DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE PROFESSIONAL LICENSING

DEPARTMENT

OF

COMMERCE

PROFESSIONAL LICENSING

DIVISION

1928

S.E.

HULSIZER

AVENUE

ANKENY,

IOWA

50021

IOWA

REAL

ESTATE COMMISSION

CASE

NUMBER

90-058

Complainant

DIA NO. 92DOCRE-1

vs.

WILLIAM

L.

SIRES

FINDINGS OF FACT,

(B23212)

CONCLUSIONS

OF

LAW,

DECISION

AND

ORDER

Broker-Respondent

On

February

13,

1992,

the

Iowa

Real

Estate

Commission

(hereinafter

Commission)

filed

a

complaint

against

William

L.

Sires,

a

licensed

Iowa

real

estate

broker

(hereinafter

Respondent).

The

complaint

alleged

specific

acts

and

alleged

these

acts

constituted

a

violation

of

Iowa

Code

Section

258A.3(2)"a".

On May

21,

1992,

the

Commission

conducted

a

hearing

to

determine

whether

disciplinary

action

should

be

imposed

against

the

Iowa

real

estate

license

of

the

Respondent.

The

proceedings

were

conducted

by

Jenny

J.

Flaherty,

Administrative

Law

Judge,

Department

of

Inspections

and

Appeals,

and

heard

by

Commissioners

Jerry

Duggan,

Joe

Ann

Lutz,

Marlys

Nielsen

and

Russ

Nading.

The

Iowa

Real

Estate

Commission

was

represented

by

Grant

Dugdale,

Assistant

Attorney

General.

The

Respondent

appeared

at

the

hearing

and

was

represented

by

Jay

P.

Roberts,

Attorney

at

Law.

A

full

presentation

of

facts

was

made

by

both

parties.

The

Administrative

Law

Judge

was

instructed

by

the

Commission

to

prepare

the

Findings

of

Fact,

Conclusions

of

Law,

and

Decision

and

Order.

FINDINGS OF

FACT

1.

The

Respondent

was

a

licensed

real

estate

broker

until

May

30,

1990.

As a

result

of

a

hearing

before

the

Iowa

Real

Estate

Commission,

the

Respondent's

license

was

suspended

for

one

year

effective

May

30,

1990.

He

received

notice

of

his

suspension

on

May

31,

1990.

2.

On May

30,

1990,

the

Respondent

presented

an

offer

to

purchase

for

property

located

at

203

Olive,

Cedar

Falls,

Iowa,

to

Robert

A.

Mills,

Seller

and

licensed

real

estate

salesperson.

The

Buyers,

Mr.

and

Mrs.

Roger

Christensen,

signed

the

offer

to

purchase

on

May

30,

1990.

The

offer

was

subject

to

the

Buyer

receiving

F.H.A.

DIA

No.

92DOCRE-1

Page

2

financing

by

July

18,

1990.

The

offer

to

purchase

was

accepted

by

the

Seller

on

May

30,

1990.

3.

On

June

1,

1990,

the

Respondent

contacted

the

administrative

office

of

the

Iowa

Real

Estate

Commission

for

advice

and

guidance

concerning

the

above

transaction

due

to

the

suspended

status

of

his

Iowa

real

estate

broker's

license;

he

spoke

with

the

Acting

Executive

Secretary

of

the

Commission

and

was

told

that

he

could

follow

the

transaction

to

conclusion

although

another

licensed

broker

would

need

to

oversee

the

closing;

he

followed

the

advice

given.

4.

On

or

about

June

20,

1990,

Robert

A.

Mills

(Seller

and

Agent)

learned

that

the

Buyers

did

not

qualify

for

F.H.A.

financing.

5.

On

June

28,

1990,

the

Seller

wrote

an

offer

based

on

a

discussion

of

Seller

financing

with

the

Respondent.

This

offer

was

written

with

Seller

financing.

The

offer

to

purchase

was

forwarded

to

the

Respondent.

6.

On

June

29,

1990,

the

Respondent

returned

the

signed

offer

to

the

Seller.

The

Respondent

changed

the

commission

from

5

percent

to

7

percent.

7.

On

July

1,

1990,

the

Seller

accepted

the

offer

of

June

28,

1990,

with

closing

on

September

1,

1990.

8.

On

July

15,

1990,

the

Respondent

contacted

the

Seller

and

asked

to

close

a

week

early

to

allow

the

Buyers

to

move

in.

9.

On

August

9,

1990,

the

Respondent

contacted

the

Seller

confirming

the

closing

and

that

he

would

be

attending

the

closing.

10.

On

August

24,

1990,

the

Respondent,

showed

up

at

the

closing.

However,

the

selling

agent

prevented

him

from

participating

in

the

closing

because

his

broker's

license

was

suspended.

CONCLUSIONS

OF

LAW

Iowa

Code

Section

258A.3(2)"a"

states:

Authority

of

Licensing

Boards:

2.

Each

licensing

board

may

impose

one

or

more

of

the

following

as

license

discipline:

.

a.

Revoke

a

license,

or

suspend

a

license

either

until

further

order

of

the

board

or

for

a

specified

period,

upon

any

of

the

grounds

specified

in

section

114.21,

116.21, 117.29,

118.13,

118A.15,

147.55,

148B.7,

153.34,

154A.24,

169.13,

or

602.3203

or

Chapter

135E,

151,

507B,

DIA

No.

92DOCRE-1

Page

3

or

522,

as

applicable,

or

upon

any

other

ground

specifically

provided

for

in

this

chapter

for

revocation

of

the

license

of

a

licensee

subject

to

the

jurisdiction

of

that

board,

or

upon

failure

of

the

licensee

to

comply

with

a

decision

of

the

board

imposing

licensee

discipline.

There

was

no

dispute

among

the

parties

concerning

the

fact

as

set

forth.

What

must

be

decided

here

is

whether

the

events

described

in

Findings

2 - 9

constitute

a

singular

real

estate

transaction

or

two

separate

transactions.

The

Commission

finds

that

the

Respondent

commenced

a

singular

real

estate

transaction

prior

to

disciplinary

action

imposed

against

his

Iowa

real

estate

broker

license

which

took

effect

on

May

31,

1990.

On May

30,

1990,

the

Respondent

handled

a

transaction

between

a

buyer

and

seller

of

a

particular

piece

of

property.

Although

the

buyers

failed

to

qualify

for

F.H.A.

financing

and

another

offer

was

drawn

up

on

June

28,

1990,

this

transaction

was

simply

an

extension

of

the

actions

which

began

on

May

30.

The

buyers

and

sellers

were

the

same.

The

revised

offer

which

was

initiated

on

June

28

and

drawn

up

on

another

realtor's

contract

form

could

have

been

handled

as

an

addendum

to

the

May

30

offer.

The

seller

(a

real

estate

salesperson)

insisted

that,

when

financing

failed

initially,

a

new

contract

be

drawn

up

and

signed

by

both

parties

to

the

transaction.

However,

this

fact

does

not

change

the

nature

of

the

transaction.

This

transaction

was

one

and

the

same,

irregardless

of

whether

two

contracts

were

involved.

The

Commission

concludes

that

the

Respondent

did

not

violate

Iowa

Code

Section

258A.3

(2)

"a"

by

following

through

with

the

transaction

initiated

on

May

30,

as

so

advised

by

the

Acting

Executive

Secretary

of

the

Commission.

DECISION

AND

ORDER

Based

on

the

foregoing

Findings

of

Fact

and

Conclusions

of

Law,

the

Commission

finds

the

Respondent

NOT

GUILTY

of

violating

Iowa

Code

Section

258A.3(2)"a".

The

charges

brought

against

·the

Respondent

in

this

matter

by

the

Commission

are

hereby

DISMISSED.

DIA

No.

92DOCRE-1

Page

4

Executed

this

I

~:!3

day

of

.-.J

\A,J

E

,

1992.

Issued

this

18'

1!J

day

of

,

1992.

JJF/jmm

cc:

Grant

Dugdale

Assistant

Attorney

General

State

of

Iowa

Hoover

Building

Des

Moines,

IA

50319

Jay

P.

Roberts

Attorney

at

Law

Beecher,

Rathert,

Roberts,

Fister,

Walker

&

Morris

620

Lafayette

Street,

P.O.

Waterloo,

IA

50704

Field,

Box

178

90-o~g