TREC roundup: disciplinary cases, fines, audits and one suspension approved in August meeting

The Tennessee Real Estate Commission took action on multiple enforcement items at its August 2025 meeting. Commissioners reviewed staff narratives, discussed evidence and accepted or modified counsel recommendations. Major outcomes included letters of instruction or warning, civil penalties, audit referrals, an administrative suspension and a number of dismissals or closed‑file determinations.

Highlights and case outcomes (by case number as presented to the commission):

- Case 2: Staff recommended dismissal with a letter of instruction. The commission approved dismissal and instructed counsel to notify Forewarn (a third‑party app named in the complaint) about possible misuse of its terms of service. Motion carried unanimously.

- Case 6: Commission accepted counsel’s recommendation (dismissal) after reviewing the respondent’s marketing materials; motion approved unanimously.

- Cases 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 (related): These matters involved multiple complaints against the same principal‑broker respondent (and the related firm). Commissioners concluded there was a pattern of failure to respond to audit/complaint notices and unresolved escrow/earnest‑money disputes. The commission assessed civil penalties of $1,000 per charged failure‑to‑respond incident (total $4,000 against the broker for cases 7–10, plus $1,000 against the firm for case 11), placed the matter on the audit schedule (desktop audit to be requested immediately, with investigators to follow if records are not provided), and ordered a one‑year suspension to be included in the consent‑order terms. Commissioners recorded a unanimous vote on the motions.

- Case 27: The commission issued a letter of instruction to the respondent recommending use of standard realtor transactional forms (mutual release) to avoid future disputes; motion passed unanimously.

- Case 29: Counsel had recommended civil and administrative action for unlicensed activity. Commissioners added a failure‑to‑respond civil penalty and directed staff to open an administrative complaint against the respondent’s principal broker for alleged supervisory failures; motion carried unanimously.

- Case 32: Staff recommended closure with a case flag to permit reopening if new information emerges. The commission accepted the recommendation and closed the matter but kept it flagged for potential reactivation; motion passed unanimously.

- Case 37: Commissioners considered a motion to close and open an administrative complaint against a former principal broker; that motion failed. A subsequent motion to dismiss the matter carried unanimously.

- Case 42: The commission assessed a $1,000 civil penalty for failure to comply with an audit (motion carried unanimously).

- Cases 67 and 68: Two related marketing/mail‑out complaints were considered. Commissioners dismissed case 67 (no action) and assessed a $250 civil penalty in case 68 for a minimally documented mailing that did not include required license information; commission also directed staff to open a supervisory complaint against the principal broker where appropriate. Motions passed unanimously.

- Case 73: Commission accepted counsel’s recommendation (including a civil penalty for unlicensed activity) and added an education requirement: the respondent must complete a core course within 180 days; the commission specified the core course not be used as continuing‑education credit for the current two‑year cycle. Motion carried unanimously.

- Case 93: The commission issued a letter of warning to the respondent to exercise reasonable skill and care and to provide clients with explicit, clear information; motion carried unanimously.

- Case 97 and 103: The commission accepted counsel recommendations (civil penalties or compliance measures as described in the agendas) and approved staff’s proposed actions; both motions were unanimous.

Elections and governance. In new business the commission elected Chair Jeff Diaz and Vice Chair Joan Smith for fiscal year 2026 by voice vote. Commissioners also approved the 2026 meeting calendar earlier in the meeting.

Next steps. Several matters will proceed to consent‑order drafts with 30‑day response periods for respondents. For matters where a consent order is offered, respondents will have 30 days to sign or pursue a formal hearing; staff will monitor outstanding criminal investigations where they intersect with disciplinary cases and reopen or amend administrative actions if new relevant evidence emerges.

The commission recorded each decision on the public docket and directed staff to schedule audits and follow up on supervisory complaints and education requirements as noted.