetite for renewed acceleration in population growth is weak. Without it, a key pillar of long-term demand has been diminished. The looming renegotiation of CUSMA in 2026 adds further uncertainty to the outlook for demand, as the prospect of trade disruption clouds Canada’s broader economic trajectory.

Meanwhile, fiscal and monetary policy operate at cross purposes. Bond markets price the possibility of higher fixed rates toward the end of next year even as the Bank of Canada signals restraint. Government spending props up GDP in the short term, yet this masks structural vulnerabilities. Insolvencies and delinquencies are rising. The foundations of household balance sheets are deteriorating.

It is in this context that CREA’s optimism must be read. The association and its economists are correct that interest rates have normalized relative to the recent past. They are less convincing in suggesting that this will unleash latent demand. Recovery requires not only lower financing costs but also a sense that the broader economy is resilient enough to sustain households over the long term.

An extended holding pattern

Canada’s housing market now occupies an awkward middle ground. It is neither collapsing nor recovering. The correction phase has ended, but the renewal phase has yet to begin. Prices are flat, sales volumes are weak, and the balance of supply and demand tips gradually toward buyers. The system is stalled in place, waiting for either confidence or affordability to break the deadlock.

For policymakers, this limbo should be a warning. In the absence of robust wage growth, sustained employment, or structural improvements to housing supply, the market will not find a natural path back to equilibrium. For households, the message is equally stark. Stability is not the same as security. The risks of job loss, inflation and policy drift weigh heavily on decisions to buy or sell.

The September report is thus not the turning point CREA suggests. It is another entry in a long sequence of data that shows the same reality. Canada’s housing market is stuck. The question is not whether a boom or bust is imminent. It is whether we are prepared for the prolonged stasis that lies ahead.

Daniel Foch

Daniel Foch is the Chief Real Estate Officer at Valery.ca, and Host of Canada’s #1 real estate podcast. As co-founder of The Habistat, the onboard data science platform for TRREB & Proptx, he helped the real estate industry to become more transparent, using real-time housing market data to inform decision making for key stakeholders. With over 15 years of experience in the real estate industry, Daniel has advised a broad spectrum of real estate market participants, from 3 levels of government to some of Canada’s largest developers.

Daniel is a trusted voice in the Canadian real estate market, regularly contributing to media outlets such as The Wall Street Journal, CBC, Bloomberg, and The Globe and Mail. His expertise and balanced insights have earned him a dedicated audience of over 100,000 real estate investors across multiple social media platforms, where he shares primary research and market analysis.

The post Foch: Canada’s housing market is stuck in neutral appeared first on REM.