ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

18F-DI-004-REL · Department of Real Estate · 2017-12-07

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

In the Matter of the Real Estate Salesperson License of:

FARAH BASSAM FARAH, holder of license number SA666442000,

Respondent.

No. 18F-DI-004-REL

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: November 28, 2017

APPEARANCES: Farah Bassam Farah, Respondent; Ryan Krench, Attorney for the Department of Real Estate; Jim Ledwith, Department witness

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Dorinda M. Lang

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

On April 5, 2017, the Arizona Department of Real Estate (“Department”) issued Real Estate Broker’s License No. SA666442000 to Farah Bassam Farah (“Respondent”). That license expires on April 30, 2019, and was active as of the time of the hearing.

On, September 5, 2017, the Department issued Respondent a Notice of Hearing and Complaint citing the following facts in support of its position that Respondent has committed a violation of the Arizona statutes governing Department licensees:

FACTS

On April 2, 2017, Farah Bassam Farah ("Farah" or "Respondent") submitted an

application for an Arizona real estate salesperson's license. In completing the application,

Farah answered "no" to the following question on the Disciplinary Actions Disclosure form:

Has the Applicant:

13. Been convicted or entered into a plea agreement or a plea of

NOLO CONTENDERE (no contest) to ANY misdemeanor in Arizona or any other state, whether nor not the pleas or verdict was set aside, judgment or sentencing was deferred, the conviction was dismissed or expunged, or has been pardoned?

The Department issued real estate salesperson license number SA666442000 to Farah Bassam Farah ("Farah" or "Respondent") on April 5, 2017. The license expires on April 30,2019.

On February 14,2017, the Department received a copy ofa letter sent to Farah from the Arizona Department of Public Safety ("DPS") notifying him that his Fingerprint Clearance Card Application was being denied because of his 2010 arrest and subsequent misdemeanor conviction for Possession or Use of Marijuana.

In June 2017, the Department received certified documents from the Maricopa County Clerk of the Superior Court regarding Farah's 2010 criminal conviction.

On June 20,2017, the Department sent Farah a letter requesting that by no later than June 30, 2017, he submit a written notarized statement regarding the offense and why it was not disclosed on his real estate application. Farah's designated broker, Jereme Kleven, was sent a copy of this letter.

On June 30, 2017, the Department received a letter from Farah, not notarized, stating that he submitted a written account of the circumstances regarding the offense and that he did not falsify his application. He also included a letter dated March 24,2017, from the Arizona Board of Fingerprinting, granting him a good cause exception for a Level I fingerprint clearance card.

The Department has no record of receiving any documents from Farah regarding his conviction when he filed his application.

At the hearing, Respondent testified that he did disclose his conviction on an early attempt to submit his application but he had trouble with the website and when he tried again, he did not enter the information and he did not know why.

Respondent’s testimony was clearly not credible. The Department established a violation by Respondent. Its attorney requested that a $750.00 civil penalty be assessed.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter is within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of the Arizona Department of Real Estate pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-2153(A).

An application for licensure to sell real estate in Arizona is required to disclose all felonies and misdemeanors in the application. A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(3) and A.A.C. R4-28-301(A)(1)(a).

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-2160.01(A), the Department is authorized to impose a civil penalty up to $1000.00 per violation of the applicable statutes and regulations. The evidence of record has established a violation of the applicable statutes and rules. Nothing in the record supports a finding that $750.00 is an unreasonable civil penalty when applied to the license at issue.

Based on the specific circumstances of this matter, the Administrative Law Judge believes that a $750.00 civil penalty is appropriate.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

It is ordered that, within 60 days of the effective date of the Order entered in this matter, Respondent shall pay to the Department a civil penalty in the amount of $750.00, and such payment shall be made by cashier’s check or money order made payable to the Department.

In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order shall be five days from the date of the certification.

Done this day, December 7, 2017.

/s/ Dorinda M. Lang

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Judy Lowe, Commissioner

Arizona Department of Real Estate