Thomas R. Lawing, Jr., of Charlotte, has been elected Chairman and Cindy S. Chandler of Charlotte, Vice Chairman, of the North Carolina Real Estate Commission effective August 1, 2014, it was announced by Miriam J. Baer, Executive Director.
Lawing is a second-generation Certified Property Manager and President of T. R. Lawing Realty, a family-owned residential property management company serving the Charlotte region since 1957.
He is a past president and REALTOR® of the Year of both the North Carolina Association of REALTORS® (NCAR) and the Charlotte Regional REALTORS® Association (CRRA) and a past director of the National Association of REALTORS® (NAR).
Active in civic affairs, Lawing is a past chair of the Church Council at Hawthorne Lane United Methodist Church, a past president of the Charlotte West Rotary Club, a Co-Captain with the Wells Fargo Championship & Chiquita Classic and an Eagle Scout.
Chandler, owner of The Chandler Group, a commercial real estate consulting and training firm, has been in real estate for more than 30 years in the areas of investment real estate, syndication, strategic planning, management, marketing and education.
She is a 2011 recipient of the Billie J. Mercer Excellence in Education Award of the Real Estate Commission and is the author of The Insider’s Guide to Commercial Real Estate, published by Dearborn/Kaplan Publishing.
A past regional vice president of the National Association of REALTORS®, Chandler was also Chair of the Mecklenburg County Zoning Board of Adjustment and Charlotte Chapter President of Commercial Real Estate Women (CREW).
Chandler is a past president of the North Carolina Association of REALTORS® and the North Carolina Real Estate Educators Association and a past Vice Chair of the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Planning Commission.
This article came from the October 2014-Vol45-2 edition of the bulletin.
KIMBERLY E. ABRAHAM (Bradenton, Florida) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Abraham effective August 13, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Abraham, a North Carolina and Florida real estate broker, voluntarily placed her Florida license on inactive status in or around August 2008; and that despite her Florida license being inactive, beginning in 2009 and continuing through 2013, Ms. Abraham represented to the Commission that she had a current, active out-of-state license on her annual renewal form in order to maintain the active status of her North Carolina license.
APS REALTY GROUP INC. (Winston-Salem) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the firm license of APS Realty Group for a period of one year effective May 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period ending May 1, 2015. The Commission found that APS Realty Group, a real estate brokerage firm, contracted to manage a property for a landlord-client who lived out of the country; that APS Realty Group entered into a one-year lease agreement with a tenant on behalf of its landlord-client and that, shortly thereafter, APS Realty Group deducted $572 from rental proceeds to cover the cost of unapproved repairs in violation of the property management agreement with the landlord-client. The Commission also found that APS Realty Group executed a “Release and Termination of Lease Contract” with the tenant in violation of the property management agreement; that APS Realty Group used rental proceeds to pay the attorney who had drafted the tenant release agreement; that APS Realty Group refunded the tenant security deposit to the tenant without its landlord-client’s approval; and that after termination of the lease agreement in June 2013, the tenant remained in the property until the end of July 2013, without paying rent.
HAL G. BARNES (Fort Lauderdale, Florida) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Barnes effective June 18, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Barnes, who resides in Florida and maintains a license there, was placed on inactive status in Florida August 2008 when his affiliation with a real estate firm ended; and that, despite being inactive, beginning in 2009 and continuing through 2013, Mr. Barnes misrepresented to the Commission that he had a current, active out-of-state license on his annual renewal form in order to maintain the active status of his North Carolina license.
CHESLEY G. BOWENS, JR. (Raleigh) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Bowens for a period of one year effective May 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of one year. The Commission found that Mr. Bowens, acting as broker-in-charge of his sole proprietorship, between 1987 and 2011, was convicted of multiple offenses that he failed to disclose on two separate license applications, and which he failed to report to the Commission after licensure. The Commission also found that Mr. Bowens failed to report at least four civil judgments at the time of his 1995 application for a real estate salesperson license.
NICOLE ANN BULLARD (Fuquay Varina) – The Commission accepted the permanent voluntary surrender of the broker license of Ms. Bullard effective April 16, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Ms. Bullard violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Ms. Bullard neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
RONALD G. CAMERON (Waynesville) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Cameron for a period of three months effective June 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Cameron listed for sale his personal residence and advertised it has having 2,600 square feet including 600 square feet of heated space with garage doors; that the space had been used as a garage, office and spare bedroom; and that Mr. Cameron disputed the action taken against his license
CYNTHIA R. CARSWELL (Gastonia) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Ms. Carswell effective July 1, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Carswell agreed to the terms of a Consent Order issued September 8, 2011, which revoked her broker license unless, by July 1, 2012, she made full payment of $10,000 owed to a consumer as reimbursement of a down payment in a failed transaction, in which case the revocation would be reduced to a one year stayed suspension; that when Ms. Carswell failed to satisfy the terms of the 2011 Consent Order, having made only partial repayment, she was notified that her license was subject to revocation; that Ms. Carswell notified the Commission that her pending bankruptcy action prohibited her from complying with the 2011 Consent Order and that she had renegotiated a payment plan that would satisfy the terms of the 2011 Consent Order, but over a longer period of time.; that Ms. Carswell agreed to the terms of a second Consent Order issued June 14, 2012, which extended her repayment deadline to July 1, 2014, and which Ms. Carswell failed to fulfill.
CHANTICLEER PROPERTIES LLC (Pinehurst) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Chanticleer Properties effective August 1, 2014. The Commission found that a local attorney created a listing agreement for Chanticleer Properties so that its agents could sell townhouses for a builder; that the listing agreement did not contain the required anti-discrimination provision; and that the listing agreement was signed by both Chanticleer Properties and the builder. Chanticleer Properties neither admitted nor deined, but did not object to the Commission’s findings.
BRIAN CINC (Winston-Salem) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Cinc for a period of one year effective May 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period ending May 1, 2015. The Commission found that Mr. Cinc, acting as qualifying broker and broker-in-charge of a real estate brokerage firm, contracted to manage a property for a landlord-client who lived out of the country; that Mr. Cinc and his firm entered into a one-year lease agreement with a tenant on behalf of their landlord-client and that, shortly thereafter, Mr. Cinc deducted $572 from rental proceeds to cover the cost of unapproved repairs in violation of the property management agreement with the landlord-client. The Commission also found that Mr. Cinc executed a “Release and Termination of Lease Contract” with the tenant in violation of the property management agreement; that Mr. Cinc used rental proceeds to pay the attorney who had drafted the tenant release agreement; that Mr. Cinc refunded the tenant security deposit to the tenant without his landlord-client’s approval; and that after termination of the lease agreement in June 2013, the tenant remained in the property until the end of July 2013 without paying rent.
DAN RYAN BUILDERS-NORTH CAROLINA LLC (Raleigh) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Dan Ryan Builders effective August 1, 2014. The Commission found that a listing agent for a real estate brokerage firm signed a listing agreement with Dan Ryan Builders to market and sell new houses on townhouse lots in a subdivision; that the listing agent provided a purchase contract drafted by Dan Ryan Builders to a buyer and the buyer’s agent for a property in the subdivision; that the contract contained an addendum given to the listing agent by Dan Ryan Builders disclosing that the streets were “public”; that the developer had also placed street signs in the neighborhood which indicated that the streets were “public”; that the listing agent also provided a plat map of the lot location, provided by Dan Ryan Builders, which indicated that the street was “private”; that, after the property closed, it was determined that some of the streets in the subdivision were “public” and some, including the street where the property which had closed was located, were “private”. The Commission noted that Dan Ryan Builders, after discovering the street disclosure discrepancy, issued the proper “private” street disclosure form with its contracts. Dan Ryan Builders neither admitted nor denied, but did not object to the Commission’s findings.
MICHELLE SIZEMORE DAVIS (Sanford) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Davis for a period of two years effective March 1, 2014. Three months of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period ending February 28, 2016. The Commission found that Ms. Davis acted as a dual agent in selling her own home and failed to obtain a written Buyer’s Agency agreement or written consent for Dual Agency; that after closing, the buyer discovered evidence of mold and ordered a home inspection; and that testing revealed a significant infestation of black mold which rendered the basement of the home uninhabitable.
ROBERT M. DAVIS (Charlotte) – The Commission accepted the permanent voluntary surrender of the broker license of Mr. Davis effective April 16, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Mr. Davis violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Mr. Davis neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
DAVID ROBERT DICECCO (Charlotte) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Mr. DiCecco for a period of five years effective April 1, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Mr. DiCecco violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Mr. DiCecco neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
BENJAMIN EDWARDS FALCON (Asheville) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Falcon for a period of two years effective July 1, 2014. Six months of the suspension is active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period ending July 1, 2016 on certain conditions. The Commission found that in November 2013 Mr. Falcon pled guilty to felony sale of marijuana; and was sentenced to between 8 and 19 months imprisonment (suspended), 72 hours of community service, and ordered to pay $1,224.50. The Commission noted that Mr. Falcon self-reported the criminal conviction to the Commission on January 7, 2014.
FOURTH DEVELOPMENT COMPANY D/B/A AL WILLIAMS PROPERTIES (Atlantic Beach) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Fourth Development Company effective October 1, 2014. The Commission found that Fourth Development Company, a real estate brokerage firm, listed a property, which went under contract for purchase as a short sale; that the buyer’s agent requested the rental schedule for the unit from the firm managing the property and requested that the advanced rents be given to the buyer at closing; that closing on the property did not occur as scheduled because the property was being foreclosed; that the buyers then went under contract with the new owner and the buyer’s agent again requested that advance rents be given to the buyers at closing; that on the day before closing, the firm managing the property notified the listing agent that there were no advanced rents to be given to the buyers, but did not notify the buyer’s agent; that the property closed without any advanced rents being reflected on the HUD-1 statement; that the buyer’s assumed that the advanced rental deposits were still in the firm’s trust account; and that, after closing, the buyers realized there were no advanced rental deposits available to them. The Commission also found that Fourth Development Company failed to enter into a new listing agreement with the new owner of the property.
KAREN H. GRACE (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Grace for a period of ten months effective May 1, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Grace, acting as qualifying broker and broker-in-charge of a real estate brokerage firm, entered into numerous property management agreements with landlord clients through the firm when, in fact, the firm was controlled by another individual. The Commission also found that Ms. Grace failed to remit collected rents to her clients and failed to keep trust account records in compliance with Commission rules.
HERITAGE REALTY ASHE INC (Jefferson) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Heritage Realty Ashe effective August 1, 2014. The Commission found that Heritage Realty Ashe was the listing firm for a property; that the listing agent for Heritage Realty knew that the home on the property was “owner built” and the MLS listing advertised that it contained one bedroom and one bath with a septic system; that no septic or building permits were pulled for verification; and that, after closing, it was determined that the home was not built to code and that it lacked the proper building and septic permits.
ASHLEE AMELIA HOOKS (Oak Ridge) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Ms. Hooks for a period of two years effective August 13, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Ms. Hooks violated provisions of the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules. Ms. Hooks neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
JENNIFER M. JOHNSON (Apex) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Johnson for a period of 18 months effective July 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of 18 months. The Commission found that Ms. Johnson, on or about December 5, 2012, was convicted of Misdemeanor Attempted Larceny after attempting to shoplift clothing from a department store. The Commission noted that Ms. Johnson notified the Commission within 60 days of the conviction as required by Commission rules.
GLENN EMERSON MAGILL, III (Nags Head) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Magill for a period of one year effective July 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Magill’s real estate license was issued in November 2012, but never placed on active status because Mr. Magill has never affiliated with a broker-in-charge; that in November 2012, Mr. Magill began managing rental properties on behalf of an unlicensed property management firm; and that Mr. Magill conducted business, including advertising rental properties on the unlicensed firm’s Web site and collecting tenant security deposits and rental payments without the supervision of a broker-in-charge. The Commission noted that Mr. Magill no longer performs property management services on behalf of others.
ELIZABETH ANN MASSEY (Cornelius) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Massey effective September 10, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Massey, on February 20, 2014, pleaded guilty in District Court to one count of misdemeanor larceny, was sentenced to one year of unsupervised probation, ordered to pay a $1,000 fine, and was banned from all TJ Maxx and Marshall’s stores in the state of North Carolina. The Commission noted that Ms. Massey reported the criminal conviction to the Commission on April 14, 2014.
SEAN NICHOLAS MCGOVERN (Belville) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. McGovern for a period of four years effective July 1, 2014. One year of the suspension is active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period ending July 1, 2019 on certain conditions. The Commission found that on May 17, 2011 Mr. McGovern pled guilty in U.S. District Court to one count of “Conspiracy to Distribute and Possession With the Intent to Distribute More Than 100 Kilograms of Marijuana”; that Mr. McGovern was sentenced to 21 months of imprisonment and upon completion of that term, five years of supervised probation; and that Mr. McGovern failed to report his guilty plea to the Commission within 60 days of sentencing. The Commission noted that Mr. McGovern self-reported his guilty plea in October 2013, more than two years after sentencing.
JOHN A. MILLER (Wilmington) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Miller effective October 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Miller was convicted of Misdemeanor Driving While Impaired on or about June 6, 2011, and again on November 28, 2011; and that Mr. Miller self-reported these convictions to the Commission on March 7, 2014, after reading an excerpt from the February 2014 Bulletin reminding him of the Commission rule to report convictions within 60 days. The Commission noted that Mr. Miller has been on inactive status for a number of years, that he wishes to obtain active status now, and that he has completed all requirements imposed by the court for these convictions and has received numerous hours in substance abuse treatment.
JAMES WILLIAM PAYLOR (Atlantic Beach) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Paylor effective October 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Paylor was a broker with a real estate brokerage firm that listed a property that went under contract for purchase as a short sale; that the buyer’s agent requested the rental schedule for the unit from the firm managing the property and requested that the advanced rents be given to the buyer at closing; that closing on the property did not occur as scheduled because the property was being foreclosed; that the buyers then went under contract with the new owner and the buyer’s agent again requested that advance rents be given to the buyers at closing; that on the day before closing, the firm managing the property notified Mr. Paylor that there were no advanced rents to be given to the buyers, but he failed to notify the buyer’s agent; that the property closed without any advanced rents being reflected on the HUD-1 statement; that the buyer’s assumed that the advanced rental deposits were still in the firm’s trust account; and that, after closing, the buyers realized there were no advanced rental deposits available to them. The Commission also found that Mr. Paylor failed to enter into a new listing agreement with the new owner of the property.
BROOKS LIVINGSTONE POOLE (Kinston) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Poole for a period of two years effective August 1, 2014. Six months of the suspension are active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period ending August 1, 2016 on certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. Poole was convicted on or about October 16, 2013 of three counts of misdemeanor possession of controlled substances and one count of misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia and sentenced to 120 days imprisonment (suspended), and placed on 18 months of supervised probation. The Commission also found that Mr. Poole failed to respond to four Letters of Inquiry sent by Commission staff, failed to fully respond to Commission staff’s requests by failing to report two of the four convictions and the resulting prison sentence (suspended), and failed to provide copies of any judgments and a detailed account describing the relevant facts and circumstances surrounding the convictions, as requested by Commission staff.
CHRISTY ESTHER QUICK (Cornelius) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Quick for a period of three years effective June 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period ending June 1, 2017. The Commission found that Ms. Quick, acting as a provisional broker, hired a contractor to perform work on bank-owned properties listed by her firm; that Ms. Quick represented that the contractor had been paid when it had not; and that instead of paying the contractor’s invoices with the monies received as reimbursement from her owner clients, she converted the funds to her own personal use. The Commission noted that Ms. Quick has repaid a substantial portion of the original amount owed to the contractor and continues to make monthly payments to settle the debt.
GAYLE S. RAY (Fayetteville) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Ray effective October 1, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Ray represented a buyer who closed on a property in Raleigh in March of 2013; that Ms. Ray possessed a reasonable knowledge of the I-540 completion project which included various proposed routes for future highway construction; that the buyer discovered in the fall of 2013 that the proposed “Orange Route”, if built, would come to rest within a quarter of a mile from his front door; that the route was proposed by the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) in 1996 and is still pending approval; that Ms. Ray did not disclose the proximity of the Orange Route to the property; and that the buyer did not order an appraisal. The Commission also found that NCDOT has still not decided which of the proposed various routes will be used and that the proximity of I-540 was not disclosed in the Residential Property Disclosure Statement, the MLS listing, or other marketing materials.
CARLA HINESLEY SEVILLA (Raleigh) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Sevilla effective August 1, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Sevilla, on behalf of her real estate brokerage firm, signed a listing agreement with a builder to market and sell new houses on townhouse lots in a subdivision; that Ms. Sevilla provided a purchase contract drafted by the builder to a buyer and the buyer’s agent for a property in the subdivision; that the contract contained an addendum given to Ms. Sevilla by the builder disclosing that the streets were “public”; that the builder had also placed street signs in the neighborhood which indicated that the streets were “public”; that Ms. Sevilla also provided a plat map of the lot location, provided by the builder, which indicated that the street was “private”; that, after the property closed, it was determined that some of the streets in the subdivision were “public” and some, including the street where the property, which had closed was located, were “private”. The Commission noted that Ms. Sevilla, after noticing the street disclosure discrepancy, immediately informed the builder. Mr. Sevilla neither admitted nor denied, but did not object to the Commission’s findings.
PATRICIA MOORE SMITH (Atlantic Beach) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Smith effective October 1, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Smith was the buyer agent for a property that went under contract as a short sale listing on or about May 27, 2013; that Ms. Smith requested a rental schedule for the property and requested that any advanced rents already paid to the previous owner be given to the buyer at closing; that on June 18, 2013, the property management firm tried to contact the closing attorney with these figures, however, the closing did not occur on this date due to the property being foreclosed on and the note sold; that the buyers then went under contract with the new owners of the property and Ms. Smith again requested the advanced rents be given to the buyers at closing; that on July 18, 2013, the day before closing, the property management firm told Ms. Smith that the correct amount would be forwarded to the closing attorney; that the property closed on July 19, 2013 without any advanced rents being reflected on the HUD-1 statement; that buyers and Ms. Smith were present at closing and buyers assumed that the advanced rental deposits were still in the property management firm’s trust account; and that after closing the buyers realized there were no advanced rental deposits available to them.
MARCUS SCARBOROUGH SPENCER (Durham) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Spencer for a period of two years effective May 1, 2014. One year of the suspension is active with the remainder stayed as a probationary period on certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. Spencer, acting as broker-in-charge of his sole proprietorship, timely reported to the Commission that on July 23, 2013, he was convicted of two counts of Possession With Intent to Sell/Distribute Marijuana in Brunswick County and was ordered to ;ay fines and court costs of $800 and placed on 24 months’ supervised probation. The Commission also found that Mr. Spencer was previously disciplined by the Commission for failing to report criminal convictions, including convictions in 1993, 1996, and 1998 and for which his real estate license was suspended for a period of two years which was stayed after a six-month active period.
LARRY A. STANLEY (Jefferson) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Stanley effective August 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Stanley was the broker-in-charge of a real estate brokerage firm when the firm listed a property for sale; that the listing agent for the firm knew that the home on the property was “owner built” and the MLS listing advertised that it contained one bedroom and one bath with a septic system; that no septic or building permits were pulled for verification; and that, after closing, it was determined that the home was not built to code and that it lacked the proper building and septic permits.
GENE D. THOMAS (Goldsboro) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Mr. Thomas effective August 13, 2014. Mr. Thomas shall be ineligible to reapply for reinstatement five years from the date of revocation. The Commission found that Mr. Thomas was Executive Director of the Housing Authority for the City of Goldsboro (GHA); that the GHA received funds from the federal government through annual grants and other assistance; that beginning in August 2002, and continuing until June 2012, Mr. Thomas falsified GHA time sheets to reflect that a former employee worked 20 hours per week, when, in fact, that employee had resigned and did very little work for the GHA; that as a result of Mr. Thomas’ actions, federal funds were illegally converted; and that on April 8, 2014, Mr. Thomas pleaded guilty to one count of Unlawful Conversion of Federal Funds in the U.S. District Court.
MINDY S. WALLER (Wallace) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Waller for a period of six months effective July 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of six months. The Commission found that Ms. Waller listed a bank-owned property and received multiple offers on the property but failed to submit to her seller the highest written offer of $40,000, instead allowing her seller to accept an offer of $38,500.
ALFRED WILLIAMS IV (Atlantic Beach) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Williams effective October 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Williams was Broker-in-Charge and Qualifying Broker for a real estate brokerage firm when it listed a property that went under contract for purchase as a short sale; that the buyer’s agent requested the rental schedule for the unit from the firm managing the property and requested that the advanced rents be given to the buyer at closing; that closing on the property did not occur as scheduled because the property was being foreclosed; that the buyers then went under contract with the new owner and the buyer’s agent again requested that advance rents be given to the buyers at closing; that on the day before closing, the firm managing the property notified the listing agent that there were no advanced rents to be given to the buyers, but did not notify the buyer’s agent; that the property closed without any advanced rents being reflected on the HUD-1 statement; that the buyer’s assumed that the advanced rental deposits were still in the firm’s trust account; and that, after closing, the buyers realized there were no advanced rental deposits available to them. The Commission also found that Mr. Williams failed to enter into a new listing agreement with the new owner of the property.
KEVIN A. WOLBORSKY (Raleigh) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Wolborsky for a period of four months effective August 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension on certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. Wolborsky represented a buyer who submitted an offer for a property and paid a $2,500 earnest money deposit; that after the Due Diligence period ended, the buyer’s financing fell through; that the seller terminated the contract and sent the buyer a Release Request for the earnest money deposit; that Mr. Wolborsky assisted the buyer in obtaining new financing and later submitted an offer to purchase another property upon pre-approval from the bank; that after the offer was submitted, the buyer signed the Release Request of the earnest money deposit and prepared a statement to the seller of the first property; that the statement contained inaccurate information and requested the return of the earnest money deposit due to the buyer’s financial troubles; that Mr. Wolborsky forwarded the buyer’s letter to the seller’s listing agent for delivery to the seller; and that ultimately the seller kept the earnest money deposit.
CHARLES GARY ZAHLER (Asheville)- Following a hearing, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Zahler effective August 5, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Zahler, a licensed real estate broker listing his own property, failed to disclose to the buyer problems with the foundation, settlement and other issues affecting the property that had been revealed in a structural engineering report provided to Mr. Zahler prior to his purchase of the property in 1997; that in 1998, Mr. Zahler replaced an aluminum overhang with a new roof and had a new retaining wall constructed to support the new roof; that Mr. Zahler believed that the new retaining wall and re-poured concrete slab cured all of the settlement and foundation issues; that between 1998 and 2008, Mr. Zahler did not notice any indications of further settlement in the home; that an appraisal performed on the home in 2006 did not indicate any deficiencies or adverse conditions affecting the structural integrity of the property; that in 2007, the City of Asheville issued a Housing Certificate and determined that the property met the requirements for occupancy under the city’s Housing Code; that when Mr. Zahler sold his property in 2008, he failed to provide the buyer with a copy of the 1997 engineering report or otherwise disclose the settlement and foundation problems revealed in the report; that in 2010, the same engineer who prepared the 1997 report inspected the property and found that several of the problems addressed in the 1997 report were still present.
This article came from the October 2014-Vol45-2 edition of the bulletin.
Reminder notices from the Real Estate Commission to renew your real estate license will reach you one of two ways: (1) if you elected to receive your Real Estate Bulletin by email, please look in your email “inbox” for your reminder or (2) if you are not receiving your Bulletin electronically, please look for it in your postal mailbox. It benefits you to act immediately when you receive your reminder to avoid a change in your license status on July 1. Simply go to www.ncrec.gov and log into your record to complete the renewal process.
There are two ways to renew your license: 1) for the most efficient way, go to the Commission’s Web site on or after May 15 and log into your record using your personal identification number (PIN). Your PIN has been set as the last four digits of your Social Security number unless you have changed it; or 2) return the blue and white postcard with your check so that it reaches the Commission office prior to the June 30 deadline. Please reference your license number on your check.
The license renewal fee is $45 and may be paid online using Visa, MasterCard or Discover Card. You will receive a confirmation of renewal to print when you finish.
While logging in to renew your license, take a moment to review your email address or addresses. NCGS 93A-4(b2) now allows you to designate your email address as PRIVATE, meaning it will not be disseminated to anyone and will be used exclusively for communication from the Commission to you, or PUBLIC, meaning it will be provided upon request to the public, including CE course sponsors and others. You may, of course, provide both a public and private email address. You may make this selection upon logging into your record.
The Commission updates all broker license records on July 1. Your record will be updated to reflect your status as expired if your renewal fee is not received by the deadline. (Because of the records updating procedure and annual maintenance, the Commission’s Web site will be down on July 1 and 2.)
Expired licenses may be reinstated with payment of a $55 fee (this fee includes your $45 license renewal) between July 1 and December 31. Failure to reinstate by December 31 will result in your having to file a new application and fee and obtain a background report. In addition you may be required to take additional education and/or pass the license examination.
You may renew your license even if your continuing education requirements are not complete. Keep in mind, however, that all CE – the mandatory eight hours consisting of the Update Course and one elective – must be completed by June 10 to retain your license on active status. If you have not completed your CE by June 10, your license will be renewed on “inactive” status.
If you are a broker-in-charge or broker-in-charge eligible, in addition to the Update, you must take the Broker-in-Charge Annual Review course by June 10. Otherwise, you will lose your BIC eligibility. Brokers-in-charge are also responsible for ensuring that licensees under their supervision have renewed their licenses and completed the proper continuing education.
Rule A. 0110 requires that a broker-in-charge who loses BIC status or eligibility must 1) first have a license on active status; 2) meet the experience requirements for designation; and 3) take the 12-hour Broker-in-Charge Course before re-designation. (This course cannot be used as an elective to meet the requirement for active status.)
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.
Attendance at a new Commission course, Issues and Answers in North Carolina Real Estate Practice, is being required of some brokers who have been sanctioned for violations of the Real Estate Law and Commission rules.
The four-hour course, given in the Commission offices, reviews selected issues which often result in violations of Law and rules. Taught by the Commission Regulatory Affairs Staff, the course covers topics relating to the specific infractions among the brokers attending. A newly developed text covering 15 topics is given to each broker along with a copy of the Real Estate License Law and Commission Rules and the Real Estate Licensing in North Carolina booklet.
Many brokers who have violated the Law or rules have done so unintentionally because of lack of knowledge. The course is designed to help these brokers avoid problems in the future.
The Commission has always emphasized education as the primary tool in regulating the North Carolina real estate brokerage industry. Commonly, brokers who have been sanctioned are required to take one or more courses as a condition when a disciplinary action is approved by the Commission. The required education, when completed, usually earns the broker a reduction in the length and/or level of the sanction.
Topics available for instruction include agency basics, broker compensation, broker-in-charge responsibilities, brokers selling/leasing their own property, conflict of interest, cooperation with the Commission, criminal convictions and disciplinary actions, improper conduct, material facts, mortgage fraud issues, property management basics, real estate license issues, requirement to provide certain documentation, and trust account issues.
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.
By Frederick A. Moreno, Deputy Legal Counsel
It seems that listing agents are being asked more frequently these days if sellers can keep some video or audio equipment “on” while their property is being shown.
Types of video or audio equipment include laptop computers, tape recorders, baby monitors, camcorders, and “nanny cams”. The reasons that sellers give is that they want to protect their property and valuables from theft or destruction, or that they just want to hear what the potential buyers are saying about their house. A person who chooses to use such equipment must be very careful not to violate State or Federal law.
In 1968, the Federal government passed the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act (“Omnibus Act”). Title III of this act speaks to wire and electronic communications and the interception of oral communications. The purpose of this Act is to protect an individual’s right to privacy. Federal statute 18 USC § 2511 makes it unlawful for anyone to “intentionally intercept…any wire, oral, or electronic communication.” Notice how the statute says nothing about “recording.” That is because the statute prohibits the interception of oral communication whether it is recorded or not. This is a criminal statute, and a violation could result in a fine and up to 5 years in prison. There are some exceptions listed in the statute, but they mostly pertain to law enforcement. However, a person will not be in violation of this statute if State law allows them to hear an oral communication, when a party to the conversation has consented.
So, let’s take a look at what North Carolina law says. General Statutes §§ 15A-286, et al. make up the Electronic Surveillance Act and reference and contain many of the same provisions found in the Federal Omnibus Act. This is a criminal statute, a violation of which is a class H felony. North Carolina also allows for a person, whose communication was intercepted, to sue the violator and get $100 per day for the violation, punitive damages, litigation costs, and attorney’s fees. The statute only makes this a violation when one party to the communication has not consented.
Example 1: If you wanted to record a conversation between you and someone else, this generally would be allowed since you are a party to the communication and have consented to it being recorded. Even so, talk to your attorney before recording conversations.
Example 2: If your seller wanted to record a conversation between a potential buyer and their agent, this would not be allowed as the seller is not a party to that communication and the parties have not consented.
In 2002, the North Carolina Court of Appeals handed down a decision on the issues in Kroh v. Kroh. This was a case in which a married couple was separated and the wife decided to hide a video camera in the home to try and gather evidence for the divorce proceedings. The Court interpreted both the North Carolina and Federal laws discussed above and determined that the videotaping of the husband “did not violate the Electronic Surveillance Act unless such videotaping also included an audio recording”. Krohv.Kroh, 152 N.C. App. 147 (2002).
What does this all mean? These laws speak to oral or electronic communications and not video surveillance. Therefore, if you have a client who is adamant about placing a surveillance device in their home, advise them to ensure there is no audio turned on. They must also still be careful as to placement of the device (i.e. living room as opposed to bathroom) so as not to violate a person’s privacy. They should not use non-recording audio devices such as baby monitors or walkie-talkies to try to figure out what people are saying about their property. As mentioned above, the fact that the devices do not record anything is immaterial. Violations of these laws are criminal and could land you or your client in jail and facing a hefty civil penalty.
Finally, the Commission recommends not using any device in the home as a means of trying to gain information on potential buyers or their agents. Such an attempt to gain potentially confidential information about a buyer would most likely be considered inappropriate at best, and has the potential to result in criminal or civil liability. Should you have any questions regarding this, please call the Commission at 919-875-3700.
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.
As the Bulletin went to press, the last remaining step in the process governing rule changes was scheduled for May 9 with Commission final review and decision. Brokers should visit the Commission’s Web site, www.ncrec.gov (Home/License Law and Rule Changes), for any updates and the full text of each revised rule.
Proposed rule changes to be effective July 1, 2014 are summarized below:
Real Estate Brokers – General Brokerage
Agency Agreements and Disclosure (A. 0104) – prohibits a broker who is selling property in which the broker has an interest from representing a buyer of the property, and further prohibits a broker who is listing property from purchasing the listed property unless the broker first discloses the conflict of interest to his principal and, if requested to do so by his principal prior to closing, terminates the listing agreement.
Broker-in-Charge (A. 0110) – deletes the requirements that brokers-in-charge complete the four-hour Broker-in-Charge Annual Review Course and the mandatory four-hour Update Course and, instead, requires completion of a new four-hour mandatory course, known as the “Broker-in-Charge Update Course”, and a four-hour CE elective course in order to retain broker-in-charge eligibility. The rule change will combine the old BICAR course and the Update Course into a single four-hour course, allowing brokers-in-charge to take an elective CE course to fulfill the mandatory eight-hour CE requirement.
Residential Property and Owners’ Association Disclosure Statement (A. 0114) – clarifies question #24 on the form to inquire whether, based upon the seller’s knowledge, the property is in violation of any local zoning ordinances, restrictive covenants, building code requirements, or other land-use restrictions, and eliminates the reference to notice from a government agency about those restrictions.
Real Estate Brokers – Examinations
Cheating and Related Misconduct (A. 0404) – clarifies the rule prohibiting cheating and certain other misconduct in connection with the licensing examination to prohibit applicants from engaging in specified activities when taking a license examination and to add forfeiture of examination and application fees as possible consequences for a violation of the Rule in addition to dismissal from an examination, invalidation of examination score, and denial of a real estate license and disciplinary action if an applicant has been issued a license.
Real Estate Brokers – Licensing
License Renewal; Penalty for Operating While License Expires (A .0503) – requires that brokers apply for renewal using an electronic application on the Commission’s Web site or by calling the Commission’s office and that brokers provide the Commission with their e-mail address if they have one. Further, brokers are permitted to designate their e-mail address as private, thereby exempting the addresses from disclosure as a public record.
Real Estate Brokers – Mandatory Continuing Education
Continuing Education Requirement (A .1702) – revision provides that four of the eight hours of continuing education required of brokers each year shall consist of the Update Course, except that brokers-in-charge shall complete the “Broker-in-Charge Update Course” prescribed in the proposed amendment to A .0110.
Extensions of Time to Complete Continuing Education (A .1709) –a request for extension of time to complete CE must be made by a broker on active status and submitted not later than June 10 of the license year for which the extension is sought.
Real Estate Prelicensing Education – Schools
Withdrawal or Denial of Approval (C .0105) –lowers the threshold below which the Commission may take formal disciplinary action in response to the substandard performance of a school’s or instructor’s students taking the license examination for the first time from 70% to 50% for any two of the previous five annual reporting periods; lowers the substandard performance threshold for a school’s first-time examination candidates from 70% to 50% for that portion of the rule authorizing the Commission to discipline a school for failing to provide a requested plan for corrective action.
Real Estate Prelicensing Education – Prelicensing and Postlicensing Instructors:
Denial or Withdrawal of Approval (C .0608) –lowers the threshold below which the Commission may take formal disciplinary action against the prelicensing and postlicensing instructor in response to the substandard performance of the instructor’s first-time examination candidates from 70% to 50% for any two of the previous five annual reporting periods; lowers the substandard performance threshold for an instructor’s first-time examination candidates from 70% to 50% for that portion of the rule authorizing the Commission to discipline an instructor for failing to provide a requested plan for corrective action.
Real Estate Continuing Education – Update Course Instructors:
Application and Criteria for Original Approval (E .0203) –requires Update Course instructor applicants to take the Commission’s Update Instructor Seminar for the license year in which the applicant’s approval would be effective prior to approval being issued. If the applicant fails to take the seminar within six months after filing the application for approval, the application will be cancelled.
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.
By Pamela R. Rorie, Continuing Education Officer
An eager crowd of real estate instructors, school officials and publisher representatives attended the 2014 Real Estate Educators Conference in Raleigh on March 17-18 at the Hilton North Raleigh/Midtown. The Commission-sponsored meeting drew 170 participants from across the state.
Miriam Baer, Commission Executive Director, kicked off the conference with a “Commission Update” in which she gave an overview of the past year’s activities and initiatives accomplished by its staff. Baer noted the new Commission Web site, proposed changes in educational requirements for brokers-in-charge who may now take an elective course as part of their annual continuing education requirement, and a library of new videos to inform and instruct brokers and consumers.
Bruce Moyer, the Commission’s new Director of Education and Licensing, addressed the Conference for the first time. He succeeds Larry Outlaw, who retired effective March 1, after 35 years of service.
A demonstration of the Commission’s newly re-designed Web site was presented by Jake Gore, the Commission’s Network Administrator. Gore emphasized the site’s improved search capabilities and the structure of the new Home page from which visitors can more easily navigate to other areas of the site.
A highlight of the first morning session was the Instructor Development Workshop conducted by Vicki Ferneyhough, DREI. Ferneyhough provided instructor attendees with various strategies and suggestions for teaching all types of adult learners. She stressed the importance of learning new instructional methods, staying current in the profession and constant self-evaluation in order to obtain superior results as an instructor.
During the first day’s luncheon, the North Carolina Real Estate Educators Association (NCREEA) held its spring meeting, officiated by President Brian Pate. Immediate Past President Kim Stotesbury conducted the annual awards presentation, which included this year an “Emeritus Award” presented to former Commission Director of Education and Licensing Larry Outlaw for his outstanding contributions to real estate education.
The Association presented its “Program of the Year” award to Dr. Deborah Longfor her continuing education elective course, From Heaven to Hell: Air, Surface and Subsurface Rights., and its “Educator of the Year” award to Tom Mangum, Vice President and Director of the HPW Real Estate School.
Mangum was also the receipient of the Commission’s Billie J. Mercer Excellence in Education Award, presented by Commission Chairman Everett “Vic” Knight. The award is given annually in memory of former Commission member and chairperson, Billie Mercer, who was especially dedicated to the cause of real estate education. The names of all award winners are engraved on the Mercer Award cup that is displayed in the Commission’s lobby. Commission members Cindy Chandler and George Bell were also in attendance for the award presentation.
The afternoon session began with NCREEA President Brian Pate giving a demonstration of NCREEA’s improved website. New Commission Education and Licensing Director Bruce Moyer then discussed changes and improvements within the Division.
The first day’s program concluded with the popular “Legal Issues, Hot Topics and Open Forum” segment featuring the Commission’s Director of Regulatory Affairs Janet Thoren, Assistant Director Charlene Moody, and Deputy Legal Counsel Fred Moreno. They discussed various legal topics including a case law update, and answered many questions from conference attendees.
Anita Burt, Education & Examination Officer opened day two of the conference with a Pre- and Postlicensing Education Update, in which she discussed proposed amendments to several rules impacting the pre- and postlicensing programs, and also recognized instructors and schools exhibiting superior exam performance during the previous license year. Dr. Lawrence J. Fabrey, Senior Vice President of Psychometrics at AMP (Applied Measurement Professionals, Inc.), discussed the examination development process as well as how North Carolina exam candidates compare with candidates nation-wide.
Pamela Rorie, Continuing Education Officer spoke to the group about various proposed rule amendments affecting the Continuing Education Program, and reminded CE instructors and sponsors of upcoming responsibilities and deadlines.
Legal Education Officer Tricia Moylan discussed with participants a summary of the remaining proposed amendments to Commission Rules, and informed attendees of the proposed topics for the 2014-2015 Update course.
The conference concluded with a very informative and highly entertaining presentation by Matt Davies and Len Elder, DREI on “Technology in the Classroom.”
The Commission thanks North Carolina’s real estate educators for their continued interest and support, and congratulates Larry Outlaw, Tom Mangum, and Deborah Long for their achievements.
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.
(Real estate brokers must conduct their business in accordance with a growing body of laws and rules. The Commission’s Web site enables compliance with many of these legal requirements by providing timely, convenient access to the information that is essential to a property manager’s business. Certain violations of laws and rules arise frequently in property management, including the handling of tenant security deposits. This article discusses how you can use the Commission’s Web site to properly manage this aspect of your business.)
A landlord asks you to serve as a rental agent, a buyer wants to acquire a rental property, a prospective tenant seeks a rental, an owner of rental property is interested in selling – each situation can involve the care and handling of tenant security deposits, if only to give your client information about what is required.
How do you as a busy, always-pressed-for-time, real estate broker remain informed and current on this important aspect of your brokerage business? How can you accurately and consistently serve the needs of your clients?
North Carolina state law, which governs the use of tenant security deposits, and Commission rules are your primary sources of information. You can maintain the key elements of each for quick, easy reference on your computer and through your mobile devices.
One key document you will want to obtain is the Tenant Security Deposit Act, (Chapter 42 of the North Carolina General Statutes, Article 6). Access it directly with the link (if you are reading this from a digital file) or through the Commission Web site, (Home page: Publications/Bulletins (2007-2014)/May 2014). Alternatively, you can find all of the North Carolina General Statutes at www.ncleg.net. Once you have the link on your computer or mobile device, you may want to save it and the links that follow in this article in one convenient location for future access.
The Tenant Security Deposit Act consists of seven sections, summarized as follows:
§ 42-50. Deposits from the tenant.
The deposits must be placed in an insured North Carolina bank unless the landlord provides the tenant with a bond.
§ 42-51. Permitted uses of the deposit.
There are eight permitted uses by a landlord including nonpayment of rent, damage to premises, damages for nonfulfillment of rental period, unpaid bills that become a lien against the property, costs of re-renting after a breach, costs of tenant property removal, court costs and certain fees defined in § 42-46 (part of the Residential Rental Agreements Act). In addition, this section also defines the amount of the deposit that can be charged by a landlord depending upon the length of the tenancy.
§ 42-52. Landlord’s obligations.
The landlord must itemize and refund any remaining deposit within prescribed times (30 or 60 days, depending upon the circumstances).
§ 42-53. Pet deposits.
An additional fee may be charged for pets kept by the tenant on the premises.
§ 42-54. Transfer of dwelling units.
When a landlord’s interest in the property is terminated “whether by sale, assignment, death, appointment of receiver or otherwise….” the landlord must transfer the deposit to the new owner, or return the balance to the tenant, after making any lawful deductions and giving notice to the tenant.
§ 42-55. Remedies.
The tenant is given legal standing to pursue specific remedies if the landlord fails to comply with the law relating to security deposits.
§ 42-56. Application of Article.
The article applies to all persons, firms, or corporations engaged in the business of renting or managing residential dwelling units, excluding single rooms, on a weekly, monthly or annual basis.
Commission rules specify acceptable methods of handling and accounting for trust money, including tenant security deposits. If a North Carolina brokerage firm is holding the funds of others (whether deposits, rents, homeowner association money, or other funds), the broker must keep records in compliance with three Commission rules, all located in Chapter 58 of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Title 21, Occupational Licensing Boards and Commissions, Subchapter 58A – Real Estate Commission. These three provisions are A. 0116 (Handling of Trust Monday), A. 0117 (Accounting for Trust Money), and A. 0118 (Trust Money Belonging to Property Owners’ Associations).
Commission rules can be accessed through the links above or through the Commission Web site (Home page: Resources/Law/Rules – a portal to the Office of Administrative Hearings Web site). They can be saved as PDFs, HTML (text readable in your Internet browser) or DOC files (Word format).
The Tenant Security Deposit Act and the three Commission rules form the essential core of what you need to know and understand about this topic. A variety of other Commission resources provides further elaboration.
There is a complete description of trust accounting requirements through the Commission’s Web site in Handling, Accounting of Trust Money Now Explained in Three New Rules from the May 2013 Real Estate Bulletin. Each rule is summarized in the article and there is a separate outline of the types of records which must be kept. For example, a tenant security deposit check should be noted in a journal, a property transaction ledger, and a bank statement, and the bank deposit ticket and a copy of the deposit check should be retained as well among the records.
One of the latest Commission videos, Residential Tenant Security Deposits, supplements these materials with discussion of security deposit limits, deposit requirements such as notification to tenant of the bank location, recordkeeping in journals and ledgers, and permitted uses of the deposit.
Selected Property Management Issues, 2009-10 Update Course (Home page/Publications/Update BICAR Topics) and the Commission brochure, Questions and Answers on: Tenant Security Deposits, provide an expanded explanation of tenant security deposits. The latter, available free from the Commission, is written primarily for tenants and elaborates on the Act. For example, the brochure addresses the effect on a tenant security deposit including when property is vacated early, the tenant is unable to pay rent, or the property is transferred to new management or a new owner.
A companion brochure, Questions and Answers on: Renting Residential Real Estate, covers various aspects of the topic primarily for the consumer. It also references the handling of a tenant security deposit including when a property is rented with several occupants and one leaves.
Requirements to Remember in the Landlord Tenant Act from the October 2011 Real Estate Bulletin discusses specific points in the Act including security deposit accounting and the voiding of a landlord’s rights in the case of willful failure of a landlord to comply with the deposit, bond, or notice requirements of the Tenant Security Act.
An article in the February 2014 Real Estate Bulletin, New Brokers-in-Charge Should Review Trust Accounts When Taking Control, suggests that new brokers-in-charge examine ledgers to determine the nature of funds on deposit such as tenant security deposits and to check to see that copies of checks have been retained.
A new Commission brochure, Questions and Answers on: N.C. Military Personnel Residential Lease Termination, and an article, Special Landlord and Tenant Laws for Military Personnel, in the May 2013 Real Estate Bulletin, address special provisions in the law for military personnel, for example, when a lease is terminated early due to change of duty station or other reasons.
All of the above mentioned laws, rules and publications may be copied to brokers’ computers, or links maintained on mobile devices. For convenient access, they can be maintained in a separate folder and shared as the need may arise with clients, prospective tenants, and landlords.
| Commission Resources/LinksTenant Security Deposits | |
| Tenant Security Deposit Act | Tenant Security Deposits Act |
| Commission Trust Account Rules | A. 0116, A. 0117, A. 0118 |
| May 2013 Real Estate Bulletin | Handling, Accounting of Trust Money Now Explained in Three New Rules |
| Video | Residential Tenant Security Deposits |
| 2009-10 Update Course | Selected Property Management Issues, 2009-10 Update Course |
| Commission brochure | Questions and Answers on: Tenant Security Deposits |
| Commission brochure | Questions and Answers on: Renting Residential Real Estate |
| October 2011 Real Estate Bulletin | Requirements to Remember in the Landlord Tenant Act |
| February 2014 Real Estate Bulletin | New Brokers-in-Charge Should Review Trust Accounts When Taking Control |
| Commission brochure | Questions and Answers on: N.C. Military Personnel Residential Lease Termination |
| May 2013 Real Estate Bulletin | Special Landlord and Tenant Laws for Military Personnel |
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.
Check out the three newest additions to the Commission Video Library on its Web site, www.ncrec.gov:
Spot Audits – describes the process of reviewing brokerage firm trust accounting in unannounced visits.
North Carolina Residential Tenant Security Act – outlines the basic requirements of the Act, which may be accessed with this link and scrolling down to § 42-50. (For more on this subject, see pages 4 and 5 of this issue of the Real Estate Bulletin.
What Brokers, Buyers and Sellers Need to Know About Fracking – This video supplements an article, Fracking: What Every Agent Needs to Know,in the October 2012 Real Estate Bulletin.
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.
NANCY B. BRADY (Pinnacle) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Ms. Brady for a period of five years effective March 19, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Ms. Brady violated provisions of the Real Estate Law and Commission rules. Ms. Brady neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
MICHAEL KENNETH BROOKS (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission revoked the broker license of Mr. Brooks effective March 19, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Brooks, acting as property manager for clients of his own sole proprietorship, failed to designate himself as broker-in-charge; that Mr. Brooks managed several properties without the knowledge or consent of the broker-in-charge of the firm with which he was affiliated; that Mr. Brooks failed to maintain trust accounts for security deposits and rents he collected while managing properties through his sole proprietorship; and that Mr. Books failed to respond to multiple letters of inquiries from the Commission.
LYNETTE MARIE GAVALIER (Chapel Hill) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Ms. Gavalier effective February 1, 2014. The Commission found that Ms. Gavalier listed a property and mistakenly advertised it on her Web site with photos of a neighboring subdivison’s amenities, which included an indoor lap pool and a fitness area; that a buyer who was out of the country during negotiations, but was present for the closing, closed on the property; that the amenties for the property subdivision did not include an indoor pool and the exercise area was different than the one represented on her Web site.
RONALD CLIFFORD HALSTEAD (Murphy) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Halstead for a period of six months effective February 1, 2014. One month of the suspension was active with the remainder stayed for a probationary period of five months. The Commission found that Mr. Halstead, acting as a dual agent in a real estate transaction, failed to inform the closing attorney or lender that the buyers had signed a separate promissory note to pay the seller a sum of money in addition to the property sales price; and that the separate promissory note was not reflected on the HUD-1 settlement statement.
FREDERICK P. HILTZ (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Hiltz for a period of two years effective April 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of three years. The Commission found that Mr. Hiltz, acting as broker-in-charge of a property management firm, managed a homeowners’ association and was authorized by the association to initiate foreclosure proceedings against an owner for non-payment of dues; that Mr. Hiltz discovered recording issues which could prevent the mortgage deed of trust from attaching to the subject property and that Mr. Hiltz failed to disclose this fact to his client, leading the association to approve Mr. Hiltz’s request to bid on the property on his own behalf; and that Mr. Hiltz directed the foreclosure attorney to issue revenue stamps indicating that the property had been purchased at full market value of $50,000 when it had actually been purchased for $10,000. The Commission also found that Mr. Hiltz reimbursed the association’s foreclosure attorney fees in 2010 following the sale but did not pay the $8,663 dues owed by the foreclosed owner until January 2012.
HILTZ MANAGEMENT CO. INC. (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the firm license of Hiltz Management Co. for a period of two years effective April 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of three years. The Commission found that the broker-in-charge of Hiltz Management Co., a property management firm, managed a homeowners’ association and was authorized by the association to initiate foreclosure proceedings against an owner for non-payment of dues; that the firm’s broker-in-charge discovered recording issues which could prevent the mortgage deed of trust from attaching to the subject property and that the firm’s broker-in-charge failed to disclose this fact to his client, leading the association to approve the firm’s broker-in-charge’s request to bid on the property on his own behalf; and that the firm’s broker-in-charge directed the foreclosure attorney to issue revenue stamps indicating that the property had been purchased at full market value of $50,000 when it had actually been purchased for $10,000. The Commission also found that the firm’s broker-in-charge reimbursed the association’s foreclosure attorney fees in 2010 following the sale but did not pay the $8,663 dues owed by the foreclosed owner until January 2012.
STANLEY BERNARD JONES (Raleigh) – Following a hearing, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Jones for a period of two years effective September 24, 2013. Three months of the suspension were active with the remainder stayed through the end of the suspension period on certain conditions to be satisfied by June 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Jones failed to retain adequate trust account records and failed to safeguard trust monies in his possession; that Mr. Jones performed activities constituting the unauthorized practice of law, including the creation and amendment of a real estate contract; that Mr. Jones commingled his principal’s money with his own and failed to deposit money he received in a fiduciary capacity into a trust account; that Mr. Jones failed to obtain a written property management agreement with his landlord client; that Mr. Jones advertised properties for lease as a provisional broker without the consent of his BIC; that Mr. Jones failed to retain records of rental transactions; and that Mr. Jones operated a sole proprietorship without designating a BIC.
ASHLEY PARKER LANCE (Charlotte) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Ms. Lance for a period of two years effective April 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension on certain conditions. The Commission found that Ms. Lance, acting as an associate broker of her real estate brokerage firm and under the direct supervision and orders of her broker-in-charge, met with clients without providing or reviewing the Working With Real Estate Agents brochure. The Commission also found that Ms. Lance utilized form lease with option to purchase contracts that violate North Carolina law and Commission rules.
PETER C. MACE (Pinehurst) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Mace for a period of six months effective April 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension on certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. Mace, acting as a real estate developer and real estate broker, failed to disclose material facts related to the sale of residential property in which he had an ownership interest.
NANCY BRADY REALTY, INC. (Pinnacle) – The Commission accepted the voluntary surrender of the broker license of Nancy Brady Realty for a period of five years effective March 14, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Nancy Brady Realty violated provisions of the Real Estate Law and Commission rules. Nancy Brady Realty neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
PEARTREE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT (Elizabeth City) – The Commission accepted the permanent surrender of the firm license of Peartree Property Management effective April 16, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Peartree Property Management violated provisions of the Real Estate Law and Commission rules. Peartree Property Management neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
RENTAL PROPERY MANAGEMENT, INC. (Wilson) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the firm license of Rental Property Management for a period of three years effective March 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension for a probationary period of three years on certain conditions. The Commission found that the broker license of Rental Property Management went on inactive status in July 2011 and the firm continued operating without a designated broker-in-charge and qualifying broker until March 2012; that the Commission conducted an audit of the firm’s trust accounts and found a shortage of $21,300 in the tenant security deposit account and $11,800 in the rental accounts; that the firm failed to maintain rents and tenant security deposits in a trust account; that the firm failed to maintain trust account records in compliance with the Real Estate License Law and Commission rules; that the firm engaged in deficit spending; and that in March 2013, the firm again engaged in brokerage services without a designated broker-in-charge or qualifying broker after its qualifying broker and broker-in-charge left the company.
MARIO ROBERTO RUIZ-CEA (Kernersville) – By Consent, the Commission reprimanded Mr. Ruiz-Cea effective Mach 1, 2014. The Commission found that Mr. Ruiz-Cea represented a buyer client in a real estate transaction, but failed to enter into a written buyer agency agreement with his buyer client; that Mr. Ruiz-Cea failed to provide his client with the Working With Real Estate Agents brochure; that in April 2013, Mr. Ruiz-Cea submitted an offer to purchase on behalf of his buyer client for a property, the seller responded with a counter offer, and Mr. Ruiz-Cea affirmed his buyer client’s acceptance without first obtaining his client’s signature on the contract.
DEBRA C. SWAIN (Elizabeth City) – The Commission accepted the permanent surrender of the broker license of Ms. Swain effective April 16, 2014. The Commission dismissed without prejudice allegations that Ms. Swain violated provisions of the Real Estate Law and Commission rules. Ms. Swain neither admitted nor denied misconduct.
CRAIG STEVEN STURDIVANT (Sanford) – By Consent, the Commission suspended the broker license of Mr. Sturdivant for a period of six months effective March 1, 2014. The Commission then stayed the suspension on certain conditions. The Commission found that Mr. Sturdivant acted as the president of a real estate brokerage and property management firm; that a buyer entered into a 20-year contract for deed in July 2008 to purchase a property from the firm; that the buyer paid the firm a $10,000 down payment and $1,000 monthly payments; that the lender foreclosed on the property in July 2011; and that another agent in the firm continued to collect the monthly payments from the buyer until January 2012.
This article came from the May 2014-Vol45-1 edition of the bulletin.