STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL ) REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ) ESTATE, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) CASE NO. 87-2082
) JOHN GRIFFIN BLANC and SANDRA )
S. KIRKLAND, )
)
Respondents. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
A hearing was held in this case in Key Largo, Florida, on March 15, 1988, before Arnold H. Pollock. The issue for consideration was whether Respondents' licenses as registered real estate salesmen should be disciplined because of the alleged misconduct outlined in the Administrative Complaint.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: Arthur R. Shell, Jr., Esquire
Senior Attorney Division of Real Estate
400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802
For Respondents: John G. Blanc, pro se
17501 West Highway 98
Panama City Beach, Florida 32469
Sandra S. Kirkland-Anderson, pro se Post Office Box 9264
Panama City Beach, Florida 32407 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
On March 30, 1987, Petitioner, Department of Professional Regulation, filed an Administrative Complaint against the Respondents alleging in one count each that Respondents were guilty of fraud, misrepresentation, concealment, false promises, false pretenses, dishonest dealing by trick, scheme or device, culpable negligence and breach of trust in a business transaction in violation of Subsection 475.25(1)(b), Florida Statutes. Respondents both denied the allegation and requested formal hearing and the case was originally set for September 24, 1987, in Naples, Florida. However, Petitioner twice moved for continuances which were granted with the case finally being set for hearing on March 15, 1988, in Key Largo at which time it was held as scheduled.
At the hearing Petitioner presented the testimony of Dorothy and William A. McKie, purchasers of a time share condominium from the Respondent Blanc; Joyce
Berta, a licensed real estate broker; and Benjamin F. Steel, Sr., a licensed real estate salesman. Petitioner introduced also Petitioner's Exhibits 1 through 4. Respondent Kirkland and Blanc both testified in their own behalf and offered Respondent's Exhibits A, B and C.
Subsequent to the hearing, no transcript of proceeding was furnished.
Neither party submitted proposed findings of fact.
FINDINGS OF FACT
At all times pertinent to the allegations contained herein, Respondents were licensed real estate salesmen in the State of Florida, with Mr. Blanc's license being 0406481 and Ms. Kirkland's license being 0399466. The Division of Real Estate is a state government licensing and regulatory agency charged with the responsibility of regulating the practice of real estate in this state.
In November, 1985, Mr. and Mrs. William A. McKie were owners of Week 43 in Unit 1 of a time share condominium located at the Anchorage Resort and Yacht Club in Key Largo, Florida. About that time, they received a card issued by the Florida Bay Club to visit a time share condominium there. Because they were somewhat disappointed in the condition of their Anchorage unit, they went to see the Florida Bay Club facility and met with Respondent Kirkland who took them on a tour of the facility and the model apartment. Mrs. McKie was quite impressed with it, but indicated she could not afford it, because she and her husband already owned a time share unit at the Anchorage. When told that, Ms. Kirkland introduced the McKies to Respondent Blanc, who in the course of his sales presentation, suggested that the McKies use their ownership at the Anchorage as a trade-in worth $4,000 off of the in excess of $11,000 price of the Florida Bay Club unit. The McKies agreed and signed certain documents incident to the purchase including a worksheet, purchase agreement, disclosure agreement, and settlement statement, all prepared by Respondent Blanc.
The worksheet reflected that the unit being purchased by the McKies, Week 44 in Unit A-5, had a purchase price of $6,500 toward which the McKies made a down payment of $650 by three separate charges to their Master Card and Visa cards, two for $300 each and one for $50. This left a mortgage balance to be financed of $5,850 payable for 7 years at 15 1/2 percent with monthly payments of $114.54. No reference was made in the worksheet to a trade in of the Anchorage unit. The purchase agreement also signed by the McKies and by Respondent Kirkland for the Florida Bay Club reflects a purchase price of $6,500 with a down payment of $650. The truth in lending form reflects that the amount financed would be $5,850 at 15.5% resulting in a finance charge of $3,771.36 with a total monthly payment amount of $9,621.36 which, when added to the $650 deposit, showed a total sales price of $10,271.36. The settlement statement signed by the McKies reflects a sales price of $6,500 with a $650 deposit. At no place, on any of the documentation, is the $4,000 trade-in for the Anchorage unit reflected.
As a part of the transaction and at the suggestion of Respondent Blanc, the McKies were to sign a quitclaim deed to him as the representative of the seller to receive credit for the $4,000 trade-in. The documents, except for the quitclaim deed, were signed by the McKies on their first visit to Florida Bay Club on November 17, 1985. Mrs. McKie does not recall either Respondent signing the documentation, but there is evidence that Ms. Kirkland signed the purchase agreement and the worksheet and Mr. Blanc approved the worksheet. Neither the
disclosure statement, the settlement statement nor the quitclaim deed, which was prepared by Respondent, Blanc, and furnished to the McKies on their second visit, was signed by either Respondent.
The McKies went back to Florida Bay Club approximately a week later to sign for the prize they had been notified they had won and to sign the quitclaim deed, which had not been ready for them on their first visit. Respondent Blanc explained what the quitclaim deed was for and according to both McKies, they would not have purchased the property at Florida Bay Club had they not been able to trade-in their Anchorage unit. They definitely could not afford to pay for both units, a fact which was repeatedly explained to Respondents on both visits.
Mrs. McKie believed that when she signed the quitclaim deed to the Anchorage unit, she would no longer be responsible for making payments there and in fact, the McKies notified the Anchorage Resort Club that Respondent Blanc had assumed their Week at the Anchorage, a fact which was confirmed by the Anchorage to Mr. Blanc by letter dated February 13, 1986. It is further noted that on January 30, 1986, Ms. Berta, general manager of the Florida Bay Club, by letter of even date, notified Mr. Blanc who was no longer an employee of Florida Bay, that the McKies' payment book, invoices for taxes due on the Anchorage property, and the quitclaim deed were being forwarded to him as evidence of the change of ownership of the Anchorage Resort unit from the McKies to Respondent Blanc. In this letter, Blanc was requested to notify the Anchorage of the change so the McKies would not be dunned for continuing payments.
At the closing of the Florida Bay unit, when Mrs. McKie and her husband signed the quitclaim deed, Respondent Blanc told her she would continue to get payment notices from the Anchorage while the transfer was being processed, but she should bring those payment notices to him at the Florida Bay Club and he would take care of them.
When Mrs. McKie received the first notice, she brought it to the Florida Bay Club to give to Mr. Blanc, but he was no longer located there. On this visit, she spoke to Ms. Berta, who advised her that the Florida Bay Club did not take trades. Ms. Berta called Respondent Blanc at his new place of business by phone in Mrs. McKie's presence and Respondent indicated at that time that he would buy the Anchorage unit himself and assume the payments. As a result, Mrs. McKie sent the delinquent notices to him at his new place of business, Gulf Stream Manor. In the meantime, she continued to make her new payments at the Florida Bay Club.
Notwithstanding Respondent Blanc's agreement to assume payments, Mrs. McKie continued to receive mortgage payment delinquent notices from the bank for the Anchorage unit. During later negotiations with the bank regarding this, Mrs. McKie was told that she would still be responsible for making the payments even if Respondent Blanc took over and didn't pay and as a result, in order to relieve herself from this impending burden, she made arrangements to pay off the entire amount due for the Anchorage unit.
After that she made several efforts to get Respondent Blanc to pay her back for the amount paid. Respondent Blanc agreed to make the payments and said he would pay the taxes on the unit, but he never reimbursed the McKies for any of the amount they had to pay.
The McKies now own the Anchorage unit and have worked out a settlement agreement with the Florida Bay Club to get out of the responsibility for the unit there.
Review of the quitclaim deed in question, prepared by Respondent Blanc and signed by the McKies, reflects that the McKies are both the grantors and grantees of the property and that Respondent Blanc's name nowhere appears on the document. It is of no force and effect.
Respondent contends that when the McKies indicated they were unable to purchase a new unit since they still had a prior unit to pay for, relying on his understanding that the marketing organization selling the Florida Bay Club units had in the past taken a unit in trade, he discussed the matter with his supervisor who advised that he could offer up to $4,000 in trade on the unit.
In order to do this, Respondent Blanc had to price the new unit at $10,500 and credit the McKies with $4,000. However, none of the documentation shows this was ever done. At no place on any of the documentations is the $4,000 trade-in referenced. It is clear the offer of a trade-in was a sham to induce the McKies to purchase a unit at Florida Bay Club. Ms. Berta, who was manager at Florida Bay Club at the time in question, indicated that no trade-ins were ever taken by the club. The prior trade-in referenced by Mr. Blanc was a unit which was completely paid for as opposed the McKies' which still had a substantial outstanding balance on it.
Respondent Kirkland who was not a party to any of the negotiations subsequent to her initial interview with the McKies indicates that she "probably" quoted the McKies a price of $10,500. When Mrs. McKie indicated that they could not afford such a high price, she turned them over to Mr. Blanc who thereafter handled the entire transaction.
Respondent Blanc tells a somewhat different story about the reaction of the McKies when his failure to assume responsibility for the trade-in unit at the Anchorage Bay Club came to light. He indicates that it was never intended that he would take title to this unit at first. The trade in was to be absorbed by the marketing company, Resort Sales International, for whom he worked, and he assumed, when he left the following week to go to a different facility, the company would follow through with its agreement to assume the McKie's Week at the Anchorage. He was quite surprised, he contends, to learn that this had not been done and since he wanted a unit in the Key Largo area anyway, he agreed to then assume it personally after first offering Mrs. McKie the opportunity to back out of the purchase. When she said that she wanted to be at Florida Bay Club, he was sent the payment books and the deed. He called the bank to notify them that he was going to assume responsibility for the loan, but the bank would give him no information regarding it and the bank official, Ms. Brown, was adamant in her representation that the McKies could not quitclaim deed the property to him. No reason was given for this, however.
Mr. Blanc claims he made a series of telephone calls between January
30 and March 31, 1986, in an attempt to straighten out the difficulty involved. These included sixteen calls to Ms. Berta, eight calls to his former supervisor at Resort Sales, four calls to the Anchorage, three calls to the bank and three calls to Mrs. McKie.
Mrs. McKie denies receiving calls from the Respondent and contends that her numerous calls to him remained unanswered. In a call he made after she paid off the loan on the Anchorage and settled with Florida Bay Club for approximately $2,183, Mrs. McKie advised Blanc to forget about it, that they were tired of messing with him and with the property. As a result, he admittedly gave up and did and heard nothing more regarding the property until he was contacted by a DPR investigator.
On January 30, 1988, Mr. Blanc offered to buy Mrs. McKie's unit at the Anchorage for $2,900 which was exactly the amount owed on the property when she paid it off. She refused to accept that offer since she had paid $6,800 for the unit initially.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of the proceedings.
Under the provisions of Section 475.25(1)(b), Florida Statutes, the Division is authorized to discipline the license of a real estate professional for fraud, misrepresentation, concealment, false promises, false pretenses, dishonest dealing by trick, scheme or device, culpable negligence and breach of trust in a business transaction.
With regard to Respondent Kirkland, there is insufficient evidence to establish that this Respondent is guilty of any of the misconduct alleged in the specification.
The situation with regards to Respondent Blanc is substantially different. This appears to be a blatant case of promising a prospective customer anything they want to hear in order to make a sale. Mr. Blanc's representations that a $10,500 unit was being sold for $6,500 with a $4,000 trade-in is unsupported by any concrete evidence. He is a professional real estate salesman and should well be aware of how to accurately reflect a $4,000 deposit. The fact that none of the documentation prepared by Mr. Blanc for the McKies to sign reflected a down payment, when coupled with the fact that the quitclaim deed he prepared was a complete nullity reflecting a transfer from the McKies to the McKies, taken together, clearly demonstrates he never had any intention of assuming responsibility for the Anchorage unit owned by the McKies. Mr. Blanc is guilty of misrepresentation, false pretense, and concealment as well as false promises and dishonest dealing by trick, scheme or device. In fact, the only thing not shown is culpable negligence.
His subsequent efforts to purchase the McKies $6,800 Anchorage unit for $2,900 adds to nothing to his protestations of good faith. This is the type of professional misconduct intended by the Legislature to be prevented when it passed a statute enabling the Commission to discipline the license of professionals engaged in misconduct. However, because this is the only incident in which Respondent Blanc has been shown to be involved, a mitigation factor should be considered in assessing an appropriate penalty.
Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is, therefore:
RECOMMENDED that the Administrative Complaint against Respondent Sandra Kirkland be dismissed and that Respondent Blanc's license as a real estate salesman in Florida be suspended for six months.
RECOMMENDED in Tallahassee this 19th day of April, 1988.
ARNOLD H. POLLOCK
Hearing Officer
Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building
2009 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550
(904) 488-9675
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 19th day of April, 1988.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Arthur R. Shell, Jr., Esquire Darlene F. Keller Department of Professional Acting Executive Director
Regulation DPR, Division of Real Estate Division of Real Estate Post Office Box 1900
Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32801 Orlando, Florida 32801
Sandra S. Kirkland Post Office Box 9264
Panama City, Florida 32407
John G. Blanc
17501 West Highway 98 Panama City, Florida 32407
Issue Date | Proceedings |
---|---|
Apr. 19, 1988 | Recommended Order (hearing held , 2013). CASE CLOSED. |
Issue Date | Document | Summary |
---|---|---|
Jul. 19, 1988 | Agency Final Order | |
Apr. 19, 1988 | Recommended Order | Salesman who falsely agreed to accept property in trade but who never did so guilty of misrepresentation supporting discipline. |