A brokerage has a policy stating that all registrants must offer designated representation to clients. A seller client explicitly expresses a desire for traditional common law 'multiple representation' services, where the brokerage could potentially represent both the buyer and seller in the same transaction. What must the brokerage do in this situation under TRESA 2023?

Question: A brokerage has a policy stating that all registrants must offer designated representation to clients. A seller client explicitly expresses a desire for traditional common law 'multiple representation' services, where the brokerage could potentially represent both the buyer and seller in the same transaction. What must the brokerage do in this situation under TRESA 2023?

Answer options:

• The brokerage must decline to represent the seller, as their internal policy prohibits traditional common law multiple representation. ✅ The brokerage can agree to provide common law multiple representation, provided a written agreement is formed with the seller, specifically detailing the risks and limitations, and all parties consent.
• The brokerage must inform the seller that common law multiple representation is no longer permitted under TRESA 2023 under any circumstances.
• The brokerage should refer the seller to another brokerage that still offers traditional common law multiple representation.

Correct answer: The brokerage can agree to provide common law multiple representation, provided a written agreement is formed with the seller, specifically detailing the risks and limitations, and all parties consent.

Explanation: While designated representation is the default under TRESA, common law multiple representation is still permissible if a registrant does not designate a representative for the client. This requires specific written agreements detailing the limitations and risks, and informed written consent from all parties involved, as per Section 23 of O. Reg. 580/05 (General).