oo (VL , STATE OF FLORIDA “Pa, 62 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATIONS AN I - ice FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD 7 SS "3 4 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & tee PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ~ DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, Petitioner, Vv. CASE NO. 9980819 LUIS M. APARICIO, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against Luis M. Aparicio (“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 2972 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 8390 West Flagler Street #213, Miami, Florida 33134. 4. On or about August 4, 1998, Respondent developed and communicated an appraisal FDBPR v. Luis M Aparicio Case No. 9980819 Administrative Complaint report for the property commonly known as 7715 NW 3 Avenue, Miami, Florida 33150. 5. The report contained the following errors: a. Respondent correctly identifies the location of subject property on the neighborhood section of the report; however, fails to identify the neighborhood boundaries, hence, obfuscating the fact that comparables in the report are outside of subject’s neighborhood. b. Respondent used comparable sales not typical of the neighborhood’s price range while there were comparables typical of subject in the neighborhood. c. In the report, Respondent stated the three comparable sales were located within subject’s general market area when they were not so located. d. In the report, Respondent stated that the three comparables were strong supporters of value for subject when they were not. e. Respondent failed or refused to analyze a previous sale of comparable three, which had closed in January 1998 for $47,500 against the current sale of February 1998 for $120,000. f. Respondent failed or refused to analyze a prior sale for comparable two, which closed in January 1998 for $65,000, against the current sale also in January 1998 for $120,000. g. Respondent failed or refused to analyze a prior sale for comparable one, which closed in March 1998 for $62,500 against the current sale in May 1998 for $118,500. COUNT I 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. FDBPR v. Luis M Aparicio Case No. 9980819 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 in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT II Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of culpable negligence in any business transaction in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida Statutes. COUNT IV Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of fraud in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida Statutes. FURTHER ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT 6. Petitioner realleges and incorporates herein Paragraphs One through Three above. 7. On or about January 19, 1998, Respondent developed and communicated an appraisal report for the property commonly known as 1334 NW 72™ Street, Miami, Florida 33147. 8. The report contained the following errors: a. Failed to report or analyze the existence and impact on value of an apartment complex located on the block adjacent to subject property. b. Failed to report or analyze the impact on value of a railroad located approximately 150 feet from subject property. c. Reported no external obsolescence regardless of the proximity of the aforementioned railroad. FDBPR v. Luis M Aparicio Case No. 9980819 Administrative Complaint d. Reported comparable two is located seventeen blocks from subject property when it is approximately forty blocks. e, Reported that the “four comparable sales presented in this report are from within subject’s general market area.” Comparable two is located in a far superior market area then subject property. f. Failed to adjust for comparable two’s superior market area. COUNT V 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. COUNT VI 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 VII Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of culpable negligence in any business transaction in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida Statutes. FURTHER ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT 9. Petitioner realleges and incorporates herein Paragraphs One through Three above. 10, On or about February 27, 1998, Respondent developed and communicated an appraisal report for the property commonly known as 2125 NW 66" Street, Miami, Florida 33147. 11. The report contained the following errors: a. Reports that subject property is located in a suburban area when it is in fact in an urban FDBPR v. Luis M Aparicio Case No. 9980819 Administrative Complaint area. b. Fails to identify or analyze the existence or impact on value of an apartment complex on a block adjacent to that of subject property. c. As to comparable one, reports “no sales recorded within the last twelve months,” when in fact public records evidence a recording on November 1997 in the amount of $28,900. d. As to comparable two, reports “no sales recorded within the last twelve months” when in fact, public records evidence a recording n January 1998 in the amount of $65,000. e. Fails to identify or analyze the impact on value for comparable two, which faces an expressway. COUNT VII 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. COUNT IX 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 X Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of culpable negligence in any business transaction in violation of Section 475.624(2), 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 FDBPR v. Luis M Aparicio Case No. 9980819 Administrative Complaint 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 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 Section 455.227, Fla. Statutes and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J1-8.002. FDBPR v. Luis M Aparicio Administrative Complaint Case No. 9980819 SIGNED this_ J day of Neolimbexe 2003. FILED ar fogsional Regul grement of Profes ‘ional © pipes Division 0} Real Ests atien PCP: JS/DB/JB 9/03 Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation By: Jason Steele Director, Division of Real Estate ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER S. L. Smith, Senior Attorney Fla. Bar No. 195995 Division of Real Estate Legal Section 400 W. Robinson Street, N801 Orlando, Florida 32801-1757 (407) 481-5632 (407) 317-7260 - FAX 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. FDBPR v. Luis M Aparicio Case No. 9980819 Administrative Complaint 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.

Docket for Case No: 04-001446PL