Regulator cites past conduct and false licence information
Ontario’s financial services regulator has proposed refusing to renew the licence of mortgage agent Anna Angelidis, alleging her past conduct and false information on a licence application make her unsuitable to be licensed.
The Financial Services Regulatory Authority of Ontario (FSRA) announced the notice of proposal Friday. The allegations have not been proven. Angelidis has requested a hearing before the Financial Services Tribunal.
FSRA says Angelidis is not suitable to hold a licence under the Mortgage Brokerages, Lenders and Administrators Act, 2006 and its regulations. It alleges her past conduct gives reasonable grounds to believe she will not deal or trade in mortgages lawfully, honestly and with integrity. It also alleges she provided false information on a licence application.
The regulator’s announcement did not describe the conduct in question. It also did not say which licence level Angelidis holds, which brokerage authorized her, or when a hearing might take place.
Suitability under scrutiny
The case fits a broader push by FSRA to police who is fit to hold a licence. When it released its final licensing suitability guidance in July 2024, Huston Loke, FSRA’s executive vice-president of market conduct, said: “This is the first time we’re releasing guidance that explains how we assess if someone is suitable to hold a licence, strengthening sector practices and further protecting Ontarians working with mortgage professionals.”
FSRA’s guidance says the regulator may refuse, restrict, suspend or revoke a licence if it has reasonable grounds to believe someone is unsuitable. It also says oversight of agents and brokers is a brokerage’s ongoing responsibility.
Recent notices have turned on similar questions. In a December 2025 notice, FSRA alleged that a Level 2 agent answered “No” on a renewal application when asked whether he was under investigation. A March 2026 notice proposed refusing another agent’s renewal in a case FSRA framed as a test of suitability. Those cases are separate from Angelidis’s, and the hearing requests in each remain unresolved.
What happens next
A notice of proposal is not a final decision. In a 2025 case, CMP reported that FSRA may proceed with its proposed order if no hearing is requested within 15 days of receipt. Because Angelidis requested one, the Tribunal will review the proposal.
For brokers and principal brokers, the case is a reminder that FSRA can assess suitability at renewal, and that the accuracy of what is submitted on licensing forms is part of that assessment. Brokerages may want to confirm that their screening and supervision processes match FSRA’s published expectations.
