The CRTC has imposed a $106,000 administrative monetary penalty on Esprit Habitat for 106 telemarketing violations, including calls made on its behalf by a Moroccan call centre.
In Compliance and Enforcement Decision CRTC 2026-281, issued October 27, 2026, the regulator reduced the $136,930 penalty proposed in the notice of violation. It rejected a separate charge for unpaid National Do Not Call List subscription fees and lowered the amount per violation from $1,250 to $1,000.
The company, legally named 9495-9590 Québec Inc., neither paid the proposed penalty nor made representations in response to the notice. Under the Telecommunications Act, that meant it was deemed to have committed the violations.
Overseas calls remained the company’s responsibility
The notice covered calls made between September 25, 2023, and September 26, 2024. The violations included calls to numbers on the national list without express consent, failures involving registration and subscription fees, and failures to maintain or honour the company’s own do-not-call list.
Some calls were made directly by Esprit Habitat and others by its agent, Téléconcept, in Morocco. The commission applied the Act’s rule making a person liable for violations committed by its agent.
It said the telemarketing rules apply to calls to Canadian consumers regardless of where they originate. Canadian businesses hiring foreign telemarketers are expected to take reasonable steps to verify their reputation for complying with those rules.
The commission found the conduct serious. Esprit Habitat had authorized calls without first filtering out numbers on the national list and had not made reasonable efforts to prevent calls to people on its own list.
Penalty was not a subscription-fee collection device
The proposed penalty included $4,430, twice the subscription fees the company had avoided paying. The commission rejected that separate component because administrative penalties promote compliance rather than compensate the list operator for lost revenue. Penalties are payable to the Receiver General for Canada.
Avoiding fees nevertheless remained relevant to deterrence. The commission said the financial benefit of non-compliance could be considered when ensuring that a penalty was not simply treated as a business expense.
It also considered the sales opportunities generated by the calls. According to the decision, Esprit Habitat used offers of gifts to invite consumers to pop-up shops where it sought to sell furniture.
Deterrence balanced against ability to pay
The commission received 45 complaints during the period, which it considered a high complaint frequency. It separately characterized the 106 violations, averaging about nine a month, as relatively low in frequency and favouring a lower penalty.
Although the company had no previous enforcement action under the rules, continued non-compliance after staff contact and the absence of evidence of corrective measures pointed to a very high risk of future violations.
Financial statements showed a profitable small business. The commission considered $1,250 per violation too high in relation to its first-year accumulated profits and unsupported by comparable cases. It found $1,000 per violation proportionate and within the company’s ability to pay.
The decision requires payment by November 26, 2026, with interest on any unpaid amount. It also identifies rights to seek commission review or leave to appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal. It does not establish that the penalty has been paid or that either process has been started.
