Findings Of Fact Pursuant to a search conducted inside the Leon County Florida home residence of the Respondent and her husband, Lynwood Moore, the following items were discovered and seized by agents of the Leon County Sheriff's Department and the Tallahassee Police Department, pursuant to a search warrant: A brown print canvas bag which contained seven plastic packets. Each plastic packet contained cocaine, a controlled substance named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. The total aggregate weight of the cocaine within the seven bags was forty-five grams. The said brown print canvas bag also contained three bottles which themselves contained benzocaine, inositil, and procaine HCL, respectively. A brown case which contained a set of triple beam balance scales, graduated in metric weights. The said scales contained a residue of cocaine, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. The said residue was located on the weighing pan of the scales. Three smoking pipes which contained an aggregate of grams of cannabis, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03 Florida Statutes. A transparent plastic bag which contained 1.9 grams of cannabis, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. A cellophane cigarette pack wrapper which contained 2.4 grams of cannabis, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. A brown glass vial which contained a residue of cocaine, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. Attached to the said vial was a miniature spoon. Two transparent glass vials which each contained a - residue of cocaine, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. A small gold colored straw or tube which contained a residue of cocaine, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. A single edged razor blade which contained a residue of cocaine, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. A partially burned, hand-rolled cigarette which contained .3 grams of cannabis, a controlled substance, named or described in Section 893.03, Florida Statutes. The Respondent married Lynwood hove on June 27,1970, and the two have lived together as husband and wife since that date to the present time. The Respondent has lived at the Leon County Florida home residence described in Paragraph One since 1977. The Respondent was certified by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission on November 29, 1974 as a law enforcement officer and issued certificate Number 02- 13249. Respondent was employed with the Florida State University Police Department on November 29, 1974, and assigned as a uniform patrol officer. The Respondent performed this function as a full-time employee until October 22, 1982 when she was promoted to the position of Education Officer. The Respondent performed this function as a full-time employee until February 15, 1983. (a) On June 4, 1975, the Respondent wrote and filed a police report as the reporting officer. The Respondent stated in the report that upon the arrest and search of an individual on a charge of vandalism, three cigarettes which appeared to be marijuana were found in the individual's wallet. The Respondents wrote and filed an evidence impoundment form regarding the incident which described her impoundment of three suspected marijuana cigarettes and a "Zig Zag" package. On November 15, 1975, the Respondent wrote and filed a police report as the reporting officer. The Respondent stated in the report that she and another officer had stopped a motorist for a traffic violation. The Respondent stated that the other officer conducted a pat down search of the motorist and discovered what appeared to be a marijuana cigarette in the motorist's shirt pocket. On October 20, 1976, the Respondent wrote and filed a police report as the reporting officer. In the report, the Respondent stated that during a pat down search of an individual she found marijuana on the individual's person and seized it. On December 21, 1977, the Respondent wrote and filed a police report as the reporting officer. In the report, the Respondent stated that during the search of an arrested person's automobile, she discovered a plastic box which contained one suspected cannabis cigarette, a plastic bag of suspected cannabis and a plastic bag of suspected hashish. The Respondent stated in her report that she arrested the person for possession of cannabis and hashish. The Respondent wrote and filed an evidence impoundment form regarding the incident which described her impoundment of a rolled cigarette, a plastic bag of marijuana, a partially smoked cigarette, a plastic bag of hashish, a cigarette roller and cigarette papers. On May 9, 1978, the Respondent wrote and filed a police report as the reporting officer. In the report, the Respondent stated that she found a marijuana cigarette in a truck that three juveniles stood by. The Respondent also stated in her report that she observed rolling papers that were apparently dropped on the ground by the juveniles upon her approach. The Respondent's report also indicated that one of the juveniles was searched and the search uncovered a plastic bag containing marijuana. The Respondent wrote and filed an evidence impoundment form regarding the incident which described her impoundment of suspected marijuana cigarettes. On July 25,1979, the Respondent wrote and filed a police report as a reporting officer. The Respondent stated in the report that she had assisted another officer in stopping a motorist. The Respondent stated in her report that upon looking into the motorist's vehicle, she saw a plastic bag containing suspected cannabis which she seized. The Respondent stated in her report that a further search of the motorist's vehicle revealed a rolled cigarette of suspected cannabis, eleven pieces of cigarettes and suspected cannabis seeds. The Respondent arrested the motorist for possession of cannabis. On October 8; 1979, the Respondent wrote and filed a police report as the reporting officer. The Respondent stated in the report that she arrested a person for driving under the influence of alcohol and possession of less than twenty grams of cannabis. The Respondent wrote and filed an evidence impoundment form regarding the arrest which described her impoundment of a brown pipe, two packages of smoking papers and cannabis. Tallahassee police received information that Lynwood Moore, husband of Respondent, was selling drugs in this area. In a combined operation with local authorities and the federal drug administration, Richard G. Hafner, an FDLA agent in Panama City, came to Tallahassee to set up a meeting with Moore to buy cocaine. With the assistance of an informant, Hafner contacted Moore and arranged for the informant to pick up one ounce of cocaine on January 18, l983. On February 2, 1983 Hafner and the informant met Moore at a filling station and they arranged for Hafner to come to an address that evening to buy an ounce of cocaine. Hafner, accompanied by the informant who was pregnant at the time, went to the address which he discovered to be a house outside the city set back from the highway more than one hundred yards with no lights on. Two or three cars were parked in front and Hafner decided the area was too dangerous under the circumstances and he returned to Tallahassee. The informant then called Moore's residence and Respondent answered the telephone. Hafner took the phone from the informant and told Respondent he was calling about the "puppies" and that the area selected to purchase the puppies was unsatisfactory as being too remote and requested she get the message to Lynwood. Hafner had been told by the informant that in telephone conversations with Moore one "puppy" was to be used to designate one ounce of cocaine. When Hafner asked Respondent to give the message to her husband, she appeared to fully understand the message she was to deliver. At a subsequent meeting with Hafner, Lynwood Moore became suspicious of Hafner and refused to sell him any cocaine. For several years Lynwood Moore has bred, raised and sold greyhound dogs, both as a business and an avocation. Respondent testified that she frequently got calls from prospective greyhound buyers inquiring about buying dogs from her husband. Some of these calls would be late in the evening and be received from women. Geneen Marsh, the informant, agreed to help police authorities arrest Lynwood Moore in exchange for releasing her husband from prison. Ms. Marsh had been buying cocaine from Moore for more than six months making purchases of 1/8 ounce twice per week. She often called the Moore residence and on occasion talked to Respondent who would pass messages to her husband. Marsh never received any cocaine from Respondent but Respondent was at home on several occasions when Marsh picked up her "buy" at the Moore residence. On one occasion Lynwood Moore had the balance scale on which the cocaine was weighed in the room while Marsh was there to pick up her buy and Respondent came into the room where the scales were in clear view. Following the controlled buys of cocaine from Lynwood Moore, the police obtained a search warrant and, on February 15, 1983, a search was made of the Moore's residence. Upon arrival of the police officers accompanied by Lynwood Moore they allowed Lynwood to go in first to alert his mother who was living with them so she would not be too upset at the arrival of the police. Upon entering the residence the police put all occupants in the living room while the search was conducted. Upon their arrival Respondent was in the bathtub washing her daughter's hair. She was told the police were there and when she exited the bathroom she was taken immediately to the living room. Upon being told the nature of the search Respondent gave no evidence of surprise but remained stoical. Two police officers searched the master bedroom occupied by Respondent and her husband. The officer who searched the walk-in closet found the items in findings l(a) and l(b) above on the floor of the closet. Although these bags were under hanging clothes on the side of the closet containing men's clothing, they could be seen without first having to remove the clothes which partially obscured these bags. The aroma of cannabis was noted in the bedroom by the police officers. The other police officer, Spears, searched the remainder of the room. On the top of the dresser in the master bedroom Spears found a cup containing several .38 caliber bullets, a razor blade with some white powder, later identified as cocaine, on the cutting edge, and police collar insignia. Also on the dresser was a marijuana cigarette, a glass cutting screen, and a man's jewelry box. Inside the jewelry box were rings, cuff links, a bag containing marijuana, three bottles containing traces of cocaine, and many wrappers used to wrap bills in $1000 and $2000 bundles. In the bottom drawer of the night stand alongside the bed were three marijuana pipes containing some marijuana in each. These pipes were covered by letters, insurance policies and exercise instructions. Some of Respondent's personal effects were kept in this night stand. Lynwood Moore testified that his wife never touched any of his possessions or intruded on his side of the closet. She wouldn't dare open his jewelry box and look in it. He normally kept the cocaine in a detached building on his property but a few weeks before the raid brought the cocaine into the house where it would not absorb as much moisture as in the out building. He insisted his wife had no knowledge that he was dealing drugs and that he left home at all hours and returned when he pleased without offering any explanation for his actions. Respondent testified that she never looked on her husband's side of the closet that she had never seen any evidence of drugs in their residence that Lynwood had been raising and selling greyhounds for several years and she often received calls regarding purchase of these dogs that she never saw Ms. Marsh until she testified at the earlier Career Service hearing that she never walked in while Lynwood was dispensing drugs to Marsh and that she never saw a marijuana cigarette, the razor blade, scales, or any other evidence of drugs in her home. On the other hand Respondent, while undergoing training leading to certification as a law enforcement officer, received training in drugs, in drug identification and drug paraphernalia. She also received refresher courses from time to time. After her promotion to sergeant she was made education officer at the FSU police department and given the duty, inter alia, of instructing other officers in the prevention of drugs on campus. A display board with pictorial identification of various drugs and drug paraphernalia was on the wall in her office. As noted in finding of fact 5 above Respondent has made numerous arrests for possession of controlled substances and was fully capable of identifying a marijuana cigarette and paraphernalia used with controlled substances. Accordingly, her testimony that she never saw any drugs or any drug paraphernalia in her home is simply not credible. While she may never have participated in any of her husband's "dealings" the paraphernalia associated with such transactions could hardly have been kept in the master bedroom and Respondent be totally unaware of its presence.
The Issue The issue is whether the alcoholic beverage license #23-03711 SRX, Series #4-COP issued to Respondent should be revoked, suspended, or otherwise disciplined because the licensee permitted patrons to commit criminal offenses on the licensed premises, including possession, delivery and distribution of controlled substances such as cocaine; because a nuisance is maintained on the licensed premises; or because the premises are a notorious gathering place for those predisposed to deal and deliver controlled substances in violation of Florida law.
Findings Of Fact All Purchase Corp. owns the restaurant and bar known as Flame Steak, located at 216 Lincoln Road, Miami Beach, Florida. The establishment holds a Series #4-COP license, #23- 03711 SRX, for the sale of beer, wine and liquor on the premises. The owner of the licensed premises is Mr. Gilberto Rivas. The licensed location consists of a 35 foot glass store front on Lincoln Road. As one enters the restaurant, immediately to the left there are tables, and farther to the left is the kitchen, which contains an open flame grill (hence the name of the establishment). Going deeper into the restaurant, at the end of the kitchen area is a bar with stools. There are more tables in the center of the room, and to the right is a dance floor. At the right rear of the dance floor is a D.J. booth. At the rear left of the establishment is a staircase leading to an upstairs hall, where the men's and women's bathrooms are located. The establishment uses the services of a security guard firm, Columbo Investigations. One guard ordinarily remains at the entrance to check IDs of patrons, and to pat patrons down, to be sure they are not carrying weapons into the establishment. In the year before the emergency suspension, the Miami Beach Police Department responded to 28 calls of incidents at the licensed premises, but none of these calls were for narcotic violations. Another guard is ordinarily stationed in the hall upstairs just in front of the bathrooms. A third guard occasionally roams the establishment. Both the security guards and the bartender are under instructions from Mr. Rivas to immediately remove any patron who breaks the law, especially one who is disorderly, drunken, or otherwise causing a problem. Although the security guard and bartender also testified that Mr. Rivas had instructed them to remove anyone engaging in any illegal activity such as the sale of cocaine, the Hearing Officer is persuaded that the focus of their activities is to remove drunken or disorderly patrons. There is no evidence of any specific program for observing patrons to watch for illegal narcotics transactions. Indeed, the evidence shows a rather casual attitude on the part of security guards to the presence of narcotics, for at one time during the investigation, one of the security guards was smoking marijuana in the men's room. (See, Finding 11, infra.). On another occasion, a DABT officer openly passed a one inch by one inch baggie of cocaine to another officer on the stairs going up to the men's room, which only elicited a wink from the security guard. (See, Finding 16, infra.). Over time, three confidential informants for the City of Miami Beach Police Department told the police that illegal drug transactions were taking place at Flame Steak. Based on these reports, the Department began an undercover investigation, which included agents from the Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco of the State. The evidence of the reputation of Flame Steak as a location where drugs can be purchased was rather general, but it did serve to explain a legitimate reason for the Police Department and the DABT to have undertaken their investigation. The police did not go to Mr. Rivas with their information before the investigation began. The investigation began on February 18, 1990, and continued through the arrests made at Flame Steak and the suspension of the alcoholic beverage license on Friday, April 6, 1990. Events of February 18, 1990. Miami Beach Police Detective Elicio Zacarias went to Flame Steak with a confidential informant at approximately 12:30 a.m. on February 18, 1990, in an undercover capacity. He spent several hours there, and the confidential informant introduced him to a man, "Eric" and a woman. After meeting Eric, Detective Zacarias asked Eric "how much he could get for $40" as he was standing at the bar. Eric told him to move to a table about 10 feet from the bar. Shortly thereafter Eric returned, and put a one inch by one inch clear plastic baggie of cocaine on the table top next to Detective Zacarias' hand. Detective Zacarias then gave him $40 cash in plain view; Detective Zacarias flicked the baggie to get residue from the top of the baggie down into its bottom in an open manner. Detective Zacarias then made three or four trips to the men's room in order to appear to be snorting the cocaine. He did not pretend to use the drug in the view of anyone in the public areas of the bar; he merely went to the men's room. That same night, Eric introduced Detective Zacarias to the owner of Flame Steak, Mr. Gilberto Rivas. Mr. Rivas is at the location every night. Eric obviously knew Mr. Rivas, and appeared to be familiar with the other people who worked at the bar. Nothing Eric said to Detective Zacarias implied that Mr. Rivas used cocaine, or had ever seen cocaine being passed in the bar, however. Before the bar closed, Detective Zacarias approached Eric for a second time and asked if he could get some more "to go". Eric replied "sure," and went to the front of the establishment to meet with some other person who Detective Zacarias could not see. Eric returned and gave him a similar baggie in a hand- to-hand exchange over the bar during which Detective Zacarias gave Eric $25. Detective Zacarias then left -the bar at about 4:00 a.m. with the two baggies of cocaine. Events of the night of February 24 and 25, 1990. Detective Zacarias returned to the Flame Steak with DABT Investigator Weiner and the confidential informant at approximately 11:00 p.m. on February 24, 1990, in an undercover capacity. The confidential informant introduced Detective Zacarias to a white latin male at the bar, near the staircase to the restrooms. The confidential informant asked that man if he could get something for later, to which the unidentified man replied "I'll take care of you," and told Detective Zacarias and the confidential informant to go up to the men's room. That unidentified man then came to the men's room and in the open part of the men's room sold a similar small baggie of cocaine for $45. Detective Zacarias and the confidential informant then returned to the bar and sat with Agent Weiner. From time to time they would go up to the men's room to appear to be using the cocaine. At about 1:45 a.m. on the morning of February 25, 1990, they made another buy from the same individual. This time the baggie of cocaine was transferred hand-to-hand but below the bar level. Detective Zacarias paid $45 for the cocaine. He left at about 3:00 a.m. Events of March 3, 1990. Detective Zacarias again went to Flame Steak with another undercovered detective, John Quiros on Saturday March 3, 1990. They met the same unidentified white latin male who had sold Detective Zacarias cocaine on two occasions on the night of February 24 and 25, 1990. Detective Zacarias asked him if there was anything available, and was told to go to the men's room. The unidentified latin male removed a baggie from his wallet, which he sold to Detective Zacarias for $30. Detective Zacarias was at the restaurant for approximately 2-3 hours on that occasion. Events of March 16, 1990. Detective Zacarias again went to Flame Steak on Friday, March 16, 1990, at about 10:30 p.m. with Detective Quiros and DABT Investigator Weiner and a female detective for the Miami Beach Police Department, Kelli Reid. The were also in the company of the confidential informant. After they were there almost two hours, Detective Zacarias was introduced to a black female, and he asked her in Spanish if there was "anything available." She replied "for $40 I can get you enough," and Detective Zacarias gave her $40. She went over to a latin male at the bar who took a small baggie, similar to the other baggies in which cocaine had been packaged on prior occasions, from his right rear pocket and gave it to her; she in turn gave it to Detective Zacarias over the table. At about 1:45 a.m. Detective Zacarias asked the same female if she could get more at a lesser price. She then introduced Detective Zacarias to a different white latin male who came to their table from the bar. She told him in Spanish "bring me back for 30" and about 20 minutes later he gave her a baggie which she gave to Detective Zacarias hand- to-hand at waist level containing cocaine. That same morning at about 3:30 a.m. Detective Zacarias asked the black female if he could buy some "to take home." She took Detective Zacarias to the second man again; he took the cocaine from his shirt pocket, and gave it to her for $35. Detective Zacarias held the cocaine in his right hand, examined it, put it in his pocket while he was at a table about five feet from the bar area. That same morning, Detective Zacarias saw a man whom he knew as "Freddie" snorting cocaine in the men's room as Detective Zacarias entered. At about 4:30 a.m. on March 17, 1990, DABT Investigator Weiner was introduced by the confidential informant to a white latin female, "Atricia." Agent Weiner asked Atricia if she could get cocaine, and she left the area where Weiner had been sitting to approach an unidentified latin male. She returned with a message that she could obtain cocaine for $30. Weiner gave her the $30. She left, and when she returned handed Weiner a clear plastic baggie of cocaine. Events of March 24, 1990. Detective Zacarias returned to Flame Steak with Miami Beach Police Detective Reid and DABT Investigator Weiner early in the morning of March 24, 1990, with the confidential informant. After being in the lounge for 45 minutes to an hour, the black female from March 17, 1990, invited Detective Zacarias to sit at her table in the center of the lounge area, near the dance floor. She was with three other women. Detective Zacarias asked her in Spanish if she could find something, she asked "how much?" Detective Zacarias gave her $40. The black female went to a male at the other end of the dance floor and when she returned she gave Detective Zacarias openly in a hand-to-hand fashion a baggie of cocaine over the table. Later they were joined by Eric. Eric had seen the black female purchase the cocaine she recently had given to Detective Zacarias, and asked for a "hit" of the cocaine. Detective Zacarias gave him the baggie and Eric and the black female consumed the cocaine, not openly on the floor of the establishment, but by going to the restrooms. Detective Zacarias had to make the cocaine available to the black female and to Eric in order to maintain his cover. It is common for people who arrange cocaine purchases to be rewarded by being given part of the cocaine they assisted in procuring. On another occasion that night while going to the men's room, Eric asked Detective Zacarias for a hit and Detective Zacarias gave Eric the cocaine in front of the security guard on the second floor landing. Detective Zacarias offered cocaine to the security guard on the second floor landing, who looked directly at it, declined, but did make the comment "it looks good." DABT Investigator Weiner later saw the guard smoking marijuana in the men's room. Later that evening at about 2:00 a.m. Detective Zacarias asked the unidentified black female if she could get more cocaine. She motioned for money and he gave her $40. The black female approached a latin male with a goatee. She gave him the cash and she returned with a clear plastic baggie of cocaine which she delivered to Detective Zacarias hand-to-hand at table level. Thereafter, at about 2:20 a.m., Investigator Weiner met Atricia and negotiated a cocaine purchase for $40. Atricia gave Weiner a baggie of cocaine in an open fashion over the table and he delivered currency to her in the same way. At about 3:45 a.m., after Detective Zacarias had made several trips to the men's room, he asked the black female if he could get some more, and gave her another $40. She then went to a latin female who had been identified as "Isabelle," and while DABT Investigator Weiner saw currency change hands, he did not see Isabelle deliver any cocaine to the black female because of obstruction of his view by people in the bar. The black female returned and delivered cocaine to him in a baggie hand-to- hand, at table level about 10 feet from the bar near the dance floor. Events of March 31, 1990. Detective Zacarias, Detective Reid, and DABT Investigators Weiner and Mesa (a female) went to Flame Steak with a confidential informant at about 12:15 a.m. on March 31, 1990. Investigator Weiner met the white latin male patron, "Frank," who asked Weiner if he "needed anything tonight?" Weiner said "yes," he would start with 1/2 gram. Frank pulled out a clear baggie and sold it to Investigator Weiner for $20. The barmaid then came to the table to take drink orders. Investigator Weiner passed the cocaine over the table to Investigator Mesa as the barmaid was serving the drinks and Mesa returned the cocaine baggie to Weiner. Although this transaction could easily have been seen by the barmaid, the evidence is not persuasive that the barmaid actually saw it. DABT Investigator Weiner negotiated a second cocaine purchase from Frank in the front part of a lounge, paying $20 for the cocaine. It was passed hand-to-hand at waist level. While they were at Flame Steak, Weiner asked Mesa to accompany him upstairs to the restrooms. They passed the security guard at the top of the stairs, where Weiner openly passed the cocaine to Mesa, which elicited the wink from the security guard which has previously been referred to in Finding 2 above. Finally at about 2:30 a.m. on March 31, 1990, Investigator Weiner negotiated his third purchase from Frank. The cocaine was purchased for $20 which was exchanged for cocaine in the same manner as the prior purchases. General Findings Despite the numerous cocaine transactions which the Miami Beach Detectives or the DABT Investigators were able to make with ease from several patrons on the licensed premises, during the entire time of the investigation, no City of Miami Beach Detective or DABT Investigator ever observed any other patrons making drug transactions at any time. Obviously Eric saw the purchase made by Detective Zacarias on March 24, 1990, because he came over and asked for "hits" from the cocaine purchased, see, Finding 11, supra. It is not clear whether the barmaid taking drink orders on March 31, 1990, saw Investigator Weiner pass cocaine to Investigator Mesa. It is clear, however, that on two occasions the security guard at the top of the stairs saw cocaine, once when it was passed from Detective Zacarias to Eric (Finding 11), the second time when it was passed from Investigator Weiner to Investigator Mesa (Finding 16). That security guard also smoked marijuana in the bathroom on the licensed premises (Finding 11). There is no evidence that any drug transactions took place in front of the owner, Mr. Gilberto Rivas. The music played by the D.J. in the bar was so loud that it would be difficult for bartenders or barmaids to overhear conversations among patrons not in close proximity to those employees. No person who sold or procured the sale of cocaine ever made any statement which could be construed as an indication that Mr. Rivas, or any bartender or barmaid knew that illegal drug transactions were taking place on the licensed premises. On the other hand, the security guards, who may nominally be independent contractors, but who are under the direction and control of the owner, Mr. Rivas, saw, knew about, and participated (through smoking marijuana) in the use of controlled substances on the licensed premises. No security guard called the police or asked any persons he saw with cocaine to leave the premises. Mr. Gilberto Rivas did not take any special precautions to prevent or detect drug activity on the premises. He did tell the employees to remove anyone whom they may see involved in drug activities. Mr. Gilberto Rivas had no actual knowledge that drug transactions were taking place on the licensed premises. He opposes drug trafficking, and he has not knowingly permitted the sale of drugs at the restaurant. He has even thrown people out of the establishment if he suspected that they were involved in drug- related activities. The majority of the cocaine sale transactions took place in plain view on the licensed premises. The sales did not take place only in closed toilet stalls in one of the restrooms, but in the open part of the restroom, and more importantly, at the bar or at tables in the restaurant. The number of people at the premises did make watching drug transactions somewhat difficult. For example, on several occasions the detectives or investigators had their views obstructed, so that the could not view both the exchange of currency and the delivery of cocaine to persons who purchased drugs for them. Nonetheless, in view of the number of drug buys that were made over a relatively brief period of time, and the remarkable ease with which apparently innocuous inquiries about whether "something was available" were immediately recognized by bar patrons as request to purchase cocaine, and the very brief periods of time in which sales were consummated, there was a sufficiently persistent pattern of open drug activity that the problem should have been noticed by a reasonably diligent licensee. Mr. Rivas focused his attention on patrons who became rowdy, drunk, or would not pay their bills, and failed to take reasonable efforts to discover or prevent drug transactions on the licensed premises.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that All Purchase Corp. d/b/a Flame Steak be found guilty of violation of the beverage laws by permitting patrons to violate the laws of Florida on the licensed premises through the use of cocaine and marijuana, and by maintaining a nuisance on the licensed premises because cocaine was used and sold and marijuana was used on the premises, in violation of Sections 561.29(1)(a) and (c), 823.10 and 893.13(2)(a)5. Florida Statutes. As a result, the beverage license should not be revoked, but should be suspended for a period of 60 days, and an administrative fine of $2,000 should be imposed. DONE and ENTERED this 20th day of April, 1990, at Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM R. DORSEY, JR. Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 20th day of April, 1990. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER DOAH CASE NO. 90-2189 Rulings on proposals made by the Respondent: 1. Adopted in Finding 1. and 3. Accepted, passim. Adopted in Findings 4-6, except that the amount of cocaine sold in each instance was not proven to be 1/2 gram, but from viewing it, it appear to have been approximately 1/2 gram. Adopted in Finding 7. Adopted in Finding 8. Adopted in Findings 9 and 10, except that the packets were approximately 1 to 1 1/2 inches square, not 1/2 inches square. Adopted in Finding 11, except that the transfer of the cocaine was not done in a concealed manner, because Eric saw it. In addition, the evidence supports the inference that the security guard was either employed by the restaurant, or was under the direct supervision and control of Mr. Rivas. Covered in Findings 14-17. Adopted in Finding 18. Accepted as to Mr. Rivas, the bartender, and the barmaids, but rejected with respect to the security guard. Accepted, see, Finding 2. Rejected because there had been 28 calls, not 4 or 5 calls to the Miami Beach Police Department. Discussed in Findings 19-22. Rulings on proposals made by the Department: Covered in Finding 1. Covered in Finding 3, in a general manner as to the impetus for the investigation. The events of each of the nights is separately explained in the Recommended Order. and 4. Rejected as unnecessary; the material purchased was cocaine. To the extent appropriate, covered in Finding 3. While the printout Sergeant Hunker offered was not admitted, his testimony established the number of police calls to the bar. Separately covered in the Findings relating to the nights of March 16 and 31, 1990. Rejected as unnecessary. Gilberto Rivas had very little useful information in his testimony, due to his limited work at the bar. Adopted in Findings 19 and 22. Generally accepted as it relates to the duties of the security guards at the premises and the instructions from Mr. Rivas. The Notice to Show Cause raises no issue with respect to sales to underaged drinkers, so no findings on that subject have been made. Generally rejected because the testimony of Mr. Rivas was rather confusing, no doubt in great part because of the difficulty in translation. Findings with respect to the time Mr. Rivas spends at the location and what he told his employees are made in Findings 5 and 19-22. COPIES FURNISHED: Harry Hooper, Esquire Deputy General Counsel Department of Business Regulation 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1007 Yale L. Galanter, Esquire Beverly Myrberg, Esquire 2800 Biscayne Boulevard 9th Floor Miami, Florida 33137 Leonard Ivey, Director Department of Business Regulation The Johns Building 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1000 Stephen R. MacNamara, Secretary Department of Business Regulation The Johns Building 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1000 Joseph A. Sole, General Counsel Department of Business Regulation The Johns Building 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1000
The Issue This is a license discipline case in which the Petitioner seeks to take disciplinary action against the Respondent on the basis of allegations of misconduct set forth in a four-count Administrative Complaint. The Administrative Complaint charges the Respondent with violation of the following statutory provisions: Sections 489.129(1)(g), 489.129(1)(h)2, 489.129(1)(k), and 489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes (1996 Supp.).
Findings Of Fact The Respondent, Allen Fader, is, and has been at all times material, a licensed Certified General Contractor, having been issued license number CG C007504 by the State of Florida. At all times material, the Respondent was licensed to contract as an individual. The Respondent, by virtue of his license, advertised construction services for Gold Coast Construction Services, Inc., during 1997. The Respondent presented a business card, with the name of Gold Coast Construction Services, Inc., to Ruby M. Shepherd, a customer, in April of 1997. On April 14, 1997, the Respondent, doing business as Gold Coast Construction Services, Inc., contracted with Ruby M. Shepherd to enclose a patio and to install hurricane shutters at Ms. Shepherd's residence located at 12325 Northwest 19th Avenue, Miami, Florida. The contract was conditioned on Ms. Shepherd being able to obtain financing to pay for the construction described in the contract. The exact amount Ms. Shepherd was required to pay under the original April 14, 1997, contract cannot be determined from the evidence in this case.4 The Respondent assisted Ms. Shepherd in obtaining a loan for the financing of the construction work described in the contract. It took several months to obtain a loan. Ultimately, through the efforts of the Respondent, and of a person engaged by the Respondent to help obtain a loan, Ms. Shepherd received a loan through Town and Country Title Guaranty and Escrow. The check from Town and Country Title Guaranty and Escrow was in the amount of twelve thousand nine hundred seventy-nine dollars and fifteen cents ($12,979.15). The check was made payable to Ms. Shepherd and to Gold Coast Construction Services, Inc. At the request of the man who helped obtain the loan, Ms. Shepherd endorsed the loan check and agreed for the check to be delivered to the Respondent. The Respondent, doing business as Gold Coast Construction Services, Inc., negotiated the loan check and received all of the proceeds in the amount of twelve thousand nine hundred seventy-nine dollars and fifteen cents ($12,979.15). The Respondent received the proceeds of the loan on or about September 12, 1997. The Respondent did not take any action on Ms. Shepherd's construction project until November 14, 1997. On that day, the Respondent placed an order for the material for the hurricane shutters on Ms. Shepherd's project. Nothing more was done on Ms. Shepherd's project for quite some time. Towards the end of February of 1998, the Respondent had some health problems, which caused him to be unable to work for several weeks. Eventually, the Respondent attempted to pick up the shutter materials he had ordered for Ms. Shepherd's project. As a result of the delay, those materials had been returned to stock and had been sold to someone else. The Respondent ordered the materials again. Eventually, in June of 1998, the Respondent had the shutter materials delivered to Ms. Shepherd's residence, and began the process of installing the hurricane shutters. In the meantime, from September of 1997 until January of 1998, the Respondent did not contact Ms. Shepherd. During this period of time, Ms. Shepherd called the Respondent's office numerous times and left numerous messages asking the Respondent to return her calls. From September of 1997 until January of 1998, the Respondent did not return any of Ms. Shepherd's calls. In January of 1998, Ms. Shepherd was finally able to speak with the Respondent. From January of 1998 until the installation work began in June of 1998, Ms. Shepherd spoke to the Respondent on numerous occasions in an effort to find out when the Respondent was going to begin work or return the money he had been paid. During this period of time, the Respondent repeatedly made false assurances to Ms. Shepherd that the work would be performed within two weeks. On or about June 12, 1998, the Respondent obtained a building permit for Ms. Shepherd's project from the Miami-Dade Department of Planning, Development, and Regulation. Installation of the hurricane shutters began that same week. The installation process was delayed because some of the materials did not fit and had to be returned to the manufacturer for modifications. Following the modifications, the installation process resumed. After a few more days, the Respondent told Ms. Shepherd the hurricane shutter work was finished and that he was not going to do the patio construction work, because the loan Ms. Shepherd had received was not enough money to pay for both projects. After the Respondent told Ms. Shepherd that the installation of the hurricane shutters was complete, the Respondent never did any further work on Ms. Shepherd's construction project. The hurricane shutters installed at Ms. Shepherd's property by the Respondent were not installed correctly. Several of the hurricane shutters will not open and close properly. Several of the hurricane shutters are insufficiently fastened. A necessary shutter over the storage room door was never installed. The problems with the subject hurricane shutters can be corrected. The cost of the corrections necessary to make the shutters operate properly and to fasten them securely is approximately one thousand dollars ($1,000). The Respondent never called for an inspection of the installation of the hurricane shutters at Ms. Shepherd's residence. In their present condition, those hurricane shutters will not pass inspection, because they were installed improperly. If corrections are made, those hurricane shutters will pass inspection. By reason of the facts stated in paragraphs 12 and 13 above, the Respondent failed to properly and fully complete the hurricane shutter portion of the contracted work. The Respondent never did any work on the patio portion of the contracted work. At some point in time between September of 1997 and June of 1998, Ms. Shepherd and the Respondent agreed to a modification of their original contract due to the fact that the proceeds of the loan obtained by Ms. Shepherd were insufficient to pay for both the hurricane shutters and the enclosure of the patio. The essence of their modified agreement (which was never reduced to writing) was that the Respondent would not do the patio enclosure portion of the contracted work; the Respondent would do the hurricane shutter portion of the contracted work; the Respondent would be paid for the hurricane shutter portion of the contracted work; and any remaining balance of the loan proceeds that had been paid to the Respondent would be paid back to Ms. Shepherd. Implicit, but apparently unstated, in this modified agreement, was the notion that the Respondent would charge a fair price for the hurricane shutter portion of the contracted work. A fair price for the hurricane shutter portion of the contracted work at Ms. Shepherd's residence, including all materials, labor, overhead, and profit, would be approximately four thousand dollars ($4,000).5 The price of four thousand dollars presupposes properly installed hurricane shutters that will pass inspection. As previously mentioned, it will cost approximately one thousand dollars ($1,000) to make the corrections to the subject hurricane shutters which are necessary for the shutters to function properly and pass inspection. Accordingly, the fair value of the work performed by the Respondent at Ms. Shepherd's residence is three thousand dollars ($3,000). Ms. Shepherd has paid $12,979.15 to the Respondent, doing business as Gold Coast Construction Services, Inc. The fair value of the work performed by the Respondent at Ms. Shepherd's residence is $3,000. Therefore, the Respondent has been paid $9,979.15 more than he is entitled to keep. As of the date of the final hearing, the Respondent has not paid back any money to Ms. Shepherd.
Recommendation On the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be issued in this case concluding that the Respondent is guilty of the violations charged in each of the four counts of the Administrative Complaint, and imposing the following penalties: For the violation of Section 489.129(1)(g), Florida Statutes (1996 Supp.), an administrative fine in the amount of $100.00. For the violation of Section 489.129(1)(k), Florida Statutes (1996 Supp.), an administrative fine in the amount of $2,000.00. For the violation of Section 489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes (1996 Supp.), an administrative fine in the amount of $1,000.00. For the violation of Section 489.129(1)(h), Florida Statutes (1996 Supp.), an administrative fine in the amount of $1,500.00, and placement of the Respondent on probation for a period of one year. It is further RECOMMENDED that the final order require the Respondent to pay restitution to Ms. Shepherd in the amount of $9,979.15, and to pay costs of investigation and prosecution in the amount of $266.55. DONE AND ENTERED this 9th day of September, 1999, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. MICHAEL M. PARRISH Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 9th day of September, 1999.
Findings Of Fact Early on the morning of February 12, 1980, Detective Edward Hanek of the Miami Police Department arrived at 533 Southwest 12th Avenue, the address of respondent's bar, Rincon de los Recuerdos. On the sidewalk in an alcove in front of the bar lay the bloody corpse of Guillermo Tey. Detective Hanek tried both doorways into the bar from Southwest 12th Avenue but found both outer doors locked. At both doorways, he was able to reach through the iron bars of the outer doors, push open unlocked wooden doors, and see the interior of the bar. Detective Hanek "followed a blood trail leading from the body to the south door" (R. 24) on Southwest 12th Avenue. Another blood trail led away from the bar. A rear entrance to the bar also featured a locked iron outer gate and a wooden door behind it, unlocked. Nahir Gil arrived at the bar in a police car and opened the back door at Detective Hanek's request. Inside were glasses and bottles of beer "that appeared to be left in a hurry." (R. 26). Balls on a pool table and change strewn on the bar had the same Flying Dutchman quality. At the scene of the crime, Mr. Gil told Detective Hanek that he had closed the bar at one o'clock, or ten minutes of, that morning; that he sent about ten customers away when he closed; that he did not know of the deceased; and that he did not know the barmaid Anna's last name or where she lived. Later the same morning, at the Miami Police Station, Detective Hanek interviewed Mr. Gil further and Mr. Gil executed a sworn statement at 6:36 a.m., on February 12, 1980, in which he stated inter alia: that this girlfriend, Melba Bernal, and her sister from Pereira, Columbia, were in the United States without visas, as far as he knew; that he and his brother Manuel owned the bar; that he had spent the day of February 11, 1980, drinking in the bar; that he closed at one instead of three o'clock on the morning of the 12th, because he was drunk, and failed to gather the day's receipts from the cash register for the same reason; that he did not know Guillermo Tey; that he did not know Anna's last name or where she lived; and that he had not seen "anybody lying on the sidewalk with blood coming out." Petitioner's Exhibit No. 2, p. 6. Mr. Gil indicated that his girlfriend had once worked in the bar. He answered, "Yes, sir" to Detective Hanek's question, "What you told me you know, is all you know?" Later on in the day, Mr. Gil told Detective Hanek that he had heard two gunshots and seen a man lying on the sidewalk just before he closed the bar. Through his lawyer, Mr. Gil got Anna's last name, Vasquez, and address to Detective Hanek. The following day, Detective Hanek visited Ms. Vasquez's apartment, only to learn that she had recently moved. Nahir Gil admitted to Detective Hanek that Anna was an illegal alien and admitted to John Clayton, an agent of the United States Border Patrol, that the Bernal sisters had been smuggled into this country. Subsequently, one sister returned to Colombia and the other married Nahir Gil. The parties stipulated that respondent's license, No. 23-00932-2COP, was current at all relevant times; that a certificate of incumbency filed on or about July 7, 1978, reflected that Geoberto Gil owned half of respondent's stock and that Nahir Gil owned the other half; that Geoberto Gil transferred fifty shares, all of his interest in respondent, to Manuel Salvador Gil on April 10, 1979, and resigned as director on the date; and that, as recently as April 10, 1979, Nahir Gil acted as secretary of respondent corporation.
Recommendation Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is recommended that petitioner dismiss the Notice to Show Cause. DONE and ENTERED this 13th day of March, 1981, in Tallahassee, Florida. ROBERT T. BENTON, II, 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 13th day of March 1981. COPIES FURNISHED: Dennis E. LaRosa, Esquire The Johns Building 725 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Thomas B. Duff, Esquire 1407 Biscayne Building 19 West Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33130
Conclusions Petitioner, Floxida Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate (DBPR), and Respondent, Garald W. Rowley, hereby stipulate and agree that the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board (FREAB) issue a Final order adopting and incoxporating the provisiona of this Stipulation as final agency action in this cauge. STIPULATED FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Respondent ig and was, at all times material herein, a STATE CERTIFIED GENERAL Real Estate Appraiser in the State of Florida, having been issued license number RZ 967 in accordance with Chapter 475, Florida Statutes. The last license the State issued Respondent was ag a STATE CERTIFIED GENERAL Real Estate Appraiser at 4552 Highgate Drive, Delray Beach, Florida 33445. 2. Respondent admits being subject to the provisions of Chapters 455 and 478, Florida statutes, the Rules promulgated thereto and, therefore, to the jurisdiction of DBPR and the FREAB, 8090/2008 1¥837 340 OSZL21EL0b X¥4 PS.O1 S002/50/50 800/200 4 377 “SIddOH ONY NY¥YH440H 2ObE OB LSS X¥4 Bt OL 6002/10/50 DBPR vs. Gerald W. Rowley DBPR Case No. 2007013479 Stipulation 3. Respondent admita that DBPR served Reepondent with the Adminiatrative Complaint, charging Respondent with violation(s) of certain provigions of Chapters 455 and/or 475, Florida Statutes, and/or the Rules promulgated thereto. A copy of the Administrative Complaint is attached hereto and incorporated herein. 4. Respondent neither admits nor denies the factual allegations in Counts Iz, IV, V, VII, and vitt of the Administrative Complaint, but ecenaeants to the Board's impesition of discipline on those counts and that such allegations constitute violations of the counts. 5. Respondent shall not in the futuxe violate Chapters 455 or 475, Florida Statutes, or the Rules promilgated thereto. 6. This Stipulation shall become effective immediately upon filing of the Final Order (hereinafter referred to as the "Effective Date"). All dates referenced herein shall commence to Yun on the Effective Date, unless otherwise specified herein. STIPULATED DISPOSITION 7. Fetitioner shall dismiss Counts I, III, VI, and IX of the Administrative Complaint. a. Respondent shall pay a fine of $1000 and $561 in costs. Respondent shall pay the fine and costs by saparate ¢hecks payable to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division 800/600 B 1v837 340 OSZ2LLEL0R XS PS .OL Bo00z/S0/50 800/600 B 377 ‘SISYOH ONY N¥YWS40H LOPE OF8 LSS X¥4 BL OL B00Z/20/50 DEPR vs. Geraid W. Rawley DBPR Case No. 2007013479 Stipulation of Real Estate, within one (1) year from the Effective Date herein. 9, Suspension of Respondent’s real estate appraisal license shall be for a period of six (6) months, effective thirty days from the date of filing of the Final Order. Reinstatement requires submission of proper forms. , 10, Respondent shall begin probation for a period of ane (1) year, beginning on the Effective Date herein, and shall have no trainees during the probationary period. During this time period, Respondent shall attend one (1) two-day FREAB general meeting, from the noticed time of the meeting te the duration of the meeting, not to exceed five o’cleck p.m. During this time period Respondent shall alse provide original evidence of satisfactory completion of continuing education appraisal courses totaling 45 hours, The education herein ig in addition to any requirement for Respondent to maintain his or her real estate appraisal license. Should Respondent completa tha above-listed requirement (s) beficre conclusion of the probationary period and previde satisfactory proof thereof, probation shall terminate. 11. Noncompliance with the terms of this Stipulation shall , xyeault in the suspension of Respondent’s appraisal license until Respondent submits satisfactory proof of compliance to DSPR; the period of suspeneaion shall not exceed ten (10) years. B00/ P00 8 V¥84a7 34o OSZLLLELOP X¥I GS.OL B002/G0/50 800/p00 A 317 ‘SI8HOH ONY N¥H4IOH 20PE OB LIS X¥4 BL-OL 6002/20/50 PAPR vs. Gerald W. Rowley Stipulation DRPR Case No. 2007013479 Reinstatement shall be effective ag of the date DBPR receives said Satisfactory proof of compliance, accompanied by the proper reinstatement forms. L2. Action of la. The FREAB Newe and Report shall publish a Summary of Final Order, as follows: (Delray Beach]: Gerald W. Rowley, Licenaa No. RZ 967; Violation: Failure to retain records for 5 years in violation of Sections 475.629 and 475.624(4), Florida Statutes relating to two appraisal reports in 2005 on a Subject Property in Wellington, Florida; violation of USPAP Standards Rule l-l(a), (b), and (c) and Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes, relating to an incorrect sales history of the Subject Property, discrepancies between data sources on Comparable Sales, and aupport for adjustments; violation of USPAP Standards Rule 1-4(a) and Section 475.624(14), relating to selaction of Comparable Sales for said appraisal reports; violation of UBPAP Standarda Rule 2-1(a) and (b) and Section 475.624(14) relating to said appraisal reports; and violation of USPAP Standards Rule 2-2(b) (viii) and Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes relating to said appraisal reports. Penalty: $1000 fine plug costs, 6 months license suspension, no trainees during the one year probation, attendance at one 2-day FREAB meeting and completion of 45 houra of education in addition to that required for licensure. The parties understand that this Stipulation 4s subject to the approval of DBPR and of the FREAB, and that in the event of its disapproval, 800/500 800/500 & 1837 Jyd OS2LLLELOP 377 “SIYYON ONY N¥N440H LOPE OB L9G the game gahall have no further force and effect. X¥4d GS OL BoO02/G0/50 X¥4 BL OL 6002/10/50 DBPR vs. Garald W. Rowley DBPR Case No. 2007013479 Stipulation 14. Respondent executes this Stipulation to avoid further administrative action with respect to this cause. Respondent authorizes the FREAB to review and examine all DBPR investigative materiale priexr to or in conjunction with consideration of this Stipulation. Further, in the event the FREAB disapproves this Stipulation, Respondent agrees that examination of any documente or records related thereto shall mot be deemed to have unfairly prejudiced DBPR, the FREAB or any of ita members, nor ehall such action disqualify any of them from further participation in the resolution of this cause. 15. Reapendent agrees that Petitioner may conduct further investigation at any time subsequent to the FREAB’s acceptance of this Stipulation, including, but not limited to, audits of Respondent's filee. Respondent further agrees that Petitioner shall have any and all rights and authority the law provides to insure Reaapondent’s compliance with Chapters 455 and 475, Florida Statutes, and the Rules promulgated therete. Respondent further agrees that DBPR and the FREAB may consider this Stipulation in connection with any future disciplinary proceeding. 16. The parties understand that this Stipulation and any final order adopting and incorporating its terms shall not preclude or deter DBPR or the FREAB from other diaciplinary proceedings g00/9008 WweAT add OSZAL1ELOb X¥4 9S.01 BOO*/S0/50 800/900 A 317 “STYYOW ONY N¥H4IOH 40bE OPB LIS X¥4 O2 OL 6002/10/50 DBPRvs Gerald W Rowlay DBPR Case No. 2007013479 Stipulation against the Respondent for acts or omissions unrelated to those set forth in the Administrativa Complaint herein. 17. Respondent hereby waivas all notice requirements and right to seek judicial review or to othexwise challenge or conteat the validity or enforcement of the terms of this Stipulation and/or of any resulting final order of the FREAB adopting and incorporating game, 18. All parties hereto shall otherwise bear any and all attorney's fees and costs they may have incurred in connection with this cause. 19. Should Respondent withdraw from or in any Way Or manner cancel, annul, alter, repudiate, or revoke the terms of this Stipulation prior to presentation or consideration by the FREAB, Respondent agrees to waive any rights to seek attorney's fees and costs Respondent may have incurred as the result of the disciplinary proceeding, up to and including the date of withdrawal from the settlement Stipulation or attempt to alter, change, annul, repudiate, or revoke the terms of this Stipulation. 20. The FREAB HAS NOT taken prior disciplinary actiom against Respondent. 8900/1008 1W¥837 aud OSZLALELOD =X¥5 SS OL 8002/50/50 800/100 8 377 ‘SIYYON ONY NVH440H ZOE OB LOS Xv¥4 O2 OL 6002/10/50 DBPR vs, Gerald W. Rowlay ‘ ‘ DBPR Case No. 2007013479 Stipulation DBPR ATTORNEY EXECUTION EXECUTED this i 1 day of VV 1, 2009. Denna Christine Linda Senior Attorney On behalf of the DBPR, DRE RESPONDENT EXECUTION EXECUTED this 7 day of { , 2009, Gerald W. Rowley BEFORE ME the undersigned authority, a, Ss J day of J , 2009 personally appeared wha is pais . known to me or who hag produced Cif n 1 L€eefcas identification and who ewore and subscribed to egoing. ms A the for NOTARY PUBLIC State of Florida at Large My Commission Expires: \s 2". YENTIFER GOME bpcu MY COMMISS*UN « 9D756024 ey: CXPIRED Febuary 00, 2012 tamertcriaty Fl ream Unsecuot Aue Co 7 g090/800R} 1WO37 340 O8SLLLELOH Xd 2G-0L GO02/G0/S0 800/800 4 311 ‘SISYOW ONY N¥N440H 2OPE OPS 19S X¥4 LZ OL 6007/20/50 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION ~ FLORIDA REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, Petitioner, v. CASE NO. 2007013479 GERALD W. ROWLEY, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT The Florida Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate ("Petitioner") files this Administrative Complaint against Gerald W. Rowley (“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 general real estate appraiser having been issued license 967 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 general real estate appraiser at 4552 Highgate Drive, Delray Beach, Florida 33445. 4. On or about April 23, 2005, Respondent developed and communicated an appraisal report FDBPR vy. Gerald W. Rowley Case No. 2007013479 Administratrve Complaint (Report 1) on a property commonly known as 10766 Versailles Boulevard, Wellington, Florida 33487 (Subject Property). A copy of Report 1 is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 1. Report 1, prepared for purposes of refinancing by a private - lender, valued the Subject Property at $1.53 million. 5. On or about November 18, 2005, Respondent developed and communicated a second appraisal report (Report 2) on the same Subject Property. A copy of Report 2 is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 2. Report 2, prepared for purposes of refinancing at the request of the client WCS Lending, LLC, valued the Subject Property at $2.2 million. 6. Petitioner received a complaint concerning Reports 1 and 2 from the private lender, Oriel Tsvi (Tsvi). Tsvi complained that Respondent failed to use more suitable, available, and proximate Comparable Sales from the Subject Property’s neighborhood, the Comparable Sales relied on by Respondent were superior to the Subject Property, and their use resulted in overvaluation of the Subject Property. 7. Through investigation, the following errors were noted in Report 1: A) In Report 1, Respondent used Comparable Sales 1 and 2 in the Subject Property’s neighborhood, but the remaining two Comparable Sales relied upon were from other subdivisions; B) Respondent failed to use numerous recent, more suitable Comparable Sales from the Subject Property’s neighborhood (the Versailles PUD subdivision); C) Comparable Sales 2, 3, and 4 were all in excess of a mile distant from the Subject Property; FDBPR v. Gerald W. Rowley Case No 2007013479 Administrative Complaint D) In the comments to the Sales Comparison Analysis section of Report 1, Respondent directed the reader to a sales (sic: subject) history addendum that recited a prior sale of the Subject Property within the previous one year period from Nathan & Yoldie Vincent to Lorraine Smith Brooks and John Kibler in May 2004 for $226,000, when no such sale had occurred; E) Respondent listed the condition for the Subject Property and Comparable Sales 1,2, and 4 as “excellent” but adjusted Comparable Sale 3 by + $5000 for “good” condition, without providing any explanation for the stated condition or adjustment; F) Respondent listed data and/or verification sources for the Comparable Sales as ISC/Public Records, but failed to note discrepancies between the data sources as set forth below: 1) Comparable Sales 1 and 2 had different dates of construction; 2) Palm Beach County records showed Comparable Sale 1 to have 5 bedrooms, 6 baths and 2 half-baths, while Respondent reported 3 bedrooms and 2 baths; 3) Respondent reported Comparable Sale 1 had 5,570 square feet of Gross Living Area, while the Palm Beach Count Property Appraiser reported 7,544 square feet; 4) Respondent reported Comparable Sale 2 to have 3 bedrooms and 2 baths, while Palm Beach County Property Appraiser’s records reflected 5 bedrooms and 5 % baths; 5) Respondent showed the gross living area for Comparable Sale 2 as 5,670 square feet, while the county records showed 6,542 square feet; 6) Respondent reported 6,715 square feet of gross living area for Comparable Sale 4, while county records showed 5,568 square feet. 8. Respondent committed the following errors or omissions in Report 2: FDBPR v. Gerald W. Rowley Case No. 2007013479 Administrative Complaint A) Respondent utilized Comparable Sales 2 and 3, which were from different communities than the Subject Property; B) Respondent failed to use numerous recent, more suitable Comparable Sales from the Subject Property’s neighborhood (the Versailles PUD subdivision); C) Comparable Sales 2 and 3 were over a mile distant from the Subject Property; D) Respondent listed the condition for the Subject Property and Comparable Sale 1 as “excellent” but adjusted Comparable Sales 2 and 3 by + $5000 for “good” condition, without providing any explanation for the stated condition or adjustment; E) Respondent made significant upward adjustments in the Cost Approach Section of Report 2 over the previous values stated in Report 1 for site value increasing it from $575,000 to $1,150,000 in under 7 months, per square foot reproduction cost of the gross living area of the Subject Property increasing from $155 per square foot to $175 per square foot resulting in an overall increase in value of $113,985, and an increase for appliances without adequate explanation or analysis; F) Respondent listed data and/or verification sources for the Comparable Sales as ISC/Public Records (and MLS in the case of Comparable Sales 2 and 3), but failed to note discrepancies between the data sources as set forth below: 1) Respondent listed the site size of Comparable Sale 1 as 14,473 square feet when the Property Appraiser’s Office shows .28 acres, equivalent to 12,196 square feet; 2) The public records show Comparable Sale 1 was built in 2003 instead of 2005; 3) County records show 6,307 square feet for Gross Living Area for Comparable Sale 1 as opposed to the 5,708 square feet reported by Respondent; FDBPR v. Gerald W. Rowley Case No. 2007013479 Administrative Complaint 4) Respondents sole supporting documentation to support listed features of Comparable Sale 1 is a printout captioned “Competitive Market Analysis” (a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Administrative Complaint Exhibit 3) dated 01/20/06, ( after the effective date of Report 2), which reported only the number of bedrooms, baths, living area square footage, date and amount of sale, lot size, dollars per square foot and year built; 5) The Competitive Market Analysis document reflects that Comparable Sale 1 was built in 2003 and not 2005 as stated, that Comparable Sale 1 had 6,959 square feet of gross living area and not 5,708 as reported by Respondent, and that Comparable Sale 1 was sold in November 2005 for $2,418,000 and not in October 2005 for $2,400,000 as stated by Respondent; 6) Respondent reported 6,101 square feet of gross living area for Comparable Sale 2, but ISC records in Respondent’s work file show 6,261 square feet, MLS records in the work file report 6,101 square feet, and Palm Beach County Property Appraiser’s records show 7,504 square feet; 7) Respondent reported 4,438 square feet of gross living area for Comparable Sale 3, while ISC records in Respondent’s work file showed 5,213 square feet and Property Appraiser’s records show 4,389 square feet. 9. Respondent was interviewed concerning the Cost Approach discrepancies between the two reports and stated that an unknown sales agent for the builder advised Respondent his per square foot reproduction cost was too low, that the site value increased with the increase in sales in the new development, and the $10,000 increase under “appliances” was for commencement of pool construction by the Subject Property’s owner. 10. Respondent acknowledged in the interview that the error in Report | regarding a non- 5 FDBPR v. Gerald W Rowley Case No. 2007013479 Administrative Complaint existent prior sale was due to a “cloning” error from an earlier, unrelated 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 is guilty of failure to retain records for at least five years 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. COUNT III Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication ofa real estate appraisal, specifically Record Keeping Section of the Ethics Rule, or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2005) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT IV Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal, specifically Standards Rule 1-1(a), (b), and (c), or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2005) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT V Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or 6 FDBPR v. Gerald W. Rowley Case No 2007013479 Administrative Complaint communication of a real estate appraisal, specifically Standards Rule 1-4(a) and (b), or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2005) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT VI Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication ofa real estate appraisal, specifically Standards Rule 1-6(a), or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2005) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT VII Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal, specifically Standards Rule 2-1(a) and (b),or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2005) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT VIII Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal, specifically Standards Rule 2-2(b)(viii), or other provision of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2005) in violation of Section 475.624(14), Florida Statutes. COUNT IX Based upon the foregoing, Respondent has violated a standard for the development or communication of a real estate appraisal, specifically Standards Rule 2-3, or other provision of the 7 FDBPR v. Gerald W. Rowley Case No. 2007013479 Administrative Complaint Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (2005) in violation of Section 475.624(14), 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 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 FDBPR v. Gerald W. Rowley Case No. 2007013479 Administrative Complaint Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J1-8.002. SIGNED this 4 day of \ ( Lone , 2008. Florida Department of Business ak Professional Regulation Thomas O’Bryant, Jr., Director Division of Real Estate ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER not 3 3 i; ~* % Sas : tonar Ces Ssionai SORE ae J dreviont of Profe Division af F Real Esiate D. C. Lindamood, Senior Attorney Fla. Bar No. 273694 Division of Real Estate Legal Section 400 W. Robinson Street, N801 Orlando, Florida 32801-1757 (407) 481-5632 (407) 317-7260 - FAX PCP: JH/PA 3/08 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 allowed by law, 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 FDBPR v. Gerald W. Rowley Case No 2007013479 Administrative Complaint 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. 10 APPRAISAL REPORT of Single Family Residence at 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD WELLINGTON, FL As Of: APRIL 23, 2005 Prepared For: Private Lender Private Lender Prepared By: SERVICE APPRAISALS Gerald Rowley 1901 SW 5 AVE MIAMI, FL 33129 DMINIST RAI WE COWwPLAINT \AV exHiait #4 a a loAGe [OF ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT, EXHIBIT # AGE vo SERVICE APPRAISALS FileNo RF-0448-05 Descnption UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT Case No i Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City. WELLINGTON State FL _ ZipCode 33467 | Legal Description LOT 284, VERSAILLES PUD County PALM BEACH Ra_Assessors Parcol No_73-41-44-24-05-000-2840 ASSD $667,273 TaxYear__2004 _RE Taxes$_ 15,067 23 Special Assessments $ NIA Borrower sENZER BURTON Current Owner LENZER BURTON Occupant [X]Owner_[ [tenant T [vacant Property nghts epprased _[X]Fee Simple _{ |Leasehotd Project Type |X ]PUD_[_[Condominum (HUDIVA only) OAS 358 00 tMo Neighborhood of Project Name VERSAILLES PUD. Map Reference: 44-41-24 Census Tract 62 030 SalePrce_$§ REFINANCE _ Date ol Sale NIA Description and $ amount of loan charges/concessions to be paid by seller N/A Lender/Clent_Private Lender Addiess Private Lender @ Aopraser Gerald Rowley Address 1901 SW 5 AVE , MIAMI, FL 33129 Location Urban Rural Predominant [Single faruly housing [Prost ind we % Land use change _ Bult up K]Over75% (_]25-75% lUnder 25% | Occupancy S00) tet [One famty 95. lotlkely [_]ukely Growth rate Rapid Slow XJ Owner 245 low 5 | 2-4 family G In process: Property values [increasing [Dechnng 375 High 35 _| Mutt farmly To Demand/supply [__}Shortage Over supply 82] Predommant ['S5e| Commercial 5 Markeung tme_[ [Under 3 mos Over 6 mos 260-345| 20 Note race and the racial composition of the neighborhood are not appratsal factors Nexghborhood boundaries and charactensties. FOREST HILL BLVO (NORTH) JOG ROAD (EAST), HYPOLUXO RD (SOUTH), & 150 AVE (WEST) TYP DWELLINGS ARE 1&2 STY CB STUCCO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, VILLAS & TOWNHOUSES, Factors that affect the marketability of the properties the nexghborhood (proxmty to employment and amenites employment stabaity, appeal (o market etc } THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AVERAGE TO GOOD PROXIMITY TO SHOPPING, SERVICES, & A REGIONAL MALL, THE WELLINGTON GREEN MALL, LOCATED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE WELLINGTON MEDICAL CENTER IS LOCATED JUST NORTH OF FOREST HILL BLVD , INTERSTATE 95 IS LOCATED 6 S MILES EAST, THE RONALD REAGAN TURNPIKE 1S LOCATED 1 MILE EAST, EMPLOYMENT CENTERS ARE IN REASONABLE PROXIMITY, RESIDENCES HAVE GOOD 70 EXCELLENT APPEAL TO THE MARKET. G Market conditions in the subject newghborhood (including suppart for the above conclusions refated to the trend of property values, demand/supply and marketing ume ~- such as data on competiive properties for sale in the neighborhood description of the prevalence of sales and financing concessions etc) VALUES HAVE REMAINED RELATIVELY STABLE DUE TO DEMAND FOR HOUSING IN THE WELLINGTON VICINITY, DISCOUNTS, BUYDOWNS, AND CONCESSIONS ARE NOT PREVALENT AND HAVE LITTLE IMPACT ON VALUE _TYPICAL a FINANCING IS CASH, FHA, & CONVENTIONAL FINANCING MARKETING TIME FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES HAS BEEN AVERAGING THREE TO SIX MONTHS. NEIGHBORHOOD Project Information for PUDs {ll applicable ~ Is the developerfbullder wn control ofthe Home Owners Association (HOA)? [X]¥es L_]No A Approximate total number of units in the subject project 456 Approximate total number of units for sale in the subject project 13 E Describe common elements and recreational faciltes COMMUNITY POOL , CLUBHOUSE, 24 HR_MANNEO GUARO GATE, COMMON AREAS Dimensions IRREGULAR (SUBJECT TO SURVEY) Topography CEVEL Sileaea 42,632 SF Comer tot | ]¥es [XJNo | Sve TYPICAL OF AREA Spectfic zoning classification and descnpton PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, Shape IRREGULAR Zoning comphance [X] Legal gies nonconforming (Grandfathered use) [__}llegal [_]No Zonng | Drainage APPEARS ADEQUATE Highest & best use as improved [X [Present use_[ ]Other use fexplan) View LAKEPRESID Utlites, Public Other Off ste Improvements: Type Public Private | Landscaping TYPICAL OF AREA Electricity Keer Street ASPHALT Onveway Surface PAVERS Gas BOTTLE Curbigutter CONCRETE/GUTTER, Apparent easements UTILITY Water Py CITY Sidewalk CONCRETE FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area (_|¥es [X]No Santary sewer [X Seetights ON FIBERGLASS POLES FEMA Zone B__MapDate_ 02/01/1979 H Storm sewer [X] Alley NONE, [|_[FEMa Map No 120192 01708 Comments (apparent adverse easements, encroachments special assessments slide areas, legal or legal nonconforming zoning use etc) NO UNUSUAL OR UNFAVORABLE ADVERSE EASEMENTS, ENCROACHMENTS, OR CONDITIONS WERE OBSERVED EASEMENTS ARE @ THOSE OF PUBLIC RECORD TYPICAL OF UTILITIES NO SURVEY PROVIDED APPRAISER GENERAL DESCRIPTION EXTERIOR DESCRIPTION | FOUNDATION BASEMENT INSULATION A No of Units ONE _| Foundation Reinf Cnc_j Slab MONOLITHIC) Area Sq Ft it} Roof CODE No of Stones TWO _] Extenor Walls C Blk Stucco) Craw Space NONE % Fimshed NIA Ceting CODE Type {Det/Att) DETACHED] Root Surtaces Conc Tite | Basement NONE | Ceiling NiA | Walls CODE Design (Style) 2STY__|Guiters & Dwnspts SIDES ‘Sump Pump. NONE Wat's BSEMNTS] Moor _CODE ExistingProposed EXISTING | Window Type SIN_HUNG]| Dampness NONE NOTEQ Floor ARE NOT | None Fe) 4 2 PY Age (Yrs) 2003(2) | Storm/Screens SCREENS | Settiemen. NONE NOTEG Outside Entry TYPICAL | Unknown _UKN FRY ctlecwve Age (vis) EFF 1 | ManufaciwedHouse NO. Infestation NONE NOTE, OF SO FLORIDA fe] Rooms | Foyer | twno | Onng | chen [den [FamiyRm| Rec Rin [Bedrooms | # Bats | Laundry | Oiner | avea Sa FL 4 Basement 0 EFA Level § x 1 i 1 1__|srtinc| 2 350 4 STUDY 3,848 Fa} Level 2 > 1 3 300 THEATER 1,860 Zz 0 FS] Finshedarea above qradecontans 10 Rooms, §__—Betrooms), «6. 50 Baths) 5,708 Square Feet of Gross Lng Area FY WTERIOR — Matenals/Conditon HEATING [ wTcHen aur | Aric AMENITIES CAR STORAGE Foor MarbieWWad /CamptiGU Type Rev Cyc| Reingerator None Fueplace(s)# NONE {_]} None Hq Walls ORYWALL/GOOD | Fuel _ELECT | RangefOven [X]} Stars Patio REAR. Garage 3 Hof cars fe} TamFinsh ~WOOD/GOOD Conditon GOOD | Disposal X]} Drop Star Deck NONE Altached _3CAR al BathFlor MARBLE/GOOD | COOLING Oishwasher |X} Scuttle XJ | Porch REAR Detached Bath Wamsoot MARBLE/GOOD __| Cenirat __A/C_} FanHood Floor Fence _ NONE Buit in ‘Doors SOLID WD _CORE EXT] Other N/A__| Microwave Heated Pool NONE Carport HOLLOW WD CORE INT/GD | Condition GOOD | WashertOryer [XI] Fished CVRO ENTRY [X]l Dwveway _ PAVERS ‘Addiwonal features (special energy effixentitems, etc) SEE COMMENT ADDENDUM Condition ofthe improvements, depreciation (physical functional and external), cepars needed, quakiy of construction remodelngadéitons, etc NO FUNCTIONAL INADEQUACIES WERE NOTED UPON INSPECTION OF PROPERTY NOR ANY EXTERNAL INADEQUACIES OBSERVED UPON EXAMINATION OF SITE WHICH WOULO ADVERSELY AFFECT THE MARKETABILITY OF THE SUBJECT SUBJECT {S EXCELLENT QUALITY CONSTRUCTION & IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN EXCELLENT CONDITION ‘Adverse environmental conditions {such as, bul not imited to hazardous wastes, toxic substances, ele } present inthe improvements, on the site or m the immediate. if ; of the subject propery NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WERE NOTED UPON EXAMINATION OF SITE. IMPROVEMENTS OR WITHIN THE SUBJECT'S IMMEDIATE VICINITY Freddie Mac Form 70.6 93 ClckF ORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fannie Mae Form 1004 (6-93) Page 1 of 16 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT al 7 SERVICE APPRAISALS File No UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT Case No ‘Valuation Section RF-0448-05 ESTIMATED SITE VALUE By ESTIMATED REPRCQUCTION COST OF Dwelling §,708__ Sq FL@$ _ 155 00 ne 575,000 Comments on Cost Approach (such as source of cost estimate, site value, square foot caleulation and for HUD VA and FmHA the estimated remaining economec ife of the property) SEE ATTACHED SKETCH & FS] Bsmt 0 sqr@s [ADDENDUM FOR DIMENSIONS AND CALCULATIONS Ped KIT APPL SIPATIOIPORCH/CVRO ENTRY OF LIVABLE AREA BASE COST TO REPRODUCE & GaragelCarport 714 Sq Ft @3_ 4550 = IASSUMES EXCELLENT QUALITY CONSTRUCTION Fd Total Estimated CostNew = |AND DESIGN AS REFERENCED BY MARSHALL & Pr Less Physical 1 $4 Functional External ISWIFT RESIDENTIAL COST HANDBOOK THERE IS fe} Depreciaton 14,518, fy 14,519NO FUNCTIONAL OR EXTERNAL OBSOLESCENCE FFA Depreciated Value of improvements. = - 928, 209ATTRIBUTABLE TEL =65 YEARS “Asis” Value of Site improvements _ _ 35,00 Bid INDICATED VALUE BY COST APPROACH = 1,538,209 Est Remaining Econ Life 64 yrs. a TEM. I SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO_1 COMPARABLE NO 2 COMPARABLE NO 3 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD | 3524 TURENNE WAY 3521 MABILLON WAY 2520 FAIRWAY ISLAND Address WELLINGTON, FL WELLINGTON, FL WELLINGTON, Fl. WELLINGTON, FL See 0.94 MI NNW 13 MLNW 28MIN i $_REFINANCE [GSES 1,340,106 if Genes 1,500,000 Bi ProelGrosslw Area [$000 (ig 24059 aa 28176 767 66 E Data andlor PUB RECORDS Verifcation Souce | PERS INSPECT | __ISC/PUBLIC RECORDS ISC/PUBLIC RECORDS _|_1SC/PUBLIC RECORDS/MLS Ry VALUE ADJUSTMEN: S| DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION +4)$ Adustment| DESCRIPTION __+{ )$ Adjustment DESCRIPTION _+{ }$ Adjustment Sales or Financing i A) CONVENTIONAL} CONVENTIONAL CASH TO Concessions i MTG $800,000 MTG $1,000 000, SELLER Date of Sale/Time PARES | OFC 2004 NOV 2004 APRIL 2005 Location EXCL/RESID | EXCL /RESID EXCL /RESID EXCL /RESID Leasehold! Fee Simple | _ FEE SIMPLE | FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE Site 12,632 SF 20,473 SF ~15,700__ 17,859 SE 10,500 31,363 SF -37,500| View LAKE/RESID | CANAURESID +5,000_ LAKE/RESID POND/RESID +10,000] ‘Design and Appeal 2STY/EXCL_|_2 STY/EXCL 2 STY /EXCL RANCH/EXCL Qualty of Construction | CBS/EXCL CBS/EXCL CBS/EXCL CBS/EXCL Ba Age 2003(2)a/EFF_1e| 1997 INF_EFF +5,000_1997 INF EFF +5,00d 1989 SIM EFF +5,000 FEY Condition EXCELLENT | EXCELLENT. EXCELLENT GOOD 45,000 Ed Above Grade. Total_|@drms} Baths | Totall Bdems} Baths: Total{Bdrms|_ Baths Total] Bdrms|_ Baths Be] Room Count io | 5 +650} 9] 3 {| 200 +31,50d_9 | 3 [200 +31,500 9 | 4 [550 +7,000 EA Gross Living Area 5,708 Sqfi| 5570 Sq fi +7,600 5,670 __Sq FL +2,104" 5,121 sq Ft]___ +32,300] = Basement & Finished NIA NIA N/A N/A Fe] Rooms Below Grade NIA NIA NIA NIA FF Funcuonal Buty AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE _| Fad HeaungCootng CENTRAL A/C _| CENTRAL A/C CENTRAL A/C CENTRAL A/C Fl Enorgy Eficent toms_| NONE SPECIAL | NONE SPECIAY NONE SPECIAL a NONE SPECIAL Fe Garane/Carport 3. CAR GARAGE |2 CAR GARAGE +5 oda CAR GARAGE -5,000 2 CAR GARAGE! +5,000 ia] Porch, Patio Deck R PATIO/R PORCH R Patio/Prck R Patio/Porch R Patio/Porch BE] Frepiaces), etc CVRD ENTRY | CVRD ENTRY CVRD_ENTRY CVRD ENTRY Pr Fence, Pool ete NONE POOL -12,00 POOL -12,00 POOL =42,000} EQUIPMENT UPGRADES |PT UPGRADES] +50,00d_ upGRaDES INF UPGRADES] __+25,000} Mepemeeeed (X|+ | |- $ 76.400 | (x]+ | |- s 11,100 {xi+ [T- s "39,800 let INet=1% Net=3% 1,416,506 _|Gross=4% 6 _1,608,692_|Gross=9% 1,539,800 Comments on Sates Companson (iscuding the ‘subject property s compatibikly fo the neghborhood etc) SEE COMMENT ADDENDUM TEM. SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO_1 COMPARABLE NO 2 COMPARABLE NO 3 Date, Pace and Data SEE SALES NO PRIOR SALE WITHIN NO PRIOR SALE WITHIN NO PRIOR SALE WITHIN. Source, for por sales HISTORY 12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS walhin year of appears | ADDENDUM ISC/PUB RECORDS ISC/PUB RECORDS. ISC/PUB RECORDS Analysis of any current agreement of Sale option oF Isting of the subject propery and analysis of any prot sales of subject and comparables within one year of the date of appraisal NO CURRENT AGREEMENT OF SALE, OPTION, OR LISTING OF THE SUBJECT OR THE SALE COMPARABLES WERE. UNCOVERED THE SALES ARE CONSIDERED TO BE CASH EQUIVALENT. @ INDICATED VALUE BY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH INDICATED VALUE BY I OME APPROACH {i Applicable) Estimated Market Rent $ NA {Ma x Gross Rent Muluptier “ =3 NIA 1,530,000 This apprassal is made s [_Jsubject to the repairs, alterations mspectons or conditons listed below —[__]subject to completion per plans and spectications Conditons of Apprasal APPRAISED VALUE IS BASED ON THE CONDITIONS & FEATURES OF THE SUBJECT AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION ALSO SEE LIMITING CONDITIONS ALL SALES ARE CONSIDERED CASH EQUIVALENT. Final Reconckaton *"INCOME APPROACH NOT USED DUE TO PREDOMINANT OWNER OCCUPANCY AND LACK OF, QUALITY RENTAL DATA_THE SALES COMPARISON ANALYSIS IS GIVEN PRIMARY EMPHASIS AS IT BEST REFLECTS CURRENT BUYER/SELLER ACTIONS IN THE MARKETPLACE THE COST APPROACH SUPPORTS: RECONCILIATION 5: ‘The purpose of this appraisal 1s to estimate the market value of the real property that is subject to this report based on the above conditions and the cerhfication, contingent and himutmg condibons, and market value defintuon that are stated m the attached Freddie Mac Form 439/Fannie Mae Form 10048 (Revised 6/93 UWE) ESTIMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS REPORT, AS OF (WHICH IS THE DATE OF NSE TION ANO THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS REPORT) TO BE $ _ APRIL 23, 2005 1,530,000 SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED) ‘Signature Od [_Jou Not acatdh ff Name inspect Property t Date Report Signed APRIL 23, 2005. Date Report Signed Slale Cenfication# _ RZ967 State FL State Certification # Slate Go Or State License # Slate Or Stale License # Stale Freddie Mac Form 70 6-93 ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fannie Mae Form 1004 (6.93) Page 2 of 16 ADM mete 5 INISTRATIVE COMPLAINT tal 4. SERVICE APPRAISALS EXTRA COMPARABLES 4-5-6 FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. City, WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 LenderiClient Private Lender Address Private Lender than the subject property a minus (-) adjustment is made thus reduct subject property, a plus (+) adjustments made, thus ncreasing the indicated value af the subject These recent sales of properties are most similar and proximate lo subject and have been considered in the market analysis The description includes a dollar adjustment saflacting ‘market reaction to those Hems of significant variation between the subject and comparable properties If a signiticant lem in the comparable property #s superior lo or more favorabley the mated vale of subject 112 Sgnicant stom m the comparable 1s enor Lo o ess favorable tan the TEM {suaJect COMPARABLENO 4 COMPARABLENO 5 COMPARABLENO 6 10765 VERSAILLES BLVD | 3540 AMBASSADOR OR Address WELLINGTON, FL WELLINGTON, FL Proxmuly to Subject 8 Sales Price eS PaceiGross Liv Area aay Af Data andior PUB RECORDS Verficaton Sowce | PERS INSPECT | 1SC PUBLIC RECORDS/MLS ee VALUE ADJUSTMENTS| DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION _[+{}$Adustment| DESCRIPTION | «{)$ Adusimeni| DESCRIPTION | +{.}$ Adjustment Kal Sales of Financing in oh CASH TO. Concessions SELLER Date of Sale/Time JUNE 2004 Locabon EXCL /RESID FH Leasehold/Fee Simple | FEE SIMPLE | FEE SIMPLE Bd Sue 42,632 SF 22,650 SF 20,000 oa View LAKE/RESID | LAKE/RESIO -| 4 Design and Appeal 2STY/EXCL__{ RANCH/EXCL ‘Quality of Construction | CBS/EXCL CBS/EXCL | Ace 2003(2)a/EFF te] 2003 SIM EFF Condon EXCELLENT | EXCELLENT Above Grade Total [Bdrm Gaths | Total] Bdrmd Baths Total] Béimd_ Baths Totall Bdrmd_Baths Rooin Count jo | 5 [esol 9 | 4 | 550 +7,00 Gross Lung Avea 5708 Sq Ea 6,715 _ Sq Ft -55,401 Sq Ft Sq Fl Basement & Finished NIA NIA Rooms Below Grade NIA NIA Functional Unity AVERAGE AVERAGE | Heatna/Cootng CENTRAL AIC | CENTRAL A/C Energy Efficent tems | NONE SPECIAL | NONE SPECIAL| GarageiCarport 3 CAR GARAGE | 3 CAR GARAGE] # Porch, Pato Deck R PATIO/R PORCH R Patio/Porch Fireplace(s), etc CVRD ENTRY | PCOUSPA -15,000 Fence, Poo, ele NONE FNCD REAR -2,000, | EQUIPMENT UPGRADES | UPGRADES Net Ad) {total -85,400 Mt Ls oO x = $ 0 Adjusted Sales Price let= 0% - let=0% | ‘of Comparable 4,564,600 _|Gross=0% _ |s 0 ross= 0% fs 0 Comments on Comparables TEM SUBJECT COMPARABLENO 4 COMPARABLENO 5 COMPARABLENO 6 Date, Pree and Daia | SEE SALES NO PRIOR SALE WITHIN Source, for prior sales HISTORY 12 MONTHS vattin year of appraisal | ADDENDUM ISC/PUB RECORDS ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 SERVICE APPRAISALS . COMMENT ADDENDUM FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No Borower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD Ciy_ WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL ZipCode 33467 LenderChent__Private Lender Address Private Lender ADDITIONAL FEATURES Oakwood banister and steps, sauna, home theater on second floor, recreation room ‘on second floor, marble flooring throughout the first floor, marble flooring and wainscots in bathrooms, high end fixtures and hardward throughout, lake front property, granite tle countertops and backsplash in kitchen, 42" wood custom cabinets in kitchen, recessed lighting throughout, 3 car garage, rear porch and pati area, tray ceiling and sitting room in master bedroom sutte, wood vanities and granite vanity tops in bathrooms, inground sprinkler system There ts wall to wall Berber carpeting in the bedrooms The house exterior 1s painted concrete block stucqo There ts a full sized washer and dryer in the laundry room ~The house has central air conditioning The subject is considered to be in excellent condition COMMENTS ON COST APPROACH Estimated Site Value was abstracted from recent improved sales in the ‘subject's area High land to value ratio 1s typical of the area due to demand for housing in this section of Wellington This factor does not adversely affect the marketability of the subject DEFERRED MAINTENANCE None noted at time of inspection COMMENTS ON THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH The comparables were adjusted to the subyect's location, site area, site/view, age, condition, size of living area, car storage, and amensties The comparables used were the best available with verifiable information Two of the comparables are located in the Versailles subdivision Comparables #3 and #4 are all located within the Wellington area The sales uncovered are similar to the subyect with regards to location, functional utility, quality of construction, total bedroom and bath count, appeal, lot size, community amenities, and size of living area Equal emphasis given to all sales PERSONAL PROPERTY Personal property, including those items which are not permanently attached/fixed to the real property, have been excluded from the estimate of value unless indicated otherwise Examples of the aforementioned include above ground swimming pools, countertop microwave ovens, movable dishwashers, TV satellite dishes, and furniture ALMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 4 of 16 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPI SERVICE APPRAISALS SKETCH ADDENDUM File No RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower__LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City_ WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 LenderClient Private Lender Address Private Lender 25 1 5 BATH ' 1 1 Family . 120 140 ROOM fot a Kitchen 3 Dining Bedroom ROOM ROOM , 2 FE Bedroom Study wic Laundry Foyer Bath as ” aad First Floor ‘Staten of Aver w™ Carers . AREA CALCULATIONS SUVIVARY LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN | Code Description Size Net Totals Breakdown Subtotals GAL First Flooe 3047 60 ea? 60 Furst Floor PrP Porch 120 00 25% 125 325 Patso au a onan osx 32% 32 $06 car Garage ne 15 na is 32% 255 Cee 40 x 27 11473 ox 25 360 00 Sx 370 795 89 05% 00% 090 910 0 x 542 2004 73 33x as 70 95 wsx 195 243 15, - 190 x 140 149 00 TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) 3848 41 Calculations Total (rounded) 3848 a4 ClickFORMS Appraisal! Software 800-622-8727 ADMINIST RATIVE COMPLAINT i SERVICE APPRAISALS SKETCH ADDENDUM FileNo — RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. City WELLINGTON County. PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 LenderChent__ Private Lender Address_Private Lender Open to 160° Recreation ROOM oe Open ta Bedroom 4 Below 520° Bath Home 16S Theater Bath 270° Bedroom oS Bedroom = 6 Second Floor 60 Comets, . ‘AREA CALCULATIONS. SUVIVARY” LUMING AREA BREAKDOWN Code Description : Size Net Totals Breakdown Subtotals Graz ‘Second Floor 1859 69 1859 69 ‘Second Floor 120 x 260 ani a2 O5x 120 x 107 64 38 05x 35 x 35 625 3S x 90 273 TO x 125 @7 89 25 x 277 6a 66 SOx 135 oa , 17x 4s 2a 53 aS x 56 19 7% O5x 81x 81 33 06 OSx 28% 28 400 20% 28 193 160 x 400 640 00 O5x 25% 25 306 a2 x 60 25 46 O5x 42x 42 9 00 OSx 42% 42 300 165% 270 4a5 50 TOTAL UVABLE (rounded) 1860 18 Calculations Total (rounded) 1860 10 ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 SERVICE APPRAISALS LOCATION MAP ADDENDUM FileNo — RF-0448-05 Case No Borower_ _LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. Cty WELLINGTON County. PALM BEACH State FL 2ip Code 33467 LenderiCkent__ Private Lender Address_ Private Lender a HAVERHILL OVAL PaLw agacy FLVING COW RANCH FOR FLsHONy 1a [HINVY ARROWHEAD on tu0 THE TOW Raney Lal | x HYPOLUXO HAGEN Raney = o 2 Ww oe iy) > VE COMPLAINT cy aro earl ess ae HAGEN RANCH Scale aP(C)i984-2001 TELE ATLAS NA INC ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 7 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM File No RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON. Property Address‘ 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Lender/Cient__ Private Lender Address _Pavate Lender Zip Code 33467 FRONT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD WELLINGTON, FL REAR OF SUBJECT PROPERTY STREET SCENE ADMINIOTR at DATIVE COMPLAINT: loz ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 8 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address __ 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL 2 Code 33467 Private Lender Address Private Lender LenderfChent VIEW OF LAKE FROM 2nd Floor ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 o TRATIVE COMPLAINT SERVICE APPRAISALS. COMPARABLES 1-2-3 FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No Borower_ LENZER BURTON Properly Addess 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH Slate FL Zip Code 33467 LenderChent__ Private Lender Address Private Lender PiaLEAOMG Anaraest Cathuare BAOKIIRTIT COMPARABLE# 1 3524 TURENNE WAY WELLINGTON, FL. COMPARABLE # 2 3521 MABILLON WAY WELLINGTON, FL COMPARABLE # 3 2520 FAIRWAY ISLAND WELLINGTON, FL SERVICE APPRAISALS COMPARABLES 4-5-6 FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code. 33467 LenderCtent_ Private Lender Address Private Lender | COMPARABLE # 4 3540 AMBASSADOR DR WELLINGTON, FL COMPARABLE # § COMPARABLE # 6 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT IGE FI AVENDMG Annemnal Cathe arn BAN B99 O77 SERVICE APPRAISALS. . FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price 1s not affected by undue stimulus Implicit in thts definition 1s the consummation of a sale as of a specified date and the passing of ttle from seller to buyer under conditions whereby (1) buyer and seller are typically motwated, (2) both partes are well informed or well advised, and each acting in what he considers his own best interest, (3) a reasonable time 1s allowed for exposure in the open market, (4) payment is made in terms of cash in U S dollars or tn terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto and (5) the price represents the normal consideration for the property sold unaffected by speciat or creatwe financing or sales concessions" granted by anyone associated with the sale “Adjustments to the comparables must be made for special or crealive financing or sales concessions No adjustments are necessary for those costs which are normally paid by sellers as a result of tradition or {aw in a market, these costs are readily identifiable since the seller pays these costs in virtually all sales transactions Spectal or creative financing adjustments can be made to the comparable property by comparisons to financing terms offered by a third party institutional lender that 1s not already involved in the property or transaction Any adjustment should not be calculated ‘on a mechanical dollar for dollar cost of the financing or concession bul the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate the market's reaction to the financing or concesstons based on the appraiser's judgment STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS AND APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The appraiser's certification that appears in the appraisal report is subject to the following conditions 1 The appraiser wall not be responsible for matters of a legal nature that affect either the property being appraised or the title to it. The appraiser assumes that the litle is good and marketable and, therefore will nol render any opinions about the title The property 1s appraised on the basis of it being under responsible ownership 2 The appraiser has provided a sketch in the appraisal report to show approximate dimensions of the improvements and the sketch is included only to assist the reader of the report in visualizing the property and understanding the appraiser's determination of ils size 3. The appraiser has examined the available flood maps that are provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (or other data sources) and has noted in the appraisal report whether the subject site 1s located in an identified Special Flood Hazard Area Because the appraiser ts nol a surveyor he or she makes no guarantees, express or implied regarding this determination 4 The appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she made an appraisal of the property in question unless specific arrangements to do so have been made beforehand 5 The appraiser has estimated the value of the land in the cost approach at its highest and best use and the improvements at thei contributory 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 so used 6 The appraiser has noted in the appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as, needed repairs, depreciation the presence of hazard wastes, toxic substances, etc ) observed during the inspection of the subject property or that he or she became aware of during the normal research involved in performing the appraisal Unless otherwise stated in the appraisal report the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent conditions of the property or adverse environmental conditions (including the presence of hazardous wastes toxic substances etc ) that would make the property more or fess valuable, and has assumed that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, express or plied, regarding the condition of the property The appraiser will not be responsibie for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineenng or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist Because the appraiser 1s not an expert 7 the field of environmental hazards, the appraisal report must not 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 thal he or she considers to be reliable and beleves them to be true and correct The appraiser does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of such :tems that were furnished by other parties 8 The appraiser will not disclose the contents of the appraisal report except as provided for in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice 9 The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal thal 1s subject to satisfactory completion, repairs. or alterations on the assumption that completion of the improvements will be performed in a workmanlike manner 10. The appraiser must provide his or her pnor written consent before the lender/chent specified in the appraisal report can distnbute the appraisal report (including conclusions about the property value, the appraiser's identity and professional designations and references to any professional appraisal organizations or the firm with which the appraiser 1s associated) to anyone other than the borrower, the mortgagee or its successors and assigns, the mortgage insurer, consultants, professional appraisal organizations, any state or federally approved financial institution, or any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States or any state or the District of Columbia, except that the tender/chent may distnbute the property description section of the report only to data collection or reporting service(s) without having to obtain the appraiser's prior written consent The apprarser’s written consent and approval must also be obtained before the appraisal can be conveyed by anyone to the public through advertising, public relations, news sales, or other media { i Freddie Mac Form 439 (6 93) ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fanmue Mae Form 10048 (5- Page 12 of SERVICE APPRAISALS. FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION The Appraiser certifies and agrees that 1 (have researched the subject market area and have selected a minimum of three recent sales of properties most similar and proximate to the subject property for consideration im the sales companson analysis and have made a dollar adjustment when appropnate to reflect the market reaction to those items of significant variation Ifa significant item in a comparable Property Is Supertor to of more favorable than, the subject properly, | have made a negative adjustment to reduce the adjusted sales price of the comparable and, if a significant ttem nm a comparable property 1s inferior to or less favorable than the subject property, | have made a positive adjustment to increase the adjusted sales price of the comparable 2 _ [have taken into consideration the factors thal have an impact on value in my development of the estimate of market value in the appraisal report | have not knowingly withheld any significant information from the appraisal report and | . believe, to the best of my knowledge, that all statements and information in the appratsal report are true and correct 3 _ | stated in the appraisal report only my own personal, unbiased and professional analysis, opinions, and conclusions, which are subject only to the contingent and limiting conditions specified in this form 4 thave no present or prospective interest in the property that 1s the subject to this report, and | have no present or Prospective personal interest or bias with respect to the participants in the transaction | did not base, either partially or completely, my analysis and/or the estimate of market value in the appratsal report on the race color, religion sex, handicap famular status, or national origin of exther the prospective owners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners or occupants of the properties in the vicinity of the subject property 5 _ Shave no present or contemplated future interest in the subject property, and neither my current or future employment for my compensation for performing this apprarsal 1s contingent on the appraised vatue of the property 6 _ Iwas not required to report a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client or any related party the amount of the value estimate, the attamment of a specific resull, or the occurrence of a subsequent event in order to receive my compensation and/or employment for performing the appraisal 1 did not base the appraisal report on a requested minimum valuation, a specific valuation or the need to approve a specific mortgage loan 7 | performed this appratsal in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were 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 does not apply ! acknowledge that an estimate of a reasonable time for exposure in the open market 1s a condition in the definition of market val.2 and the estimate | developed 1s consistent with the marketing time noted in the neighborhood section of this report unless | have otherwise stated in the reconciliation section 8 Ihave personally inspected the interior and exterior areas of the subject property and the exterior of all properties ksted as comparables in the appraisal report | further certify that | have noted any apparent or known adverse conditions im the subject improvements on the subject site, of on any site within the immediate vicinity of the subject property of which | am aware and have made adjustments for these adverse conditions in my analysis of the property value to the extent that | had market evidence to support them | have also commented about the effect of the adverse conditions on the marketabulty of the subject property 9. I personally prepared all conclusions and opinions about the reat estate thal were set forth in the appraisal report If | relied on significant professional assistance from any indwidual or individuals in the performance of the appraisal or the Preparation of the appraisal report, have named such individual(s) and disclosed the specific tasks performed by them in the reconciliation section of this appraisal report { certify that any individual so named is qualified to perform the tasks Shave not authorized anyone to make a change to any item in the repor, therefore, #f an unauthorized change ts made to the appraisal report, | will take 00 responsibilty for SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION: {f a superusory appraiser signed the appraiser report, he or she Certifies and agrees thal | directly superuise the appraiser who prepared the appraisal report have reviewed the appraisal report, agree with the statements and conclusions of the appraiser, agree to be bound by the appraiser's cerlificalions fumbered 4 through 7 above, and am taking full responsibilty for the appraisal and the appraisal report ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD , WELLINGTON, FL. APPRAISER: SUPERVISORY APPRAISER {only if required) Signature Signature Name Gerald Re Name Date Signed APRIL 23, 2005 Date Signed State Certification # RZ967 Stale Certification # or State License # or State License # State FL_, State Expiration Date of Certification or License 11/30/06 Expiration Date of Certification or License Ord Ord Not Inspect Property 107 Froddie Mac Form 439 6-93 ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fannie Mae Form 10048 6.93 Page 13 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT HISTORY ADDENDUM FileNo — RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address_10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 Lender/Clent Private Lender in developing a real estate appraisal, an appraiser must consider, analyze and disclose (a) Any current agreement of sale, option or isting of the property being appraised (b) Any prior sale of the subject properly being appraised that occurred within the following time penods (I) one (1) year for 1-4 family residential property, and {if} three years for all other property types ‘The appraiser has attempted to obtain specific information on the subject property with the following findings The subject property has had ao change of ownership during the past one (1) year The subject property has had no change of ownership during the past three (3) years The subject property 1s currently under contract Details of the pending purchase are summarized below [-] The subject property 1s currently offered for sale, listing price is $ [X] The subject property has been sold dunng the past one (1) year period Details of the previous sale are disclosed below The subject property 1s proposed construction and 1s not currently being offered A previous sale history of the property could not be obtained by the appraiser in the normal course of business Grantor/Owner of Record NATHAN & YOLOIE VINCENT Grantee/Purchaser LORAINE SMITH BROOKS & JOHN KIBLER Contract Price/Sale Puce $226,000 Date of Contract/Sale MAY 2004 Comments The subject property has not sold within the prior thirty six months ~ 10% ClickFORMS Appratsal Software 800-622-8727 Page 14 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS USPAP COMPLIANCE ADDENDUM FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION ‘The following Certification statements are m addition to and may supercede the signed Agpraiser’s Certification altached to this appraisal report This Apprarser’s Certification 1s compliant with the current edition of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice | certify that to the best of my knowledge and belief The statements of fact contamned in this report are true and correct . The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal, impartial and unbiased professional analyses, opimons and conclusions "have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved have no bias with respect to the property that 1s the sudject of this report or to the partes mvoved with this assignment My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results My compensation for completing this assignement 1s nol contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the chent the amount of the value opinion the attainment of a stipulated result or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly relate to the intended use of this appraisal My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice | [XJhave[_]have not made a personal inspection of the property that is the subject of this report {If more than one person signs this certification the cerbification must clearly specify which individuals did and which individuals did not make a personal inspection of the appraised property ) No one provided significant real property appraisal assistance to the person signing this certification (if there are exceptions the name of each individual providing significant reat property appratsal assistance must be stated ) PURPOSE, INTENDED USE, AND INTENDED USER OF THE APPRAISAL The purpose of the appraisal is to estimate the market value of the subject property, as defined in this report as of the effective date of this report The intended use of the appraisal ts to assist the clent and any other intended users in the underwnting, approval and funding of the mortgage foan The intended users of this report are the stated client and any other insttutions involved in the underwnting , approval, and funding of the mortgage oan No one else, including the purchaser and seller, should rely on the estimate of value or any other conclusions contained in this appravsal report ANALYSIS AND REPORT FORM The appraisal is based on the information gathered by the appraiser from public records, other identified sources inspection of the subyect property and neighborhood, and selection of comparable sales listings, and/or rentals within the subject market area The onginat source of the comparable data descnbed in the Data Source section of the market gnd along with the source of confirmation provided, where available, the onginal source ts presented first The sources and data are considered reliable When conflicting information was provided, source deemed most reltable has been used Data believed to be unreliable was not included in the report or used as a basis for the value conclusion The extent of the analysis to this assignment 1s stated in the Appraiser's Certification included above and attached to this report EFINITION OF INSPECTION The term ‘inspection* as used mn this report 1s not the same level of inspection that is required for a “Professional Home Inspection” The appraiser| does not fully inspect the electrical system, plumbing systems mechanical systems, foundation system, floor structure or subfloor The appraiser 1s not an expert in construction materials and the purpose of the appraisal 1s to make an economic evaluation of the subject property if the chent needs a more detailed inspection of the propery a home inspection, by a Professional Home Inspector, is suggested DIGITAL SIGNATURES The signature(s) affixed to this report and certification were applied by the onginal appraiser(s) or superisory appraiser and represent their acknowledgements of the facts, opinions and conclusions found in the report Each appraiser(s) applied his,or her signature electronically using a Password encrypted method Hence these signatures have more safeguards and carry the same validity as the individuat’s hand applied signature {f the report has a hand-applied signature, this comment does not apply OPINION OF MARKET VALUE VS ESTIMATE OF MARKET VALUE The current Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice defines the market value conclusion as an opinion of market value and not an estimate of market value THREE YEAR SALES HISTORY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY The appraiser has complied with Standards Rute 1-5b and 2-2b (0x} requinng the appraiser to analyze and report all sales of the subject property that occurred within the three (3) years pnor to the effective date of the appraisal If this information was available to the appraiser(s) tts reported in the subject column of Sales Comparison Analysis section of the appraisal report EXPOSURE PERIOD By studying the sales of similar comparable residential properties with value ranges as identified in the Neighborhood section of this report and discussions with individuals knowledgeable of current neighborhood trends in the subject area, the appraiser feels that the exposure ttme for the subject property 18 equal to the indicated Marketing Time identified in the Neighborhood section of this appraisal report op Signature Jord Did Not x Name inspect Property Date Report'Signed APRIL + | Date Report Signed State Certification # RZ967 State FL_ State Certification # State Or State License # State Or State License # State 164 ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 15 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS APPRAISAL AND REPORT IDENTIFICATION = FileNo — RF-0448-05 Case No Borrower_LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 Lender/Chent Private Lender Address Private Lender This Appraisal conforms to one of the following definitions Complete Appraisal The act or process of estimating value, or an estimate of vaiue, performed without invoking the Departure Provision Limited Appraisal The act or process of estimating value, or an estimation of value, performed under and resulting from invoking the Departure Provision This Report is one of the following types Self Contained Report Awntten report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(A) of a complete or limited appraisal performed under Standard 1 Summary Report A.wntien report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(B) of a complete or limited appraisal performed under Standard 1 Restncted Report Awaitten report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(C) of a complete or limited appraisal performed under Standard 1 Comments on Appraisal and Report Identification Note any departures from Standards Rules 1-2, 1-3, 1-4, plus any USPAP-related issues requiring disclosure ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT. ERY BIT ClickKFORMS Appraisal! Software 800-622-8727 Page 16 of 16 INVOICE Date APRIL 23, 2005 FileNo RF-0448-05 Case No Prepared for Private Lender Private Lender Property Appraised LENZER BURTON 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD WELLINGTON, FL. Work Performed. APPRAISAL OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE $ 495 00 $ Customers payment towards appraisal fee $ 495 00 $ $ $ Total Amount Due $ 000 Piease make checks payable to SERVICE APPRAISALS 1901 SW 5 AVE MIAMI, FL 33129 ’ X ADMINISTRATIVE COMFLAINT. EXHIBIT # | . PAGE I> Lae ClickFORMS Appratsal Software 800-622-8727 | | | APPRAISAL REPORT of Single Family Residence at 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. WELLINGTON, FL As Of November 18, 2005 Prepared For WCS LENDING, LLC = 6501 Congress Ave Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL 33487 Prepared By. SERVICE APPRAISALS Gerald Rowley 4552 Highgate Dr Delray Beach, FL 33445 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT. EXHIBIT i —____— co (0 re 1b PAGE __ OF SERVICE APPRAISALS FileNo — RF-4102-05 erty Description UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT case No Proj Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD Cry WELLINGTON State FL Zip Code 33467, Legal Desenpion _ LOT 284, VERSAILLES PUD County PALM BEACH Assessors Parcel No_73-44-44-24-05.000-2840 ASSD $667 273 TaxYear 2004 RE Taxes$ 15,067 23 SpecialAssessments$ NIA Borrower LENZER BURTON Current Owner LENZER BURTON Occupant [X]Owner [7 }Tenant_ [Yvacant Property nghis apprased |X| Fee Simple [| ]Leasehotd Prowect Type [X [PUD [Condominum (HUDIVAcnly) HOAS 358 00 Mo. Newhborhood or Project Name. VERSAILLES PUD. Map Reference 44-41-24 Census Tract 62 030 Sale Prce_$ REFINANCE DateofSae N/A __Desenption and $ amount of loan charges/concesswons lo be paid by seller N/A LenderiClent WCS LENDING, LLC Address 6501 Congress Ave , Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL 33487 Appraiser Gerald Rowley Address 4552 Highgate Dr, Delray Beach, FL_33445 Location [_furban Suburban [_]Rurat Predominant] Single family housing [resto vse % Land use change 4 Buiit up XJ Over 75% 15-75% Under 25% | occupancy Storr bear ‘One family 95 & ‘Not likely Likely Growhrate — {_|Rapad Stable Slow [X]owner 375 tow 5 | 2-4 famuly 0 In process Property values [_ | Increasing Stable Declining | [_] Tenant 3MM_Hagh 35 _| Mutt-family To Demandisupply (__|Shortage Inbatance {_|Over supply] [X] vacant (0-5%)} FREY Predominant [EA] Commercial 5 Marketing tine [ |Under 3 mos [13 6 mos [Over 6 mos | [7 |vacant fore 5%)/ 800-2 suum] 20 Note race and the racial composition of the neighborhood are not appraisal factors. Nexghbochood boundaries and characteristics FOREST HILL BLVD (NORTH), JOG ROAD (EAST) HYPOLUXO RO (SOUTH), & 150 AVE (WEST) TYP DWELLINGS ARE 1&2 STY CB STUCCO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, VILLAS, & TOWNHOUSES : Factors that affect the marketabiliy of the properties in the neighborhood (proximity to employment and amenities employment stabikly, appeal fo market, etc ) THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AVERAGE TO GOOD PROXIMITY TO SHOPPING, SERVICES, & A REGIONAL MALL, THE WELLINGTON GREEN MALL, LOCATED WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, THE WELLINGTON MEDICAL CENTER IS LOCATED JUST NORTH OF FOREST HILL BLVD , INTERSTATE 95 IS LOCATED 6 5 MILES EAST, THE RONALD REAGAN TURNPIKE. 1S LOCATED 1 MILE EAST, EMPLOYMENT CENTERS ARE IN REASONABLE PROXIMITY, RESIDENCES HAVE GOOD TO. EXCELLENT APPEAL TO THE MARKET. Market conditions in the subject neighborhood (including suppor for the above conclusions related to the trend of property values demand/supply and marketing time ~ such as data on compettive properties for sale m the nexghborhood, descnption of the prevalence af sales and financing concessions, etc ) VALUES HAVE REMAINED RELATIVELY STABLE DUE TO DEMAND FOR HOUSING IN THE WELLINGTON VICINITY, DISCOUNTS, BUYDOWNS, AND CONCESSIONS ARE NOT PREVALENT AND HAVE LITTLE IMPACT ON VALUE TYPICAL FINANCING IS CASH, FHA, & CONVENTIONAL FINANCING MARKETING TIME FOR COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES HAS BEEN AVERAGING THREE TO SIX MONTHS Project Information for PUDs (lt applicable - Is the developer/buider m contro of the Home Owner's Association (HOA)? ‘es L_JNo Approximate total number of units in the subject project 456 Approximate total number of units for sale in the subject project 13£ Describe common elements and recreational facies COMMUNITY POOL , CLUBHOUSE, 24 HR_ MANNED GUARD GATE, COMMON AREAS Omensions IRREGULAR (SUBJECT TO SURVEY) Topography LEVEL 4 Sie area 12,632 SF Comertot [_]¥es [X]No | Sze TYPICAL OF AREA Specific zonng classification and descnpion PUD, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Shape IRREGULAR Zoning comphance [XK] Legal [“]Legat nonconforming (Grandfathered use) [_Jillegal [_]No Zoning | Dranage APPEARS ADEQUATE Highest & best use as mproved_[ X ]Preseni use. Other use (expiain) view LAKE/RESID H] Utiives Pubic Other Off-ste Improvements Type Public Prvate | Landscaping TYPICAL OF AREA Etcctricty XJEPL Sree ASPHALT [Xx] [_) Joneway Sudace PAVERS Gas BOTTLE Curbigutler CONCRETE/GUTTER x Apparent easements UTILITY. Water X| CITY Sdewak CONCRETE x LJ FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area Yes [X]No 4) Santary sewer Steetights ON FIBERGLASS POLES [X FEMA Zone B__ Map Dale _02/01/1979 Storm sewer__{X Aley NONE FEMAMapNo__ 120192 01708 ‘Comments (apparent adverse easements, encroachments special assessments, side areas, iltegal or legal nonconfacming zoning use etc) NO UNUSUAL OR UNFAVORABLE ADVERSE EASEMENTS ENCROACHMENTS, OR CONDITIONS WERE OBSERVED EASEMENTS ARE HOSE OF PUBLIC RECORD TYPICAL OF UTILITIES NO SURVEY PROVIDED APPRAISER ‘GENERAL DESCRIPTION EXTERIOR DESCRIPTION FOUNDATION BASEMENT INSULATION No of Units ONE ___| Foundation Reinf Cnc_]} Slab MONOLITHIC} Area Sq FL i) Roof _CODE 4 No of Sicnes TWO __ | Cxtenor Walls C Bik Stuccd Crawt Space NONE ‘% Finshed NIA Cetlng CODE Type (Det /Att) DETACHED] Roof Surfaces Conc Tile } Basement NONE Cetling NIA Wals CODE W Design (Style) 2STY _| Gutters & Dwaspts SIDES ‘Sump Pump NONE Walls BSEMNTS] Floor _CODE Existag/Proposed _EX{STING | Window Type SIN HUNG] Dampness NONE NOTEG Floor ARE NOT] None Age (Yrs) 2003(2) | Stomm/Screens SCREENS | Settlement NONE NOTED Ouise Envy TYPICAL | Unknown _UKN Effectve Age (Yrs) EFF 1 | Manufactured House. NO Infestavon NONE. NOTEG OF SO FLORIDA ROOMS | Foyer | twing | Ding | Kitchen | “Den [FamiyRm]| Ree Rm |Bediooms | # Baths Area Sq Fl q_ Basement 0 d Level} x 1 1 i 1__[simnc| 2 350 3.848 Level 2 1 3 300 THEATER 1,860 0 Finished area above grade contains 10 Rooms, 5. Bedroom(s) 6 50 Bath(s), 5,707 uare Feet of Gross Living Area INTERIOR — MaterralsiConduon HEATING KSTCHEN Equip_[ ATTIC ‘AMENITIES ‘CAR STORAGE Floors MarblefWd /Carpt /GQ Type Rev Cyc] Refngerator {X]} None (_] | Fueplaceis)# NONE None Walls DRYWALL/GOOD | Fuet ELECT } RangefOven {X]} Siaus Pato REAR Garage 3 #of cars . : sanders i TnFash ~=WOOD/GOOD Conditon GOOD | Osposai [XI] Drop Star [_] | Deck _ NONE Atached _3 CAR AUNTS Phe DEVE LIVE CALNER poh oor MARBLE/GOOD —T COOUNG Oshwasher [XI] soutle [K] | Porch _ REAR Detached ' Bath Wainscot MARBLE/GOOD _| Cental _ AVC _| FantHood Floor Fence _ NONE Burlt-tn EXHIBIT # Doors SOLID WD CORE EXT| Other ~_N/A_| Microwave Heated Pool __ NONE Carport a “WO CORE INT /GD | Condition GOOD | WasherOryer [Xl] Fiushed CVRD _ ENTRY Driveway _ PAVERS. PAGE OF A] Additonal features (special energy efficient dems, etc) SEE COMMENT ADDENDUM J Condon of the improvements depreciation (physical, functional and extemal) epars needed qualiy of construction, remodelingladditions etc NO FUNCTIONAL INADEQUACIES WERE NOTED UPON INSPECTION OF PROPERTY NOR ANY EXTERNAL INADEQUACIES OBSERVED UPON EXAMINATION OF SITE WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT THE MARKETABILITY OF THE SUBJECT SUBJECT IS EXCELLENT. QUALITY CONSTRUCTION & 1S CONSIDERED TO BE IN EXCELLENT CONDITION Adverse environmental conditions (such as. but nol limited to, hazardous wastes, loxic Substances, ec ) present in the mprovernents, on the sile, orm the ummediate vicinity A of he subject property NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS WERE NOTED UPON EXAMINATION OF SITE d IMPROVEMENTS OR WITHIN THE SUBJECT'S IMMEDIATE VICINITY. Freddie Mac Form 70 6-93 ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fannie Mae Form 1004(6 93) Page 1 of 16 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINY, EXHIBIT 4 ee ey SERVICE APPRAISALS FileNo RF-1102-05 Valuation Section UNIFORM RESIDENTIAL APPRAISAL REPORT Case No BA ESTIMATEDSITEVALUE oe s$ 1,150,000 Comments on Cost Approach (such as, source of cost estimate site value, ESTIMATED REPRODUCTION COST-NEW OF IMPROVEMENTS square foot calculation and for HUD and FmHA, the estimated remaining Bi Oweling __5,707_ Sq FL@S_ 17500 =$ 998,725 economic feof the property) SEE ATTACHED SKETCH & Ee] Bsmt OSes > 0 |ADDENDUM FOR DIMENSIONS AND CALCULATIONS Fey KIT APPL-SIPATIO/PORCHICVRD ENTRY = 35,500 lOF LIVABLE AREA BASE COST TO REPRODUCE Eq Gavgetcapon 714 Sq FL@$__ 5550 = 39,627 |ASSUMES EXCELLENT QUALITY CONSTRUCTION EY Total Esumated CostHew = 7,073,852 IAND DESIGN AS REFERENCED BY MARSHALL & t Less Physical 1 54! Functional [ever SWIFT RESIDENTIAL COST HANDBOOK THERE IS fe] Depreciation 16,537 0 ° 16,537INO FUNCTIONAL OR EXTERNAL OBSOLESCENCE Depreciated Valve of Improvements 7.057, 319ATTRIBUTABLE _T EL = 65 YEARS. “As is" Value of Site Improvements _ _ - - 35,000, iNDICATED VALUE BY COST APPROACH = =$ 2,242,314 Est Remaining Econ Life 64 yrs. (TEM SUBJECT COMPARABLE NO 1 COMPARABLE NO_2 COMPARABLE NO 3 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD 3597 Royalie Terrace 3595 AIKEN RD 71332 Long Meadow Dr Address WELLINGTON, FL WELLINGTON, FL WELLINGTON, FL WELLINGTON, FL Proximity to Subject ae 032 MISSE 15 MINW 14 MINNW Sales Price $_ REFINANCE 2,400,000 2,430,000 [RSEARASHEE 1,950,000 ProelGrossiw Area _[$ 000 s 42046 Ales $398 30 RPESEEe|s 43939 Rea Data andor PUB RECORDS SALES OFFICE Verication Source _| PERS INSPECT | _ISC/PUBLIC RECORDS _] ISC/PUBLIC RECORDS/MLS|_ISC/PUBLIC RECORDS/MLS. VALUE ADJUSTMENTS DESCRIPTION +{J$ Adjustment] DESCRIPTION »{-)$ Adjustment DESCRIPTION +{-)$ Adjustment, Sales or Financing CONVENTIONAL CONVENTIONAL CONVENTIONAL Concessions : | MTG $800,000 MTG $1,665,000 MTG_$400,000 Date of Sale/Time ARs OCT 2005 OCT 2005 JULY 2005 Location ~ | EXCt/RESIO. | EXCL RESID EXCL /RESIO EXCL /RESID Leasehold Fee Smple | FEE SIMPLE | FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE FEE SIMPLE Site 12,632 SF 14,473 SE <17,000 47,480 SF -209,10d 23,958 SF “68,000 View TAKE/RESIO | LAKE/RESID Polo Grounds +15,000 Golf Crs (RES. +10,000] Design and Appeal 2 STY/EXCL__|_2 STY /EXCL 2 STY /EXCL RANCH/EXCL Quatity of Construction |__ CBS/EXCL CBSIEXCL CBS/EXCL CBS/EXCL Age 2003(2)a/EFF 12] 2005 SUP_EFF ~5,00_1993 INF EFF +5,000 1988 SIM_EFF +8,000] Condition EXCELLENT | EXCELLENT GOOD +5000 GOOD +5,000 Above Grade Total_|Bdrms|_ Baths | Total] Bdrms| Baths Total] @drms| Baths: Total| Bdrms}_Baths Room Count 10 | 5 [650| 10} 5 [650 io{ 5 [600 +3500 9 | 4 | 450 +44,000] Gross Living Area 5,707 Sq Ft §,708 Sq Ft -101 6,101 Sq Ft -21,701 4438 Sq Ft +69,800) Basement & Finished NIA NIA NIA NIA : Fe] Rooms Below Grade N/A NA NIA NIA PA Functonal Utity AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE AVERAGE Fd Heating/Cooling CENTRAL AC | CENTRAL AC CENTRAL A/C CENTRAL A/C Energy Effinent lems _| NONE SPECIAL | NONE SPECIAL NONE SPECIAL NONE SPECIAI| a4 Garage/Carport 3 CAR GARAGE |3 CAR GARAGE| 3 CAR GARAGE} 3. CAR GARAGE, Porch, Patio Deck, R PATIO/R PORCH R Patio/Prch R Patio/Porch R Patio/Porch Fireplace(s},elo _, | CVRD ENTRY | CVRD ENTRY CVRD ENTRY CVRD_ENTRY Feace, Pool, etc NONE POOL -15,000 POOL 715,000 POOL, -15,000 EQUIPMENT UPGRADES |SUP UPGRADES| _-100,000_ UPGRADES INF UPGRADES|__+100,000 Net Ad) (total e Dea cel Tx] $ _-131,100 | { [+ [X]- $s -217,300 X[+ {]- $123,800 ‘Adjusted Sales Price % | let=-9% fisse __.| of Comparable ae es 2,268,900 _|Gross=11% 2,212,700 _|Gr b__2,073,800 ‘Comments on Sales Companson (including the subject property's compatbilty (othe neghbochood etc) SEE COMMENT ADDENDUM TEM SUBJECT. COMPARABLE NO_1 COMPARABLE NO 2 COMPARABLE NO 3 Dale Poe andData | SEE SALES | NOPRIOR SALE WITHIN | NOPRIOR SALE WITHIN [ NO PRIOR SALE WITHIN Source, for prior sales HISTORY 42 MONTHS 12 MONTHS 12 MONTHS within year of apprarsal | _ ADDENDUM ISC/PUB RECORDS (SC/PUB RECORDS ISC/PUB RECORDS ‘Analysis of any current agreement cf sale option oF isting of te subject property and analysis of any prior sales of subject and comparables vain one year of the date of appraisal NO CURRENT AGREEMENT OF SALE, OPTION, OR LISTING OF THE SUBJECT OR THE SALE COMPARABLES WERE. UNCOVERED THE SALES ARE CONSIDERED TO BE CASH EQUIVALENT INDICATED VALUE cY SALES COMPARISON APPROACH ©. ----------- $ ___ 2,200,000 INDICATED VALUE BY INCOME APPROACH _{If Applicable) Estrmated Market Rent$__N/A_/Mo x Gross Rent Multiplier vss N/A This appraisals made subject the repans,alteratons, mspecions or conditions Isted below — [_] subject to completion per plans and specifications BY Conditions of Appraisal APPRAISED VALUE IS BASED ON THE CONDITIONS & FEATURES Of THE SUBJECT AT THE TIME OF INSPECTION ALSO SEE LIMITING CONDITIONS ALL SALES ARE CONSIDERED CASH EQUIVALENT Final Reconciliation “INCOME APPROACH NOT USED DUE TO PREDOMINANT OWNER OCCUPANCY AND LACK OF QUALITY RENTAL DATA THE SALES COMPARISON ANALYSIS IS GIVEN PRIMARY EMPHASIS AS IT BEST. REFLECTS CURRENT BUYER/SELLER ACTIONS IN THE MARKETPLACE THE COST APPROACH SUPPORTS “The purpose of ths appraisal s {o estate the market value of the real property that s subject to this report based on the above conditions and the certification, contingent and limiting conditions, and market value defintion that are stated inthe atlached Freddie Mac Form 439/Fannie Mae Form 10048 (Revised 6/93 {WE} ESTIMATE THE MARKET VALUE, AS DEFINED, OF THE REAL PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS REPORT, ASOF November 18_2005 fe |ON AND THE EFFECTIVE DATE.OF THIS REPORT) TO BE $ 2,200,000 D>; fic. cJ SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (ONLY IF REQUIRED) fh , 1 Signature od [Jou not Name Inspect Property Date Report Signed : ‘__ Dale Report Signed Z State Cestficaton# —_ RZ967_ State FL State Certiication # Stale i Bas Or State License # State Or State License # State Freddie Mac Form 70 6-92 ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fannie Mae Form 1004 (6-93) Page 2 of 1 SERVICE APPRAISALS COMMENT ADDENDUM FileNo RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Propeny Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD Cay WELLINGTON County, PALM BEACH State Fu Zip Code 33467 LenderfChent__WCS LENDING, LLC Address 6501 Congress Ave , Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL_33487 ADDITIONAL FEATURES Oakwood banister and steps, sauna, home theater on second floor, recreation room ‘on second floor, marble flooring throughout the first floor, marble flooring and wainscots in bathrooms, high end fixtures and hardware throughout, fake front property, granite tle countertops and backsplash in kitchen, 42° wood custom cabinets in kitchen, recessed lighting throughout, 3 car garage, rear porch and patio area, tray celling and sitting room in master bedroom suite, wood vanities and granite vanity tops in bathrooms, inground sprinkler system There ts wall to wall Berber carpeting in the bedrooms The subject has a built-in home theater ‘on the second floor The house exterior is painted concrete block stucco There 1s a full sized washer and dryer in the laundry room = The house has central air conditioning The subject ts considered to be tn excellent condition COMMENTS ON COST APPROACH Estimated Site Value was abstracted from recent improved sales in the subject's area High land to value ratio is typical of the area due to demand for housing in this section of Wellington and the lake front lot This factor does not adversely affect the marketabulty of the subject DEFERRED MAINTENANCE None noted at time of inspection COMMENTS ON THE SALES COMPARISON APPROACH The comparables were adjusted to the subject's tocation, site area, site/vew, age, condition, size of living area, car storage, and amenites The comparables used were the best available with verifiable information The subject and Sale #1 are lake front propertes Sale #1 ts a recent sale of a similar modet as the subject located in the Versailles subdivision Comparables #2 and #3 are all located within the Wellington area The sales uncovered are similar to the subyect with regards to location, functional utility, quality of construction, total bedroom and bath count, appeal, community amenities, and size of living area Equal emphasis given to all sales PERSONAL PROPERTY Personal property, including those items which are not permanently altached/fixed to the real property, have been excluded from the estimate of value unless indicated otherwise Examples of the aforementioned include above ground swimming pools, countertop microwave ovens, movable dishwashers, TV satellite dishes, and furniture ADMINISTRATIVE Comer ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 3 of SERVICE APPRAISALS SKETCH ADDENDUM FileNo RF-1102-05 Case No Borower LENZER BURTON Property Address _ 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 LenderiChent_ WCS LENDING, LLC Address 6501 Congress Ave , Third Fir Boca Raton, FL 33487 \ Pool } Under Ye 225 Cor Sitting ROOM Kitchen 635 Dining ROOM Bedroom 595° Bedroom Bath 2 15 as zs First Floor Shel by Ape v= Cormats . \AREA CALCULATIONS, SUMVARY — . LIVING AREA BREAKDOWN Code | __ Description a Size, Net Totals Breakdown Subtotals an Furst Floor 3847 60 3ea7 Farat Floor P/E Porch 120 00 25 x as 3125 Patio am 42 aia osx 32% 32 5 06 on Garage na is na 1s 32% 255 eta 40 x 27 aaa ox 25 360 00 asx 30 795 89 : osx 00% 00 030 s70 x 542 2008 73 33 « 2s 70 95 2S x 19s 243 75 wo x «wo 140 00 RETR Om Dy Ae PARP QTD A re an oe ANMIBISTD RIVE pager Re vrs a PE we wre 0 “. TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) 3848 11 Calculations Total (rounded) 3848 | % mee etenetawen cys oe cee ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 4 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SKETCH ADDENDUM FileNo RF-1102-05 Case No Borower LENZER BURTON Property Adgress__ 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code. 33467 LenderiChent_WCS LENDING, LLC Address 6501 Congress Ave , Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL_33487 160 Recreation ROOM Bedroom 520° Home 465° Theater Bath 270 Bedroom o Bedroom = 6 Second Floor 60 Conmsts, Code Description ° Size Net Totals. 1 . Breakdown Subtotals Gig Secured Floor 1es9 69 1959 6 ‘Sosa Floor 20x 260 an 05x 0x 107 64.38 o5x 35% 35 625 35 x 90 an Tox 2s e189 255 27 62 66 sox 135 an idx us 2453 35x 56 wa osx 81 an no osx 28x 28 «00 28x 28 193 wo x 400 640 00 osx 25x 25 3 06 «2x 60 25:46 osx 42m 42 900 osx 42% 42 900 165 x 270 44s 50 . TOTAL LIVABLE (rounded) L 1960 18 Calculations Total (rounded) 1960 lj ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page S of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS LOCATION MAP ADDENDUM FileNo — RF-1102-05 . Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State Fu Zip Code 33467 LendedCuent_ WCS LENDING, LLC Address_6501 Congress Ave , Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL 33487 i pe cnegiNDoD |__ wee) S som “ a _ — ~ = LO KAZET. I~ Toast z com 7 OO ete & za | 2200) zara] CKEECHOSEE | OKFECHGBEE| fOKEECHOBEE For] BRYAN ¥ aT Taser, "hed user j— 7/2 al ae RK a TT 7 g re ai=| T= J es ine Geo ~~ wf a | | e cofcect inc |dayan 5; a b 1 3 ACER, a r sca ” Lar 5 B | Fs d DILLMAN A a S NA me ENIE ys at - = Lye ad $ 2 FOREST HI = FA > o ra 2 — SMED I fal ¥ c a ~~ 7 nese cy Y i Pa (qerenteay z S —_—__|. al \a fae ou OGa] fer ie suc: > ©} —t LAKE MI _I 441 = = a ~——+ in { ‘ | Q JB Pf | 3 te] | 3 Tr LAT anal 7 sist \ i \ & . é \. eae WAP (C)1964-2001 TELE ATLAS NA inc Seal 11 61 mies ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 6 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM FileNo — RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address__ 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. Cty WELLINGTON County, PALM BEACH State FL Zp Code 33467 LendeClent_ WCS LENDING, LLC Address 6501 Congress Ave , Third Fir, Boca Raton, Fi_ 33487 FRONT OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD WELLINGTON, Ft REAR OF SUBJECT PROPERTY STREET SCENE ADMINISTRATIVE SXMIBIT “AGE io] sre MELAING ClickFORMS Appratsal Software 800-622-8727 Page 7 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM FileNo RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. Cly_WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 LenderCient _WCS LENDING, LLC Address_6501 Congress Ave , Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL_33487 VIEW OF LAKE FROM 2nd Floor PHOTO OF KITCHEN PHOTO OF FAMILY ROOM ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 8 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM File No RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower __LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD Cily_ WELLINGTON. County PALM BEACH Slate FL 21p Code 33467 Lender/Cient__WCS LENDING, LLC Address_ 6501 Congress Ave Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL_33487 PHOTO OF Master Bedroom PHOTO OF MASTER BATHROOM PHOTO OF BATHROOM ADMINISTRATIy PXHIBIT 4 O DASE ae LD ADM meta arn ae a } SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT PHOTO ADDENDUM File No RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower _LENZER BURTON Property Address__ 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. Cily_WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH Staie FL Zip Code 33467 LendedChient__WCS LENDING, LLC Address_ 6501 Congress Ave Third Fir Boca Raton, Fl. 33487 PHOTO OF BEDROOM PHOTO OF RECREATION ROOM. PHOTO OF DINING ROOM ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 10 of SERVICE APPRAISALS. COMPARABLES 1-2-3 FileNo RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Properly Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. Cay WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH Siate FL 2p Code 33467 Lender/Clent_ WCS LENDING, LLC Address_6501 Congress Ave Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL_ 33487 ~ — |] COMPARABLE # 1 3597 Royalle Terrace WELLINGTON, FL COMPARABLE # 2 iee|| 3595 AIKEN RD ei WELLINGTON, FI. COMPARABLE # 3 11332 Long Meadow Dr WELLINGTON, FL ADMINISTRATIVE COMP LAINT ArdSit de ee ees iets el Click ORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 11 of 16 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLA ne Em ME SERVICE APPRAISALS FileNo RF-1102-05 Case No DEFINITION OF MARKET VALUE The most probable price which a property should bring in a competitive and open market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, the buyer and seller, each acting prudently, knowledgeably and assuming the price 1s not affected by undue stimulus Impficit in this definition 1s the consummation of a sale as of 2 specified date and the passing of tite from seller to buyer under conditions whereby (1) buyer and setier are typically motivated, (2) both parties are weil informed or well advised and each acting in what he considers his own best interest (3) a reasonable tme ts. allowed for exposure in the open market, (4) payment ts made in terms of cash inU S$ dollars or in terms of financial arrangements comparable thereto and (5) the price represents the normai consideration for the property so'd unaffected by special or creative financing or sales concessions“ granted by anyone associated with the sale “Adjustments to the comparables must be made for special or creative financing or sales concessions No adjustments are necessary for those costs which are normally patd by sellers as a result of tradition or law in a market, these costs are readily identifiable since the seller pays these costs in virtually all sales transactions Special or creative financing adjustments can be made to the comparable properly by comparisons to financing terms offered by @ third party institutional lender that is not already involved in the property or fansaclion Any adjustment should not be calculated ona mechanicat dollar for doliar cost of the financing or concession but the dollar amount of any adjustment should approximate the market's reaction to the financing ar concessions based on the appraiser's judgment STATEMENT OF LIMITING CONDITIONS AND APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION CONTINGENT AND LIMITING CONDITIONS: The apprasser’s certification that appears in the apprassal report is subject to the following conditions 1 The appraiser will not be responsible for malters of a legal nature that affect either the property being appraised or the title to it The appraiser assumes that the tille is good and marketable and, therefore, will not render any opinions about the tiie The property s appraised on the basis of il being under responsible ownership 2 The appraiser has provided a sketch in the appratsal report to show approximate dimensions of the improvements and the sketch 1s included only to assist the reader of the report in visualizing the property and understanding the appraiser's determination of its size 3. The appraiser has examined the avatlable flood maps that are provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (or other data sources) and has noted in the appraisal report whether the subject sie 1s located in an identified Specral Flood Hazard Area Because the apprarser 1s nol a surveyor, he or she makes no guarantees, express or implied, regarding this determination unless specific arrangements to do so have been made beforehand 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 contributory 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 so used 6 The apgraiser has noted in the appraisal report any adverse conditions (such as, needed repairs, depreciation, the presence of hazard wastes toxic substances, etc ) observed durmng the inspection of the subject property or that he or she became aware of during the normal research involved in performing the appraisal Unless otherwise stated in the apprarsal report, the appraiser has no knowledge of any hidden or unapparent conditions of the property or adverse environmental conditions (including the presence of hazardous wastes, toxic substances, etc ) thal would make the property more or less valuable, and has assured that there are no such conditions and makes no guarantees or warranties, express or implied, regarding the condition of the property The appraiser will not be responsible for any such conditions that do exist or for any engineenng or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions extst Because the appraiser 1s nol an expert in the field of environmental hazards, the appraisal report must not be considered as an environmental assessment of the property 7 The appraiser obtained the information, estimates, and opinions thal were expressed in the appratsal report from sources that he or she considers to be reliable and believes them to be true and correct The appraiser does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of such items that were furnished by other parties 8 The appraiser will not disclose the contents of the apprarsal report except as prowded for in the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice 9 The appraiser has based his or her appraisal report and valuation conclusion for an appraisal that 1s subject to satisfactory completion, repawrs, or alterations an the assumption that completion of the improvements will be performed in a workmanlike manner TNF The apprarser must provide his or her prior wntten consent before the lendericlent specified in the appraisal report dn distnbute the appraisal report (including conclustons about the property value, the appraiser's denuty and professional designations, and references to any professional appraisal organizations or the firm with which the appraiser ts associated) to-anygng-aijer than the borrower the mortgagee or its successors and assigns, the mortgage insurer, consultants, professional appraisal organizations, any state or federally approved financial institution, or any department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States or any state or the District of Columbia, except that the lender/client may distnbute ifie property descnption section of the report only to data collection or reporting service(s) without having to obtain the appraiser's prior written consent The appraiser's written consent and approval must also be obtained before the appraisal can be conveyed by anyone to the public through advertising, public relations, news, sales, or other media 4. The appraiser will not give testimony or appear in court because he or she made an appraisal of the property in question, WHE Freddie Mac Form 439 (6 93) ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fannie Mae Form 10048 (6 93) : Page 12 of 16 AUWINISTRAHIVE exHigit 4% SERVICE APPRAISALS File No — RF-1102-05 Case No APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION The Appraiser certifies and agrees that 1 Ihave researched the subject market area and have selected a munmum of three recent sales of properties most simular and proximate to the subject property for consideration in the sales comparison analysts and have made a dotiar adjustment when appropriate to reflect the market reaction to those tlems of significant variation if a significant stem in a comparable property 1s superior to, or more favorable than, the subject properly | have made a negative adjustment to reduce the adjusted sales pnce of the comparable and, if a significant tem in a comparable property 1s inferior to, or less favorable than the subject property, | have made a positive adjustment to increase the adjusted sales price of the comparable 2 Ihave taken into consideration the factors that have an impact on value in my development of the estimate of market value in ha appraisal report { have not knowingly withheld any significant information from the appraisal report and | believe to the best of my knowledge that all statements and information mn the appratsal report are true and correct 3. | stated in the appraisal report only my own personal, unbiased, and professional analysis, opimons, and conclusions, which are subject only to the contingent and limiting conditions specified in this form 4 Thave no present or prospective interest in the property that 1s the subject to this report, and | have no present or prospective personal interest or bias with respect to the participants in the transaction | did not base, either partally or completely my analysis and/or the estimate of market value in the appraisal report on the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familar status, or national origin of either the prospective awners or occupants of the subject property or of the present owners or occupants of the properties in the vicinity of the subject property 5 Lhave no present or contemplated future interest in the subject property and neither my current or future employment nor my compensation for performing this appraisal (s contingent on the appraised value of the property 6 | was not required to report a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client or any related party, the amount of the value estimate, the attainment of a specific result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event in order to receive my compensation and/or employment for performing the appraisal { did not base the appratsal report on a requesied minimum vatuation, a specific valuation or the need to approve a specific mortgage foan 7 1 pertormed this appraisal in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice that were 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 does not apply | acknowledge that an estimate of a reasonable time for exposure in the open market 1s a condition in the definition of market value and the estimate | developed is consistent with the marketing time noted in the neighborhood section of this 7eport, unless | have otherwise stated in the reconciliation section 8 | have personally inspected the interior and exterior areas of the subject property and the exterior of all properties hsted as comparables in the appraisat report | further certify that | have noted any apparent or known adverse conditions im the subject improvements, an the subject site, or on any site within the immediate vicinity of the subject property of which | am aware and have made adjustments for these adverse conditions in my analysis of the property value to the extent that | had market evidence to support them | have also commented about the effect of the adverse conditions on the marketability of the subject property 9 | personally prepared ail conclusions and opinions about the real estate that were set forth in the appraisal report If relied on significant professional assistance from any individual or individuals in the performance of the appraisal or the Preparation’ of the aopraisal repo | have named such individual(s) and disclosed the specific tasks performed by them In the reconetlation section of this appraisai report | certify that any individual so named 1s qualified to perform the tasks { have not authorized anyone to make a change to any stem in the report, therefore, if an unauthonzed change 1s made to the appraisal report Iwill take no responsibility for it SUPERVISORY APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION if a supervisory appraiser signed the appraiser report, he or she certifies and agrees that | directly supervise the appraiser who prepared the appraisal report, have reviewed the appraisal report agree with the statements and conclusions of the appraiser, agree to be bound by the appraiser's certifications numbered 4 through 7 above and am taking full responsibility for the appraisal and the appraisal report ADDRESS OF PROPERTY APPRAISED. 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD , WELLINGTON, FL SUPERVISORY APPRAISER (only if required) Signature Name Date Signed November 18, 2005. Date Signed State Certification # RZ967 State Certification # ~~ or State License # or State License # State FL State Expiration Date of Certification or License 11/30/06 Expiration Date of Certification or License [J od ([) did Not inspect Property Freddie Mac Form 439 6 93 ChckFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Fane Mae Form 10048 6 93 Page 13 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS SUBJECT HISTORY ADDENDUM FileNo — RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD City WELLINGTON County PALM BEACH State FL Zip Code 33467 Lender/Client WCS LENDING, LLC In developing a real estate appraisal, an appraiser must consider, analyze and disclose (a) Any current agreement of sale, option or listing of the property being appraised (0) Any prior saie of the subject property being appraised that occurred within the following time periods (I) one (1) year for 1-4 family residential property, and (ll). three years for all other property types The appraiser has attempted to obtain specific information on the subject property with the following findings [X] The subject property has had no change of ownership during the past one (1) year (7) The subject property has had no change of ownership during the past three (3) years The subject property 1s currently under contract Details of the pending purchase are summanzed below The subject property is currently offered for sale, listing pce 1s $ The subject property has been sold during the past one (1) year period Details of the previous sale are disclosed below The subject property 1s proposed construction and 1s not currently being offered A previous sale history of the property could not be obtained by the appraiser in the normal course of business Grantor/Owner of Record TRANSEASTERN VERSAILLES LLC Grantee/Purchaser LENZER L_ BURTON, JR Contract Price/Sale Price $834,077 Date of ContraclSale DEC 2003 Comments COMPLAINT Ly ClckFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 14 of 16 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Drie dF 2 PAG SERVICE APPRAISALS USPAP COMPLIANCE ADDENDUM File No Case No RF-1102-05 APPRAISER'S CERTIFICATION “The following Certification statements are in addition to and may supercede the signed Appraiser s Certification aliached to this appraisal report This Appraisers Certification 1s compliant with the current edition of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice | certify that, to the hest of my knowledge and belief ‘The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct The reported analyses opinions and conclusions are limited only by the reported assumptions and limiting conditions and are my personal impartial, and unbiased professional analyses opinions, and conclusions Ihave no present or prospective interest n the property that 1s the subject of this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved Ihave no bias with respect to the property thats the subject of this report or to the parties invoved with this assignment My engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or reporting predetermined results My compensation for completing this assignement is not contingent upon the development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment of a stipulated result or the occurrence of a subsequent ‘event directly related to the intended use of his appraisal My analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has been prepared in conformity with the Uniform Standards of Professionai Appraisal Practice 1 [X]have[__Jhave not made a personal inspection of the property that is the subyect of this report (If more than one person signs this certification, | the certification must clearly specify which individuals did and which individuals did nol make a personal inspection of the appraised property } No one provided significant reat property appraisal assistance to the person signing this certification (If there are exceptions the name of each individual providing significant real property apprarsai assistance must be stated ) PURPOSE, INTENDED USE, AND INTENDED USER OF THE APPRAISAL ‘The purpose af the apprarsat is to estimate the market value of the subject property as defined in this report as of the effective date of this report ‘The intended use of the appraisal is to assist the client and any other intended users in the underwriting approval, and funding of the mortgage loan The intended users of this report are the stated chent and any other institutions volved in the underwriting approval, and funding of the mortgage loan No one else, including the purchaser and seller, should rely on the estimate of value or any other conclustons contained in this appraisal report ANALYSIS AND REPORT FORM ‘The appraisal is based on the information gathered by the appraiser from public records, other identified sources inspection of the subject property and neighborhood and selection of comparable sales, listings and/or rentals within the subject market area The original source of the comparable data desonbed im the Data Source section of the market grid along with the source ‘of confirmation provided where available the onginal source 1s presented first The sources and dala are considered reliable When conflicung information was provided source deemed most reliable has been used Data believed to be unreliable was not included in the report or used as a basts for the value conclusion The extent of the analysis to this assignment is stated in the Appraiser's Certification included above and attached to this report DEFINITION OF INSPECTION The term "Inspection", as used in this report 1s not the same level of mspection thal is required for a ‘Professional Home Inspection The appraiser does not fully inspect the electrical system plumbing systems, mechanical systems, foundation system, floor structure, of subfloor The appraiser is not an expert in construction materials and the purpose of the appraisal ss to make an economic evaluation of the subject property If the client needs a more detailed inspection of the property a home inspection by a Professional Home Inspector 1s suggested DIGITAL SIGNATURES ‘The signature(s) affixed to this report, and certification were applied by the ariginal appraiser(s) of supervisory appraiser and represent their acknowledgements of the facts, opinions and conclusions found in the report Each appraiser(s) applied his or her signature electronically using a password encrypted method Hence these signatures have more safeguards and carry the same validity as the individual's hand applied signature , If the report has a hand-applied signature, this comment does not apply OPINION OF MARKET VALUE VS ESTIMATE OF MARKET VALUE The current Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisat Practice defines the market value conclusion as an opinion of market value and not an estimate of market value THREE YEAR SALES HISTORY FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY ‘The appraiser has complied with Standards Rule 1-5b and 2-2b ('x) requiring the appraiser to analyze and report all sales of the subject property that occurred within the three (3) years prior to the effective date of the appraisal If this information was available to the appraiser(s) t's reported _an the subject column of Sales Comparison Analysis section of the appraisal report EXPOSURE PERIOD ying the sales of similar comparable residential properties with value ranges as identified in the Neighborhood section of this report and discussions with individuals knowledgeable of current neighborhood trends in the subject area the appraiser feels that the exposure time for the t property ts equal to.the indicated Marketing-Time identified in the Neighborhood section of thes appraisal report if I Signature Cod (Jo not ft Name Inspect Property Date Report Signed‘November 18, 2005 Date Report Signed State Certification # RZ967 State FL State Certification # State Or State License # State Or State License # State ( ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 15 of 16 SERVICE APPRAISALS APPRAISAL AND REPORT IDENTIFICATION = FileNo_—- RF-1102-05 Case No Borrower LENZER BURTON Property Address 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD. City WE!LINGTON County PALM BEACH State, FL ZipCode___33467 Lender/Chent WCS LENDING, LLC Address 6501 Congress Ave_, Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL_ 33487 This Appraisal conforms to one of the following definitions [X] Complete Appratsal The act or process of estimating value, or an estimate of value performed without invoking the Departure Provision Limited Appraisal The act or process of estimating value, or an estimation of value, performed under and resulting from invoking the Departure Provision ‘This Report is one of the following types Self Contained Report Awnitten report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(A) of a complete or limited appraisat performed under Standard 1 DQ summary Report Awwntten report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(B) of a complete or umited apprarsal performed under Standard 1 [_] Restncted Report Awnitten report prepared under Standards Rule 2-2(C) of a complete or limited appraisal performed under Standard 1 Comments on Appraisal and Report Identification Note any departures from Standards Rules 1-2, 1-3, 1-4, plus any USPAP-retated issues requiring disclosure y ? ClickKFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 Page 16 of 16 INVOICE Cate November 18, 2005 FileNo RF-1102-05 Case No Prepared for WCS LENDING, LLC 6501 Congress Ave Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL 33487 Property Appraised LENZER BURTON 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD WELLINGTON, FL Work Performed APPRAISAL OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 400 00 $ $ $ ms $ $ $ $ Total Amount Due 400 00 Please make checks payable to SERVICE APPRAISALS 4552 Highgate Dr Delray Beach, FL 33445 ADMINISTRATH ERPS, £ COMPLAINT ‘ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727 INVOICE Date November 18, 2005 FileNo — RF-1102-05 Case No Prepared for WCS LENDING, LLC 6501 Congress Ave Third Fir, Boca Raton, FL 33487 Property Appraised LENZER BURTON 10766 VERSAILLES BLVD WELLINGTON, FL Work Performed APPRAISAL OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 400 00 Total Amount Due $ 400.00 Please make checks payable to SERVICE APPRAISALS 4552 Highgate Dr Delray Beach, FL 33445 ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT 2 oar LSI ClickFORMS Appraisal Software 800-622-8727, PI1S*022 COMPETITIVE MARKET ANALYSIS 01/20/0¢ PAGE. 11 A PREPARED BY- SCB FUNDING GROUP SUBJECT 73-414424~05-000-4240 BD BTH SQFT SLU CLC WG V LOT SIZE 3520 PALAIS TERR 3.2 0100 14,374 CORRELATED PROPERTY AVERAGES SCANNED 484 FOLIOS FOR 12 MATCHES AVERAGING 4,401 SQ/FT @ $3022 37 /sQrt SALE-HIGH 61,318,060 Low: 581,000 AvG- 6,137,819 AVG ASMT 259,02€ AVR 23.696 ASSESSED RATIO AMT: 3,080,480 LIVING SQ FT AVERAGE: c X PROPERTY ADDRESS BD BT LIVSQF DATE SALE AMT DT I LOTSZE T SQFTS YB AVE 10275 TRIANON PL 302 0 1105 700000 Wo 11325 97 B.E 0 3597 ROYALLE TERR 3_ 6 6959 1105 2418000 wo 12196 347 4 03 3.2 _ 3610 ROYALE TERR 304 3917 1105 1095168 Sw 6969 279 5 03 2.€ 10678 VERSAILLES BLVD 3 2 0 0905 885000 WD 11325 97 7.5 _ 3608 COLLONADE DR 3.2 0 0805 1040000 wo 9147 97:1 ¢ ~ 10273 TRIANON PL 3.2 0 0805 900000 sw 11325 97 1.3 73-414424-05-000-2630 3.4 2773 0805 61318000 sw 6969 112.5 03 4.0 ea 10707 VERSAILLES BLVD 3 __2 0 0805 1650000 WD 11761 97 2.6 3518 TURENNE WAY 3.3 4181 0705 1092000 wo 16552 261.1 03 2.2 & 1077} VERSAILLES BLVD 3.2 0.0705 1260000 wo 12632 979.6 _ 3600 COLLONADE DR 3.2 0 0205 714662 wD 8712 97 B 2 _ 10329 TRIANON PL 303 4174 0205 581000 WD 8712 139.1 03 1.3 X=VIEW D=DELETE F1=SHIFT DATA F4=MORE F6=ALTER SEARCH F7=SUBJECT F1LO=HELP PI15 << ADD A COMP >> RE otis Oriel Tsvt private. Lendipl. | ‘ * EXHiBIT # 2 0.7- PAGE ) _oog
Findings Of Fact James V. Hodnett, Jr., was registered as a real estate broker in 1974 and has been continually so registered since that time (Exhibit 7). Sea Pines Realty, Inc.'s Articles of Incorporation were filed December 13, 1977, and it was authorized to operate as a Florida corporation on December 15, 1977. Respondent, Sea Pines Realty, Inc., applied for registration as a corporate real estate broker on January 14, 1978, with James V. Hodnett, Jr., as president and active firm member. Request for initial certification for corporation was forwarded to the Florida Real Estate Commission on January 20, 1978, and license was issued to Sea Pines Realty, Inc., as a corporate broker effective February 9, 1978 (Exhibit 6). Of those nine witnesses who purchased homes or lots in Sea Pines, only one of these witnesses, William Barnes, purchased a lot (or home) in Sea Pines later than 1977. Mr. Barnes purchased his home in 1979 from the previous owner and neither of Respondents was involved in or had any influence on that transaction. Mr. Miller testified on direct examination that he had searched the public records and learned that Hodnett had owned the land abutting Sea Pines to the north which was sold to Belcher mines, that Belcher mines set off explosives to blast rock in those mines, and that his house was damaged by those explosives. Upon cross-examination, Mr. Miller admitted that he could not say for certain that the property had been sold to Belcher by James Hodnett, Jr., or James Hodnett, Sr., and that it could have been sold by the latter. In addition to Miller, who purchased his property in 1976; Wurst, who purchased in 1971; Morgal, who purchased in 1977; Farrelly, who purchased in 1971; Leggiere, who purchased in 1976; Senderling, who purchased in 1976; Anderson, who purchased in 1969; and Campbell, who purchased in 1971, all testified that they purchased their properties through, and had contact with, Jean Humphries, who was the salesperson for the developer of this property. Representations regarding the plans to build a golf course, to install underground utility lines, and other representations constituting the gravamen of these charges were all made by Ms. Humphries and none of these representations was made by Hodnett.
