ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

18F-DI-189-REL · Department of Real Estate · 2019-05-13

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: April 23, 2019 APPEARANCES: Respondent Jordan Lam did not appear. The Arizona Department of Real Estate was represented by Assistant Attorney General Deian Ousounov. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Tammy L. Eigenheer _____________________________________________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Arizona Department of Real Estate (Department) is the duly constituted authority for licensing and regulating the practice of real estate in the State of Arizona. 2. On or about January 12, 2018, Jordan Lam (Respondent) entered into a Consent Order with the Department as a condition for being issued a provisional real estate salesperson’s license. The Department issued a two-year provisional real estate Salesperson’s license number SA674779000 to Respondent. That two-year provisional license is inactive and will expire on January 31, 2020. 3. The Consent Order required Respondent to submit quarterly affidavits, signed under penalty of perjury and countersigned by Respondent’s Employing/Designated Broker, with each signature being notarized, to the Department Compliance Officer, stating that Respondent has been in compliance with all terms of the Consent Order and Provisional License. 4. On or about January 26, 2018, Respondent submitted the first affidavit required under the Consent Order. 5. Respondent failed to submit the second affidavit required under the Consent Order that was due on July 12, 2018. 6. On or about July 30, 2018, the Department’s compliance officer, Jennifer Daley, called Respondent regarding the late affidavit, and Respondent stated he would send the affidavit the following day. 7. On or about August 2, 2018, Ms. Daley mailed a certified letter to Respondent at his address of record requiring Respondent to submit the required affidavit that was due on July 12, 2018, by August 10, 2018. 8. On or about August 9, 2018, the Department received the letter back from the United States Postal Service marked “Return to Sender”, “Attempted – Not Known”, and “Unable to Forward”. 9. The Department did not receive Respondent’s affidavit by August 10, 2018. 10. Department staff left a voicemail for Respondent regarding the late affidavit. 11. As of the time of the hearing, the Department had no communication from Respondent other than the initial telephone call. 12. Respondent did not present any evidence or legal argument to refute or rebut the evidence or legal arguments presented by the Department in this matter. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Pursuant to A.R.S. Title 32, Chapter 20, the Department has the authority and duty to regulate all persons engaged in the business of, or acting in the capacity of, a real estate broker or salesperson, and to enforce all statutes, rules, and regulations relating to real estate. Because this matter is disciplinary in nature, the Department bears the burden of proof. The standard of proof on all issues is by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.A.C. R2-19-119. 2. A preponderance of the evidence is “such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960). It is “[e]vidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than the evidence which is offered in opposition to it; that is, evidence which as a whole shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1182 (6th ed. 1990). 3. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(24), the Commissioner may suspend or revoke a license if the licensee violated any condition or term of a commissioner’s order. The evidence of record established that Respondent failed to submit the information required under the Consent Order. Therefore, the preponderance of the evidence establishes that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(24).[1] 4. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(3), the Commissioner may suspend or revoke a license if the licensee has “disregarded or violated any of the provisions of this chapter or any rules adopted by the commissioner.” Based on the above-found violation of the provisions of Title 32, Chapter 20 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, Respondent also violated A.R.S. § 32-2153(A)(3). ORDER Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order entered in this matter, Respondent’s real estate salesperson’s license shall be revoked. 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 will be five (5) days from the date of that certification. Done this day, May 13, 2019.

/s/ Tammy L. Eigenheer Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Judy Lowe, Commissioner Arizona Department of Real Estate ----------------------- [1] A.R.S. § 32-2153(A) provides, in relevant part, as follows:

A. The commissioner may suspend or revoke a license, deny the issuance of a license, issue a letter of concern to a licensee, issue a provisional license or deny the renewal or the right of renewal of a license issued under this chapter if it appears that the holder or applicant, within five years immediately preceding, in the performance of or attempt to perform any acts authorized by the license or by this chapter, has: . . . . 3. Disregarded or violated any of the provisions of this chapter or any rules adopted by the commissioner. . . . . 24. Violated any condition or term of a commissioner's order.

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826