Brand Findings
Exinda HPERV is Illegal and Non-Compliant
https://exindagroup.com/products/exinda-hperv-all-in-one-ceiling-duct-heat-pump-ventilator
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. In fact, it is illegal to import or sell a unit that is not listed. At the time of this publication, March 16, 2026, the Exinda HPERV is not listed in the NRCan Searchable Product List.
Failure to meet NRCan Minimum Efficiency Requirements
Guangdong Exinda Technology manufactures the Exinda HPERV in China, with specifications claiming 11,000 BTU and a 10.75 EER. The Exinda HPERV only lists an EER and a COP. Neither EER nor COP is a legal rating for this product category. For a heat pump, federal law requires SEER2 and HSPF2. Under federal law (Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016, and AHRI 210/240), any 11,000-BTU heat pump in this class must meet a minimum SEER2 rating of 13.4 to be legally sold, installed, or used in Canada. This alone renders the units illegal.
Illegal Misclassification
By using an EER instead of SEER2, Exinda is classifying the HPERV as PTHP, but HPERV does not meet the PTHP definition under Energy Efficiency Regulations. A lawful PTHP must have:
- a wall sleeve,
- a separate unencased chassis,
- through-the-wall mounting
The Exinda HPERV unit lacks these traits. Misclassifying the Exinda HPERV as a PTHP by using EER is a direct violation of NRCan rules and is illegal.
Fraudulent and Fake Numbers
Exinda HPERV is not capable of delivering 11,000 BTUs of cooling at 10.75 EER (Exinda incorrectly lists this as an EER of 3.15) or 14,000 BTUs of heating at 3.72 COP. Most importantly, Exinda’s own numbers don’t add up. 14,000 BTU of heating is 4,103 W of heat; divided by 1,300 W of power, it's 3.16 COP, not the 3.72 they incorrectly show. While these metrics are not relevant to this unit, the numbers cannot be obtained. There is no way the Exinda HPERV will use only 1,160 watts to produce 11,000 BTU of cooling, or 1,300 watts to produce a whopping 14,000 BTU of heating. With heat pumps, the heating and cooling outputs are similar because one is simply the reverse of the other. Exinda wants you to believe that the same unit can produce 32% more heat than cool, and at a 17.5% higher efficiency. Ask any first-year engineering student if a heat pump can have a 55% better performance in heating than cooling.
Regulatory Violation Summary: Exinda — HPERV
This product is illegal to distribute, specify, install, or use in the United States and Canada. Exinda's published efficiency numbers are fabricated, mathematically impossible, and use two separate illegal rating metrics — publishing EER instead of SEER2 and COP instead of HSPF2 — neither of which has been legally acceptable since January 1, 2023. The HPERV fails to meet DOE and NRCan minimum efficiency requirements under every applicable classification.
Minimum Efficiency Requirements Not Met | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Classification | Metric | Legal Minimum Required | Exinda's Status | Result |
Heat Pump cooling | SEER2 | ≥ 13.4 | Publishes an illegal EER metric with fabricated data | ❌ Fails |
Heat Pump heating / Canada) | HSPF2 | ≥ 5.4 | Publishes an illegal COP metric with fabricated data | ❌ Fails |
Heat Pump heating / US) | HSPF2 | ≥ 6.7 | Publishes an illegal COP metric with fabricated data | ❌ Fails |
These ratings cannot simply be invented. They must be established through testing in a genuine laboratory under correct DOE and NRCan test procedures. Exinda has not done this, and the data it publishes makes clear why.
Illegal Rating Metrics Used | ||
|---|---|---|
Required Metric | Metric Exinda Publishes Instead | Legal Status |
SEER2 | EER | ❌ Illegal — EER is not an acceptable substitute for SEER2 under any applicable standard and has not been legally acceptable since January 1, 2023 |
HSPF2 | COP | ❌ Illegal — COP is not an acceptable substitute for HSPF2 under any applicable standard and has not been legally acceptable since January 1, 2023 |
Publishing two separate retired and inapplicable metrics is not a technicality or an oversight. EER and COP were both replaced by mandatory legal requirements in 2023. Their continued use constitutes a deliberate misrepresentation of compliance status to customers, dealers, and regulators.
Faking Test Results | ||
|---|---|---|
Violation | US Law Violated | Canadian Law Violated |
Exinda fabricated HPERV laboratory test data rather than conducting legitimate testing under the required industry methods, AHRI 210/240, and ASHRAE 37 | 10 CFR Part 429 | Energy Efficiency Act; Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Published cooling efficiency numbers are fabricated and mathematically impossible, and could not result from any legitimate test | 10 CFR Part 430 | Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Published heating efficiency numbers are fabricated and mathematically impossible, and could not result from any legitimate test | 10 CFR Part 430 | Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Published efficiency numbers contradict basic mathematics — the stated heating and cooling values are physically impossible | 10 CFR Part 430 | Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Exinda publishes two illegal and retired metrics — EER instead of SEER2 and COP instead of HSPF2 — both mandatory since January 1, 2023 | 10 CFR Part 430 | Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Exinda failed to use the correct AHRI 210/240 and ASHRAE 37 test methods, rendering every efficiency rating ever published legally invalid | 10 CFR Part 429/430 | Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Lying to Customers and Regulators | ||
|---|---|---|
Violation | US Law Violated | Canadian Law Violated |
HPERV efficiency and capacity ratings directly conflict with what government-certified testing would produce, and false information was filed with regulators | 10 CFR Part 429.12; 18 U.S.C. § 1001 — federal criminal offence | Energy Efficiency Act — fines up to $10,000 per violation |
Nameplates, product literature, and marketing materials display fabricated efficiency ratings using two separate illegal and retired metrics — EER and COP — in violation of US and Canadian labeling requirements | FTC Energy Labeling Rule, 16 CFR Part 305; DOE Labeling Requirements under 10 CFR Part 430 | NRCan Product Classification and EnerGuide Labeling Requirements under Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Exinda misrepresented the HPERV certification and compliance status to customers, dealers, regulators, and certification bodies | 18 U.S.C. § 1001 — federal criminal offense | Energy Efficiency Act offense |
Selling a Product That Should Not Be on the Market | ||
|---|---|---|
Violation | US Law Violated | Canadian Law Violated |
HPERV does not meet minimum efficiency standards under any applicable product classification, exposing every distributor and dealer carrying the product to joint legal liability | 10 CFR Part 430 | MEPS under Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
The product fails mandatory SEER2 minimum cooling efficiency thresholds at 11,000 BTU because published numbers are falsified | SEER2 under 10 CFR Part 430 | CEER under Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
The product fails the mandatory HSPF2 minimum heating efficiency thresholds at 1400 BTU because published numbers are falsified | HSPF2 under 10 CFR Part 430 | Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Exinda never registered the HPERV in the DOE's Compliance Certification Management System (CCMS) or filed required certification reports before distribution | DOE CCMS — fines up to $575/model/day under 10 C.F.R. § 429.120 | — |
Exinda never listed the HPERV on NRCan's searchable product database, meaning the product was never legally cleared for import or interprovincial sale in Canada. | — | NRCan Searchable Product Database; Energy Efficiency Act |
HPERV was never certified by an accredited certification body and does not carry the mandatory compliance mark | DOE Certification under 10 CFR Part 429 | Standards Council of Canada Energy Efficiency Verification Mark |
Exinda violated product classification rules, affecting which efficiency standards and test procedures apply | DOE Product Classification Rules under 10 CFR Part 430 | NRCan Product Classification Rules under Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016 |
Breaking Consumer Protection and Competition Laws | ||
|---|---|---|
Violation | US Law Violated | Canadian Law Violated |
False efficiency claims, two separate illegal and retired rating metrics, and misleading energy performance advertising constitute deceptive trade practices, exposing Exinda to regulatory action and civil lawsuits from competitors, including claims for damages | FTC Act Section 5, 15 U.S.C. § 45; Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) | Competition Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-34 |
Maximum penalties for serious violations or refusal to take corrective action | FTC civil penalties up to $53,088 per violation | Energy Efficiency Act fines $10,000–$200,000 |