«Sh ¢ STATE OF FLORIDA a3 te #m DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION” £3 FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD, / Ay 8 fo FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & “PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, uy DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, oS Petitioner, v. CASE NO. 9983399 . + 9983709 DANA MARC DISANTO, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against Dana Mare Disanto (“Respondent"), and alleges: ~ ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT 1. Petitioner is a state government licensing and regulatory agency charged with the responsibility and duty to prosecute Administrative Complaints pursuant to the laws of the State of Florida, including Section 20.165 and Chapters 120, 455 and 475 of the Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated thereunder. 2. Respondent is currently a Florida state-certified residential real estate appraiser having been issued license RD0000872 in accordance with Chapter 475 Part I of the Florida Statutes. 3. The last license the State issued to Respondent was as a state-certified residential real estate appraiser at 1296 Camellia Lane, Weston, Florida 33326. 4. Onor about October 27, 1998, Respondent developed and communicated an appraisal FDBPR v. Dana Marc Disanto Case No. 9983399 Administrative Complaint report (Report) for property commonly known as 1318 Silverado Drive, North Lauderdale, Florida (subject property). A copy of the Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 1. 5. During the course of the official investigation, Petitioner obtained an expert review of the Report. A copy of the review is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. 6. The Report included comparable sales numbered one through three, which were outside of the subject property’s subdivision. These comparable sales were smaller than units within the subject’s subdivision, and the units within the subdivision were of similar age and lot size to the subject. 7. The Report included four comparable sales with lot sizes approximately twice as large as that of the subject property. 8. The subject property is an attached home without a garage. Comparable sales one through three are detached homes with garages on separate lots. 9, The Respondent failed to adequately adjust the comparable sales for size, age, lot size, and condition to the subject property. 10. The sales utilized by Respondent in the Report are therefore not comparable sales. 11. Comparable sales existed in the subject property’s subdivision that Respondent could have utilized in preparing the appraisal report. 12. These errors resulted in overstated estimated market value. FDBPR v. Dana Marc Disanto Case No. 9983399 Administrative Complaint COUNT I ~” Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (1998) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes (1997). ADDITIONAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT 13. On or about March 16, 1999, Respondent developed and communicated an appraisal report (Report 2) for property commonly known as 812 NE 92 Street, Miami Shores, Florida 33138 (subject property 2). A copy of Report 2 is attached hereto and incorporated herein ‘as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 3. 14. During the course of the official investigation, Petitioner obtained an expert review of the Report. See Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. 15. Sales within the subject property’s subdivision ranged typically from $106,000 to $142,500 from December 1997 to May 1999. 16. Respondent used sales in the Report’s Sales Comparison Approach that were from . outside the subject’s subdivision. 17. The Respondent failed to adequately adjust the comparable sales for size, house living area, and pool to the subject property. 18. The Respondent failed to adequately adjust for the garage in comparable sale number three. 19. The Respondent failed to list and adjust for the garage in comparable sale number four. 20. The sales utilized by Respondent in the Report are therefore not comparable sales. 3 FDBPR v. Dana Marc Disanto Case No. 9983399 Administrative Complaint 21. The Respondent failed to properly calculate the estimated site value in the Cost Approach, which resulted in a significant land value difference between the subject property and the comparable sales. 22. These errors resulted in overstated estimated market value. COUNT II ; Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (1999) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes (1997). . COUNT Ill Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of having failed to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Section 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (1997). WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board, or the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, as may be appropriate, to issue a Final Order as final agency action finding the Respondent(s) guilty as charged. The penalties which may be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 475 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense; imposition of investigative costs; issuance of a reprimand; imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal 4 FDBPR v. Dana Marc Disanto Case No. 9983399 Administrative Complaint education courses; publication, or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See Section 475.624, Florida Statutes and Rule 61J1-8.002, Florida Administrative Code. The penalties which may be imposed for violation(s) of Chapter 455 of the Florida Statutes, depending upon the severity of the offense(s), include: revocation of the license, registration, or certificate; suspension of the license, registration, or certificate for a period not to exceed ten (10) years; imposition of an administrative fine of up to $5,000 for each count or offense; imposition of investigative costs; issuance of a reprimand, imposition of probation subject to terms including, but not limited to, requiring the licensee, registrant, or certificate holder to complete and pass additional appraisal education courses; publication, restriction of practice; injunctive or mandamus relief; imposition of a cease and desist order; or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See § 455.227, Fla. Stat. (1999) and Fla. Admin. Code R. 61J1-8.002. SIGNED this__2 day of ——_ , 2001. Professional Regulation By: Director, Division of Real Estate ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER foxy 40 A ae : Sunia Y. Marsh : L0 fs .. . . 20 / es Fla. Bar No. 0068896 FDBPR-Division of Real Estate Legal Section 400 W. Robinson Street, N308A Orlando, Florida 32802-1772 (407) 481-5632 (407) 317-7260 - FAX FDBPR v. Dana Marc Disanto Case No. 9983399 Administrative Complaint PCP: EC/LM/PA 10/1/01 NOTICE TO RESPONDENTS PLEASE BE ADVISED that mediation under Section 120.573 of the Florida Statutes, is not available for administrative disputes involving this type of agency action. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that pursuant to this Administrative Complaint you may request, within the time proscribed, a hearing to be conducted in this matter in accordance with Sections 120.569 and 120.57 of the Florida Statutes; that you have the right, at your option and expense, to be represented by counsel or other qualified representative in this matter; and that you have the right, at your option and expense, to take testimony, to call and cross-examine witnesses, and to have subpoena and subpoena duce tecum issued on your behalf if a formal hearing is requested. PLEASE BE FURTHER ADVISED that if you do not file an Election of Rights form or some other responsive pleading with the Petitioner within twenty-one (21) days of receipt of this Administrative Complaint, the Petitioner will file with the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board a motion requesting an informal hearing and entry of an appropriate Final Order which may result in the suspension or revocation of your real estate license or registration. Please see the enclosed Explanation of Rights and Election of Rights form. oe PISO. : 7 Tale fea Sunpite ea ase DANA DISANIO, ASA Jtiw XT Suxetane [x] ers Jasin f ‘ Cres (Xi sie fds Picpaty vabies [2] mnoeasig (XP sutte — [" } dectinng Nob helghtorhood Lounvaries acd ¢ 12 HOLLY OOD. FL 33020 Land ase chanyo (K} terme Urey 1) to process i housing Trresent land use hau favedy BA bundy witty i] shertage yy (x) mussee [Joanne » Race aid the tacial cov EAST OF ROCK ISLAND ROAD Ati Macket conuiligns in Ihe subject neighborhood (i 1 a6 data on coriyel Live propaties fa sae in thet JARKET CONDITIONS APPEAR Apposivale lotalamatsc alunos fr sate it tee subject project To tad yy Converter (J ves [Pte sipton Rhy ae coujtance OO begat Leg ence cutetasadusay [egal [_] No roving Leenage Hanes! $ vest use asieryceed. [X]Presont uso [ } Gimet use (eaptsiny wa Utilities Otier LedLeapig Elecuraty {venay Surface as “heater Spasial Fiood Nacaid Zune “AL” Sanitary eect Stoo saaar J. vents (apparent 6J-ersa easer WERSE EASE: RUSULATICH Fondue GENER ot By ob Us sib CONCRE yh PVA | Rint 129 of Staies Type det Patt) Roof Stace TARIGRAVEL| Busemait 1A Cog YA vals Extarice Wats CBS GadSpoe HONG _| a seher N/A Ceting Cre sija (Style) ass Bssepts ALUMINUM | Sarpfanp iS EnsteypPteposed Window Hye StanvSue Intestats Faced, Ri tetgerate — (X] une Cf ttangriOven — (X] | Sess Leporal r, Behaacher ual ard | eesonve Meash coe yet a2) COVERED ENIRY, PATIO.6 CEILI tyre Fu & cn Cabal eles Capit ig si as, Lat ne( iewitact to, hazardous wastas, losis subslancas, ete ) RSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONUL iw the inapracameats, on the sita QUSERVED ON THE SUBIEC RECEIVED hamiey FEB 15 200U r hf party: UO ADY ws peata ASE PAGE 10FD UtHEORM RE! ‘A atel Fialtf ie peti UST HALUBUL APPLIATE Burcliciae Est Dyeciba $13,559 [0 Oo” Unpreuuted Yo WDICALED VAI UE GY COST APPROACH. - SUB ES 7316 SILVERADO DRIVE Ades | LAUDERDALE _ dS $ 7165 wife ISCREOI XTERMOR INSPECTION _ Ss 00 HISFECTION DESCRIPTION Beer) Sules cr Fansichig NONE KHOWHN Conzersions. Date of Saleffime _|FEE SIMPLE 2300 SF Atave Gade Room Count Goss Laney Aaa. Doseient Salted aos loa Guna Functional Utty: TCOVERED f __| COVERED PATE COVERED PATIC! BALCONY FEN STANDARD Hot Fy (totaip 5 Pie ~ Gass 0.5% of Comparable, . $ 101,700] tat-_ -2.6% 96,000 Cont ents Ga Sates Comgasisan (insted 24 property's con patitity ty the nelshborhood, ele ) DMPARABLES UTIL GEDA BEST, MOST SIMAAR RECEN] SALES | AVAIAGLE FROM VIEL THE $ SUBIELI SMARKE [AREA AND SiJULY DA ‘Q TIE SAME MARKET SEGME! FACTORS AS THE SUBJECT. E SUSIECT TO PRIOR SALE | 719 PRIOR SALE Voi Tuird ONE YR [Wat Ht ONE YEAR ISCHES ISCNE! . tof sale, option, of botany of thy gut ject pscpatty at J a VARE OF All CURRENT AGREEMENT FOI SAL | uoarepva UE BY INCRE APPROACHit! Arg io) Estunated Markel Ret S Sljectb erepis ataateas. tq oul CO. Tie purge sa of uns afraid is testa roe math Wa seal propesty Matis tha s: sertisteg conditions adinahel save doftiton Wal ave stated i the alta ol FrodSa Lc Fer 430 antde Mae Prasn 1758 Re hed Wee) ESUMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, CF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUB JECT C# HIS REPORT, ASCP (awcnis) of INSPECTION AND THE EF FECTIVE DATE OF HS REPORI)TO BS lay AFPRAIS SUFERVISONY APPRAISE FRR (OLY IF RECTED: ft Senate TC. ASA __. sf. 4 1027.93 i ettivalon # 0000872 Or Sipta License 9 RECEIVER Wetaraat tn STATE CERTIFIED FEB 15 2000 PIVIRIOM Gr Gkal ApTare sESIDEN TIAL APPRAISER BANOS 72 UNIS EE ter nee tnt Fife No, 810143 vent 4 oh AMAL TA 7318 SANERADO ORIVE SiS PINE TREE LANE [8315S CO ~ HORTH LAUDERDALE FAMARAC FLORIDA NATH LAUDERDALE EL __! | 15 BLOCKS SW 20 BLOCKS SW _. TA $106 000 $101,500 $ i Ooo vs 60.02 2 56.58 U1 e900 INSPECTION |ISC/REDE iSCREDI EXTERIOR INSPECTION EXTERIOR INS VaLescastacrTs | pescripnen | _cescrpnon | iitananee | CESCRIPTION DeschuPTign | sitio Sosa Francig |N/A NONE KNOWN NOWE KNOWN | i Concessions N/A NONE KHOWN NONE KNOWN} i Dots ct Suita {N/A 5/99 CLOSED _ 04/98 CLOSED} _| } _ Location AVERAGE AVERAGE ' _ : ~ LareckiFes Sagi FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE + H 8300 SF +f 72.000 1900 SF +/- : i - AVERAGE H _ 2-STORY : ‘ _ AVERAGE 3 9 YEARS H 1,000 Ny ‘ AVERAGE H — fan} Bawa} Bats} feta Gann f Bans, , 632.00; aan Geos tiving A203 1,782 Sqft._+ -3,100 ___ Sa, _ Basement 8 Fisted [NONE NONE Hl Reoms Below Grace NONE NONE i i : AVERAGE : AVERAGE : : Peaivigioubing CENTRAL i CENTRAL H ; ~ Enea 3Eetoont rs | NONE ms NONE i | NONE “|GARAGE-1 H =3 000 | NONE : me 1 COVERED ENTR| COVERED ENTR; COVERED ENTR: 1 COVERED PATIC| COVERED PATIC; COVEREO PATIC! _ . tt _. Fease Poot ets BALCONY. FENCI| FENCE : FENCE H A __ KIT.EQUIP. STANDARD Hi asooll t+ (xl. 1s aio0ll; [iis Gress: 4.0% Gross: 0.0% of Compasable Net $ 97,200 |Ner__-4.0% 3 97,400 | Net: 0.0%. $ a Comments on Sais Compariscn (including tha subject geoperty’s compalbility lo the neighborhood, etc. a eet SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO. ¢ COMPARABLE COPE NE Date, Frce and ata [HO PRIOR SALE | NO PRIOR SALE || NO PRIOR SALE scuceksgeeesses | WITHIN ONE YR |V/ITrHIN ONE YEAR VATHIN ONE YEAR wtinyect of seas [ISCNET ISCNET ISCNET ‘Anaijsis af any curanl ayeerent al sale, option, ca wsisy of the subject property and ‘daly 5 of any pre Sales cf S72 and compa bles wits coe yew Of ie Cuts 4 4p sed ra) COMPLAINT PAGE 2 RECEIVED FEB 1.5 2008 juyislod DE teal Epia. a — foe ADDENDUM Filo Ho, 810143 BORROWER: GAINER THE SUBJECT’S REMAINING ECONOMIC LIFE IS ESTIMATED TO BE 48 YEARS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A UNIQUE TOWNHOME FOR THE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE TOWNHOME IS A ONE OF A KIND PROPERTY WHICH tS LARGER THAN ALL OTHER UNITS IN THE SUBJECTS DEVELOPMENT AND CONTAINS A BALCONY, COVERED PATIO, LARGE COVERED PATIO, A SCREENED COVERED PATIO AND LAUNDRY ROOM WHICH OTHER UNITS IN THE DEVELOPMENT LACK. THE SALES UTILIZED IN THE REPORT ARE COMPETITIVE WITH THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. RECEIVED FEB 15 2000 PIWSION OF REAL ESTAT SKETCH/AREA TADLE ADDEKDUM File HoB1LCLAZ Borrower/Client s o GAINES, | ALPHONSO a | Property Address rf 2318 SILVERADO DRIVE e| ov County State Tip code C NORTH LAUDERDALE. BROWARD FLORIDA 33068 Lender oa 1 1ST FLOOR y3.4 2ND FLOOR ~ “13+ ~ a o LU VENG z- ROOM ABOHAYT 3 BEDROOM DINING KITCHEN ND ROOM Due mEnemeonmven 30.8 spc | BATHROOM BATHROOM STAIRS BEDROOM STALRS HENROON - 5 23.7 SCALE: + Inch AREA CALCULAT(ONS — SUHHARY LIVING AREA CALCULATLOKS Area Hame_of Aree size Totals Breakdown * + Sibtotol: Lal First Floor 863.14 963.14 13,60 x 41,20 952.08 GLAZ Second Floor 715.7% 735.74 10.30 x 30.20 311.08 POR PATIO 107,20 0.00 x 30.20 0.0¢ PATIO 62.70 169.90 23.70 x 30.20 71S.7% on COVERED ENTRY 118.50 LaUNORT 50.60 BALCONY 147.40 316.50 omayrenr>o ATIVE COMPLAINT 1575 TOIAL LIVABLE (rounded) RECEIVED FEB 15 2000 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Autres: ere i . FEB 1 5 2000 Benn an sare caeeeneeterieet ve EAL ASTALE Pe Mo cr |e ul aad ! a TRATIVE COMPLAINT pou RECEIVED FEB 15 2000 Bisronwie UT LAL ESTATE tl Ze SUBJECT PROTEICEY PHOTO ADDENDENT Hur duane AVUSEMSS trad dic tts BHOTNZ TRONT VIEW OL SUBJECT PROPERLY ATs L318 STEVE RADIO DRIVE NORTE LAUDERDALE. 1 Appwatsed: 10/27/98 AS REAR VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY SERERT SCENE eee RIVEL PRET 3 ue vfs ADM mye PAGE VS PRATIVE OMPLAINT COMPAL MBI SAS ES PEDO EOE VEMESD IND Pioneer (grab al Gir ag BD ae BELEK Cots thats ; 1 ; 1 DAV ise the DP NGS rte sents da Mate ah sce USE MOS Flt PVN USE IIS M84 brie. GLOLAS COMPARABLE SALE 4 ‘ : 916 MAGNOLIA AVEHUE NORTH LAUDERDALE, EI le Dates W2/98 CLASP LD ie Priv 108,000, COMPARABLE SALE #2 906 MAGNOLLA AVEHUE NORTIELAUDERDALE, Hf Sale Dates (4298 CLOSET? Sate Prive: $98 600 COMPARABLL SALE #5 JA MADDY LANE NORTH LAUDERDALE. 11 Sale Dade: 2/98 CL OST Ts Sale Price: 207000 HLGETY PEB ES Lasigluet ye dia uf « COMPARABLE SALES PHOTO ADDENDUM ppenisers & Consullants 29 Avene 109 33020 “1801 File No. 810143 COMPARABLE SALE #4 6181 PINE TREE LANE B TAMARAC, FLORIDA Sale Date: 05/98 CLOSED Sale Price: $106,000 COMPARABLE SALE #5 8315 S CORAL CIRCLE NORTH LAUDERDALE, FL Sale Date: 04/98 CLOSED Sale Price: $101,500 RECEIVED FEB 15 2000 DIVISION Ye nenL BbIAL uf 3: tet D bo pice which a property should bring iy aeompebtee and epen ina et the buyer and sellet, each acting priontly $rasledyeably and acsimning the price is vol definition is the consanustion of a sale as ot a specifind date and the passing of tite Tom fetiarto buyer ender corubtians wherety: 1) tviyer al seller ave typically moitivaten (2) 4th pottias are well infuunve or ial advised, anf each acting in what ions ls www bol inierest; (3) a to-vonatile line is allnwred (or exposure in the open trvrhel: (4) payroant és sade its leitis of ca ass of feaicdal anangaluenis couparable Cetwtos and (b) tas pit consideration for the prope ily sot anattecteal by specis! or creative financing oF sales canressions? granted by anyrne a sale DEFINITION OF MANKET VALUE: Heraret prok tandar all cowatinns Lerquisl affected by unhie site i tential vcised wilh the *Adjustiants to the £0 » anailo for speciat ot creative financing ox sates concessions. Ho adjustuieits ate necessary {nt those cosls which are ritually paid ty sotiors as a tesa of bauilinu ota in amadel ai2a; these costs are teailly Wentifiahte since the seller jays these costs at or vteative financing adjartinents can he made (y the compatable piopetty by comparisons lo Financing terns offered by athind party insitaional lender thal is not alteaty involved in the property or transaction Any adjustment should fot he calculated una mechanical doliag fox dollar cost of the Tivancing ot concession but the dritar amcunt of any adjustiieal shonh! approximate the aikel’s 1eyetian ts Hue Linaneing oF roncesstons based on he appraiser's judguent STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS AND APPMAISER'S CEATIFICATION. N CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: the appraiser's cerlificalion that appears inthe aypiaisal repo is subject ta the following codons 1. The appraiser will aul be ce: appraiser arsuines thal the title cons the Lasig of it emg under taspansitle nsible (or mattess af afeyal ature thal affect either Wg property being appraised cr the tile Io il, The Lio awh therolore, will nol render any cy isians about thn tille The propedty is appraised I report to show approximate. dirtansions cof the improvements and the sketch Is Wy the property and understating Ne apptaisor’s delernination of its size 2. The appraiser has provided a sketch in the appiai inetuded only to arsist the reader of the ceport in visuali 3. The appraises has exatnined the available thood maps that are provided by the Federal Einesgency Management Agency (os olher dala sources) and has noled in the appraisal iopett whethes the subject site is located in an identified Special Cond Hazard Area. Because the apyitaigor is not a surveyor, he ar she inakes on guarantees, expiess or implied, segarding Wis determination 4. Vhe appraiser will nat give lestimony oF appeat in cont because he ur she made an appraisal of (he properly in questtod, unless specilic aulangaents lo do so have been inade beforehand 5. The appraiser has estimated the valur ihe laud inthe cost approach al ils highest and best use aid Ihe improvements al thelr coulilulory value, Mase separate valuations of tke laid aad inprogeinents inst pot be used in conjunction wilh avy other appraisal and ate invalid if hey are so used 6. the appraiser has nated in Ihe appraisal tepart any aduerse conditions (such as, needed iapairs, depreciation, the jresence ol hazardous wastes, toric substances, ele.) observed during the insj2ction of the subject property o1 U 31 ve of she became aware of using the normal taseatch involved in pertouning the applaisat Unless otherwise stated in the applaisal teput, the appraiser has no Friowledge of any hidden fo unappatent condilions of the property or averse environmental conditions (Incheting the presence of hazardous wastes, lovia sulistances, ele ) thal would male Ihe properly wore ot less valushle, and has assumed that there are no such conditions andimakes no guarantees o1 wartanties, exy1es% OF innptiod, rogaihny the condition of the properly. Ike apptaiser will not be respansitde Jor any sich onufiligns that do exist or for any engineering oF lestug thal might be tequited to, discorer whether such conditions exis, Because the appraiser is nol ap exper! in Ihe {wilt of envhormnentat hazards, the appiaisal report must 21 be considered as ar envitonmentsl assassinen! of the prope! 7. Ve appraiser ob nl opinions that were expressed ss the appraisal reprrt frow's 2 ot shit considers lo ka celiahle ant bolinyes them bo be tows andl cariact Whe ayprsisen des r € assume reeqnsihity far tle aeutary at suey items thal yore bunished ly other pat HAs Q. The appraiser will not dicclise tly eal fat in Wa Uniform Standards al Pinfessional Appraisal Pract contents nl the appraisal wget except as per 9, The appratsar has basnd his wt het appraisal port and valuation conetason fo an =rsratal hat is subject tn satisfactory coirpletion repais, oF alerafions on the assaupiun that cxanptalion of Ye inyovenents will he pestoymed in a wotkinanlike manner 10, The appraiser anast proviee his 01 het prior vaitten consent before Un tena febent j out in the appraisal iepunt cain distitela: UL appraisal repert (including conclusions abl the penpeny value, the ayywaiser’s Henly aud jwotossionat dusignations, and relerences any professional appraisal organizations + the fim wilh which the appraiser is led) lo anyone other Wan the Lorre ray; Ul. the inorlyage insures, consullants; professic: L appraisal organizations, any stalz of federal; ent, agency, or inslamentality nf tha United Slales of any slate oc the histiict of Columbia, the preperty doseription section of the repel only to dala collection or sepoeting service(s) 2er's pint yailtan consent [la appraizey’s wiitten vient and approval inst atse be obtah nd Wolo veilhioul havi bs a {Us appraeal ean te conveyed hy anja te Ha pie Uengh ahentising, pubic reali, news, safes, oy ether meta Wf sy Page lof? Fannie Mie Pon 160418 8-9" RECEIVE FEB 15 20 APPRAISERS CERTIFICATION: — the Appraiser certifies and agrees that: WiloNa, BYO1N3 1, [have researched the subject markel area and have selected a minimum of Ihree recenl sales of properties most timitar and proximale to Ine subject property for considesalion iu the safes comparison analysis and have made a dollar adjustment when appropriate lo reflect the markel reaction to those ileins of significant vatialion, {f a significant item in a comparable property is superior lo , of more favorable than, the subject property, [have mada a negalive adjustment lo reduce Ihe adjusted sates price of the comparable and, if a significant item in a comparable property is inferior to, of less favorable than the subject properly, Itave made a positive adjustment to incteasa tha adjusted sales price of the comparable. 2. thave taken into considzralion the factors that have an isnpact on value ia my devetofment of tha estimate of markel value In the appraisat teport. | have not knowingly withheld any significant information from the appraisal report and! believa, tothe besl ol my knowledge, thal all statements and information in the appraisal report ave Ire and correct 3. [slated in the appraisal report only my own personal, unbiased, and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which ara. subject only to the contingent and limiting conditions specified in this form. 4, Vhave no present or prospective Interest in the proporty that is the subject to Unis repart, and | have no present or prospective personal interest or bias with respect to the paiticipants in the transaction. | didnol base, either partially or complately, my analysis and/or the estimate of matkel value in the appraisal sepor! on the tace, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin of either the prospective owners of occupants of the subjecl property or of tha present owners oF occupants of the proparlies in the vicinity of tho subject properly. 5. | haveno present or contemplated future interest in the subjecl properly, and neither my cursent of future employment nor my compensation for performing this appraisal is contingent on the appraised value of the property, 6. Iwas not required to report a predetermined value or diraction in value thal favors the cause of the client or any tolated party, the amount of the value estimate, the atlainment of a specific resutl, of the occurence of a subsequent event in order loteccive my compensation and/or employment for performing the appraisal. {did nol base the appraisal report ona requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, or the need to approve a specific mortgage loan. 7. [performed this appraisal in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practica that ware adopted and promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and that were in place as of the effective date of this appraisal, with the exception of the departure provision of those Standards, which dows not apply. | acknowledge thal an estimate of a reasonable time tor exposure in the open market is @ condition in the definilion of market value and the estimate | daveloped is consistent with the marketing time noted in the neighborhood section of this report, unless | have olherwise stalad in the reconciliation section. 8. Ihave personally inspected the inlerior and exlerior areas of the subject properly and bie exterior of all properties lisled as comparables in the appraisal seport. | further certify thal Ihave noled any apparent or known adverse conditions in tha subject improvements, on the subject site, or on any site within the Immediale vicinity of lhe subjecl property of which | am aware and have tnada sdjustmenls for these adverse conditions in my analysis of the properly value to the exlent thal |had markel evidence to suppoil them. have also commented about the effect of the adverse conditions on the marketabitily of the subject property. 9. | personally prepared all conclusions and opinions about the reat estate that were set forth in the appraisal report. If Irelied on significant protessional assislance from any individual or individuals in the pecformance of the appraisal or the preparation of the appraisal teporl, [have named such individual(s) and disclosed the specific tasks performed by trem in the Teconciliation section of this appraisal report. 1 certify thal any individual so named is qualified to perform the lasks. { have nol aulhorized anyone to make a change to any item in the report; theretore, if an unauthorized change ts made lo the appraisal reporl, | will take so responsibilily for it. SUPERVISORY APPRAISER’S CERTIFICATION: _ If 2 supervisory appraiser signed the appraisal reporl, he or she certifies and agrees that: | diseclly supervise the appraiser who prepared Ihe appraisal report, have reviewed the appraisal raport, agree with the slatemenls and conclusions of the appraiser, agree to be bound by lhe appraiser's certifications numbered 4 through 7 above, and am taking full responsibility for the appraisal and the appraisal report. ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED: 1318 SILVERADO DRIVE, NORTH LAUDERDALE, FL 33068 APPRAISER: SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (only If required) Signalure: B Z Signalure: Name: _DANA_DISANTO,_ASA Name: . Date Signed: 10/27/98. Dale Signed: State Cerlification #:_ 0000872 ‘of Slale License #: Stale: FL State Certification #: or Slale License #: Slale: 4 SAAT FIED RESTOR! f F AS __ eee STATE CFRTIFIED RESHVENTIAL APPRAISER £0000872 Expiration Dale of Centilicalion or License: (D) Did [[] bit Not Inspect Property a |. Freddie Mac Form 439 6-93 Page 2 of2 Fannie Mae Foret BOdg ip oF FEB 15 20¢ Callaway & Price, inc. A Real Estate Appraisers and Consuitants Licensed Reai Estate Brokers “0, fey BWEST PALM BEACH@ aro PIERCE Mm * Robert J Callaway. MAI. SRA, CRE Harry D. Gray. Nyy SRA” 4) St.Cert Gen REA RZ0000505 _ StCenGea REA Rz0 eee Michael R. Slade. MAI. SRA, CRE a Si Cen.Gen. REA RZ0009116 Daniel P. Hrabko. MAI St.Cert:Gen. REA RZ0000048 Stephen D. Snaw., MAI StCer.Gen REA RZ 0901192 Joe R. Price. MAI, SRA St.Cen. Gen. REA RZ000C555 43 Harry D. Gray. M/S St Cert. Gen. REA RZ0000 Piease reply to West Palm Beach E-mail cpi@cpwpo.com August 14, 200% Sunia Y, Marsh, Esquire Senior Attorney, Real Estate Department of Business & Professional! Regulation Hurston North Tower 400 West Robinson Street, Suite N308 ~~ SS Orlando, Florida 32801-1772 RE: DBPR v. Dana M. Disanto DBPR Case No. 99-83399, 99-838709 Dear Ms. Marsh: ! have reviewed the files including; but not limited to, the appraisal, the complaint, response to the complaint, and various data that was included in your letter to me dated April 5, 2001. The First file, Case No. 99-83399, was an appraisal on a residence ‘at 1318 Silverado Drive in North Lauderdale, Florida. The appraisal was prepared as of October 27, 1998 by state certified general appraiser Dana M. Disanto, ASA. The appraiser ‘s opinion of value as of the date of appraisal was $95,000. The complaintant, as a reviewer for a lender, found no support for the value conclusion shown on the appraisal report. The reviewer provided three sales in the immediate sub division, two of which were on the same block, personally inspected the Subject and the property and stated it was the same model and recommended a value between $63,000 and $65,000. Mr. Disanto states in the addendum that the Subject is a one-of-a-kind property which is larger than all of the units in the Subject's development and contains a balcony, covered patio, large covered patio, a screen covered patio, and laundry room which other units in the development lack. He further states in his response that it was the largest unit and then additional square footage was added. - LAINT ee ere a’ 01 a issingaShana an ss5uees-3705 FORT PIERCE - 500 South U.S Highway 1, Suite 107. Fort Pierce. FL 3495) (581)464-8607 / Fax (561}481-0809 BOCA RATON - PMB5 #87, 4400 N. Federal Hwy, Ste 210, Boca Raton, F 34 (581)998-8088 / Fax (561)685-3705 STUART - 500 South US Highway 1, Suite 197, Fon Pierce. FL 34959 (58 11287-3230 ! Fax (561)451-0809 WEST PALM BEACH - Sunia Y, Marsh, Esquire Senior Attorney, Real Estate Department of Business & Professional Regulation August 14, 2001 Page Two In my opinion, there are still sufficient sales within the Subject’s immediate subdivision which could have been utilized and adjusted for the varying differences. As a matter of ! fact, Disanto’s Sales 1 through 3 are much smaller units than the Subject and at least , according to the tax roll, smaller than units within the Subject’s subdivision such as 1349, 1366, and 1308 Silverado Drive, all of which sold in the months preceding the appraisal date for $41,000, $62,400, $65,000 respectively. These are salés of homes which may not have had all the items mentioned by Disanto, but are of similar age, with similar lot sizes and in the immediate community. Four of his five sales have sites which are nearly twice the lot size, with only Sale 5 being smaller. All of the sales had garages with the exception of Sale 5, while the Subject did not have a garage. The Subject was 24 years old while the oldest of the sales was 9 years old with Sales 1 and 2 being only 4 years old. The Subject was stated to be in average condition. A review of sales within the subdivisions where the Disanto's sales are located, indicated the following: Sales 1 and 2 reflected sales between $81,500 and $105,000 from January 1998 through to the appraisal date; Sale 3’s sales reflected sales from $95,000 to $100,000 (an exception being a special warranty deed for $41,800); Sale 4’s subdivision was between $90,000 and $115,000; and Sale 5’s subdivision with ‘numerous sales averaging in the $80,000's with several sales in the $60,000's, two of which were not recorded as warranty deeds. It is clear from this data that the sales within these subdivisions utilized were not, in fact, competitive with sales within the Subject subdivision, this being the case even though they were only blocks away. : In my opinion, Disanto has not adequately reflected adjustments for differences in lot size and age and condition. He has estimated a $1000 adjustment for the Subject's 2300 square foot lot verses Sales 1 through 3 being nearly twice as much. Sale 4 which is more than twice the size and is only adjusted -$2000. The second item is the age adjustment. As previously mentioned, the Subject is 24 years old while Sales 1 and 2 are 4 years old, and a -$2000 adjustment was made despite the fact that the condition (average) was the same. Sale 3 was 8 years old, 1/3 the age and a -$1000 adjustment was made as was Sale 4 and 5. Extraction (formerly known as abstraction) would indicate that the sum of the parts for Disanto sales do not add up. Appraisers do abstraction or extraction differently, but no matter how you do it, in my opinion, utilizing the Disanto estimate of Cost New, Land Value, Depreciation, etc. do not add up to its ultimate sales price by a significant difference. Sunia Y, Marsh, Esquire Senior Attorney, Real Estate Department of Business & Professional Regulation August 14, 2001 Page Three What this means is that Disanto has not accounted for either the depreciation difference or the land value difference which would have a significant effect on the resulting value utilizing those sales. The Second file, case number 99-838709, was an appraisal on a residence at 812 NE 92™ Street in Miami Shores, Miami-Dade County, Florida. The appraisal was prepared as of March 16, 1999 by the same state certified appraiser. The appraiser's opinion of value as of the date of appraisal was $185,000. The Sales within the Subject subdivision from December 1997 to May 1999 ranged fram $106,000 to $142,500. There were 5 recorded sales according to ISC. There was one sale in November 1997 at $189,000. All the remaining sales with the exception of one, are less than $140,000. The sales activity within the Subject’s subdivision were homes of similar size as the Subject than the sales Disanto utilized and would appear to require less adjustments. There were 7 sales in Sale 1's subdivision between March 1997 and October 1998 range from $120,000 to $178,500. The 3 sales within Sale 2’s subdivision occurred between July 1997 and July 1998 ranged from $190,000 to $225,000. Sales within Sale 3 and Sale 4's subdivision were more numerous-and ranged from $184,000 to $256,000. There was an $860,000 sale as well as an $85,000 sale which were not reflective of the typical sales between December 1997 and May 1999. As in the previous file, it appears as if the sales within these subdivisions were not in fact competitive with sales within the Subject’s subdivision. This also being the case even though they were on the same street but several blocks away. In my opinion, Disanto has not adequately reflected adjustments for difference in lot size, house living area, pool, and in the case of Sale 3, garage. The Subject lot contains approximately 7,000 square feet and while the price per square foot is not necessarily reflective of the difference of lot values, lot sizes that range from 21% — 34% larger typically would require more than a $1,000 difference in lot value. The difference in the house living areas is reflected in a $10 per square foot difference. $10.00 per square foot is approximately 15% of cost new and this is also not typically reflective of market conditions. Also, an adjustment for a 1-car garage of only $2,500 appears to be low based on market conditions. Sunia Y, Marsh, Esquire Senior Attorney, Real Estate Department of Business & Professional Regulation August 14, 2001 Page Four Utilizing extraction as in the first file, would indicated that the sum of the parts for , Disanto’s sales do not add up. Appraisers do abstractions or extractions differently as previously mentioned, but no matter how you calculate it, in my opinion, utilizing Disanto’s estimate of cost new plus land value less depreciation, etc. do not add up to the ultimate sale prices by a significant difference. This also is based on Disanto’s estimate of the underlying land for all the sales at $81,000 versus the Subject's $80,000. What this means is that Disanto has not accounted for the land value difference which would have a significant effect on the resulting value utilizing his sales. | had another problem in that the file | was provided had two copies of the. Subject appraisal with the same file number; however, the adjusted value of the sales Was different in the two appraisals even though the final value was the same. | am referring to the grid pages which are marked 5 — 13 and 5 — 14 which indicate adjusted sales prices for Sale 1; $170,600, Sale 2; $179,400, Sale 3; $172,300 and Sales 4; $185,600. The other pages which appear to be marked 12 ~ 25 and 12 — 26, indicate values after adjustments for Sale 1 of $174,100, Sale 2; $185,400, Sale 3; $175,800 and Sale 4; $184,600. Both copies of the appraisal are signed by Disanto as of the same date so I'm not sure which was the correct appraisal and of course | did not contact Disanto. Conclusion Based on the above-mentioned discussions of both files it is my opinion that each of the Market Values for each of the properties is significantly overstated. If Disanto had . stayed within the Subject subdivisions, the values reflected would have been significantly lower even if the sales would have required more adjustments as he stated. If | can be of further assistance in this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Respectfully, TLR did Michael R. Slade, MAI, SRA, CRE St.Cert.Gen. REA RZ0000116 MRS/hlr SUMMARY APPRAISAL REPOR | UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT s RIP TL oP STRE 7 c City MIAME S phon LOL AT ELIS 2 GOLOEM GATE PARK AUD 1B 6.130 weaforatth 11-2296 005-0180 Ty Yeu 1998 Powe aot LOPE 2, ROSA ent Dance LOPEZ, ROSA by tt Tar il. _ epee Lb uo, Teughtouhand r4 Project tame NI — car sabe Fuise BELA ore cencions ta ba pad hy sate “LORIDA 33129, FL 33020 — Xi Suburban (_ | Rural Predominant | Single tanvly housing | Present land use % | Land wee change ~ leaves lasren, { diinnesase | eecupancy— |RREE aoe T lsey Lo Mined iX Stenle Ud Sow i. Qanar 165 Las Vinereariog [Xi starie {| pecining | P| tenant J shorts: 1x! mtaaeon |_| Ovrsonly | UX! varrontoy Axl 35nes_ |] over 8a | L 205 tigr tings and chang BLVD. AND WEST OF tha navbetabehty Sinighbarhn OF BISCAY Paetag iy TIE SHIGLE LAMILY MARKET APE IL AMA STABLE. SLYDPPIN ARE MOLED, sieht a dala en eueupaktivn piopesbes tors RAL MARKET CONDITIONS APP! of sales and financing concestions. NCING ARE AVAILAGLE AT Tis tho davolopar?builder in contial of Wa fon Approsinate total ate tora! number ef units in the subject project ouks and recreat anal facilitins enn Dwneusions 60% 140_ RESIDENUAL ey Imegal (he No zoning By corti rorunn elon ahr ston aid dogs phan 16.8, 5 1 Lagat norcenisrning Gra __ View Potiic Puatel Landscaping Strest ERD ED | oicnaay Stace STONE TLE Curbiguiter RETE | ty Apparent easements NONE APPARE! __ | Sidewalk __. i FEMA Spacial Flood Hazard Aveo [| Yes. tho ___ | Steettighs x Lol | Fens Zone "x _ Map O9's 3/2/94 NO! ‘TIONS NOTED. FAUMDATION so» CO) WY GFHERA DESERT TON BASEMENT Ho of nits el Stories (Oot vt) Dangn (Stim) Evelng Prep sad Aga (ves) 4 Etfacto Aga Qs) 23 _] Foumtaten Entevior Walls, Root Sutface e Sump Pump N/A. Danpness. N Window Type Storm: Sereeus, 2 Besyoons Kitenen equ — | ATTIC - IX) | none fq 7 Koowrs HEATING AMENITIES Fveg ae DRYWALLIAV 7 [xl] stars FY | rare. covedAN. 18 itt) oe Hobcars, BB tenetish == WOUDIAVERAGI CtentvERAG. Oreporal | V] orop star |] f beck WOOD Atached Bist ix!) Seuttte Ix! T Rehibfed _| Fenmtood Floor [} | Fence CHAINLINK IX) | Bs'tin tone —[X}) rested} | root Conutition VERAG. Washartane Dh thaistied £) tuacuzzt a 3 CEILING FANS « Seeesitin of the inpto SEE SICAL, FULLCTIONAL sinity of the sub THE IMAMEQIATE. Pea tyutnnts £1 EB oparty ACH YO TE SUBJECT PROPERTY. Feete ion ED ples us 903851 UNIFORM RESIDE! TIAL APPRAISAL REPORI Fig Ro. EASEE SAE ~~ TE 8D G0] Cammnnis en hasl Appre rch (wich as, saurceat coat aatimata, POTTER EOC TION COS DME ATOF ISP OE MENTS: sita valee, foe cateulatinnand for HMO, VA ard FmitA, the 1G10sq Ft @E 6500 astitnated remaining economic Kfa of tha property) sqit ms 3100 7 MARSIIALL & SWIFT RI Ep Pt ms Total batinstert Carel thew “SL 32, ane Phyiet [ruortonatf Fetanal Pat Renalning Fen Uta Uepersiaton $30,004 li le oto. 30004 : BA soprariatad aire of lnpravenionts ‘Aa ix” Valua nf Selo bnyravernents, @ HDICATEN VALUE BY COST APPROACH nee Bat ee “cONTATA EN) 2. HIP NE 92 STREET ~ 1541 NE 105 STREET 1165 NE 97 STREET Adkbess MIAMI SHORES: MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA, talAMI St WORES,TLCRIDA ~ 185, Bal Ti63NEO2STREET MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA 12 BLOCKS NW fone NOI HOLE uo HONE KNOWN KHON Fs podCeuesieh st Aosemant & Feist of Raowis Delow Ganda Funetinal iy FENCE, POOL | STANDARD: . - - eel - aE APACL —__j—. RABLE NO. Date, Price and Data MO PRIOR SALE {HO PRIOR SALE NO PRIOR SALI 06/98 CLOSED Scure to pieesites | WITHIN ONE YR {WITHIN OHNE YEAR WITHIN OE YEAR: $ 184,000 ISCNET ng of tha subjnct properly and analysis of aury pei sala RENT AGREEMENT FOR SALE, JISCNET ibjpct and axmparntias win ono year ofa dala of appa OPO OR LISUING OF THE SUBJECT _ reais ry currant agreatnent of sa INOICATED VALUE BY INCOME ArrE 's appraisal is rk al “agit retinol Arpeae and ining eenuitlons, and market value dabinitiowiat wa stated in the attadved Fierkéie hia Form A397 pain haa Fem 1OOMB (Rested 6/93 L(WE} ESTIMATE TRE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS IIE SUBJEC OF FHISREFCRT,AS OF (VACHS THE DATE OF INSPEC IOM AMID THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THISREFORI)TORES 185.00) RECE! APPRAISER: . SUPERVISORY APFRAL: ER {ONLY IF REQUIREO): Signatun Hewat dL. = Sqnatus oe ie (Toa tict DANN UIGANTO, ASA —JAN- 43 afm ty Qa'eRopalsgred 3/16/99 Oc State bi F ” STATE CER TIPIG RESIDENTIAL APPRAISER #0000872 rece MISANTO AL PAISAL GROUT ve AM Sales A Crientzos SUMMAR f APPRAISAL REPORT UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT a = Supplemental Valuation Section _ 7 HE _ 8 T 612 NE 92 STRE Aitiess MIAMI SHORES Progeny bs iv Nea Hata ade Verification Sourras._| COMPARABLE HO 4 LONFARABLE NO 5 __ 1181 NE $2 STREET MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA _ AME STREET _ $180,000 SCARED JERIOR INSPECTION VALUE ADAISTSEITS|__ CESCRIPTION DESCRIPAION | J sane mies Satoser Financing PVA LNA Ni Conressy NONE KNOWN: NONE KNOWN OS erent Loca"on ~ [AVERAGE wen Drath pt Coessucv HONE Perch, Patio, Geek, | COVERED ENT BA canplacas).ctn, [CV PTYOCMACU I Fence, Poo! FEN “| NONE mt COVERED ENT A Kir equip, | STANDARD Agj, (tata) ADDITIONAL SUPPOR MB ijisted Salas rice | ; of Conpaable, . 0.0% $_ O| Net i reuruvnts rn Sales Goong alee (ww tah g they sthoci, ete.) SALE 4 WAS INCLUDED 1 Date Prce ard Bata s Sewce ke privessas | YMIIHIM ONE YR ‘thn eae ctagyeaeat [ISCNET BF Analysis of aay curaul agrenuent of sale, opt d INWARE COMPARABLE ND § COMPARABLE HO 6 | HO PRIOR SALE WITHIN ONE YEAR NET . 1g of the subject props HY CURRENT AGRE Sad analysis of any price sales of wibjnct and ow parables within one year ofthe die of apyraisal (ENT OF SALE, OPTION. OR LISTING OF THE SUBJECT.___ a FLOORPLAN 993081 MIAMI SHORES _. . State: FL Zip: 33138 SUN FEDERAL MORTGAGE 29.4 Wood Deck JACUZZI Ost 250 Bedroom Bedroom S72 zy Kitchen Dining Room Living Room i 12.0 Famil , amily | COVERED] & 120 17.6 ‘ Sketch by Apex IV Windows™ | y AREA CALCULATIONS SUMMARY LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN | 1 Area Name of Area Size Totals : Breakdown Subtotals | GUAT First Floor 1609.68 1609.68 Firat Floor il ! oTH COVERED ENTRY 72.00 . 17.4 x 87 4 { woos DECK 735.00 407.00 22.0 x 54.2 i | . i t | it i : | | i \ | : | 1 \ i | | f t i ; { | : | i! ‘i i | i | ‘ ‘ TOTAL LIVABLE — (rounded) 1610 Y 2 Areas Total (rounded) Hi : RE JAN 18 2000 Hane Be rAte ' pavigions OE ' 2700 North 29 Avenue, Suile 109, Hollywood, Fl. 33020 954-925-7800 FAX 954-925-7801 1h, Mead Kanal Dodge shane » CAUSEWAY frunnek island GREEK NF VILLAGE }® 8 938 fidser Kland | jy jq” Jnepe a 2008 ~ Hist bypristait Uy Kew. EOIATE ff 2) RECEIVED JAN 13 2008 RNUSIQN OF rene KSIATE 1129 fa VE COMPLAINT Ce TY = ¢< o € 5 L oe f IN > 3 wim * Oo = 3 uw = 3 =e 3 3 EY SArSHOzE Manse 152-53; |= TL a NE. + i RECEIVED ann 13 2000 pivisier OE RENE ESIATE of / {5 a Z Garner Thee Rosa Stoperly Addiace Aid tH a3 Site Et Gry IAL S Landon SURE! FRONT VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY Appraised Date: March 16, 1999 Appraised Value: $ REAR VIEW OF SUBJECT PROPERTY ua STREET SCENE RECEIVED JAN 13 2009 AWINQN OE REAL, ESIALE (4c. URATIVE COMPLAINT Ce, OS ty Addess R12 HE 99 SIREET Up MAM SHOPES | Vendor SUNT EDERAL MORTG, ie ; a REAR VIEW REAR VIEW RECEIVED JAN 13 2008 ate pryistolt OE Rene EST ele. EP Uwe! LEZ HOGA SOUT eee Prapenty Ar _Casr Ne COMPARABLE SALE #1 S41 NE 105 STREET MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA Sale Data. 10/98 CLOSED. Sale Price: § 178,500 COMPARABLE SALE #2 1165 NE 97 STREET MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA Sale Date: 07/98 CLOSED Sale Price: $ 190,000 ” api COMPARABLE SALE #3 1163 NE 92 STREET MIAMI SHORES, FLORIDA Sale Date 07/98 CLOSED Sale Price: $ 180,000 RECEIVED JAN 13 2000 PIVISION OE REAL ESIATE fifiy a? Ce Flopetty Addiess 812 ME 82 SI City BIAS St COMPARABLE SALE #4 1181 NE 92 SIREET MIAMI SIIORES, FLORIDA Sale Date 07/98 CLOSED Sale Plice: $ 180,000 COMPARABLE SALE #5 Sale Data; . Sale Price: $ mete eee be | COMPARABLE SALE #6 Sale Date: Sale Price. $ RECEIVED JAN 13 2000 | DIVISION OE REAL Esiace, a {2 es Fie tio SG3061 DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE: The most probable price which a property should bring in a compelilive and open markel tinder all ronhtions requisite to @ (air sale, the buyar and seller, each acting prudently. knowledgeably and assuming the price is not aftacind y unlue stimulus ltnplici in this definition is the consummation of a sate as of a spmcifind date aud the passing of tile ror seller lo buye: under condhions whereby (1) buyer and seller are typically molivated, (2) both parlies are welt informed of well advised, and each acting in what he considers his own best interest: (3) a reasonable time is allowed for exposure in the open market, (4) payment ¥6 miade in terns of cash in U S. dollars ar io terais of financial arangements comparable thereto; and (5) the price represents the normat Consideration for Ihe properly sold unaitected by special or creative financing ot sales concessions* granted by anyone associated with the gale “Adjustments to the comparables must be made for special or creative financing or sales concessions. No adjustments ave necessary for those costs which are normally paid by sellers as a result of tradition or law in a markat area, these costs ave reaully identihable since the salter pays these costs in virtually all sales transactions Special or creative financing adjustments can be made to the comparable properly by comparisons Io financing terms offered by a third parly institulionat lender that is not already involved in the property ot transaction Any adjustment should not be calculated om a mechanical doltar (or dollar cost of the financing or concession but the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate Ihe market's reaction lo the finarcing or concessions based on the Appraisers judgment STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS AND APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: — The appraiser's cerlitication that appears in the appraisal report is subject to Une fottowing conditions: 1 Pha aperaiine will not be responsitte for matters of a legal nature that affect either the property being appeaised or tha lille lo it The aprraiser assumes lisal the litle is good and markelable and, Inerefore, will nol rendes any opinions about the ttle The property is appraised (on the basis of it being under responsible ownership. oa 2 The appraiser has provided a sketch in the appraisal reporl to show approximate dimensions of the iniprovements and the sketch is included only lo assist the reader of the repeet in visualizing the property and understanding the appraiser's determination of its size. 3. The appraiser has examined the available flood maps that are provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency {or other dala Sources) and has noted in the appraisal reporl whether the subject site is located in an identified Special Flocd Hazard Area. Because the appraiser is nct a surveyor, he or she makes no guarantees, express or implied, regarding this deterniinabion, 4. The appraiser will not give lnstunony or appear in cowl because he or she made an ‘appraisat of Ihe property in question, unless ‘specific arrangements to da so have been made beforehand we 5 The appraiser has estimated the value of the land in the cost approach at its highest and best use and the improvements at their Contibutory value, These separate valuations of the land and improvements must not be used in conjunction with any other appraisal and are invalid if they are 0 used. 6. The appraiser has noted in the appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as, needed repairs, depreciation, the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc, ) ubserved during the inspection of the subject property or that he or she becarne aware of during the normat cesearch invelved in performing the appraisal. Unless otherwise stated in the appraisal report, the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden OF unapparant condilions of the property or adverse environmental conditions {including the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, elc. ) thal would make the property more ot less vatuable, and has assuined Ihat there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, express or implied, regarding (he condition of the property. The appraiser wil nat be responsible for any such Conditions that do exisl or for any engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist Because the appraiser fs not an expert in the field of environmental hazards, the appraisal report must net be considered as an environmental assessment of the property 7. The appraiser obtained the information, estimates, and opinions that were expressed in the appraisal report from sources Ihat he or she considers lo be teliatla and betiaves them to he true and correct. The appraiser does not assume responsibilily for the accuracy of such ilams that were Iurnished by other parties. 8. The appraiser will not disclose the contents of the appraisal report except as provided for in the Unitcrm Standards of Professional Anysaisal Practice 9. The appraiser has based his or her appraisa! report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal Ihat is subject to satisfactory completion, tepairs, OF alterations on the assumption that complation of the Impvovements will be performed in a workmanlike manner. 10. The appraiser must provide his or her prior written consent before {he lendar/client specified in the azeraisat report can distribute the appraisal report (including conclusions about the property value, the appraiser's identity and professionat designations, and references to aNY professional appraisal organizations or the firm with which the appraiser is associated ) to anyane olhar than Ihe borrower: the morlgagee or its successors and assigns, {he mortgage insurer; consultants; professional appraisal organizations; any state or federally approved financial institution: or any department, agency, or instrumentalily of the United States or any state of the District of Columbia: 2ccepl that (he lenifericiiant may dishiibute the properly description section of the report only to date esilection or reporting service(s) without having to obtain the appraiser's prior wiitten consent. The aprraiser’s writlen consent and approval musl also be obtained belore (he appraisa can be convayad by anyone to the public through advertising, public retations, news, sales, oF ctner RECEIVED JAN 13 2000 _ orm ms nm DAYISIGN GE HEAL Rated g—— Fags tof 2 Fannie tize Form 10048 6-93 TY 5 * Pied Atne Form £296.93 PAMBL Ary feats G03051 APPRAISERS CERTIFICATION: The Apprais> cnitian ard ag ons that 1 thave researched the subject market area and have selecled a minimum of three recent sales of properlies most simitar and proximate Io Ilia subiect properly for cancideration ia the sales eomnpatison analysis and have made a datlae adjustment when appropiate lo reflect the markal caactinn to those items of significant variation. Ia significant ilem in a comparable properly is superlor lo , er more favorable than, tlie subject property, thave made a negalive adjustinoul lo reduce the adjusted sales juice of tha camparatta and, if a significant iter in a Comparable property is Inferior 10, of less favorable than the subject properly, I have made a posilive adjustment lo increase the adjusled sales rire of thn comparable 2. thave taken tate consideration the faclors thal have an Impact on vatue in my development of the estimate of market value [nthe appraisal report. | have not knowingly withheld any significant intormallon feors the appraisal report and | believe, to the bast of my bnowladge, that all statements and information in the appraisal report are tue and correct - 4 U stated in tha appraisal report only my own personat, unbiased, and profassional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which are subject uly Io the contingsul and liniting conditions specified in this torn 4, Ihave no prasent oF prospective interest in Ihe properly that is the subject to this repert, and t have no present or prospective personal inlarest or bias with respect to Ihe participants in (he transaction. | did nol base, either partially or completely, my analysis andior the estimate of markel value fn the appraisal repert on the race, color, religion, sex, hanicap, tamilial status, or nalional origin of either the Prospective owners of occupants of the subject property or of Ihe prasenl owners or occupanls of the properlies in the vicinily of the subject property, 5, thave n9 present or contemplated future interast in the subject property, aad naither my current or future employmant nor my Componsalicn for pet forming this appraisal is contingent on the appraised value of the property 6. Iwas not required lo report a predetermined value er direction in value that favors the cause of the client or any related party, the aucunt of the valic estimate, the attainment of a specific resull, of the orcinrence of a subsnquent event in order lorecelve my Compensation andior employment for performing the appraisal. I did not base le appraisal repost on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation, e the need lo approve a specific mortgage loan,” 7. I perforined this appraisat in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Protessional Appraisal Practice that were adopled and Promulgated by (he Appraisal Standards Board of The Appraisal Foundation and thal viere in place as of the effective date of this appraisal, with the exception of the departure provision of those Standards, which does not apply | acknowledge that an eslimale of a reagonable lime foe exposure in the open market is a condition In the definition of markel value and the estimale | developed is consistent wilh the markeling fine noted in the neighborhood section of this reper, unless { hava otherwise stated in the reconciliation section. 8. I have personally Inspected the interior and exterior areas of the subject properly and the exlerlor of all proporties listed as comparables in the appraisal report, Hurther certify that { have noled any apparent or known adverse conditions in tha subject Impcovements, on the Subject site, oF on any site within the immediate vicinily of the subject property of which ! ain aware and hava made adjustinents for these adverso conditions in my analysis of the properly value to the exlent thal | had market evidence lo support them. t have also commented about the effect of the adverse conditions on tie mavkelabilily of the subject properly. 9. | personally prepared al! conclusinns and opinions aboul the real estate that were set forth in the appraisal reporl. tI I velied on signilicant protessionat assistance from any Individual or Individuals in the pettormance of lhe appraisal or tire preparalion of the appraisal Seport, Lave named such individua\s) and disclosad the specific lasks performed by them in the reconciliation seclion of this appraisal Eeport. Vcerlify Wal any individual so named is quatfied lo perform the tasks. | have not authorized anyane to make a change to any ilem in the report, teeretara, if an unaulhvized change is nade to the appraisal eeport, twill take no responsibilty fori SUPERVISORY APPRAISER’S CERTIFICATION: {ta supervisory apcraiser sighed the appraisal repert, he or she cerlifics and agrees thal: | Vireclly supervise the appraiser who prepared the appraisal ceport, have reviewed the appraisal report, agree with the statements and conclusions ef the appraiser, agree to be bound by the appvaiser’s cevtéications numbered 4 through 7 above, and am laking haltrespensibitty for the appraisal and the appraisal port ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED: 812 2 STREET, MIAMI SHORES, FL_93138. APPRAISER: SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (only if required) Signature: _ Name Dale Signed — Stale Cettiications ME. or State License #: oF Slale License # RECEIVED. State FL Siler Expkation U: Evpiration Da's of Certification of Licansa: JANT 92000 (F Dis [1 vidttot nepact Prog AySION OF Hen ESIALE Fage 2 of 2 Fann‘e Hae Form 10048 6-93 /2{59 FOS DAP Ne 2 een eee eA URI LAG

Docket for Case No: 03-003582PL