Network head raises concerns about REDX, AMP

by |

No one less than a network head is warning mortgage professionals across the country after finding four REDX reports attached to his own name, specifically tied to his AMP designation.

“I really think most brokers are simply unaware that this can and does happen,” Ron De Silva, head of RMAI told Wednesday. “I really would like an explanation for why this is happening – why deciding not to renew your AMP designation should result in a REDX report being created. It doesn’t seem to fit with the whole purpose of REDX which as stated on the website is to “Prevent Fraud, Manage Risk, Protect your interests.'”

The concerns come on the heels of his discovery of not one, but four such incident reports now appended to his file on the industry database meant to alert lenders to the fraudulent activity of mortgage professionals. 

The first three REDX “hits” stems from De Silva’s delay in renewing his AMP. The last was generated after he decided not to renew, period.

The respected industry vet is concerned that those marks against him could put off lenders and underwriters who fail to study the exact nature of the reports but use their mere existence to disqualify a broker.

“What’s even more of a concern for me,” he said, “is the many other brokers who may have had the same thing happen to them just because they made the decision not to renew their AMP designation and that they don’t even know a report was generated. All brokers should request a free copy of their own REDX report by completing and submitting the online form at”.

De Silva is just the latest mortgage professional to sound the alarm over what many argue is the growing abuse of the REDX system, which relies on lenders and, indeed, information made public by CAAMP to generate incident reports as red flags to other REDX members. Brokers are also concerned that under REDX rules only the member who posted the report can remove it.

“The whole purpose of REDX is for a lender to determine if the brokers is suitable to work with,” the Ontario broker told “I just want CAAMP or whoever to explain how opting out of a designation that is not mandatory to our profession somehow indicates that the broker isn’t suitable to partner with. I could perhaps understand an incident report being generated if CAAMP withdrew the designation from a member for ethical reason, but not because the AMP him- or herself decided not to renew.”

CAAMP President Jim Murphy argues that AMP membership rolls are public information, although isn’t confirming or denying whether the association directly provides that information to REDX.

“Our membership information, including members who have their AMP, is public information,” he told “It has been available online for several years and prior to that in print. In terms of recourse you would have to follow up with REDX.”

  • Michael Mitchell on 2013-05-02 9:24:15 AM

    The entire AMP designation is a scam,you have to take a course that tells you how to legally lie to a client.I prefer just being honest all the way through with every client as do 99% of all people in the industry.

  • Catherine on 2013-05-02 9:39:49 AM

    That is absolutely disgusting. I never understood why the AMP Designation has to be renewed every year. We have earned it...we should keep it. When a person studies hard to become a CA does someone take that away from them for not paying for it every year thereafter? Being a part of an associate is one thing but paying MORE to that association because you are MORE educated makes no sense.
    Reporting someone to REDX for finding the obvious flaw in the CAAMP money plan is like the whiney bully in the sandbox. You don't give him your brand new pail and shovel every spring time then he will kick sand in your face.
    You would have to be an UN-EDUCATED moron to fall for that every year.
    Bloody ridiculous!

  • John Hamilton on 2013-05-02 10:08:45 AM

    I have elected this year to not renew my AMP designation. My opinion is there is no benefit to even being a member of CAAMP. This news confirms to me that the organization has no purpose other than to receive funds.

  • Jeremy Nagel on 2013-05-02 10:16:28 AM

    Unfortunately, the AMP designation is more of a cash grab than it every was about business acumen. The simple fact that CAAMP would report this to REDX is absolutely asinine. Equally disturbing is the fact that REDX would process this and it speaks to a lack of integrity, in my opinion.

    REDX like Equifax, is only as good as companies doing the reporting and we all know what Equifax is like. There are always a few bad apples.

    There was a time when it was said that if you are unhappy with CAAMP, speak up. To date CAAMP has not listened to its members, so I say vote with your wallet and expect another REDX hit.

    Keep up the great work fellow brokers! Lets all work together to go after the other 70% market share we do not have.

  • George on 2013-05-02 10:47:04 AM

    The AMP sticky notes are the most expensive stationary that I pay for. Probably generated a REDX report when I told them I didn't want to pay for that stationary anymore.

  • James Loewen on 2013-05-02 10:57:41 AM

    Visited ...

    On the home page: Endorsed By CAAMP

    Saddened to read the above information as a fellow broker of what Ron has experienced, very unfair.

    Apparently the page should state "Sponsoured by & Mandatory to keep and pay your CAAMP membership or you'll receive 1 to 4 RedX reports on you as a broker"

  • Gary George on 2013-05-02 10:59:18 AM

    I have not renewed my AMP designation in years as I perceive it to have little Professional value given the fact that they give it to anybody that shows up versus maybe awarding it to those with the experience and tenure befitting such a designation. I have also witnessed answer being given and or shared in order to get AMP credits. Shameful!!!

  • Jane on 2013-05-02 11:52:15 AM

    Hi, I also have not renewed my AMP for a few years now as I saw no value. Imagine my surprise to find 4 REDX marks against my name for not renewing.
    I am all for continuing education, but was just tired of paying to renew a designation where the required credits were given out for attending a wine and cheese party held by the lender!!!

  • John Dearin on 2013-05-02 12:05:49 PM

    Curious what the reports say...are you now crooks and thieves...untrustworthy....tight asses? It surely just can't report that you didn't renew a designation that is not even recognized outside the profession?

    Must order mine and see what evils have befallen me, though I have kept my AMP,, a few inches above "better than nothing"

  • Robert Stanfield, Invis on 2013-05-02 12:06:03 PM

    Who reports the non renewal of the AMP designation to REDX?
    Is CAAMP reporting this to REDX?

  • Paolo Di Petta | on 2013-05-02 12:31:45 PM

    Well, this is interesting...

    I'm rarely a fan of CAAMP practices, but this one really takes the cake. Turning the AMP designation into some form of reputation extortion.

    Not to mention, this goes back to another article I commented on a few months back - CAAMP is pushing to be our educator, the keepers of our designation, and our lobby group. With their hands in so many pies, it's easy to see how can use their power for their own benefit, not necessarily for the benefit of the industry.

    More surprising though, is how no one saw this coming. They charge for 'courses', built some artificial designation to validate them, and are trying to make that a defacto standard for industry practice. It's not about education, it's a cash grab. It was pretty obvious to me from the beginning, which is why I never bothered with the AMP designation to begin with.

  • Elfie Hayes on 2013-05-02 12:57:57 PM

    I've just submitted a request for my own file as I did not renew my AMP this year for the same reason stated by many.
    We need to be heard as a group if this reporting continues. I will be filing a complaint with my broker if I find I have been reported for not renewing. I'm tired of belonging to a self serving organization. Shame on you Jim Murphy for your empty response. Who else would report to Redx if not CAAMP?

  • Derek Rowley on 2013-05-02 2:09:03 PM

    Hi Ron and all my fellow brokers and agents

    How can I sum this up in a short two word essay, hhhmmm

    How about Hello IMBA

    Just a thought


  • Shawn on 2013-05-02 2:48:07 PM

    On the same topic, Redx is a flawed system and not transparent. I knew a broker who had a RedX filed on him, hurting his standing with lenders. You are not told what it is you have done, nor who your accuser is. You are not even notified you are on RedX. It seems very dark ages, and gives you no opportunity to clear your name. In this, it was not fraud, merely an underwriter who has their story wrong. How many times has this happened?

  • Education supporter on 2013-05-02 5:05:13 PM

    I too support the idea of the AMP but do not think it is fair that this is being held against you for not renewing a bogus title to begin with. I gave up my AMP as I saw no value in it. I still attend the conference annually and I still participate in learning. I think there should be a web site where customers and brokers can complain about lenders and underwriters who are stupid and add conditions and out right fail as a lender or underwriter. Now that is a website I would be interested in.

  • Michelle on 2013-05-02 10:23:56 PM

    After being perm disabled in an auto accident an AMP committed fraud on me ... A fellow AMP. The response I received and action taken was far from what I expected from the association. #disappointed

  • Mukesh Patel on 2013-05-02 11:25:20 PM

    I too agree with the fact that CAAMP does nothing for our industry except take our money. I have never opted for the AMP designation because I never saw the value in it. I have never been asked by a client about it either, ever.

    What I have never understood about CAAMP is can it look out for us, mortgage agents and brokers, if it allows banks and their employees to be CAAMP members.

  • Jason - BC on 2013-05-03 10:05:48 AM

    I think it is time for Jim Murphy and Michael Ellingsworth to step down, they are ineffective and have only hurt the image of CAAMP in our industry. Their constant harping on the AMP, a designation which 80% of their membership do not support shows that they have no concept on what it means to run an association. It is why I dropped my AMP and have since dropped my CAAMP membership. What is the point when they do not support my business? I am tired of spending money to keep those two in a job.

  • John Bargis on 2013-05-04 8:18:10 AM

    Anyone for a the definition of a bad joke?....It's called CAAMP and the jokers who run it.

  • Elfie Hayes on 2013-05-06 6:59:06 AM

    I would ask Jim Murphy to respond to these posts. Seems we as members are all talking about it but CAAMP remains mum on the sunject.

    Any words from you Jim??

  • Paul Whatmore on 2013-05-09 8:43:21 AM

    Before I commented I thought obtaining my own Redx would be useful... Sure enough I have 4 incidents reported. From my read of it CAAMP it would appear has allowed REDX access to the AMP membership database. The issue is the stupidity of REDX as to how they use the information. The purpose as I understood REDX was to report fraud and inappropriate behavior... How can my membership in or out of AMP be construed as an incident? What REDX should report is that I am licensed, I am an AMP and there are NO INCIDENTS reported against me. Given the recent review of my own file I question how any person or lender can give credence to REDX. Lenders are large supporters of CAAMP and if they want to rely on a REDX report they should be pressuring REDX to cleanup its act.

  • Paul Therien - CENTUM on 2013-05-14 9:37:07 AM

    As the face of a national brand the topic of REDX has come up several times since this article was published with people asking me what my thoughts on the subject are. To be honest; it was not something that I spent an inordinate amount of time considering. Generally speaking our CENTUM franchises have not had issues with reporting. That being said, I felt that it was my duty to educate myself further and so to that end I have done just that.

    As you all know, REDX is a reporting mechanism for lenders (and apparently CAAMP = I am sure that I would be reported on REDX as I too have made the choice not to renew my AMP designation) to track and monitor issues with brokers who perhaps do not conduct their business in an appropriate way. Think of it as the credit bureau of mortgage broker business. Initially I had not thought of this as an issue, however in retrospect and with much thought on the subject I have to revisit my first impression.

    I note in some of the comments made on this forum the use of the word “fraud” (a term that in my opinion gets thrown around rather liberally in our industry) and the assertion by lenders and REDX that this is a reporting mechanism to report incidents of inappropriate behavior, including fraud. Therein lies the issue for me and where I have some questions and concerns.

    Fraud is a crime under the criminal code… my understanding of the laws of Canada are that if any person has evidence that a person has committed an illegal act, they have a duty under the law to report these incidents to the proper authorities, be it a regulator or the police.

    So then the questions for me becomes these: (1) If a lender or person reports an individual of committing fraud to REDX and they DO HAVE evidence that confirms the person committed this crime, do they not have a duty to report this to the authorities? (2) If they DO NOT HAVE evidence that clearly demonstrates the individual has committed a crime, how can they then report this incident to a reporting agency as fact? Is this slander or defamation? (I am not a lawyer, so I cannot answer this)

    I am all for us as an industry protecting our business through reporting agencies and co-operating with the authorities, in fact I believe that it is a necessary thing to do for the protection of all, including the consumer. REDX could prove to be a useful tool if, like any tool, it is used properly. I also think however that we need to be careful and not throw the term fraud around willy-nilly and without evidence – it damages us all. If we do have proof that a person has committed fraud then let’s do the right thing and report to the authorities. Let them do their jobs, namely investigate and if appropriate charge - at least we know then that we have done the right thing.

  • Concerned ONT broker on 2013-05-14 9:50:01 AM

    EXCELLENT POINTS PAUL! (as an FYI to everyone I am not using my name because I know what lenders are like... but i want to tell my story)

    I have a REDX report against my own name and my brokerage for a file that had an issue from an agent of mine. One lender felt that the NOA's were "fraudulent" (they used that term) but when we confirmed and got original copies directly from CRA and we proved that they were not... it did not matter.

    Another lender did the deal and the original lender reported us to REDX - and we cannot get it removed becasue the lender that reported ahs to remove it and they refuse. Maybe I do need to talk to a lawyer...

  • Education supporter on 2013-05-14 10:08:33 AM

    Derek that is a fabulous idea. I have known for sometime that CAAMP is not for the broker any longer.

Broker news forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Name (required)
Comment (required)
By submitting, I agree to the Terms & Conditions