Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Discipline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission decides contested cases: revocations, probated revocation, reprimand and penalties
Summary
After oral arguments and executive session the commission adopted or modified several administrative-law-judge recommendations: it ordered revocation or suspended/probated revocation in criminal‑fitness matters, adopted a reprimand and monetary penalty for an inspector, and authorized staff‑recommended settlement of a recovery‑fund claim.
The Texas Real Estate Commission resolved multiple contested enforcement matters and a recovery‑fund settlement after hearing parties and considering administrative-law-judge proposals.
Enforcement Director Mike Mallaloy briefed commissioners on several contested dockets that involved allegations ranging from forged documents and financial‑fraud convictions to negligent inspections. The commission moved into executive session to consider the cases and returned to take public actions.
Key outcomes included a decision to revoke or place on probated revocation the licenses of agents whose federal or state convictions the administrative‑law judge found directly related to their fitness to hold a real‑estate license. In one contested matter, commissioners discussed mitigation evidence including repayment of restitution, community service and treatment; after discussion the commission approved a probated revocation (revocation suspended with conditions) to allow supervised practice subject to terms and ongoing reporting.
In an inspector case involving roof‑inspection deficiencies the commission adopted a reprimand and imposed a $500 administrative penalty after the judge found negligent performance related to roof inspection processes.
Separately, the commission authorized a recovery‑fund settlement payment of $57,205.52 (plus statutory post‑judgment interest) in RF26003, a case in which a property manager failed to remit rent and maintain required records; the action implements an earlier judgment and extends payment to the recovery fund claimant.
The commission’s enforcement actions reflect its statutory fitness analysis — weighing the nature and seriousness of conduct, time elapsed, rehabilitation evidence and present fitness — and underscore the commission’s reliance on administrative hearings and record evidence in deciding discipline.
Next steps: the commission’s final orders will be issued in writing setting conditions or the effective suspension/revocation dates, and staff will track and report on compliance with any probated‑revocation conditions.
