Practice Test GeeksOMVIC (Ontario Motor Vehicle Industry Council) Practice Test
← All OMVIC Flashcard Decks

MVDA and Legislation Flashcards

6 cards from real OMVIC practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.

Read the first 6 MVDA and Legislation flashcards as text

  1. A used vehicle dealer receives a $3,000 deposit cheque from a buyer at 6:00 PM on a Friday evening after all banks have closed. Under Ontario Regulation 333/08 under the MVDA, 2002, when must this deposit be placed into the dealer's trust account?

    Answer: No later than the next banking day (Monday), since it was received after banking hours

    Under the MVDA and its regulations, deposits received after banking hours on a banking day must be deposited into trust no later than the next banking day. Friday is a banking day, but since the deposit was received after the bank closed, the dealer has until Monday (the next banking day) to place it in trust. The 24-hour rule does not override the banking-hours provision.

  2. A business operates an online platform that connects private motor vehicle buyers with registered dealers in Ontario, negotiates pricing on behalf of buyers, but never takes possession of, or title to, any vehicle. Under the MVDA, 2002, which registration category is most appropriate for this business?

    Answer: Motor vehicle dealer — broker, because the business arranges deals without holding title or possession

    The MVDA, 2002 establishes a 'broker' registration category specifically for businesses that facilitate motor vehicle transactions without taking title or possession of the vehicles. Negotiating on behalf of buyers and connecting them to dealers constitutes 'trading' under the Act, requiring registration. The broker category captures this activity; operating without the correct registration is an offence.

  3. An OMVIC-registered salesperson was defrauded by the registered dealer who employed them — the dealer took the salesperson's personal vehicle as a trade-in on the promise of commission, then went insolvent without paying the commission or returning the vehicle. Can the salesperson make a claim against the OMVIC Compensation Fund for this loss?

    Answer: No, because OMVIC registrants are expressly ineligible to claim against the Compensation Fund

    The OMVIC Compensation Fund is designed to protect consumers — not industry participants. The MVDA expressly excludes OMVIC registrants (registered dealers and salespersons) from eligibility to make claims against the Fund, even if they suffer a loss arising from a transaction with another registrant. The salesperson's recourse would be civil litigation or an OMVIC complaint, not a Fund claim.

  4. A used vehicle dealer acquires a trade-in that was previously used as a daily rental vehicle for 22 months, then privately owned for four years. The dealer has rental history documentation in the vehicle's file. The prospective buyer does not ask about prior use. Under MVDA disclosure obligations, the dealer must:

    Answer: Disclose the rental history, because prior use as a daily rental is a prescribed material fact regardless of subsequent private ownership

    Under Ontario Regulation 333/08, prior use of a vehicle as a daily rental is a prescribed material fact that must be disclosed by the dealer — regardless of how many subsequent owners the vehicle has had or how old the vehicle is. The obligation to disclose is proactive, not contingent on a buyer's inquiry. The existence of the documentation in the dealer's file further reinforces the disclosure obligation.

  5. A dealer sells a used vehicle with a signed 'as-is' clause in the purchase agreement. After delivery, the buyer discovers the odometer reading is 55,000 km lower than the vehicle's actual mileage, and the dealer had possession of a prior CarProof report showing the discrepancy. In this scenario, the 'as-is' clause:

    Answer: Does not protect the dealer, because odometer discrepancy is a prescribed material fact and the dealer had prior knowledge

    An 'as-is' clause cannot waive a dealer's obligation to disclose prescribed material facts under the MVDA. Odometer discrepancy is explicitly listed as a material fact that must be disclosed. If the dealer possessed documentation (such as a CarProof/Carfax report) confirming the discrepancy and failed to disclose it, the 'as-is' clause provides no legal protection. This may also expose the dealer to fraud liability and OMVIC disciplinary action.

  6. A dealer's advertisement prominently features '0.9% financing for 84 months' on a specific vehicle model. In fine print visible only on the dealer's website (not in the ad itself), the offer is restricted to buyers with a credit score above 750 and excludes vehicles with existing manufacturer incentives. Under MVDA advertising requirements, this advertisement:

    Answer: Violates MVDA advertising requirements, because material conditions of a financing offer must be clearly and prominently disclosed in the advertisement itself

    The MVDA and OMVIC's advertising standards require that material conditions attached to advertised offers — including eligibility restrictions and exclusions — be clearly and prominently disclosed in the advertisement itself, not buried on a separate web page. A financing rate that applies only to a narrow subset of buyers with restrictive conditions is misleading if those conditions are not visible in the same ad. Relegating restrictions to fine print elsewhere does not satisfy the disclosure standard.