Vivid at the Yates development, where Jason Leslie was found to have bought an affordable unit in 2018 and rented it out (vividattheyates.com).
A B.C. real estate agent has been fined $200,000 and had his licence suspended for six months after purchasing a unit through an affordable homeownership program – despite knowing he did not meet the requirements – and renting it out.
Jason Alexander Leslie and his personal real estate corporation entered into a consent order with the BC Financial Services Authority (BCFSA) on Aug. 14. The regulator found Leslie committed professional misconduct in connection with the purchase of a condo in Victoria’s Vivid at the Yates development.
Affordable housing program
Jason Leslie (Remax Generation – Victoria).
The Vivid building was developed as part of BC Housing’s Affordable Homeownership Program, with units selling for an average of 12 per cent below market rates, according to the BCFSA consent order. The B.C. government provided a $52.9-million low-interest loan to the developer as part of a pilot project aimed at increasing affordable homeownership options for middle-income households in Victoria.
Under a covenant attached to the development, eligible households could have a combined gross worldwide annual income of no more than $150,000. Purchasers were also required to make the unit their primary residence and could only purchase one unit.
For the first two years, units could not be leased to third parties. Leslie, who was licensed to provide trading services at Remax Camosun at the time of the transaction, entered an agreement to purchase a 505-square-foot, one-bedroom unit in February 2018.
Leslie knew program requirements
According to the consent order, Leslie signed several documents acknowledging the affordable housing requirements, including a statutory declaration stating that he was a “Qualified Person” and agreeing to be bound by the covenant.
During BCFSA’s investigation, Leslie acknowledged he never intended to use the unit as his primary residence. He also told investigators he had attended an education session required before purchasing at Vivid and had a “comprehensive understanding” of the requirements for qualified purchasers.
Leslie had also acted as a buyer’s agent for other purchasers in the development. He told investigators he had acted as an agent in six sales, including his own, three of which involved affordable housing units at Vivid.
He represented himself as buyer’s agent on his own purchase and received a commission.
Unit rented after possession
Leslie took possession of the unit on May 7, 2021.
A month later, on June 7, he signed a Form K identifying himself as landlord, followed by a residential tenancy agreement on June 10. The consent order says he never occupied the unit.
BC Housing contacted Leslie in March 2022 after auditing his eligibility, and determined he was not eligible to purchase the unit. It demanded the property be returned.
Leslie agreed, and the transaction was completed in September 2022.
As part of the return, Leslie repaid the net real estate commission he received on his purchase and the net rental income from the property. He also paid property transfer tax owed by BC Housing and its related legal fees.
BCFSA finds professional misconduct
BCFSA received two complaints about Leslie in March 2024, one from a member of Vivid’s strata council and another from a member of the public. A notice of discipline hearing was issued in December 2025.
Under the consent order, Leslie and his personal real estate corporation were found to have committed unbecoming conduct. The regulator also found professional misconduct involving “wrongful taking or deceptive dealing”, as well as a failure to meet the duty to act honestly and with reasonable care and skill.
Previous disciplinary action
The consent order notes Leslie and his personal real estate corporation were previously disciplined in 2019.
In that case, they were found to have committed professional misconduct while Leslie acted as a limited dual agent for buyers and sellers. The regulator found he failed to avoid a conflict of interest, disclose all material facts and obtain all sellers’ consent before an inspection took place.
He was ordered to pay a $7,500 penalty and $1,500 in costs and complete two educational courses.
Six-month suspension, enhanced supervision
Under the latest order, Leslie and his personal real estate corporation must jointly pay the $200,000 discipline penalty, along with $5,000 in enforcement expenses.
Their licences are suspended for six months, and Leslie is prohibited from working as an unlicensed assistant during that period. He must also complete a remedial education course through the University of British Columbia’s Sauder School of Business.
Once the suspension ends, Leslie will be subject to enhanced supervision by a managing broker for at least 12 months.
“The $200,000 penalty and six-month licence suspension sends a clear message: exploiting an affordable homeownership program for personal gain is serious misconduct that erodes public confidence in real estate professionals and will result in significant consequences,” Jon Vandall, BCFSA’s senior vice-president of financial professionals, said in an Aug. 24 news release.
“Real estate agents are entrusted to act honestly. Deceptive dealing violates that trust, undermines confidence in the profession, and demands decisive regulatory action.”
Leslie was most recently working under the banner of Remax Generation – Victoria. REM reached out to the brokerage for comment.
Courtney Zwicker is a digital reporter and associate editor for REM. Based in Atlantic Canada, she has over a decade of experience covering daily business news.
This case raises serious questions, particularly as governments consider further intervention in B.C.’s condominium market.
First, how was this allowed to happen? The individual was a licensed real estate professional who understood the affordable-housing requirements, signed documents confirming his eligibility and apparently never intended to occupy the unit. Yet it took approximately eight years from the original 2018 transaction to reach a final regulatory disposition in 2026. That hardly inspires confidence in the effectiveness or speed of the oversight process.
It also raises questions about the proposed government intervention involving approximately 2,200 unsold B.C. condos. The Vivid units were reportedly sold at an average of 12% below market value. How was that 12% established? Who independently verified the market value? More importantly, was 12% actually enough to make these homes meaningfully affordable?
Finally, this was not the licensee’s first disciplinary matter. He had previously been disciplined for professional misconduct. This time, BCFSA imposed a $200,000 penalty, a six-month suspension, education and enhanced supervision, but he can ultimately return to the profession.
At what point does repeated misconduct result in losing the privilege of being licensed? Will another fine and another course genuinely change someone’s behaviour?
These are legitimate questions, particularly when taxpayer-supported housing programs are involved. Before governments embark on another major housing intervention, taxpayers deserve to know that eligibility, valuation, enforcement and accountability mechanisms are strong enough to prevent history from repeating itself.