96-002197 Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board vs. Donald R. Snapp, Jr. Status: Closed Recommended Order on Monday, September 30, 1996.

Summary: Respondent stipulated to violation of Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practices (USPAP) standards 2-2 in use of letter of opinion. Reprimand or USPAP education recommended.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND )

PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, REAL )

ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 96-2197

)

DONALD R. SNAPP, JR., )

)

Respondent. )

___________________________________)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Robert E. Meale, Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative

Hearings, conducted the final hearing in Sebring, Florida, on August 21, 1996.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Steven W. Johnson

Senior Attorney

Division of Real Estate

Post Office Box 1900

Orlando, Florida 32802-1900

For Respondent: Clifford R. Rhoades, Esquire

227 North Ridgewood Drive

Sebring, Florida 33870

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue is what penalty should be imposed for a violation by Respondent

of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraising Practice.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

By Administrative Complaint dated February 8, 1996, Petitioner alleged

that, in the preparation of a real estate appraisal, Respondent failed to

exercise reasonable diligence in preparing an appraisal report, in violation of

Section 475.624(15), Florida Statutes, and violated Standards 2, 4, and 5 of the

Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, in violation of Section

475.624(14), Florida Statutes.

Respondent timely demanded a formal hearing.

At the hearing, Petitioner and Respondent stipulated to the following.

Petitioner dismissed Count II, which alleged that Respondent failed to exercise

reasonable diligence in the preparation of an appraisal report. As to Count I,

Petitioner dropped the allegations of a violation of Standards 4 and 5.

For his part, Respondent agreed that he violated Standard 2-2.

The parties stipulated to other facts, which are set forth in the findings

of fact. The parties also introduced into evidence two joint exhibits. Neither

party called any witnesses.

The parties did not order a transcript. Neither party filed a proposed

recommended order. At the hearing, Petitioner requested a penalty of a minimum

fine and appraiser education. Respondent requested that no penalty be imposed.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. At all material times, Respondent has been a certified general real

estate appraiser, holding license number 000894. He has worked as an appraiser

for 14 years and has held his real estate license for 15 years. He has never

previously been disciplined.

2. By letter dated March 16, 1995, Respondent sent what he entitled as a

"letter of opinion of value for property located at [address omitted]." The

letter of opinion states that the document "is not a Real Estate Appraisal

Report, rather [it is] an opinion of value." The letter estimates the value of

appraised property as $65,000-$70,000.

3. The client for whom the letter of opinion was prepared was satisfied

with the process by which Petitioner prepared the letter of opinion and the

letter of opinion itself. The letter of opinion caused no one any damage or

inconvenience.

4. Standard 2-2 of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal

Practice (USPAP) states: "Each written real property appraisal report must be

prepared under one of the following three options and prominently state which

option is used: Self-Contained Appraisal Report, Summary Appraisal Report or

Restricted Appraisal Report."

5. SMT-7, which is commentary that accompanies certain standards of the

USPAP, provides:

Various nomenclature has been developed by

clients and client groups for certain

appraisal assignments. The development of

this Statement on Appraisal Standards is a

response to inquiries about several types

of appraisal assignments, and it is

appropriate to clarify the meaning of these

terms for future reference.

The term Letter Opinion of Value has been

used to describe a one-page letter sent to

a client that stated a value estimate and

referenced the file information and

experience of the appraiser as the basis

for the estimate. This type of service does

not comply with USPAP, and should be

eliminated from appraisal practice. USPAP

recognizes that the results of any appraisal

assignment may be presented in a letter

format provided that the content items in

one of the three report options under

Standards Rule 2-2 are addressed. The

Restricted Report is the minimum report

format and replaces the concept of the

Letter Opinion of Value.

6. Respondent has stipulated to a violation of USPAP Standard 2-2 in the

preparation of the March 15, 1995, letter.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

7. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the

subject matter. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes. (All references to

Sections are to Florida Statutes.)

8. Section 475.624(14) provides that the Florida Real Estate Appraisal

Board may impose discipline for a violation of any USPAP provision.

9. Rule 61J1-8.002(3)(o), Florida Administrative Code, provides that the

normal penalty range for a violation of the USPAP is up to five years'

suspension or revocation.

10. Respondent has stipulated to a violation of the USPAP, so issues of

the effective date of the changes purportedly prohibiting the use of letters of

opinion and the effect of the use of "should" in SMT-7 are not directly

relevant.

11. The stipulated infraction caused no public injury and results from

recent changes in the USPAP. Respondent has never been disciplined in his long

career in real estate.

12. Rule 61J1-8.001 provides for the issuance of citations in minor

matters, but limits the violations for which citations may be issued to those

violations cited in the rule. The subject violation is not cited.

13. The least serious form of discipline cited in Rule 16J1-8.002 is a

reprimand. However, if the Board and Respondent could agree, a better

resolution would be to withhold issuing an order for a reasonable period of

time, during which Respondent would successfully complete a short course in the

USPAP. If he successfully completed the course within the agreed-upon period of

time, the Board would dismiss the administrative complaint. If not, the Board

would issue a final order, pursuant to this recommended order, issuing a

reprimand.

RECOMMENDATION

It is

RECOMMENDED that, in the absence of an agreement of the type described in

the preceding paragraph, the Board of Real Estate Appraisers enter a final order

reprimanding Respondent.

ENTERED on September 30, 1996, in Tallahassee, Florida.

___________________________________

ROBERT E. MEALE, Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

[phone]

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this September 30, 1996.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Henry M. Solares

Division Director

Division of Real Estate

Post Office Box 1900

Orlando, Florida 32802-1900

Steven W. Johnson

Senior Attorney

Division of Real Estate

Post Office Box 1900

Orlando, Florida 32802-1900

Attorney Clifford R. Rhoades

227 North Ridgewood Drive

Sebring, Florida 33870

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions to the Recommended

Order. All agencies allow each party at least 10 days in which to submit

written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit

written exceptions. You should consult with the agency that will issue the

Final Order in this case concerning their rules on the deadline for filing

exceptions to this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order

should be filed with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case.