A forged signature or a falsified deal document in Ontario: what the MVDA says and what a buyer can do

A dealer or salesperson who falsifies a document on a car deal breaks section 26 of the Motor Vehicle Dealers Act, 2002, and one who hands a false document to anyone, a lender included, breaks section 27. Neither section mentions signatures. Both cover “any information or document relating to a trade”, wording wide enough for the bills of sale and the credit application in the cases below. A breach is a provincial offence, and the regulation under the Act separately requires the buyer’s own signature on the sale contract and on any extended warranty the dealer sells. A buyer who finds a signature they never wrote has three routes, each run separately: a complaint to the Ontario Motor Vehicle Industry Council (OMVIC), a claim to cancel under the Consumer Protection Act, 2002, and, once a court has ruled, the Motor Vehicle Dealers Compensation Fund.

What do sections 26 and 27 of the MVDA say?

Section 26, falsifying information, reads in full: “No registrant shall falsify, assist in falsifying or induce or counsel another person to falsify or assist in falsifying any information or document relating to a trade in motor vehicles.”

Section 27, furnishing false information: “No registrant shall furnish, assist in furnishing or induce or counsel another person to furnish or assist in furnishing any false or deceptive information or documents relating to a trade in a motor vehicle.”

A registrant is a dealer or a salesperson registered under the Act (s. 1). The two sections split the conduct in two: s. 26 is making the document false, and s. 27 is passing false information or a false document along. Both also reach a registrant who assists, induces or counsels someone else to do it, so the person who asks for the signature to be filled in is covered as well as the person holding the pen.

Is it an offence, and what are the penalties?

Under the MVDA it is a provincial offence. Section 32(1)(c) makes contravening any section of the Act or its regulations, other than the Code of Ethics, an offence, and s. 32(3) sets the maximums: for an individual, a fine of up to $50,000, imprisonment of up to two years less a day, or both; for a corporation, a fine of up to $250,000. On a conviction the court may also order the person to pay compensation or make restitution (s. 33(1)).

The Code of Ethics runs alongside. Section 9(3) of O. Reg. 332/08 requires a registrant to use best efforts to prevent “error, misrepresentation, fraud or any unethical practice” in a trade, and the discipline committee, OMVIC’s Discipline Tribunal, can fine a registrant up to $25,000 for a breach of the Code (MVDA s. 17(4)).

Does a dealer need my signature on the contract?

Yes. For a sale to a buyer who is not a dealer, the regulation makes the dealer ensure that “the contract is signed by the parties”, that the salesperson signs it where one acted on the sale, and that “the purchaser receives a copy of the contract immediately after signing it”. The rule is s. 39(10) for a new vehicle and s. 40(9) for a used one.

An extended warranty the dealer sells itself carries the same two requirements in s. 47(5): signed by the parties, and a copy to the purchaser immediately after signing. Where the dealer only facilitates a warranty sold by another company, s. 47(7)(a) asks it to use best efforts to meet those two requirements. An extended warranty added to a deal without a contract the buyer signed does not meet s. 47(5) where the dealer sold it, and puts a facilitating dealer’s best efforts under s. 47(7)(a) in question.

The dealer also has to keep records of each sale it makes and each extended warranty or service plan it sells or facilitates, and copies of those contracts (s. 53(1)(e) and (i) and s. 53(4)). An OMVIC books and records inspection reviews those trade files, as the Patvivi inspection below did.

What does a charge under these sections look like?

On August 10, 2026, OMVIC laid charges in Mississauga against 1000035337 Ontario Inc. o/a Mercedes-Benz Mississauga and Nasir Mohamed. The Information alleges, over the trade of a 2025 Mercedes-Benz GLC 300 between August 28, 2024 and January 15, 2025, that each of them, “being a registrant”, falsified information and documents contrary to s. 26 and furnished false information and documents contrary to s. 27. A further count alleges the corporation failed to keep a record of the sale under s. 53(1)(e) of O. Reg. 333/08.

These are charges only. The court table lists them as active, nothing has been proven, and the Information does not say what was falsified or whether any signature was involved.

Two matters that did reach a finding show what the sections cover in practice:

• In the Patvivi Inc. consent order, the agreed facts record that the purchaser’s name and signature on four bills of sale were incorrect and did not match Ministry of Transportation records, and that Patrick Nwandu falsified and furnished false information contrary to s. 26 and s. 27 (agreed facts, paras 15, 26, 36 and 50).
• In Hritani and Danish v Registrar, the Licence Appeal Tribunal found at [47] that a salesperson falsified a buyer’s credit application, and noted at [33] his earlier guilty plea to one s. 27 count, fined $1,500. The buyer had signed the documents herself; the figures on them were the false part.

A signature the buyer never wrote and a real signature under figures the buyer never gave are both documents relating to a trade.

What can I do if the dealer forged my signature?

Start with the paperwork. A buyer is owed a copy of the contract immediately after signing, so a copy that was never handed over, or one that differs from what the lender or warranty company holds, is itself worth writing down. Ask the dealer in writing for copies of every document in the deal file.

Complain to OMVIC. Under s. 14 of the MVDA, the registrar can require the dealer to answer, and can attempt to mediate, issue a written warning, require further education, refer the matter to the discipline committee or act on the registration. OMVIC’s complaints process page says a formal complaint starts once the buyer signs and returns an acknowledgement form, with 45 days the expected turnaround. The same page is plain about the limits: “OMVIC cannot compel or order a dealer to cancel a contract, return money, or carry out repairs.”

Ask to cancel under the Consumer Protection Act, 2002. Section 18(1) lets a consumer rescind an agreement entered into “after or while a person has engaged in an unfair practice”, with any other remedy in law, including damages. A false, misleading or deceptive representation is an unfair practice under s. 14(1). The notice must be given within one year after entering into the agreement (s. 18(3)), may be expressed in any way that states the intention to rescind and the reasons (s. 18(4)), and may be delivered by any means. If the consumer has no satisfactory response within the prescribed period, the consumer may sue in the Superior Court of Justice (s. 18(8) and (9)). Rescission cancels the related agreements too, credit agreements the dealer arranged among them (s. 18(14)). Whether a particular falsified document amounts to an unfair practice is for a court, and OMVIC’s cancelling an agreement page adds that, because time may pass before a cancellation is granted, the courts may allow the dealer to charge for the buyer’s use of the vehicle.

Keep the Compensation Fund in view. A consumer who bought from a registered dealer can claim from the Fund in the cases s. 79(3) of O. Reg. 333/08 lists, two of which can follow from a case like this: the claim “arose from a trade in connection with which the registered motor vehicle dealer has been convicted of an offence” (paragraph 2), and the amount is the subject of a final court judgment or restitution order against the dealer (paragraph 10). The customer must first give the dealer a written demand that the dealer refuses or cannot pay (s. 79(1)(e)). The Fund pays on a claim that arose from the trade itself; the Tribunal’s Hurry decision turned a claim away because a refinancing was not a trade. The Fund’s other rules are in the Compensation Fund practice section.

Paragraph 2 turns on the dealer’s own conviction over the trade, for any offence. In the Mercedes-Benz Mississauga file the Information was laid by an OMVIC provincial offences officer, not a buyer.