The Issue The issues in this case are as follow: Did Respondent violate Section 475.25(1)(b), Florida Statutes, by representing to Laverne Hahn that he would rent his house to her if she sold her house, representing to Ms. Hahn that he would deliver certain papers to her attorney, and representing to Ms. Hahn that the closing on her house would not occur until after February 15, 1981? Did Respondent violate Section 475.25(1)(d), Florida Statutes, by failing to deliver survey, abstract and title insurance policy documents to Ms. Hahn or her attorney?
Findings Of Fact At all times relevant hereto, the Respondent, Allan R. Heuton, held real estate salesman license #0313305 Assued by the Board of Real Estate (now Florida Real Estate Commission). At all times relevant hereto, Respondent was registered as a salesman with Hugh Anderson Real Estate, Inc., at 2631 East Oakland Park Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33339. Respondent listed with his employer, Hugh Anderson Real Estate, Inc., Laverne Hahn's offer to sell her residence and advised Ms. Hahn at that time that upon the sale of her residence she could rent his residence for a period of six months at the rate of $300 per month. In reliance on Respondent's statement, Ms. Hahn proceeded to sell her residence and made no other arrangements for a place to live, expecting to move into Respondent's house upon closing as per their agreement. (Petitioner's Exhibit 2, Pages 5 and 8.) Respondent testified to the events surrounding the transaction which gave rise to the Administrative Complaint. The Board presented the deposition of Ms. Hahn taken in Lakeland, Florida. Respondent admitted that he had advised Ms. Hahn it was not unusual to have closings delayed 60 days, and did offer and stood ready to rent his house to Ms. Hahn. Respondent testified that he did not recall picking up any documents from Ms. Hahn, but that had he done so it was his normal business practice to immediately deliver the documents to the attorney handling the closing. Ms. Hahn's deposition reflects that she could not locate the Respondent although she attempted to contact him through his broker's office. This was the reason she could not rent his house. Respondent testified that Ms. Hahn never asked to rent his house. Respondent testified that on January 14, 1981, the day after his birthday, he was suddenly taken ill and had to have emergency surgery in the early morning hours of that day. Respondent's testimony was corroborated by the testimony of Sheilah Kirk, who testified that she visited Respondent in the hospital on January 14 or 15, 1981, and that he was recovering from surgery at that time. Respondent testified that he was hospitalized for more than one week. Respondent testified that he was visited by the manager of the brokerage office for which he worked. It is hardly credible that Ms. Hahn could not find a man who was sick in a hospital for more than one week and whose whereabouts were known to his brokerage office. Wherefore, the Hearing Officer disregards the deponent's testimony and accepts the Respondent's testimony as the more credible concerning the rental of his house Ms. Hahn's deposition reflects that Respondent told her she would not have to move out until February of 1981. Respondent admits he told Ms. Hahn that closings were frequently delayed 60 days or more. The contract for sale originally provided for closing on December 29, 1980, a time which was changed to January 15, 1981, by persons unknown on a date unknown. The contract was signed by Ms. Hahn, who is presumed to have known its terms. Notwithstanding Respondent's statements as to delayed closings, Ms. Hahn had no basis for using such statement as a basis for planning in light of the contract which she signed. Again, Respondent's testimony is deemed to be more credible in light of the closing date provided in the contract for sale. A further conflict exists between Ms. Hahn's deposition and Respondent's testimony regarding the allegation that Respondent picked up certain documents from her but failed to deliver them. Respondent's statement that he had no recollection of the events, but that his regular practice was to deliver such documents immediately, and that since the time in question he has not discovered any such documents in his papers, is deemed credible.
Recommendation Having found that the allegations against the Respondent, Allan R. Heuton, were not proven, it is recommended that the Administrative Complaint against Respondent be dismissed. DONE and ORDERED this 22nd day of July, 1982, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 22nd day of July, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Bruce D. Lamb, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Mr. Allan R. Heuton 6891 Forrest Street Hollywood, Florida 33024 C. B. Stafford, Executive Director Florida Real Estate Commission 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Samuel Shorstein, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Findings Of Fact In January, 1985, Petitioner was convicted of thirteen felony counts involving 12 fraudulent applications for FHA and VA loans, obstruction of justice, add failure to report income for federal income tax purposes. For the counts involving a conspiracy to defraud agencies of the federal government in connection with loan applications, obstruction of justice, and falsifying an income tax return, Petitioner received a sentence of two years. This sentence was later modified, and Petitioner was given five years' probation for all counts. Petitioner's probation ends in about two years. The criminal acts concerning the loan applications were done in order to assist a real estate brokerage firm in Illinois owned by Petitioner and his wife, who was also named in the indictment, to sell homes with VA and FHA guaranteed and insured financing. Petitioner was convicted of knowingly causing the making of loan applications showing inflated purchase prices and nonexistent gifts as sources of downpayments. The net effect of these practices was to leave the mortgage lender undersecured. On or about November 2, 1987, Petitioner submitted an application for licensure as a real estate salesman. In his application, he disclosed the above felony convictions, the revocation of his Illinois real estate broker's license which took place as a result of the convictions, and the denial of an earlier application for Florida licensure as a real estate salesman which denial was due to his convictions and the revocation of his Illinois broker's license. By letter filed December 2, 1987, Respondent notified Petitioner that his application for licensure as a real estate salesman had been denied because he failed to meet the requirements that he be "honest, truthful, trustworthy, and of good character, and shall have a good reputation for fair dealing." The letter cited as reasons for this determination the same reasons cited in the earlier denial plus a recommended order filed on July 27, 1987, in DOAH Case No. 87-2018, in which it was recommended that the application be denied. Although Petitioner has not regained his Illinois real estate broker's license, he received an Illinois real estate salesman's license in the fall of 1986. Since his conviction, Petitioner has taken various educational programs useful in the real estate business. On March 17, 1987, Petitioner graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree in Business Administration from California Coast University. On November 1, 1987, Petitioner completed the Florida Real Estate Commission Course #1 sponsored by the Gold Coast School of Real Estate. By letter dated November 30, 1987, L. Edward Holmes, a licensed real estate broker, notified Respondent that he was willing to supervise personally Petitioner if he were granted a license. By letter dated March 10, 1987, V. A. Indovina, M.D., who is staff psychiatrist with the DuPage County (Illinois) Health Department, notified Respondent that he (or she) felt that Petitioner has learned the consequences of his past behavior and will not engage in illegal behavior in the future. On or about November 24, 1987, Petitioner applied for a Florida contractor's license with the Construction Industry Licensing Board. He clearly disclosed his convictions in the application. Shortly prior to the hearing, the Construction Industry Licensing Board informed Petitioner that he was eligible to take the next contractor's examination. Respondent entered a final order on August 19, 1987, adopting the recommended order of June 17, 1987, in DOAH Case No. 87-2018, and denying Respondent's earlier application for licensure as a real estate salesman.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that a Final Order be entered denying the application of Petitioner for licensure as a real estate salesman. DONE and RECOMMENDED this 10th day of May, 1988, in Tallahassee, Florida. ROBERT E. MEALE Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 10th day of May, 1988. COPIES FURNISHED TO: LAWRENCE S. GENDZIER, ESQUIRE ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL DEPARTMENT OF LEGAL AFFAIRS 400 WEST ROBINSON STREET ROOM 212 ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801 ROGER WOZNIAK 14 HICKORY HILL ROAD TEQUESTA, FLORIDA 33469 DARLENE F. KELLER EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION POST OFFICE BOX 1900 400 WEST ROBINSON STREET ORLANDO, FLORIDA 32801 WILLIAM O'NEIL GENERAL COUNSEL DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION 130 NORTH MONROE STREET TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-0750
Findings Of Fact Petitioner, Kimberly D. Coyle, filed her first application for licensure as a real estate salesman in 1979 with Respondent, Department of professional Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission. She did not pass the examination and resubmitted a second application in February, 1980. However, she did not take the examination at that time. By application dated November 2, 1981, she filed another application for licensure with Respondent. All responses on the application at that time were complete and correct. The application was returned to Petitioner in January, 1982 with a request that she resubmit the same and enclose a passport photograph and a set of her fingerprints which had been previously omitted. Because Petitioner was in a hospital at that time, her mother returned the original application together with the requested fingerprints and photograph. These were received by the Commission on February 10, 1982. The November application was refiled a third time on March 4, 1982 because the required $25 application fee had not been included with the prior two submissions. Applicant was thereafter approved for licensure, and successfully passed the salesman examination. On December 8, 1981, Petitioner was arrested in Dade County and charged with three counts of possessing a controlled substance. She was later placed in the South Miami Hospital Addiction Treatment Program on December 11, 1981 where she remained for six weeks. On March 1, 1982, Coyle was accepted as a participant in the State Attorney's Diversion Program and has been a successful participant since that time. As a result of her participation, adjudication on the charges has been withheld pending a successful completion of the conditions of her program. On April 30, 1982, the Commission wrote Petitioner a letter in which it advised her that the December 8 arrest had come to its attention, and requested that she forward a "complete explanation of these charges along with an explanation of (her) partial answer to. . .question (six)." Question six requires that the applicant answer whether she had ever been arrested without regard to whether she was convicted, sentenced, pardoned or paroled. Petitioner furnished a reply to the Commission's inquiry on June 8, 1982. She gave a full explanation of the charges and stated that a partial answer to question six was given on the March 4 submission because "as of March 4, 1982. . .(she) had not yet appeared in court." On July 2, 1982, Respondent notified petitioner that her application was denied on the ground that her answer to question six on the application "failed to reveal the 1981 drug charge." The denial precipitated the instant case. 1/ Petitioner is twenty-one years old. She is currently employed as a waitress in Miami. If her application is approved, she intends to work for her mother's real estate firm in Marco Island, Florida. Coyle stated that when her application was originally submitted in November, 1981, it was complete and accurate. The resubmissions in February and March, 1982 were made by her mother, and simply involved the refiling of the November application with the additional items (photograph, fingerprints and check) requested by the Commission. There was no intent on the part of Coyle to deceive the Commission, and when asked to clarify her response to question six, she did so in a full and truthful manner.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the application of Kimberly D. Coyle for licensure as a real estate salesman be GRANTED. DONE and ENTERED this 28th day of September, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. DONALD R. ALEXANDER Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of September, 1982.
