The Alberta Real Estate Regulator Needs to Improve

Brad Mitchell is the CEO of the Alberta Real Estate Association, a not-for-profit professional association representing the interests of more than 15,000 Alberta Realtors from 10 local real estate boards/associations.

Albertans deserve the confidence that their real estate transactions, often the most significant financial commitments of their lives, are conducted within a regulatory framework designed, first and foremost, to protect the public. That is the cornerstone of professional real estate regulation. Unfortunately, recent events have raised serious concerns about whether Alberta’s regulator is fulfilling its mandate.

The case involving Eric Drinkwater, formerly of Re/Max Central in Calgary, has revealed a deeply troubling situation. Civil litigation, criminal charges, and the removal of Re/Max Central from the Re/Max network are all part of a broader failure of oversight. Most distressing is the impact on the victims, many of whom are Realtors, and the erosion of trust this incident has caused.

Despite clear authority under the Real Estate Act, particularly Section 53, which allows the Chair of an Industry Council to suspend and impose conditions on licensees in the public interest without a hearing, those tools were not and are not being used properly. This was not a failure of legislation. It was a failure of execution. This is not an isolated failure. It reflects a pattern of inaction and misplaced priorities that have steadily undermined public confidence in the Real Estate Council of Alberta (RECA) and its ability to fulfill its duties.

Consumers “left at risk”

In 2018, the Government of Alberta commissioned a report that uncovered serious problems within RECA. In response, the province introduced significant reforms, including the Real Estate Amendment Act, which took effect in December 2020. One crucial change was made to Section 54 of the Act. It requires RECA’s Industry Councils to reject requests from licensees who want to voluntarily withdraw from the profession if there are credible allegations of fraud or criminal activity that warrant investigation.

Despite this clear requirement, RECA did not implement the change. It only began to enforce the provision after the Minister responsible for Service Alberta issued a formal directive several years after the law had taken effect. Even then, the RECA Board did not inform Industry Council members about the Minister’s directive. Council members only learned about it through an advisory issued by AREA.

As a result, consumers in Alberta were left at risk. Individuals facing serious allegations were allowed to leave the profession without facing any consequences. In one case, a licensee was granted a lifetime withdrawal from RECA and resumed selling new homes the following week.

A look at RECA’S spending

It is difficult to reconcile failures like these with RECA’s spending priorities.

While RECA has spent money on initiatives such as building a private employee gym and paying off a $13 million mortgage, it has simultaneously cited financial constraints as a reason for its limited enforcement capacity. In any public-serving institution, especially one with regulatory responsibilities, such spending choices warrant scrutiny.

“Inadequate response” to Drinkwater fraud case

AREA has long advocated for a regulatory system in Alberta that is transparent, competent, and focused on the public good. In this case, the regulatory response has been inadequate.

RECA has stated that in the Drinkwater case, it acted “swiftly and in strict accordance with our regulatory obligations,” but such assurances ring hollow given the extent of the harm. Speed and diligence must be measured not by RECA’s internal timelines but by the consequences of inaction and the public’s interests.

RECA to go under the magnifying glass

AREA supports the Alberta government’s decision to conduct a full review of RECA’s operations and governance. A regulator must not only be independent but also effective. Regulatory independence cannot serve as a shield against accountability.

Our industry relies on a well-functioning regulator to uphold standards, enforce rules, and ensure consumer confidence. When enforcement is delayed, regulatory tools go unused, and resources are diverted away from public protection, the system fails to serve its core purpose.

AREA will continue to advocate for the victims in the Drinkwater case, including seeking compensation through the Consumer Protection Fund. If current policies are insufficient to meet the needs of victims, they must be revised. A fund intended to protect consumers must do just that.

There is now an opportunity to reset Alberta’s real estate regulatory system—to ensure that enforcement is proactive and that transparency is practiced and not merely promised. Real estate regulation is not about image. It is about trust. It is about responsibility. And it is about…