STATE OF FLORIDA E | { p DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION tom tina FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD . 105 APR-y P 4: by FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, arti fed OF DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, He pRt ge IV Petitioner, v. CASE NO. 2003045171 2003003790 CHARLES E. SCOTT, Respondent. O5 - | peel PL / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against Charles E. Scott (“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 1851 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 931 NE 79" Street, Miami, Florida 33138-4715. 4. At all times material Charles Scott, (Respondent) was a certified residential real estate FDBPR vy. Charles E. Scott Case No, 2093045171 Administrative Complaint appraiser. 5. On or about February 10, 2001, Respondent Charles Scott developed an appraisal (Report) for certain property known as 1315-1317 NW 102 Street, Miami, Florida 33147 (Property). 6. The Property sold in January, 2001 for $47,300, and December, 2000 for $11,000. 7. The Report does not mention these prior sales. 8. The value opinion in the Report was $110,000. 9. The Report lists only ISC and drive-by as its data sources. 10. The Report lists the Property’s number of beds/baths as 6/4 and also as 4/4. 11. ISC lists the Property’s beds/baths as 4/2. 12. At all times material, the Property’s bed/bath count was 4/2. 13. The Report states that the Property was on a comer lot. 14. At all times material the Property was not on a corner lot. 15. The Report fails to properly describe the Property. 16. In developing the Report, Respondent utilized the sales comparison approach. 17. The Report states that Comparable 1’s bed/bath count as 4/2. 18. ISC states Comparable 1’s bed/bath count as 4/3. 19. At all times material Comparable 1’s bed/bath count was 4/3. 20. The Report misstates Comparable 1’s bed/bath count. 21. The Report states that Comparable 2’s bed/bath count as 4/2. 22. ISC states the bed/bath count for Comparable 2 as 2/1. 23. At all times material the bed/bath count for Comparable 2 was 2/1. FDBPR v. Charles E. Scott Case No. 2093045171 Administrative Complaint 24. The Report misstates Comparable 2’s bed/bath count. 25. The Report states that Comp Rental 2’s bed/bath count as 5/3. 26. ISC states Comp Rental 2’s bed/bath count as 4/2. 27. At all times material Comp Rental 2’s bed/bath count was 4/2. 28. The Report misstates Comp Rental 2’s bed/bath count. 29. The Report states that Comp Rental 3’s bed/bath count as 5/3. 30. ISC states Comp Rental 3’s bed/bath count as 4/2. 31. At all times material Comp Rental 3’s bed/bath count was 4/2. 32. The Report misstates Comp Rental 3’s bed/bath count. 33. The Report states that Comp Listing 3’s bed/bath count as 5/3. 34. ISC states Comp Listing 3’s bed/bath count as 2/2. 35. At all times material Comp Listing 3’s bed/bath count was 2/2. 36. The Report misstates Comp Listing 3’s bed/bath count. 37. The Report contains photographs it purports to be of properties at issue. 38. At all times material, these photographs are not of the properties the Report states them to be. 39. The Report elects comparables that are superior to the Subject property and fails to properly adjust the comparable sales price. 40. Respondent claims the Report was prepared under “as repaired” condition. 41. The Report does not state that it was developed under an “as repaired” condition. 42. The Report fails to adequately describe the purpose or scope of the appraisal. FDBPR y. Charles E. Scott Case No. 2003045171 Administrative Complaint 43. Petitioner requested Respondent’s workfile. 44. The Report fails to state the intended use of the appraisal. 45. The Report’s corresponding workfile did not contain all data the Respondent stated he relied on in developing the Report. 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. COUNT II Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal, specifically Standard 1 and 2, Ethics Rule, Department Rule and Supplemental Standards Rule, or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT ITI Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of culpable negligence, or breach of trust in any business transaction in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida Statutes. COUNT IV Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of failing to retain, for at least five years, original or true copies of any contracts engaging the appraiser’s services, appraisal reports, and supporting data assembled and formulated by the appraiser in preparing appraisal reports in violation of Section 475.629, Florida Statutes and, therefore, in violation of Section 475.624(4), Florida Statutes. FDBPR v. Charles E. Scott Case No. 2003045171 Administrative Complaint 46. 47. FURTHE ESSENTIAL ALLEGATIONS OF MATERIAL FACT Petitioner realleges and incorporates herein Paragraphs One through Three above. On or about February 1, 2001, Respondent Charles Scott developed an appraisal (Report) for certain property known as 1951 NW 81 Street, Miami, Florida 33147 (Property) and conveyed the Report around February 1, 2001. 48. The Report’s corresponding workfile did not contain all data the Respondent stated he relied on in developing the Report. 49, 50. them to be. 59. 60. 6l. The Report’s workfile contained data that did not correspond with the Property. The Report fails to state the intended use of the appraisal. . The Report lists only ISC and drive-by as its data sources. . In developing the Report, Respondent utilized the sales comparison approach. . The Report states that Comparable 2’s bed/bath count as 1/1. . ISC states Comparable 2’s bed/bath count as 3/2. . At all times material Comparable 2’s bed/bath count was 3/2. . The Report misstates Comparable 2’s bed/bath count. . The Report contains photographs it purports to be of properties at issue. . At all times material, these photographs are not of the properties the Report states The Report fails to properly describe the Property or comparable properties. On or about April 15, 2003, Respondent delivered a copy of the Report to Petitioner. The copy of the Report supplied by Respondent to Petitioner on April 15, 2003 had FDBPR v. Charles E. Scott Case No. 2003045171 Administrative Complaint been modified from the Report conveyed around February 1, 2001. 62. Respondent failed to keep a true and accurate copy of the Report. 63. Respondent claims the Report was prepared under “as repaired” condition. 64. The Report does not state that it was developed under an “as repaired”’ condition. 65. The Report fails to adequately describe the purpose or scope of the appraisal. 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, specifically Standard 1 and 2, Ethics Rule, Department Rule and Supplemental Standards Rule, 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, or breach of trust in any business transaction in violation of Section 475.624(2), Florida Statutes. COUNT VII Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of having obstructed or hindered in any manner the enforcement of Chapter 475, Florida Statutes or the performance of any lawful duty by any person acting under the authority of Chapter 475, Florida Statutes in violation of Section 475.626(1)(f), Florida Statutes. FDBPR v. Charles E. Scott Case No, 2003045171 Administrative Complaint COUNT IX Based upon the foregoing, Respondent is guilty of failing to retain, for at least five years, original or true copies of any contracts engaging the appraiser’s services, appraisal reports, and supporting data assembled and formulated by the appraiser in preparing appraisal reports in violation of Section 475.629, Florida Statutes and, therefore, in violation of Section 475 .624(4), 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 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 \ipon 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; FDBPR vy. Charles E. Scott Case No. 203045171 Administrative Complaint 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. SIGNED this _22/_ day of Susur. , 2004. Ron GOR, lorida Department of Business and Professional Regulation a By: Director, Division of Rez! 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 PCP: CW/CK 6/04 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. FDBPR v. Charles E. Scott Case No. 2003045171 Administrative Complaint 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.

Docket for Case No: 05-001224PL