Hathi v. Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affiars6/7/2002
Ramanik T. Hathi (Hathi), Broker t/d/b/a The Ram Realty Group, RAM Realty and RAMCO, petitions for review of the September 4, 2001, order of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs (Bureau), State Real Estate Commission (Commission), which revoked Hathi's real estate licenses. We affirm.
On January 28, 1997, the Commission issued Hathi a notice and order to show cause, alleging numerous violations of the Real Estate Licensing and Registration Act (Act). Specifically, with respect to a transaction which involved the management of townhouses (the Aiken transaction), the order to show cause alleged that Hathi: (1) acted as a broker without holding an active broker's license, in violation of section 604(a)(21) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a)(21); (2) conducted business as a broker from an unlicensed real estate broker office, in violation of section 604(a)(15) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a)(15), and the Commission's regulations regarding offices; (3) failed to deposit rents into a rental management account, in violation of section 604(a)(5)(vi) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a)(5)(vi); (4) refused to make escrow accounts and escrow records available to the Commission after receiving proper demand, in violation of section 604(a)(5)(v) of the Act, 64 P.S. §455.604(a)(5)(v); (5) received a commission or valuable consideration from a person other than a licensed real estate broker with whom he is affiliated, in violation of section 604(a)(12) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a)(12); (6) conducted himself in a real estate transaction in a manner that demonstrated bad faith, dishonesty, untrustworthiness or incompetence, in violation of section 604(a)(20) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a)(20); and (7) failed to provide the Commission with information requested during the course of an investigation of a formal complaint, in violation of section 604(a)(17) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a)(17).
Additionally, with respect to transactions involving the purchase of a drycleaning business (the Kim transaction) and the purchase of a convenience store (the Patel transaction), the Commission charged Hathi with, inter alia, failing to provide the Commission with information requested during the course of an investigation of a formal complaint, in violation of section 604(a)(17) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a)(17).
Hathi filed a timely answer denying all of the allegations; additionally, he asserted the affirmative defense of laches, arguing that the Commission failed to act promptly in the matter, as required by section 604(a) of the Act, 63 P.S. §455.604(a). On May 1, 1997, a hearing was held before a hearing examiner, and on September 22, 1999, the hearing examiner issued a Proposed Order and Adjudication. On September 23, 1999, the Commission gave notice of its intent to review the record. On September 4, 2001, the Commission issued its Adjudication and Order in which the following relevant findings of fact were made.
On July 1, 1992, Hathi was issued an associate broker's license. (Commission's Findings of Fact, No. 4.) From that date until March 29, 1994, Hathi served as an associate broker with American Home Realty Center, Inc. (American Home); from March 30, 1994, until December 10, 1996, Hathi served as an associate broker with Homeowners' Consultants, Inc. (Commission's Findings of Fact, Nos. 5-6.) However, from 1992 to 1996, Hathi did no work on behalf of, or out of, the office of either American Home or Homeowners' Consultants. (Commission's Findings of Fact, No. 19.)
Instead, Hathi, doing business as The Ram Realty Group, entered into a contract to manage a townhouse complex owned by Hugh H. Aiken, beginning July 1
Page 1 2 3 4 Pennsylvania Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|