ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

20F-408-REL · Department of Real Estate · 2021-04-26

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

In the Matter of the Real Estate License of:

Tracy Van Ravensway, holder of License No. BR525948000,

Respondent

No. 20F-408-REL

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: April 13, 2021

APPEARANCES: Respondent Tracy Van Ravensway appeared on her own behalf via Google Meet. Assistant Attorney General Holly Wan, Esq. appeared via Google Meet and represented the Arizona Department of Real Estate.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Adam D. Stone

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

On March 21, 2016, the Arizona Department of Real Estate (“Department”) issued Real Estate Broker License No. BR525948000 to Tracy Van Ravensway (“Respondent”). The current licensure expires on March 31, 2022.

On October 21, 2017, the Department issued entity license number LC67532800 to Collective Concepts, LLC. (“Collective Concepts”). Respondent is the designated broker of Collective Concepts and its license is set to expire on March 31, 2022.

On or about March 19, 2020, the Department informed Respondent that she was to participate in an Electronic Remote Sales Audit for the time period of February 1, 2015 through February 29, 2020. Respondent’s records were to be provided to the Department by April 2, 2020.

On April 4, 2020, the Department sent a letter to Respondent requesting that additional information be provided by April 17, 2020.

On June 18, 2020, the Department’s Audit Report indicated that the brokerage was not in compliance with the Department’s rules and statutes regarding signage, license displays, payments to another agent not employed by Respondent and that there were at least two transactions which were deposited into the general operating account rather than an escrow or trust account.

At hearing, Respondent stipulated to the above facts and testified that she immediately corrected the signage and license display. Respondent also acknowledged that she made the payments to another agent who was not in her employ, and admitted that she commingled funds inappropriately.

Respondent also testified that she will be closing her brokerage down in a couple of weeks and merging with another brokerage.

Finally, Respondent testified that she believed that $500.00 for each violation of the statutes was unreasonable.

The Department argued that based upon the six violations a $3,000.00 was appropriate.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Pursuant to A.R.S. Title 32, Chapter 20, the Commissioner has jurisdiction over Respondent and the subject matter in this case. The Arizona legislature has charged the Department with protecting the public and consumers who deal with licensed salespersons when it issues licenses. Pursuant to A.R.S. §32-2153, the Commissioner has authority to deny, suspend, or revoke the real estate license of a broker or salesperson. Pursuant to A.R.S. §32-2160.01, the Commissioner has authority to assess a civil penalty up to $1,000.00 per violation of the real estate laws and rules.

Pursuant to A.R.S. §41-1092.07(G)(2) and A.A.C. R2-19-119(B), the Department has the burden of proof in this matter. The standard of proof is by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.A.C. R2-19-119(A).

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).

The evidence of record established and Respondent admitted, that she failed to display the proper signage in violation of A.R.S. §32-2126(B).

The evidence of record established and Respondent admitted, that she displayed incorrect license certificates in violation of A.R.S. §32-2128(A).

The evidence of record established and Respondent admitted, that she paid compensation or commissions to a licensee employed by another brokerage in violation of A.R.S. §32-2153(A)(10) and A.R.S. §32-2155(A).

The evidence of record established and Respondent admitted, that she commingled funds by placing earnest money deposits into her general operating account rather than an escrow or trust account in violation of A.R.S. §32-2151(A) and A.R.S. §32-2153(A)(16).

In totality, the evidence of record established that grounds exist to discipline Petitioner’s broker’s license pursuant to A.R.S. §32-2153.

Based on Respondent’s immediate correction of the signage issue and the license display issue, the candor of Respondent in admitting her errors in regards to the payments and the deposits, as well as Respondent’s testimony that her brokerage is merging with another company, the Administrative Law Judge concludes that a $1,000.00 civil penalty is appropriate.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based upon the foregoing,

IT IS RECOMMENDED that within thirty (30) days of the effective date of the above Final Order entered in this matter, Respondent shall pay to the Department a civil penalty in the amount of $1,000.00, and such payment shall be made by cashier’s check or money order made payable to the Department.

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED in the event that Respondent fails to pay the penalty, the Department take action to impose further discipline upon proper notice to Respondent.

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 days from the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, April 26, 2021.

/s/ Adam D. Stone

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Judy Lowe, Commissioner

Arizona Department of Real Estate

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000