Posted by steve smith on February 08, 2004 at 16:49:43:
Point taken…thanks for the valuable advice!!
unlicesened agent question - Posted by steve smith
Posted by steve smith on February 07, 2004 at 22:12:32:
Here is the situation:
-
Bought preforeclosure (subject to) on contract for deed in my company name
-
Sold house on contract for deed to new buyers
-
Original owners came by, bothering the new buyers claiming they still owned the property.
-
New buyers stopped paying because they were harrassed so much by previous owners.
-
House ends up being lost to foreclosure
-
Original owners File a complaint with the state of Florida Division of Real Estate saying I said I was a licensed agent and was selling there house.
-
Division of Real Estate sends me certified mail saying they are prosecuting me civilly for operating as a real estate agent w/o a license?? According to them, this could result in license suspension (which I do not have anyways) and large fines.
My question is does anyone know if this is something I should go out and hire an attorney over or disregard? I do not intend on becoming a real estate agent and never represented myself to be one. Any advice on this situation would be appreciated. I am most concerned with whether or not they can get a judgement against me resulting in liens, credit damage etc.?
Re: Since you bought on contract - Posted by Ed Copp (OH)
Posted by Ed Copp (OH) on February 08, 2004 at 13:49:04:
for deed, and then you sold on contract it is likely that you sold something that the buyer can not get the deed to. The original owner may very well still be the owner. Did you check the title?
If as the contract for deed seller in this case you did not maintain sufficient control of the project then it is you that let the property go to foreclosure.
As Bill said the issue needs to be addressed. You could be ordered to deliver the deed at some point, and if you can’t get it then this could be a problem.
Don’t worry about the licensing issue. You don’t have one to take, and you will not ever get one with this problem unresolved.
Re: unlicesened agent question - Posted by William Bronchick
Posted by William Bronchick on February 08, 2004 at 12:44:09:
You should never disregard any investigation or inquiry from a state agency. Under the situation you described, you would not be acting as a broker, but, you still need to address the issue.
The original owners, once the property is deeded, have no claim to the property. I am surprised to hear that they came back and made a stink. I am going to guess that maybe you didn’t explain this well enough to the old owners?
I’m not clear on one part here… “house ends up being in foreclosure.” How did this happen? If the buyers did not pay, you should have evicted them and got a new one. You should have also continued making payments on the existing loan.
Re: Since you bought on contract - Posted by steve smith
Posted by steve smith on February 08, 2004 at 13:57:04:
As previosuly mentioned…dont want a license. Also, as previously mentioned, I do have the deed in possesion. Also, as previously mentioned the new buyers defaulted. What was not mentioned is that they abandoned the property anyways. I will definitely address the issue just in case. Thanks for the advice.
P.S.- I am not so much concerned with the licensing issue, but rather any monetary judgement that could be imposed on me resulting in liens etc…Only concerned about a judgement by the state or dept. of real estate, not the other parties.
Re: unlicesened agent question - Posted by steve smith
Posted by steve smith on February 08, 2004 at 13:03:00:
I agree, I probably should have evicted the buyers. This was my second r.e. deal and I was still very inexperienced. I reasoned that the expense I would incur to have the original owners stop harrassing each new buyer I put in the property would not be worth the possible reward. Because the original owners actually verbally advised the tenant/buyers to stop paying me, I decided that I would let them have there wish. The tenant/buyers stopped paying anyone and the previous owners did not have the funds to get them out. That was a curse they brought on themselves.
My belief is that once the loan was originally reinstated by me, they decided they wanted the house back and began harrasing my buyers. However, I am not opposed to taking a careful look at myself to see if I could have explained the details better. After all, I was very new to this type of transaction…and real estate in general.
I do not intend to disregard this investigation, as much as I would like to.
My main concern is whether or not they could get a monetary judgement against me or if the penalties would only be imposed should I ever decide I want to be a licensed real estate agent (HIGHLY UNLIKELY)? Do you know the answer to that?
Re: Your concerns - Posted by Ed Copp (OH)
Posted by Ed Copp (OH) on February 08, 2004 at 14:36:27:
are well founded. Do not ignore the situation.
Re: unlicesened agent question - Posted by William Bronchick
Posted by William Bronchick on February 08, 2004 at 16:31:46:
I don’t see this is as a license issue at all under the facts you stated. FL law clearly states that you need to be acting “for another” to be required to have a licensed. You didn’t bring parties together, you didn’t act as a representative of anyone and you didn’t collect any finders fee. Again, under the facts stated, that’s how I see it.
However, you can’t ignore a state inquiry, because the sellers may have told the licensing board a different story. I had a complaint against me once from a disgruntled seller and I heard from the Real Estate Commission, the Atty General, the Sheriff, etc etc. I dealt with them straight up and they laughed off the seller as a nut cake. But, if you do nothing, they will assume you are hiding and deal with you accordingly.