33-06-0956
Licence number
B8009
Broker's name
Fung, Suet-Yim
Decision
Notice of suspension of the certificate
of Mrs. Suet-Yim Fung
(also known as Debbie Fung)
File: 33-06-0956
NOTICE is hereby given that Mrs. Suet-Yim Fung, affiliated real estate agent (B8009), formerly employed by or authorized to act on behalf of Re/Max Platine, chartered real estate broker (A2784), whose establishment is located at 1850 Panama Avenue, suite 110, in Brossard, has been found guilty by the Discipline Committee of the Association des courtiers et agents immobiliers du Québec of the twelve (12) counts of infractions summarized as follows:
1st count: From 2003 to 2006, with respect to various immovables, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, committed acts derogatory to the honour and dignity of the profession, participated in an act or practice in real estate matters which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or the profession, namely by:
A) acting as a real estate agent for the acquisition of the Properties, by buyers of Asian origin and domiciled outside of the province of Québec, while she knew or should have known that the purpose of these acquisitions was to grow cannabis inside the Properties or to conduct other illicit activities;
B) by acting, as a listing agent, for the resale of properties while she knew or should have known that for each of the properties:
a) cannabis had been grown inside the house;
b) superficial alterations, repairs or works had been done or actions had been taken in order to hide the stigmata left by the said growing;
and by:
iii) letting buyers present promises to purchase for the properties without disclosing that fact;
v) letting buyers notarize the sale without disclosing that fact;
the whole contrary to sections 1, 13, 26, 28 and 29 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
2nd count: Beginning on or around September 24th, 2005, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice in real estate matters which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or the profession, did not disclose a factor of which she has knowledge, that could unfavorably affect a prospective buyer, or the object of the transaction, namely by:
a) not disclosing in writing the fact that the immovable has been used for cannabis’ growing;
b) by denying to his real estate agent, that the immovable has been used for such;
the whole contrary to sections 1, 13, 26, 28 and 29 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
3rd count: Beginning on or around March 15th, 2005, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice in real estate matters which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or the profession, did not disclose in writing a factor of which she has knowledge, that could unfavorably affect the object of the transaction, namely the fact that the immovable has been used for cannabis’ growing, the whole contrary to sections 1, 13 and 29 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
4th count: Beginning on or around August 22nd, 2003, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness of the signature of her client, while she was not present when the following documents were signed:
a) a promise to purchase together with annexes A and AB dated August 22nd, 2003 and an annex pyrite;
b) an amendments form dated August 23rd, 2003;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
5th count: Beginning on or around June 1st, 2004, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness of the signature of her client while she was not present when the following documents were signed:
a) a promise to purchase together with an annex A, dated June 1st, 2004;
b) a counter-proposal dated June 1st, 2004;
c) a counter-proposal dated June 3rd, 2004;
d) an amendments form dated June 9th, 2004;
e) an amendments form dated June 9th, 2004;
f) an amendments form dated June 9th, 2004;
g) an amendments form dated June 11th, 2004;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
6th count: Beginning on August 22nd, 2003, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness of the signature of her client, while she was not present when the following documents were signed:
a) a promise to purchase together with an annex A and AB, dated August 22nd, 2003;
b) an amendments form dated August 27th, 2003;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
7th count: Beginning on April 24th, 2005, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness of the signature of her client, while she was not present when the following documents were signed:
a) a promise to purchase together with annexes A, AB, and an annex pyrite dated April 24th, 2005;
b) a counter-proposal dated April 24th, 2005;
c) an amendments form dated April 27th, 2005;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
8th count: Beginning on May 27th, 2005, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness of the signature of her client, while she was not present when the following documents were signed:
a) a promise to purchase together with annexes A and AB dated May 27th, 2005 and an annex pyrite;
b) an amendments form dated May 27th, 2005;
c) a promise to purchase together with an annex A, dated June 10th, 2005;
d) a counter-proposal dated June 10th, 2005;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
9th count: Beginning on August 14th, 2003, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness of the signature of her client, while she was not present when the following documents were signed:
a) a promise to purchase together with annexes A and AB dated August 14th, 2003;
b) a counter-proposal dated August 16th, 2003;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
10th count: On or around August 21st, 2003, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness to the signature of her client, while knowing that the latter was not the one who signed an amendments form, the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
11th count: Beginning on or around July 15, 2003, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness to the signature of her client, while knowing that the latter was not the one who signed the following documents:
a) a promise to purchase together with annexes A and AB, dated July 15th, 2003;
b) a counter-proposal dated July 16th, 2003;
c) a counter-proposal dated July 16th, 2003;
d) a counter-proposal dated July 17th, 2003;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
12th count: Beginning on or around April 13th, 2002, with respect to an immovable, Defendant did not demonstrate integrity, participated in an act or practice which may be illegal or which may cause prejudice to the public or to the profession, namely by signing as a witness to the signature of her client, while knowing that the latter was not the one who signed the following documents:
a) a promise to purchase together with annexes A and AB, dated April 13th, 2002 as well as an annex pyrite;
b) a counter-proposal dated April 15th, 2002;
c) an amendments form dated April 15th, 2002;
d) an amendments form dated April 24th, 2002;
the whole contrary to sections 1 and 13 of the Rules of professional ethics of the ACAIQ.
On September 5th, 2006, the Discipline Committee ordered a permanent suspension of the certificate of Mrs. Suet-Yim Fung (also known as Debbie Fung) for these twelve counts.
The above decision of the Discipline Committee is enforceable from the date of the appeals deadline, i.e. October 11, 2006. The permanent suspension of Mrs. Suet-Yim Fung’s affiliated real estate agent certificate is therefore effective as from October 11th, 2006.
This notice is given in accordance with section 137 of the Real Estate Brokerage Act (R.S.Q., c. C-73.1).
Brossard, October 16th, 2006
Chantal Peltier
Discipline Committee Secretary
