From The North Carolina Society of Surveyors, Inc.
(Reprinted from the March 2004 Real Estate Bulletin)
There is a school of thought that it is not necessary to obtain a current survey when purchasing real estate–that title insurance and affidavits from sellers sufficiently protect the purchaser’s interests or that the purchaser can simply rely upon a previous survey. However, real estate agents should be aware that purchasers face potential problems typically referred to as “matters of survey” when a current field survey of property is not performed.
Matters of survey relate to anything that could negatively affect the use of property being purchased. These include, encroachments across property lines or building restriction lines; fences/walls, landscaping features, wells, swimming pool decks; the location of utilities, access ways, etc., relative to easements, property lines or buildings; the existence of flood zones; and other similar matters.
It is possible that matters of survey may be covered in title insurance policies. But coverage that protects the purchaser=s interests is unlikely to be included unless a survey is performed prior to issuance of the policy. ALender=s policies@ maycover matters of survey without requiring a current survey, but they do not protect the purchaser. The risk associated with lenders= policies is often acceptable to the title insurer because claims from a lender are not likely to occur until the purchaser defaults on the loan.
In recent years, it has become popular to have the seller sign an affidavit effectively guaranteeing that no matters of survey negatively affect the property. However, in doing so, the seller may be unwittingly accepting some unwarranted risks of liability. The buyer may also be tempted to simply rely upon a survey document from a previous transaction, but such survey may not contemplate changes to the property since the earlier survey was performed.
Many people choose not to obtain a current survey because they believe it will delay closing the transaction. This may be true if it is not ordered from the surveyor until closing of the transaction is assured. However, if the purchaser decides that a current survey is desired, it can be ordered early enough so as not to delay the closing date.
An informed purchaser knows that an accurate, current survey will provide peace of mind that cannot be obtained from any other source.
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
Governor Beverly E. Perdue has appointed Everett “Vic” Knight of Raleigh and Alice L. Mosteller of Lake Junaluska to the Real Estate Commission, it was announced by Phillip T. Fisher, Executive Director.
Knight, a licensed broker since 1984, is also a certified appraiser and the owner of Chapel Hill Appraisals and Consultants. He previously was broker/owner of Century 21 Vic Knight Realty in Hillsborough for 10 years.
A native of Burlington, Knight graduated from North Carolina State University with a BS in Civil Engineering and worked internationally for Bechtel Corporation for several years. He was a licensed General Contractor in North Carolina.
Knight is currently a director of the National Association of REALTORS®, a past president and member of the board of directors of the North Carolina Association of REALTORS®, and past president of the Chapel Hill Board of REALTORS® and the Triangle Multiple Listing Service. He is a Continuing Education Instructor for the Real Estate Commission and the North Carolina Appraisal Board.
Knight has two daughters, “Krystle” Gray Knight, 23, and “Victoria” Scarlet Knight, 16, and is a member of Hillsborough United Church of Christ.
Mosteller is Vice President/Managing Broker of the Beverly Hanks & Associates office at Waynesville. She formerly owned Apple Realty, Inc., in Waynesville for 18 years until selling it to Beverly Hanks in 2004.
A graduate of Appalachian State University, she taught at schools in North Carolina and Virginia for 20 years. She received her real estate license in 1984.
She is a former Haywood County and North Carolina REALTOR® of the year and a past president of the Haywood County Board of REALTORS®
Mosteller has two daughters, Debra Bryant, a Registered Nurse in Raleigh, and Paulette Childers, a broker at Beverly Hanks in Waynesville.
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
Editor’s Note: The recently implemented Home Valuation Code of Conduct is intended to enhance the independence and accuracy of the home appraisal process and provide added protections for homebuyers, mortgage investors and the housing market. In response to complaints from real estate consumers and brokers regarding the Code, the Real Estate Commission has announced its support for legislation requiring appraisal management companies operating in North Carolina to be regulated by the North Carolina Appraisal Board, and it directed that the following letter be sent to the Federal Housing Finance Agency.
September 23, 2009
The Federal Housing Finance Agency
1700 G Street, NW 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20552
Dear Sir or Madam:
To assist your agency in monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the Home Valuation Code of Conduct implemented May 1 by the U.S. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), the North Carolina Real Estate Commission has directed me to share with you its observations and experiences with regard to the Code and to respectfully offer its suggestions for improvement. The Real Estate Commission is a governmental agency charged with protecting the interests of real estate consumers in our State. The Commission recognizes and appreciates your efforts through the Code to address some of the more egregious abuses visited upon the public by the unscrupulous acts of certain mortgage lenders. However, like your agency, we have found when adopting rules and implementing new legislation, some innocent misunderstandings and intentional attempts to exploit ambiguities in them are perhaps unavoidable.
With regard to the Code, prospective homebuyers have complained to us that lenders assert that under “new rules” the lenders must order appraisals through appraisal management companies. We have also received complaints from buyers, sellers and real estate agents that appraisers assigned by such companies to perform the appraisals are not familiar with or sufficiently informed about the real estate market where the property is located to make accurate appraisals. We are, in fact, aware of cases where appraisers have traveled from other states and of cases where appraisers attempted to perform appraisals without consulting MLS sales data. Further, despite the apparent intent of the Code to distance lenders from the appraisal process, we have learned that some lenders own or have an ownership interest in the appraisal management companies they use.
Although the Real Estate Commission does not at this time support a proposed moratorium on the continued implementation of the Code and we are aware that bulletins and other supplemental information about the Code have been published, it recommends for your agency’s consideration that the Home Valuation Code of Conduct itself be amended to:
1. Clarify that lenders need not engage appraisal management companies;
2. Prohibit lenders from engaging appraisal management companies which are owned, controlled by, or affiliated with the lender;
3. Expressly require lenders to engage, whether directly or indirectly, appraisers who are state-licensed and that the appraisals performed by such appraisers conform to the minimum requirements of state laws and rules and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice; and
4. Expressly require appraisers who are engaged to perform appraisals to be familiar with the market where the property is located and to have access to and use the best available data for that market in performing the appraisal.
We hope our suggestions are received in the helpful spirit in which they are intended and that you will you not hesitate to contact our office if we can be of any assistance to your agency with this or any related matter.
Sincerely yours,
North Carolina Real Estate Commission
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
The Real Estate Commission recognized the outstanding academic achievement of three brokers in REALTORS® Institute courses.
Nigel Terry of Raleigh received the Joe Schweidler Memorial Scholarship and Thomas Alexander of Havelock, the Blanton Little Memorial Scholarship. Both Schweidler and Little were former Executive Directors of the Commission.
Dorothy Boudreaux Hays of Murphy received the Phillip T. Fisher Scholarship. Fisher is currently executive director.
The recipients were selected by the North Carolina Real Estate Educational Foundation.
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
Real Estate Commission member and former Chairman Wanda J. Proffitt of Burnsville has resigned. A member of the Commission since 1994, Proffitt was appointed by Governor Perdue to the State Board of Transportation.
Joe L. Hodge, Jr., of Raleigh, a member since 2006 and Vice Chairman, has also left the Commission.
Commission members thanked Proffitt and Hodge for their leadership and valued service to North Carolina.
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
The Broker-in-Charge Guide, a valuable reference and resource for the management of North Carolina real estate offices, has been updated and expanded.
This 194-page volume features a lengthier discussion of licensee compensation with several pages of examples, plus updating of the requirements for maintaining and reinstating BIC eligibility under the new rules effective July 1, 2009.
Orders may be placed for the book either online from the Publications page or with printed forms available online or in this issue of the Bulletin to mail or fax.
It is recommended that BICs with editions of the Guide dated 2006 or older (see date at bottom of title page) purchase the newly updated volume. The Guide was first published in November 2004.
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
Lindsey E. Wakely of Raleigh, a second year law student at the University of North Carolina, was the Allan R. Dameron Legal Intern for 2009.
The award is given annually in memory of and tribute to former Commission Chairman Dameron for his dedicated service in protecting the interests of North Carolina real estate consumers.
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
RHONDA KAE AXHOJ (Waxhaw) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Axhoj effective October 1, 2009. The Commission found that Ms. Axhoj, broker-in-charge of her sole proprietorship, sold a property she owned and signed an incorrect closing statement indicating the buyer paid a $2,000 earnest money deposit to her, when the buyer had not, in the belief that the buyer would pay the deposit after closing. Ms. Axhoj attempted to collect the $2,000 after closing but the buyer did not pay it.
JACOB O. BALOGUN (Fayetteville) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Balogun for a period of one year effective May 1, 2009. One month of the suspension was active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of 11 months. The Commission found that the N. C. State Board of Certified Public Accountant Examiners revoked Mr. Balogun’s CPA license in 2008, the revocation stemming from a violation of a six-month suspension of his CPA license in 2006, and that Mr. Balogun had failed to inform the Commission of either disciplinary action.
BDF REALTY, INC. (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the firm license of BDF Realty for a period of one year effective June 10, 2008. Thirty days of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of one year. The Commission found that BDF Realty received $950 which was intended to be used as option money. The Commission further found that BDF Realty had a verbal property management agreement with the owner, but no written agency agreement with any party. BDF Realty released the option money from its trust account to the would-be optionor, but did not have an option contract executed by the parties. The Commission noted that BDF Realty, upon first request of refund by the would-be optionee, refunded the would-be optionee $950.
BEAZER/SQUIRES REALTY, INC. ET. AL. (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the firm license of Beazer/Squires Realty, Inc., effective July 13, 2009. The Commission found that Beazer/Squires Realty, Inc. sold new construction homes to consumers and that its parent company, Beazer Homes USA, was charged in the U.S. District Court of the Western District of North Carolina with one count of Mortgage Fraud Conspiracy and one count of Accounting Fraud Conspiracy for transactions that occurred in or about 2000 through 2007.
HENRY C. BLAKE, JR. (Riegelwood) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Mr. Blake effective September 9, 2009. The Commission found that Mr. Blake, a broker-in-charge of a sole proprietorship, participated in mortgage fraud schemes in which he prepared false and inflated appraisals of certain parcels of real property that were submitted to mortgage lenders who relied on his appraisals to determine the values of certain real properties which would be collateral for mortgage loans.
JOHN MICHAEL BURTON (Catawba) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Mr. Burton for a period of five years effective August 13, 2009. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Mr. Burton violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Mr. Burton neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
MARTHA LILIANA CAMPOVERDE (Charlotte) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Ms. Campoverde effective May 28, 2009. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Ms.Campoverde violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Ms. Campoverde neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
DIANNE M. CARTER (Matthews) – The Commission permanently revoked the broker license of Ms. Carter effective August 18, 2009. The Commission found that Ms. Carter, as broker-in-charge, principal broker, and/or treasurer of various real estate brokerage firms, failed to account for or to remit monies coming into her possession which belonged to another. The Commission also found that Ms. Carter scheduled withdrawals to herself without authorization from her principal, failed to turn over rental proceeds, failed to maintain rental proceeds in a trust account, and failed to make her trust account records available for inspection by the Commission.
BECKY PERRY CODER (Charlotte) – The Commission accepted the permanent voluntary surrender of the broker license of Ms. Coder effective October 1, 2009. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Ms. Coder had violated the Real Estate Law and Commission rules. Ms. Coder neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
CREATIVE BUYERS NETWORK, LLC (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Creative Buyers Network effective July 1, 2009. The Commission found that Creative Buyers Network, a licensed real estate brokerage firm, listed a home threatened with foreclosure, and that its broker-in-charge convinced an acquaintance to invest $15,000 to bring the mortgage payments current and make improvements on the property. The Commission further found that the broker-in-charge filled out a promissory note between the seller and investor and included Creative Buyers Network as trustee but that Creative Buyers Network failed to deposit the funds into its trust account.
JOSEPH F. DAVIS, JR. (Burlington) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Davis effective June 1, 2009. The Commission found that Mr. Davis, broker-in-charge of a real estate brokerage firm, failed to maintain his trust account records as required by the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. The Commission noted that Mr. Davis corrected all the violations noted with respect to his trust account records, there were no shortages, and no consumers were harmed as a result.
MARTIN J. EVANS (Hampstead) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Evans for a period of three years effective November 1, 2008. Six months of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of 30 months on certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. Evans, qualifying broker and broker-in-charge of a real estate brokerage firm, listed a personal rental home and lot and advertised it in the MLS as being located in in a federal flood zone, but specifically not a COBRA zone, when in fact it was. Buyers of the property demolished the house, intending to build a new home, and then discovered that the property was in a COBRA zone and federal flood insurance was not available for a new structure.
KELLY A. FEELEY (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Feeley effective January 14, 2009. The Commission found that Ms. Feeley certified in July 2007 that she had four years full time, active experience as a real estate broker or salesperson, thereby causing the Commission to remove her from provisional license status, when in fact her license had only been active for a total of only two years and 11 months. The Commission noted that prior to activation of her license she had worked in home sales for a builder developer in a capacity exempt from licensure. Ms. Feeley’s license was returned to provisional status until June 10, 2009, by which time she had completed a 30-hour post-licensing course.
RONALD S. FERRELL (Cornelius) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Ferrell for a period of two years effective May 1, 2009. Thirty days of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed for two years. The Commission found that Mr. Ferrell, a certified appraiser from 2001 to 2004, surrendered his appraisal certificate to the North Carolina Appraisal Board in a consensual arrangement with the Board in the face of allegations that he had violated provisions of the appraiser licensing statutes and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.
BRETT DAVID FURNISS (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Furniss for a period of one year effective June 10, 2009. Thirty days of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of one year. The Commission found that Mr. Furniss, broker-in-charge of a real estate brokerage firm, received $950 intended as option money. The Commission further found that Mr. Furniss had a verbal property management agreement with the owner, but no written agency agreement with any party. Mr. Furniss released the option money from his trust account to the would-be optionor, but did not have an option contract executed by the parties. The Commission noted that Mr. Furniss, upon first request of refund by the would-be optionee, refunded the would-be optionee $950.
MARK GAGLIARDI (Greenville) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Mr. Gagliardi for a period of five years effective August 1, 2009. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Mr.Gagliardi violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Mr. Gagliardi neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
JON C. GILLMAN (Charlotte) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Mr. Gillman for a period of five years effective July 1, 2009. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Mr. Gillman violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Mr. Gillman neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
GTC REALTY, INC. (Waxhaw) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded GTC Realty effective May 1, 2009. The Commission found that GTC Realty entered into a buyers’ agency agreement with a husband and wife and continued to act as a buyers’ agent after the agreement expired including writing an offer on a property and assisting the buyers in a lease-purchase contract. The Commission also found that GTC Realty was paid a 2% fee of just under $6,000 for its services which included showing the clients the house, contacting the seller on behalf of its clients, and delivering funds to the seller. Finally, the Commission found that after the clients filed a complaint with the Commission about the lease-purchase transaction, GTC Realty repeatedly failed to respond to Letters of Inquiry.
DR HORTON, INC. (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the firm license of DR Horton for a period of one year effective May 1, 2008. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of two years on certain conditions. The Commission found that former employees of DR Horton sold 14 new construction homes to buyers and paid fees to unlicensed persons and entities for producing the buyers in these transactions.
ELBERTA L. JONES (Manson) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Jones for a period of one year effective March 1, 2009. Three months of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of nine months on certain conditions. The Commission found that Ms. Jones, who listed and sold a property for her seller clients, witnessed a promissory note executed by the buyer at closing in which the buyer agreed to repay a loan from the seller, but did not inform the closing attorney about the loan, which was not shown on the closing statement or otherwise disclosed to the lender. The Commission also found that after closing Ms. Jones acted as a conduit for payments from the buyer to the seller on the undisclosed loan.
JAMES M. MADAGAN (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Mr. Madagan effective October 8, 2009. The Commission found that Mr. Madagan, as a broker with resort real estate developer, became the custodian of a resort club new member initiation fees and failed the hold the money in a trust account and converted in excess of $700,000 of the money to his own use. The Commission noted that Mr. Madagain entered into an agreement to repay the money but has failed to make full restitution as of this date.
PAUL DEVON MAXWELL (Lewisville) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Mr. Maxwell effective October 8, 2009. The Commission found that Mr. Maxwell, as broker and rental agent for the owner of a rental property, procured a tenant and collected $1,800 for rent and security deposit, but failed to deposit the money into an escrow account, and instead gave the money to his girlfriend. The Commission also found that Mr. Maxwell, whose license had expired at the time of the transaction, did not account for or remit the money to his landlord client or to the tenant.
FRANK T. MCCOY, JR. (Albemarle) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. McCoy for a period of six months effective October 1, 2009. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of one year effective October 1, 2009. The Commission found that Mr. McCoy managed a property but failed to obtain a written property management agreement with the owner or written lease agreement with the tenants. The Commission also found that Mr. McCoy failed to maintain his trust accounts in compliance with the License Law and Commission rules. The Commission noted that Mr. McCoy has since taken the Basic Trust Account Course and brought his books and records into compliance.
MOUNTAIN LIFESTYLES, LLC (Asheville) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mountain Lifestyles effective September 1, 2009. The Commission found that Mountain Lifestyles, a real estate brokerage firm, listed in July 2006 a property which was served by a septic system and advertised the property as having three bedrooms, but failed to verify that the property was permitted for three bedrooms. The Commission further found that the buyer of the house discovered it had only been permitted for a two-bedroom home when attempting to sell the property several years after the purchase.
MYREALTY CONSULTANTS & MANAGEMENT, INC. (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the firm license of MyRealty Consultants & Management effective August 13, 2009. The Commission found that MyRealty Consultants & Management managed a residential rental property, but failed to deposit funds collected on behalf of the property owner into a trust account, failed to maintain and retain trust account records, and to maintain records in such a manner as to create a clear audit trail.
EZEKIAS R. NAPANT (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. NaPant for a period of one year effective September 1, 2009. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of one year under certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. NaPant, as qualifying broker and broker-in-charge of his own licensed firm, listed a home threatened with foreclosure, convinced an acquaintance to invest $15,000 to bring the mortgage payments current and make improvements on the property, promised a 20% return on the funds at closing and represented that he had a buyer waiting to close. The Commission further found that Mr. NaPant filled out a promissory note between the seller and investor and included himself as promissor and his firm as trustee but failed to deposit the funds into his trust account. The Commission further found that Mr. NaPant, after the contracted sale fell through, failed to repay the investor’s money and the home fell into foreclosure again.
DEBRA PAGANO (Waxhaw) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Pagano for a period of one year effective May 1, 2009. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of one year on certain conditions. The Commission found that Ms. Pagano, qualifying broker and broker-in-charge of her licensed firm, supervised a provisional broker in the firm, who entered into a buyers’ agency agreement and continued to act as the buyers’ agent after the agreement expired including writing an offer on a property and assisting the buyers in a lease-purchase contract. The Commission also found that Ms. Pagano’s firm was paid a 2% fee of just under $6,000 for the provisional broker’s services which included showing the buyers the house, contacting the seller on behalf of his buyers, and delivering funds to the seller. Finally, the Commission found that after the buyers filed a complaint with the Commission about the lease-purchase transaction, Ms. Pagano repeatedly failed to respond to Letters of Inquiry.
WILLIAM T. PAGANO, III (Waxhaw) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Pagano for a period of one year effective May 1, 2009. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of one year on certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. Pagano, as a broker on provisional status, entered into a buyers’ agency agreement and continued to act as the buyers’ agent after the agreement expired including writing an offer on a property and assisting the buyers in a lease-purchase contract after the termination of the offer. The Commission also found that Mr. Pagano was paid a 2% fee of just under $6,000 for his services which included showing the buyers the house, contacting the seller on behalf of his buyers, and delivering funds to the seller. Finally, the Commission found that after the buyers filed a complaint with the Commission about the lease-purchase transaction, Mr. Pagano repeatedly failed to respond to Letters of Inquiry.
HELEN W. PEE (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Ms. Pee effective August 13, 2009. The Commission found that Ms. Pee, as qualifying broker and broker-in-charge of a real estate brokerage firm, managed a residential rental property, but failed to deposit funds collected on behalf of the property owner into a trust account, failed to maintain and retain trust account records, and to maintain records in such a manner as to create a clear audit trail. The Commission also found that Ms. Pee converted approximately $600 of the property owner’s funds to her own use.
MEN NESHIANNE PHILLIPS (Rocky Mount) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Phillips for a period of two years effective July 1, 2008. One year of the suspension was active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of two years on certain conditions. The Commission found that Ms. Phillips, acting as both broker and loan officer in a transaction, created a false verification of rent in order to assist her buyer in qualifying for a loan. The Commission also found that Ms. Phillips negotiated a higher interest rate for her buyer client to increase her income at the expense of her buyer and received a $1,900 yield spread premium when the loan closed.
RONNIE B. RICKS (Smithfield) – The Commission ordered the permanent revocation of the broker license of Mr. Ricks effective May 11, 2009. The Commission found that Mr. Ricks, in three transactions involving new construction homes and in which the buyers were introduced to the properties by the same unlicensed entity, failed to disclose to the lender the true purchase prices for the properties and misrepresented the purchase prices on contracts. The Commission also found that on the HUD-1 closing statements Mr. Ricks misrepresented the true purchase contract prices, misrepresented that he owed monies, when he did not, for second mortgage payoffs and assignment fees to the unlicensed entity that introduced the buyers to the properties, and assisted the unlicensed entity in receiving payment for conducting brokerage services.
DON STEPHEN SCOTT (Murphy) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Mr. Scott effective July 13, 2009. The Commission found that Mr. Scott was indicted in August, 2008 in U.S. District Court on one count of sending sexually explicit photos of a minor via the Internet, 13 counts of receiving sexually explicit photos of a minor via the Internet and one count of possessing a computer containing sexually explicit photos of minors. The Commission further found that Mr. Scott pled guilty to all charges in December 2008, failed to report his conviction to the Commission as required by Commission rule and failed to respond in a timely fashion to the Commission’s Letters of Inquiry.
ABIGAIL SEYMOUR (Charlotte) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Ms. Seymour for a period of five years effective July 1, 2009. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Ms. Seymour had violated the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Ms. Seymour neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
DEVERA S. SMITH (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Smith for a period of one year effective December 1, 2008. The Commission found that Ms. Smith, became broker-in-charge of a sole proprietorship in 2005 and her employer’s broker license was revoked in 2005 for various trust account violations; despite the revocation, her employer continued to represent clients and Ms. Smith acted as a broker and accepted trust monies from clients, but failed to safeguard the funds received.
SUNSHINE REALTY-PROPERTY MANAGEMENT (Burlington) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Sunshine Realty-Property Management effective June 1, 2009. The Commission found that Sunshine Realty-Property Management failed to maintain its trust account records as required by the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. The Commission noted that Sunshine Realty-Property Management corrected all the violations noted with respect to its trust account records, there were no shortages, and no consumers were harmed as a result.
DONNA A. TEELING (Mount Holly) – The Commission revoked the broker license of Ms. Teeling effective July 13, 2009. The Commission found that Ms. Teeling certified to the Commission in June 2006 that she possessed four years’ full-time experience as a broker or salesperson to remove her license from provisional statusal when, in fact, she possessed less than three years’ experience. The Commission also found that Ms. Teeling failed to respond to Letters of Inquiry from the Commission.
PAXTON J. TUCKER (Pawleys Island, South Carolina) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Mr. Tucker for a period of five years effective July 1, 2009. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Mr. Tucker had violated the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Mr. Tucker neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
GIDGETT M. WAY (Mount Airy) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Way effective April 1, 2009. The Commission found that Ms. Way, broker-in-charge of a sole proprietorship, listed a home located in Virginia and represented on the MLS that it was a modular home with 1,800 heated square feet, relying on inaccurate data in a previous MLS listing and not measuring it herself; after entering a lease/purchase agreement, buyers discovered that the home was a mobile home with 1,472 square feet, a difference of 22%.
ANN WEEKS (Asheville) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Weeks for a period of six months effective September 1, 2009. The Commission stayed the suspension for a probationary period of six months. The Commission found that Ms. Weeks listed a property in July 2006 which was served by a septic system and advertised the property as having three bedrooms, but failed to verify that the property was permitted for three bedrooms. The Commission further found that the buyer of the house discovered it had only been permitted for a two-bedroom home when attempting to sell the property several years after the purchase.
AMY MARIE YOUNGERMAN (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Youngerman for a period two years effective January 26, 2009. Six months of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of four years on certain conditions. The Commission found that Ms. Youngerman, on or about August 13, 2008, pled guilty to and was convicted of Level 2 Impaired Driving, placed on probation for 24 months, and ordered to surrender her drivers license and obtain substance abuse assessment and recommended education or treatment. The Commission noted that Ms. Youngerman was convicted of of Level 4 Driving While Impaired in April 2006 while licensed as a real estate broker and timely reported the conviction, and Driving After Consuming Under 21 in 1998, which she disclosed on her 2003 license application.
This article came from the October 2009-Vol40-2 edition of the bulletin.
Following is a summary of Real Estate Commission rule changes which become effective July 1, 2009.
General Brokerage
• Require provisional brokers to have the consent of their broker-in-charge in order to advertise any real estate brokerage service, and to include in any advertisement the name of the broker-in-charge or firm with which they are associated.
• Revise the requirements for being reinstated as a broker-in-charge after losing broker-in-charge eligibility.
• Remove the requirement that loan commitment dates be shown in offer to purchase and sales contracts.
Examinations
• Authorize the Commission to discipline brokers who cheated on or misused the licensing examination where the cheating or misuse did not come to the attention of the Commission until after the person was licensed.
Licensing
• Eliminate language in connection with firm activation referring to a “form provided by the Commission” when the Commission does not provide or require such a form.
• Address the requirements for reinstating licenses “cancelled” when provisional brokers fail to complete their postlicensing education.
• Clarify that the license issuance date will not be changed for licenses reinstated within six months following their expiration.
• Provide that a broker whose license has been suspended by the Commission shall have sixty days from the end of the period of license suspension to pay any license fees that may have accrued during the period of suspension, and that failure to pay within that period will result in loss of licensure.
• Require brokers and license applicants to report to the Commission any “notarial commission sanctions” they have received.
Postlicensing Education
• Permit the Commission to deny or withdraw postlicensing course credit to any broker who attends more than twenty-one classroom hours of postlicensing instruction in any given seven-day period.
This article came from the May 2009-Vol40-1 edition of the bulletin.
Beginning July 1, most former brokers-in-charge can be re-designated as brokers-in-charge without first completing the Broker-in-Charge Course; however, within 120 days following their re-designation they must complete either the 12-hour BIC Course or, if they have completed the BIC Course within the past three years, the 4-hour Broker-in-Charge Annual Review Course.
Currently, a broker-in-charge must complete the course prior to re-designation.
The Commission found that when BICs lose their BIC status (usually due to their failure to complete all required CE or to renew their licenses on time), the offices they supervise are effectively shut down until the broker can take the BIC Course.This may require a few weeks’ wait and possibly considerable travel.
The revised rule allows the former brokers-in-charge to re-designate themselves immediately after reinstating the expired licenses (if applicable), satisfying any CE deficiency and re-activating their licenses. They then have 120 days to complete the BIC Course (or, if eligible, the BICAR Course).
Of course, they must also be able to certify on a new Broker-in-Charge Declaration that they have two years’ full-time brokerage experience within the past five years. Remember, always check with the Commission to verify the specific requirements for your particular situation!
Brokers-in-charge who do not satisfy their education requirement within 120 days following designation or re-designation are removed as BIC and must complete the 12-hour BIC Course prior to requesting to again be designated, even if the course was completed within the preceding three years.
A related rule revision reserves the BICAR Course exclusively for currently designated BIC’s and brokers who are “BIC eligible” (former BIC’s who have continuously maintained an active license and taken the BICAR Course each year). Other brokers attending the BICAR Course will not receive any CE elective credit for it. A Certificate of Eligibility (verification of BIC status) can be obtained from the Commission’s website.
A further rule revision exempts from the broker-in-charge requirement sole proprietor brokers who hold tenant security deposits only in a trust account for properties they personally own.
This article came from the May 2009-Vol40-1 edition of the bulletin.