What happened, in one page
In March 2017 the owners of a house that had sat empty for about seven years answered a door flyer and met Mustafa Zia, then a salesperson at a brokerage the decision calls “Brokerage A”. That same evening they signed a five-month exclusive listing agreement at a price he recommended, $1,200,000. RECO found he did not adequately explain what an exclusive listing meant for them.
Five days later he brought them an offer for $1,125,000 from a corporation the decision calls “Buyer A”. Zia was that corporation’s sole director and officer, and a shareholder. He did not disclose that. The buyer’s agent worked at the same brokerage, and no consent for multiple representation had been sought. The sellers said no.
Two days after that he returned with $1,300,000, told the sellers it was a very good offer, and encouraged them to accept. They did, still without a clear explanation that the buyer was his own company. Among the papers they signed was a “Registrant’s Disclosure of Interest” form stating, in the decision’s words, that “RREA is the director of the corporation purchasing the property.” The sellers only understood the connection when their lawyer read the file. The lawyer raised concerns, and the sale was cancelled by mutual release.
RECO’s Discipline Committee concluded, on facts Zia agreed to, that this breached the Code of Ethics in three ways: pushing an exclusive listing without explaining it, failing to clearly disclose his interest in the buyer, and failing to get timely consent to represent both sides. The penalty was a $20,000 fine and a mandatory ethics course.
- Registrant
- Mohammed Mustafa Zia (aka Mustafa Zia)
- Regulator
- Real Estate Council of Ontario (RECO)
- Decision released
- 23 February 2022
- Conduct at issue
- March 2017 listing and sale of a vacant property in “City A”, Ontario
- Findings
- Breach of REBBA 2002 Code of Ethics sections 4, 5, 17, 38, 39 and 2(1) in respect of section 16
- Penalty
- $20,000 fine (due 30 June 2022) and RECO’s MCE Compliance and Ethics course, Parts 1 and 2 (by 15 May 2022)
- How it was decided
- Agreed statement of facts; hearing waived; order made by the Chair
- Type of finding
- Regulatory Code of Ethics discipline. Not a criminal or civil finding.
Every sentence above is sourced to the decision. Names of the property, brokerage, buyer corporation and second salesperson are anonymised in the original and we have kept it that way.
What his own public listings say
According to his profile on remax.ca and on realtor.ca, Mustafa Zia operates from 1140 Burnhamthorpe Road West in Mississauga under the brokerage name “RE/MAX Centre Mustafa Zia Realty”, and his personal website describes him as its broker of record. His marketing highlights RE/MAX sales awards and describes work in resale, pre-construction and commercial property across the Greater Toronto Area. We have not verified any award claim; we list them because they are part of how he presents himself publicly.
Registration status changes over time. Before relying on any of this, check the live entry in RECO’s registrant search, which shows whether a person is currently registered, with which brokerage, and any conditions. Our guide explains how to read it.
What the record is not
It is a professional-conduct finding under a provincial code of ethics. It is not a criminal conviction, a civil judgment, or a finding of fraud. The section of the Code headed “Error, misrepresentation, fraud, etc.” (section 38) was among those breached, but the finding under it is that he failed to use best efforts to prevent misrepresentation or unethical practice, not that he committed fraud. Anyone describing this decision in stronger terms is going beyond it.
Equally, the fine was $20,000 against a statutory maximum of $25,000 at the time, and the facts, a registrant buying his own clients’ property through a company they did not know was his, go to the heart of what the Code exists to prevent. Readers can weigh that for themselves.
About the name
The decision is styled against “Mohammed Mustafa Zia (aka Mustafa Zia)”. His marketing uses “Mustafa Zia”. Search results also return unrelated people who share the name, including a podiatrist in Georgia, USA, and several Pakistani public figures with Zia as a surname. This site concerns only the Ontario real-estate registrant named in the RECO decision.
Why this record matters to you
You will not find this decision on the first page of a normal search for the agent’s name, and RECO’s own site does not surface old decisions well. A discipline record does not stop a registrant from working. It is public precisely so that clients can weigh it. Whether you are hiring Mustafa Zia or any other Ontario registrant, the questions this case raises are the same:
- Does my agent, or a company they control, have any interest in the buyer or the seller?
- Has the brokerage asked me, in writing and before any offer, to consent to representing more than one party?
- Do I understand what I am locked into by an exclusive listing, and for how long?
We wrote a short guide for each of those: when your agent is the buyer, multiple representation, and exclusive listings. And a two-minute method to check any Ontario agent’s record before you sign anything.
Explore the record
- All recordsEvery decision on this site, indexed by name, date and penalty.
- The decision, full textAll seven pages, transcribed and readable, with the PDF beside it.
- TimelineFrom the door flyer in March 2017 to the order in February 2022.
- The six breachesEach Code of Ethics section RECO cited, in plain language.
- FAQIs he still licensed? Was it fraud? Can I still hire him?
- SourcesEvery document and public listing this site relies on.
This is a regulatory decision reached by agreement, not a court judgment. It records a specific set of events in 2017. It does not say anything about Mr. Zia’s conduct before or since, and it does not use the word “fraud” as a finding. We don’t either. If you are Mr. Zia and believe anything here is inaccurate, our corrections and right-of-reply policy applies and we will publish your response.