Forest Air FPH-12-2PA & FPH-12-2PD
is Illegal and Non-Compliant
Innova’s Million Dollar Challenge
How Forest Air is Cheating
Failure to be listed in the NRCan Searchable Product List
In Canada, all air-conditioning and heat-pump systems must be listed in the NRCan database. It is illegal to import or sell a unit that is not listed. At the time of this publication, March 16, 2026, the Forest Air FPH-12-2PA and FPH-12-2PD cannot be located in the NRCan Searchable Product List under any product category — not as a Room Air Conditioner, not as a Heat Pump, and not even as a PTHP.
Failure to Meet NRCan Minimum Efficiency Requirements
Forest Air Air FPH-12-2PA and FPH-12-2PD have a claimed nominal cooling capacity of 8,000 BTU and a claimed heating capacity of 8,000 BTU.
Under federal law, any unit in this class must meet one of the following minimum efficiency thresholds to be legally sold, installed, or used in Canada:
- As a Heat Pump: 13.4 SEER2 for cooling and 5.4 HSPF2 for heating
- As a Room Air Conditioner: 9.3 CEER (rising to 13.7 CEER effective May 26, 2026)
Forest Air publishes neither a SEER2, nor a CEER, nor an HSPF2. This alone renders the unit illegal, regardless of any other violation.
Illegal and Nonsensical Rating: “REER”
Forest Air FPH-12-2PA publishes a rating of 2.6 “REER.” There is no such rating as REER under any Canadian, American, or international standard. It does not exist in NRCan regulations, AHRI 210/240, ASHRAE 37, CSA C744, or any applicable certification framework.
If the “R” is a typographical error and the intended rating is CEER, the published value of 2.6 is still deeply problematic. CEER values are expressed in BTU/Wh, not in Kw of cooling /K watts of power and a CEER of 2.6 would be catastrophically below the 9.3 minimum — roughly 72% below the legal threshold. If, alternatively, the 2.6 represents a COP-style metric in watts, then multiplying by 3.412 to convert to BTU/Wh yields an approximate CEER of 8.87, which is still below the legally required 9.3 minimum. Intersting to note, that in the document Forrest Air shows the “REER”rating is “BTU/W*hr”
Either interpretation renders the unit non-compliant. There is no reading of “2.6 REER” that results in a lawful, compliant efficiency rating.
Fraudulent and Fake Numbers
The performance data published for the Forest Air FPH-12-2PA fails basic mathematical scrutiny.
In Cooling
- Cooling Capacity: 8,000 BTU
- Power Input: 1,380 W
- Using Forest Air's own published figures: 8,000 ÷ 1,380 = EER 5.80
An EER of 5.80 is not only far below the legal CEER minimum of 9.3 — it is so low that it suggests the unit is operating at roughly half the efficiency of a compliant product. For context, window air conditioners from the 1970s achieved EERs in this range. A modern heat pump claiming to be efficient while delivering an EER of 5.80 based on its own published wattage is either consuming far more power than it claims, delivering far less cooling than it claims, or both.
Given that the CEER must always be lower than the EER — because CEER accounts for standby power consumption in addition to active consumption — the unit’s CEER would be even lower than 5.80. No reasonable interpretation of Forest Air’s own published numbers supports a CEER anywhere near the required 9.3, let alone the 13.7 that will be required after May 26, 2026.
In Heating
Forest Air claims an 8,000 BTU heating capacity with a published COP. COP is not a legal rating for this product category under NRCan regulations. The legally required metric is HSPF2, derived from AHRI 210/240 testing. The fact that Forest Air publishes a COP instead of an HSPF2 confirms that no proper laboratory testing was ever conducted, since a genuine AHRI 210/240 test produces an HSPF2 result, not a COP.
Furthermore, Forest Air claims equal cooling and heating capacity — both 8,000 BTU — at meaningfully different power inputs. In a real heat pump, the relationship between heating and cooling outputs is governed by the refrigeration cycle and the laws of thermodynamics. While heating and cooling outputs are not always identical, the published figures must be internally consistent with the compressor, coil size, refrigerant charge, and operating conditions. Forest Air provides no data to support the plausibility of its heating claims, and its cooling data alone disqualifies the unit from compliance.
Illegal Rating Metric
Forest Air publishes a COP for heating instead of the required HSPF2, and a fictional “REER” for cooling instead of the required SEER2 or CEER. Neither published metric is legally valid for this product category. Using non-standard or invented rating metrics is a direct violation of the Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016, and constitutes a deceptive representation under the Competition Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-34).
No accredited laboratory would issue a test report using the term “REER.” The use of a fabricated metric confirms that the data originates from a spreadsheet, not a certified testing facility.
Illegal Misclassification
Forest Air does not explicitly classify the BTU/W*hr as a PTHP, but its use of a non-standard EER-style metric and COP implies a PTHP-adjacent classification framework. Regardless of how Forest Air internally classifies the unit, it does not meet the structural definition of a PTHP under the Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016. A lawful PTHP must have a wall sleeve, a separate unencased chassis, and through-the-wall mounting. The FPH-12-2PA lacks all of these features.
The unit also does not qualify as a portable air conditioner or a single package vertical unit. It must therefore be classified either as a Room Air Conditioner or as a Heat Pump — and under either classification, it fails to meet the required minimum efficiency thresholds.
Summary of Violations
Forest Air FPH-12-2PA and FPH-12-2PD:
- Failure to list on the NRCan Searchable Product List
- Publishes a non-existent rating metric ("REER") that has no basis in any applicable standard
- Publishes fabricated and mathematically inconsistent numbers in cooling
- Publishes fabricated and legally non-compliant numbers in heating
- Fails to publish any legally valid efficiency rating (SEER2, HSPF2, or CEER)
- Fails NRCan minimum efficiency requirements under every applicable classification
- Calculated EER based on published data (5.80) is less than two-thirds of the minimum required CEER of 9.3
- Violates NRCan product classification and labeling requirements
- Fails to use any correct or recognized testing methodology
- Violates the Competition Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-34), which prohibits false or misleading representations in a material respect
Forest Air FPH-12-2PA cannot legally be sold, installed, or used in Canada, and we back that statement with a $1,000,000 Guarantee.
Illegal to Distribute, Install, and Use
Forest Air FPH-12-2PA and FPH-12-2PD are illegal to distribute, specify, install, or use in Canada. It is not listed in the NRCan Searchable Product List as required by the Energy Efficiency Act. It does not meet — and based on its own published data, cannot come close to meeting — the NRCan minimum efficiency requirements for any applicable product category.
To be legally sold as a Heat Pump, the FPH-12-2PA and FPH-12-2PD would need a certified SEER2 rating of at least 13.4 at its rated cooling capacity and a certified HSPF2 rating of at least 5.4 at its rated heating capacity. To be legally sold as a Room Air Conditioner, it would need a certified CEER of at least 9.3, rising to 13.7 after May 26, 2026.
Based on Forest Air’s own published power consumption of 1,380 watts against a claimed cooling capacity of 8,000 BTU, the unit’s calculated EER is 5.80 — so far below either standard that no plausible adjustment to the data could bring it into compliance. The gap between the published performance and the legal minimum is not a rounding error or a classification technicality. It is a fundamental performance failure.
These ratings cannot be invented. They must be established through certified testing in an SCC-Accredited laboratory under the correct NRCan test procedures. Forest Air has not done this, and the data it publishes makes clear why.
How Everyone Gets Hurt
Sellers
Private labelers, Manufacturers,
Distributors, Dealers, Resellers
Selling a non-compliant HVAC product is a direct violation of the Energy Efficiency Act and NRCan regulations. Sellers are exposed to:
Federal Civil Penalties
NRCan may prosecute for non-compliance for every unit distributed in commerce. Penalties stack and can reach six-figure outcomes per model.
Product Seizure and Forced Recall
NRCan can seize inventory, block further distribution, and mandate recall or destruction of illegal equipment.
Competition Bureau enforcement… Competition Act Section 52
Publishing fabricated ratings constitutes a deceptive trade practice under the Competition Act. This exposes the seller to federal enforcement, mandatory corrective advertising, and civil penalties.
Breach of Contract and Indemnification Claims
Developers, contractors, and property owners can sue the seller for damages if the installed equipment fails inspection, fails commissioning, or causes code violations.
Class-Action Exposure
Tenants, condominium associations, and homeowners’ groups can sue for misrepresentation, damages, inflation in energy costs, or unsafe equipment.
Loss of Manufacturer and Distributor Licenses
OEM partnerships and distribution channels can be terminated for selling illegal equipment.
Selling these units is both legally and financially dangerous.
Installers
Contractors, HVAC technicians, MEP firms
Installing non-compliant equipment exposes the installer to direct professional and legal risk.
Violation of state and local mechanical codes
Most jurisdictions require installed equipment to be listed, certified, and compliant with NRCan minimums. Installing unlisted units violates the code.
Loss of contractor license
Boards can suspend or revoke licenses for installing non-certified or illegally rated equipment.
Civil liability for damage
If the unit fails, performs below specifications, overdrafts electrical circuits, leaks refrigerant, or causes mold or structural damage, the installer can be sued.
Professional negligence claims
Installing non-certified equipment is a breach of standard practice.
Insurance denial
Work performed with illegal equipment can void contractor liability insurance coverage.
Installers who choose these units are assuming direct legal and financial responsibility.
Loss of Contractor License
Boards can suspend or revoke licenses for installing non-certified or illegally rated equipment.
Civil Liability for Damage
If the unit fails, performs below specifications, overdrafts electrical circuits, leaks refrigerant, or causes mold or structural damage, the installer can be sued.
Professional Negligence Claims
Installing non-certified equipment is a breach of standard practice.
Insurance Denial
Work performed with illegal equipment can void contractor liability insurance coverage.
Installers who choose these units are assuming direct legal and financial responsibility.
Engineers
MEP engineers, Specifiers, Consultants
Engineers face a high risk of exposure if they specify or approve the use of illegal equipment.
Professional malpractice exposure
Specifying equipment that does not meet SEER2 or CEER requirements, or does not appear in AHRI/NRCan Searchable Product Lists with accurate data, is a breach of engineering duty.
Loss of PE license
Stamping drawings with illegal or misclassified equipment creates a direct disciplinary risk.
Design liability
If the equipment fails to meet code, fails load calculations, causes tenant complaints, or drives excessive energy use, the engineer is liable for damages.
Insurance exposure
Errors & Omissions insurers reject claims involving knowingly illegal equipment.
Any engineer who signs off on these units is accepting personal liability.
Building Owners
Developers, Property managers, REITs, Condo associations
Owning a building with illegal HVAC equipment exposes the owner to substantial financial and legal risks.
Code violations and failed inspections
Buildings containing non-certified equipment can fail Local Authority inspections.
Forced removal and replacement
Authorities can mandate the removal of every installed unit, at the owner’s expense.
Insurance cancellation or claim denial
If the equipment is not legal or not NRCan-compliant, insurers may deny coverage or void property insurance policies.
Reduced property value
Buildings with illegal equipment face valuation reductions, impaired financing, and lender objections.
Tenant lawsuits and warranty claims
Tenants can sue for non-performance, high heating/cooling costs.
Fines and enforcement actions
Owners can be fined for every illegal unit installed or operated within the building.
Owning or operating these units exposes the property to material legal and financial damage.
End-Users
Residents, Tenants, Homeowners
Even the resident or end-user is exposed to risk when using non-compliant equipment.
High energy bills and poor performance
Because the published performance data is fake, real-world operating costs are substantially higher than the claimed ratings suggest.
End-users bear financial burdens due to equipment that consumes more power and has limits.
The Million Dollar Challenge
Innova guarantees that the performance numbers published by “Inspiron Air” are fake.
Innova will pay one million CAD to any manufacturer, distributor, engineer, or entity that can produce a certified, independent laboratory test report corroborating the claimed capacity and efficiency when tested in accordance with DOE regulations.