Brand Findings

Williams Montara HP003 is Illegal and Non-Compliant

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 Williams Montara HP003 is not listed in the NRCan Searchable Product List.

Failure to meet NRCan Minimum Efficiency Requirements

Williams Montara HP003 has a claimed nominal cooling capacity of 8,000 BTU. Under federal law, any 8,000 BTU heat pump in this class must meet a 13.4 SEER2 or 9.3 CEER minimum to be legally sold, installed, or used in Canada. Williams lies when it publishes a 13.9 SEER2 rating, making it seem as if it complies; however, that 13.9 SEER2 rating is fake. This alone renders the units illegal.

Fraudulent and Fake Numbers

The Williams Montara HP003 is manufactured by Zymbo (China), and Zymbo does not publish an SEER2 rating in any of its documentation. However, it is worth noting that the manufacturer, Zymbo, publishes very different numbers.

Zymbo claims the same unit, which they call Clima Puro, has a higher capacity of 8,831 BTU and a much higher efficiency of 10.6 EER. What’s even more fascinating is that Zymbo’s math doesn't work.

Here’s what Zymbo publishes:

Cooling Capacity: 8,831 BTU
Power Input: 750 W

Using Zymbo’s own watt input: 8,831 ÷ 750 = EER 11.77. Yet Zymbo, the manufacturer, publishes an EER of 10.6. In heating, Zymbo still fails basic math.

Heating Capacity: 8,800 BTU
Power Input: 700 W

Using their own watt input: 8,800 ÷ 3.412 (BTU to W) ÷ 700 = 3.68 COP. Yet, Zymbo publishes 3.35 COP. Zymbo is playing with the numbers. The numbers they published looked too good to be true, so they simply “dumbed down” the efficiency and presented reduced efficiency values.

When Williams went to publish their own numbers, the company did not rely on the fabricated data provided by Zymbo. This may be because Williams reviewed the figures and found them mathematically inconsistent, or because it questioned whether Zymbo’s unit could genuinely achieve the claimed capacity and efficiency. As a result, it’s plausible that Williams further reduced the reported capacity and efficiency to present values that appeared more realistic.

Williams adjusted the 8,831 BTU to 8,000 BTU and dropped the EER from 10.6 to 8.89. In doing so, Williams did a much better job producing values that appear more consistent than the original figures, suggesting an attempt to produce numbers within a plausible range. However, the resulting data does not align with expected performance levels. The data Williams provides is unreliable and undeniably false.

When tested in a lab, Montara HP003 will not produce 8,000 BTU with a 13.9 SEER2 rating as claimed. The numbers they claim are fake.

Regulatory Violation Summary: Williams — Montara HP003

This product is illegal to distribute, specify, install, or use in the United States and Canada. Williams' published cooling and heating efficiency numbers are fabricated and fail to meet DOE and NRCan minimum efficiency requirements. The Montara HP003 further uses outdated and illegal rating metrics — publishing SEER instead of the legally required SEER2, and COP instead of the legally required HSPF2 — metrics that have not been legally acceptable since January 1, 2023.

Minimum Efficiency Requirements Not Met
Classification	Metric	Legal Minimum Required	Williams' Status	Result
Heat Pump	SEER2	≥ 13.4	Publishes an illegal SEER metric with fabricated data	❌ Fails
Heat Pump	HSPF2	≥ 6.7	Publishes an illegal COP metric instead of HSPF2	❌ Fails
Heat Pump	CEER	NRCan minimum	Not listed on the NRCan database	❌ Fails

These ratings cannot simply be invented. They must be established through testing in a genuine laboratory under the correct DOE and NRCan test procedures. Williams has not done this, and the data it publishes makes clear why.

Illegal Rating Metrics Used
Required Metric	Metric Williams Publishes Instead	Legal Status
SEER2	SEER	❌ Illegal — SEER retired January 1, 2023
HSPF2	COP	❌ Illegal — COP is not an acceptable substitute for HSPF2 under any applicable standard
CEER	None published	❌ Not listed on NRCan database

Publishing retired or inapplicable metrics is not a technicality. SEER and COP were replaced by mandatory legal requirements in 2023. Their continued use is a deliberate misrepresentation of compliance status.

Faking Test Results
Violation	US Law Violated	Canadian Law Violated
Williams fabricated Montara HP003 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
Williams publishes the illegal and retired SEER metric instead of the legally required SEER2, and COP instead of the legally required HSPF2, both of which are mandatory since January 1, 2023	10 CFR Part 430	Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016
Williams derived published performance ratings from non-compliant test conditions and 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

Selling a Product That Should Not Be on the Market
Violation	US Law Violated	Canadian Law Violated
Montara HP003 does not meet minimum efficiency standards, exposing every distributor and dealer carrying the product to joint legal liability	10 CFR Part 430	MEPS under Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016
Montara HP003 fails the mandatory SEER2 minimum cooling efficiency thresholds because published numbers are falsified	SEER2 under 10 CFR Part 430	CEER under Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016
Montara HP003 fails the mandatory HSPF2 minimum heating efficiency thresholds because the published numbers are falsified	HSPF2 under 10 CFR Part 430	Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016
Williams never registered the Montara HP003 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	—
Williams never listed the Montara HP003 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
Montara HP003 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

Lying to Customers and Regulators
Violation	US Law Violated	Canadian Law Violated
Montara HP003 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 illegal and retired metrics — SEER instead of SEER2, and COP instead of HSPF2 — 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 EnerGuide Labeling Requirements under Energy Efficiency Regulations, 2016
Williams misrepresented the Montara HP003 certification and compliance status to customers, dealers, regulators, and certification bodies	18 U.S.C. § 1001 — federal criminal offense	Energy Efficiency Act offense

Breaking Consumer Protection and Competition Laws
Violation	US Law Violated	Canadian Law Violated
False efficiency claims, illegal and retired rating metrics, and misleading energy performance advertising constitute deceptive trade practices, exposing Williams 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