() Ue a STATE OF FLORIDA Phet pp DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION} Q¢7 5 9 FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD PH 2:99 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, wi OF HEAR Tislve Petitioner, v. CASE NO. 2000-84549 DAVID L. MUSTO, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against David L. Musto (“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 RD2949 in accordance with Chapter 475 Part II of the Florida Statutes. 3. The last license the State issued to Respondent was as a state-certified residential real estate appraiser at 2629 West 23" Street #A, Panama City, Florida 32405. 4. On or about October 19, 1998 and/or October 26, 1998, Respondent developed and FDBPR v. David L. Musto Case No. 200084549 Administrative Complaint communicated with Robert L. Pohlman (PohIman) and Larry E. Jacks (Jacks) an appraisal report (Report) for property commonly known as 506 Maine Avenue, Panama City, Florida 32401 (Subject Property). A copy of the Report is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 1. 5. On or about October 26, 1998, Respondent signed the Report in an unknown capacity. 6. During the course of an official investigation, Respondent admitted to Petitioner’s investigator that he signed the Report ina supervisory capacity. 7. At all times material to the Report and herein, Respondent was not registered as supervisor for Jacks. "8. The Report contained the following errors: a. Indicated that the zoning description of Subject Property was residential and that the zoning compliance was legal, when in fact the zoning description was general commercial and its compliance was as a legal non-conforming use; b. Failed to indicate the specific zoning classification for Subject Property; c. Indicated that site view of Subject Property was “‘homes/canal,” when, in fact, there is no canal located near Subject Property; d. Failed to contain information relating to Subject Property’s proximity to an automotive company’s storage yard, which was located adjacent to Subject Property; e. Indicated an incorrect calculation for depreciation of Subject Property in the cost approach analysis; and f. Indicated in the description of improvements for Subject Property that there were two 2 FDBPR v. David L. Musto Case No. 200084549 Administrative Complaint porches with a total square footage of 230, but the sketch addendum indicated that the total square footage for the two porches was approximately 153 square feet. 9. In the Report, Respondent indicated that the data sources supporting the sales comparison analysis for Subject Property to the comparable sales were by inspection of Subject Property and public records for each of the comparables. 10. In the Report, Respondent indicated that the sales comparison approach was given the most consideration in the Report. 11. On or about November 15, 2000, and November 16, 2000, Petitioner’s investigator obtained a copy of the workfile for Subject Property from Pohlman and Jacks. 12. There was insufficient data in the workfile to support Respondent’s adjustments for the comparable sales used in the sales comparison analysis, in that there were no public records data or other data to support the adjustments contained within the workfile. 13. Respondent failed to verify the data sources. 14, In the Report, Respondent indicated that the construction of comparable sales one and three consisted of brick veneer and that the construction of comparable sale two consisted of brick veneer and wood while Subject Property consisted of metal siding. 15. Respondent failed to explain or adjust for in the Report or addenda the difference in the quality of construction between the Subject Property and the comparable sales. 16. The workfile contained information that there were holes in the walls and ceiling for Subject Property. 17. The Report failed to contain information regarding the holes in the walls and ceiling. 3 FDBPR v. David L. Musto Case No. 200084549 Administrative Complaint 18. The above-stated errors resulted in an inaccurate and misleading appraisal report. COUNT I Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of fraud, misrepresentation, concealment, culpable negligence, or breach of trust in any business transaction in this state or any other state, nation, or territory in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida Statutes. 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 in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT II 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. 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. David L. Musto Case No. 200084549 Administrative Complaint education courses; publication, or any combination of the foregoing which may apply. See Section 475.624, Florida Statutes and Rule 61] 1-8.002, 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__ day of __ 1}: , 2002. ProtéSsional Regulation By: Director, Division of Real Estate FDBPR v. David L. Musto Case No. 200084549 Administrative Complaint ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER Stacy N. Robinson Pierce Fla. Bar No. 182796 FDBPR-Division of Real Estate Legal Section 400 W. Robinson Street, N308A Orlando, Florida 32802-1772 (407) 481-5632 (407) 317-7260 - FAX PCP: MC/CK/JB 11/02 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 duces 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. NETWORK APPRAISAL SERVICES Fie No. 010045 October 26, 1998 Homestar Mortgage Lending $728 Major Boulevard Suite 600 Orlando, FL 32819 Fite Number; 010045 in accordance with your request, | have personally inspected and appraised the real property at: 506 MAINE AVENUE PANAMA CITY, FL 32404 The purpose of this appraisal is to estimate the market value of the subject property, as improved. The property rights appraised are the fee simple interest in the site and improvements, \n my opinion, the estimated market value of the property as of OCTOBER 19,1998 jg: $48,500 FORTY-E)GHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS The attached report contains the description, analysis and supportive data for the conclusions, final estimate of value, descriptive photographs, limiting conditions and appropriate certifications. Larry E. Jacks 0004175 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT EXHIBIT # Pace f or 7 7651-A ASHLEY PARK COURT, SUITE 402, ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32835 407-254-9760 RUDEKI L. PUN, gan sogang Deztsiption UNIF...ARESIOENTIAL APPRAISAL RE...2T rine ws. 010045 Propory address 506 Maine Avenue Gy Panama City State Fl. Zp Code 32.404 Lega! Description Lot 9 Block O, Pinecrest Addilion Couny Bay Assessor's Parcel No. 2269 1-000-000 Tar Yea 1997 RE, Texes$ -O- Special Asswssmenis$ None iiams Gren Omer Alberta W. Willams Ocapant. XL Owner Tenant} Vacani 2 praised Proc Tyee) PUD (_] Condgrninium HUCvva only) HOAS N/A. ttéo Neighbachood a Projac Name Panama City Map Refyentca 123.01 Census Tract 6015.14 Sale Price $ N/A Date of Se N/A Desariplion and $ amount of loan chargesiconcessions to be paid by seks N/A. _ LanaeriCient_ Homeslar Lending Mortgage Corp. Agoess praise Larry E Jacks agtess 2629 Wesl 23rd Street, Suite A, Panama City, Fl. 32405 Predominant Single famtiy housing | Present lend use % Same Levee] oceupaney PRICE AGE : to ins) | On family _ 8 30 tow S24 tomy 5%] 75 _bigh, 80 | Mubifamdy $% | to: I Predominam 4 ¥Al Commerce! 5% 36 mos. Over 6 mas. 40 40 \Vaceant, 5%. ee Bad the racial camposition af the neighborhood ace not appraisal faciere. S ighbothood boundaries and chaacleristics: North - 11th Street, South - Cherry Street, East - Transmitter Road, West - 1 {_) Urban x Suburban [_) Rurat Ove 78% 25-78% Unde: 26% Grown rae Rapid ‘Stable ‘Siow Property values (_) ina Stable Dedining Phares x resing Domandsuppy (7) Shonage Highway Factors that affect cha markocabillty of the propertins in the neighborhood (proximily to employmant and amenitias, employment stability, appeal (o market, otc ) There were no apparent unfavorable factors which would affect he markelability of the subject neighborhood. Ihe | neighborhood is convenient to all areas of employment, public parks, schools and shopping afeas. Appeal to ite markel is average to goad, and is based on price, location and stability. NEIGHBORHOOD. ‘hacker conditions in the subject neighborhood (including Suppori for the above conciusians retaled to the Wand a! property valves, demand/supply, and marketing nie +> such as data on compalitive properties far sale in lhe neighborhood, description of the prevatence af sales and financing concessions, ete): An Average and typical amaunt of listings is found in this neighborhood. No sales or financing concessions were _ foted. Sales to asking price ration is 90%. The average length of time to sale is 180 days. Trend of property _ vatues is stable based upon sales in the area . et Information far PUDE (if applicable) -- Is the developeribulldes in conwol of the Home Owners’ Assacialion (HOA)? YES re) . Aaproxmnale total numbes of units in the subject project Approximate tolal number of units for sale in the subject project Topogtaphy At Grade Level No | Size Typical forarea hacen TR aaa pares tc Shape Reclangular ~ Boning comptancs (x) Legal _{_) Legal noncontarring (Grandlathered use) [_Jitegal (“) No zoning Orainage Appears adequate hast A bes! use as improved [x] Prasani use [ ] Oba use (oxpiain) View * Homes/Canal__ Pubke Other Of-alte lmprovamente Type Publ Private) Landscaping Average . Steet Asphalt (x) = Driveway Sutace Unpaved = Curb/gue None Appaenteasements None apparent _ =) Sidewak None ) | FEMA Special Fiood Hazard Area ye |x) re) Stestights Halogen x FEMA Zone C Map Date 1/3/86“ aly None FEMA Map No. 120012 00100 . Comments (apparent adverse easements, encroachmanis, special assessments, slide ateas, iisgal or legal nonconforming zoning, use, vic.) No apparcrt adverse easements, encroachments, special assessments or slide areas. Use is legal and conforming. RRCHEN EQUIP. AMENTIES Poo CptViniavg- EXTERIOR DESCRIPTION FOUNDATION BASEMENT INSULATION Foundation Conc.Blk. | sub No Ava Sqft.” None Root _ am Sxerorvats Metal Sdg__! cawspe Yes Fished None caiing Adeq, _{¥] Type (Dean) Detached] Roof sutace AIS Gasenent NO Celing None. wats Adeq {%] Design (Style) Rambier_| Gutlers & Dunspts. None Sump Pure No Wats None Poor {-] Fy existiigPropcsed = Existin: Window Type Alum. S/H__| Dampness None nated | Fror None None. c FA% 51 Years } stamsaeens Yes Setttement None noted | outsde Enay None vasa Ee zl ) 45 Years | manutaciurad House NO Infestation None Apo. _ H : Doing T itcren | Oen | Famiyrim] Ree. Aim | Bedooms | abate | cavndy Toner [a sa FL 4 | 1 3 10 367 oI |. . é —L 4 = 3 Bedroom(s} 1 Battie), of Gross | rig does G 3 Fa 0) Retigesalor ©) | Freplacessy + C) Was Drywail/Avg~ RangelOven C) | Pate () | Garage : Disposal Deck rs Attached Dishwasher Pon 230SF/2 Detached FantHood Fence {_} } Buitun Moowave Pool C} | carpon CondionAvg, WasheDryer [") | criveway Addlional fealwres (special energy effclent items, ete}, nSulation Condition of vie improvements. depreciation (physical, Functional, and ealernel), repai's nuedod, quality of construction, remodeling/agditions, ela. Minor cosmetic sprucing is being noted ebove. This is considered minor in nature and will be considered in the S.C AL The condition of the improvement is Average. with normal depreciation Advarse anvicanmental conditions (such as, bul not limliad to hazardous wastes, toxic substances, alc.) preseni in (re improvements, on the ile. or in ihe 18 vicinity of the subject property: Pome Faw tae ob ns Iota wea e PAGE 1 OF 2 Ya et td he A) ceed ee ep AE irverer ener Valuation Section UNIF...../ RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL RE..RT FileNo__ 010045 ESTIMATED SITEVALUE ce eee =$ 10,000] Comments on Cost Approach (such as, source of cost estimate ESTIMATED REPROOUCTION COST-NEW OF IMPROVEMENTS: site vatue, square foot caleviation and for HUD, VA ang FmHA, the Dwelling 967 sa.ft. @s_45.00 =s 43.515 estimated remaining economic life of the praperty): fy Sa.Ft. @S 3 The Marshall and Swift cost publication is utiliz Fi Apphances/Utility Shed ® 2,500 the estimated reproduction cost approach to va Fd GaageCapat O $4. A. QS 6 0 Est, Remaining Economic Life 35 yrs. to 40 Vis E74 Total Estimated CostNew =$ 46,015 Est. Remaining Physical Life N/A Yrs. N/A Yrs. 4 17) Less Physical | Functional | External Land value is derived from vacant land sales in the Fi] dernedaion $10,501) 0 $s 40,500 35.618 area. RECE! Depreaaled Vaiue cf improvements = 515) = 7 "Asis" Value of Sule Improvements: we . 2s 3.000 _ : mt 2 5 70 it} _ INDICATED VALUE BY COST APPROACH ss S 48,515 _ ITEM SUBJECT T COMPARABLE NO. 1 COMPARABLE NO. 2 rey Fel qMDEGGREARE 5 . 506 Maine Avenue a0 904 Agéexs Panama Cit Greentree Road Nottingham Drive Greentree Road Proximity lo Subject a cks Northeast 7 Blocks Northeast 8 Blocks Northeast_ EES 51,000 IES § 48.400 | eR OBR 5 f S32 oes S650 OMS 400 Public Records Public Records Public Records | ORB 1803 Page 2072 ORB 1798 pear 4371 ORB 1782 Page 115 | DESCRIPTION Sick “ CRIPTION, +103 Adasiment DESCRIPTION 119 paper 7] Conv. ‘ Conv. 4 }FHA tiene None Known} None Known None Known} 1198, ! {6/5/98 : 3/2798 : Average A Average A verage i e Simple + Fee Simpie Fee Staple t Average A Average ‘ Average ‘ i i interior : inte ior i : Avgi1Star ‘ Avgit Story ae A wood i i - -1,425136 Years i -1,000| Average i 005300; -4,0 t Hy -160 888 sar: t : None : : i None i : Average H Average H Average Dee jace/WACU : [CHICA 7 _-1,500{ CHICA’ 1 ‘Oo Insulation Insulation H Insulation : . Fel GaracexCore 1CPACG __-3,000/1 Carport 17,000 [None : F4 Porch, Palio, Deck, ! 500/Porch 7 $00/Porch : 7 : 2,000!Storage Shed i No Adj. {None ms ‘ Fence ‘ Fence te $s 4,065 le Oke i 46,915 Comments on Sales Compaison (ecudng neighborhood. The compat the subject property's compatinility to the neighborh rable sales are those which reflect the market characteristics of the subject. Consideration is given {o all three comparable sales. em SUBIECT COMPARABLE NO. + COMPARABLENO 2 ‘+: COMPARABLENO 3 Date, Price and Osta | None None None None Souteto prix ales | None None None None wun yer fappasa | Public Records} Pubtic Records __{Public Records. Public Records ‘Analyse 01 any ar ani agreement cl sale, option, or Ksling of Ino subject proporty and analysis of any pcs walcs of subject and cerrparablas within one yaaw of he date ct appr asa Sudject is not listed for sale. Subject nas not sold during the past year. INDICATED VALUE BY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH. INDICATED VALUE BY INCOME APPROACH (If App This apprasalismade [X) “asi” Estimated Market Renc ‘sibjecl lo the repats, aaratons, inspections canctons (sted below ; L) ‘subject lo completion per plans and spedivaios Condions ot Appeisat This is a Complete Appraisal/Summary Report. See the altached sketch. Fina Rewnedainn The Sales Comparison Approach Is given most consideration in this appraisal report. The Incurne ~ Approach to Value is not utilized as homes in this area are nof typically purchased for income purposes. No value §s given furnishings or personal items marked "P” in the appliances section of this appraisal report. ‘The purpose of this appraisatis 10 estimate Ine market valus of the teal property that fy APPRAISER: is the subject of this report, based on the atove candilions and the castiicalion, conbrgent and biting condiions, and market value definilion thal are stated in the attached Fradda Mac fom 43Fannie Mae Form 1008 (Revised 6/93 ) (WE) ESTIMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT'S THE SUBJECT OF THISREPORT,aSoF October 19,1996 _ fe] (WHICH iS THE DATE OF INSPECTION AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS REPORT) TO BE 5 48,500 (Joe [XJ ne Namo Larry SUPERMIS! PRISER ON! nD): ~ Signature Py Name Robert L. Pohiman, SRA Inspecl Poperty Dale Report Signed October 19.1998 Dale Ragen Sqned October 15, 1996 Stale Corifcaizn s_ St.Reg RI #0004757 Sue FL Siata Ceritcationg St.Cent Res.REA #0000056 swe FL. © Stale License Slate, 2 Stale License # Slate Fretbeten Foote 6 PAGE 2 OF 2 TH SOOU Ade | Perle ter te 6 Rober. Pohiinan, SRA Syl pee? ‘obert L. Pohiman, WEIL i SKETCH ADDENDUM ZipCode S240T" | Borrower! Client Property Address 506 MAINE AVENUE FL. Siare PANAMA CITY Covaty HOMESTAR MORTGAGE UA Rigs Agsacvad 1 (800) 243-545 Ne800 ‘SCL MAP 44 i i PVD vil we bia EXHI PAGE __(p- s «