Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs. JAMES C. VINSON, 76-001816 (1976)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 76-001816 Visitors: 24
Judges: KENNETH G. OERTEL
Agency: Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Latest Update: May 11, 1977
Summary: Resondent should be issued reprimand for forging a contract to get financing when he could have gotten more by appraisal.
76-1816.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 76-1816

)

JAMES C. VINSON, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


This matter was brought to hearing on an Administrative Complaint filed by the Florida Real Estate Commission charging the Defendant, James C. Vinson, with obtaining a mortgage on a piece of real property based upon a forged and fraudulent contract of sale in order to achieve a higher amount of financing.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Richard J. R. Parkinson, Esquire For Respondent: Joseph R. Park, Esquire

  1. The evidence presented in this case clearly established that Vinson purchased a piece of real property in Clearwater, Florida for $55,000 in January of 1975. On or about February 20, 1975, Vinson prepared a contract dealing with the same property which showed a purchase price of $79,500. This contract was a forgery in that he signed the purported names of the seller and witness. Based on this fraudulent contract Vinson applied for financing at Clearwater Federal Savings and Loan Association. He received a $63,600 mortgage.


  2. Unbeknownst to Vinson he would have received greater financing had he not based his mortgage application on the forged contract, but had gone and asked for financing based solely on an appraisal. Clearwater Federal Savings and Loan Association's mortgage policy was that mortgages were based upon a certain percentage of either the appraisal or the property or the sales contract, whichever was lower. The appraisal of the property was in excess of the forged contract and had Vinson known this he could have achieved even greater financing by seeking a mortgage based solely on an appraisal.


  3. In any case, the above facts are not in dispute and Vinson testified that he acknowledged doing the above, but did not do it for any wrongful reason. The loan was repaid shortly after it was granted. Vinson acknowledged the impropriety of his actions and appeared to be genuinely contrite over the whole incident.


Considering all the facts and circumstances which surround this case, it is RECOMMENDED:

That Vinson be given a letter of reprimand from the Florida Real Estate Commission.


DONE and ORDERED this 11th day of May, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida.


KENNETH G. OERTEL, Director

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building

2009 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9675


Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 11th day of May, 1977.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Richard J. R. Parkinson, Esquire Florida Real Estate Commission 2699 Lee Road

Winter Park, Florida 32789


Joseph R. Park, Esquire

20 North Ft. Harrison Avenue

P.0. Box 1368

Clearwater, Florida 33517


Docket for Case No: 76-001816
Issue Date Proceedings
May 11, 1977 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 76-001816
Issue Date Document Summary
May 11, 1977 Recommended Order Resondent should be issued reprimand for forging a contract to get financing when he could have gotten more by appraisal.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer