But you are not correct.
The whole point is that if you are liable for the assessment the realtor acting for you is liable. They did not protect your interests. I provided you with a standard clause that should have been in your offer. It was not. That was negligent.
If you are asking for a refund don't bother with the refund. The rating is so I can get paid. If you rate me they site pays me and then you process the refund and the money comes right back out of the account.
In both cases I am not paid and my stats are damaged. It's that simple.
I don't work for the site nor do I have any say on how the site is run but their TOS are clear and I am not your lawyer and cannot give actual advice but just legal information. That also reflects the rules of each law society in Canada. It is not lawful for me to practice law online. I cannot advise anyone who is not my client. If I want to advise a client I have to identify them and do a conflict search at the start That it to protect the client as well as the lawyer.
So it is unfair that you didn't read the rules before hand and I will end up working for free and having my stats harmed as a result.
However, what you should know is that may answer is correct and went well beyond generic information. I provided you with a clause that should have been used. I provided you with a clear explanation of the law and also explained about suing the realtor which you clearly didn't know was an option because in your last post you make it apparent that you still did not understand that point.
Had the realtor drafted your offer properly then this would never have become an issue at all. Do you see that now? The fact that this is now a problem is because that one standard provision was omitted and it should have been included for a condo purchase.
Anyway, the TOS also allow you to have a refund at any time for any reason so as I don't like working for free I will stop now.