FORMAL HEARING DECISIONS
Page 4
Thee following information is extracted from Findings of Fact, Conclusions of
Law and Order, and Consent Orders issued by the Commission from December 2016
through December 2017. Formal Hearing Decisions that have been appealed are not
listed.
he would hold this money for us to bring to closing.” Respondent Payne did not reduce to writing Complainants
Sluik’s agreement to pay the $4,000 down payment.
Complainants Sluik signed a Buyer Agency Agreement with Respondent Payne. Complainants Sluik did not receive
a copy of the signed Buyer Agency Agreement from Respondent Payne.
On April 25, 2015, Complainants Sluik signed a HUD-9548 Sales Contract to purchase the property located at
926 E. New Hope Road, Rogers, Arkansas, in the amount of $134,000. e contract was scheduled to close within
forty-ve (45) days of the contract. e subject property was a foreclosed property oered for sale by the Secretary
of Housing and Urban Development. Complainants Sluik also signed a Property Disclosure Program form, Owner
Occupant/Investor Sales Contract, and other required HUD forms provided to them by Pemco Limited. Pemco
Limited was an asset management and preservation company which was contracted with the U. S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, to facilitate the sale of the subject property. Respondent Payne signed all forms
as the Selling Broker for Complainants Sluik. e terms of the contract required Complainants Sluik to provide a
cashier check for Earnest Money in the amount of $1,000 payable to, and to be held by, First National Title Com-
pany, Bentonville, Arkansas, as the closing company. Respondent Payne did not provide Complainants Sluik a
signed copy of the HUD-9548 form, or the other documents signed by Complainants. ere was no written refer-
ence to the $4,000 down payment Complainants Sluik previously paid to Respondent Payne.
On or about May 5, 2015, Respondent Payne told Complainants Sluik they needed to provide $300 for a HUD
processing fee. Respondent Payne did not reduce to writing Complainants Sluiks’ agreement to pay the $300.
Complainants Sluik provided $300 cash to Respondent Payne. Respondent Payne signed a hand written receipt
dated May 5, 2015, for $300 received from Complainant Tim Sluik.
On or about June 1, 2015, Respondent Payne told Complainants Sluik he needed a check for utilities in the amount
of $1,500, which was to be held by him as a deposit in case there was damage to the subject property which could
occur during the inspection and appraisal. Respondent Payne did not reduce to writing Complainants’ agreement to
pay the $1,500. Complainants Sluik issued check number 1800, dated June 1, 2015, in the amount of $1,500 pay-
able to “Jimmy Payne.” Complainants Sluik did not receive a receipt for the payment of $1,500. e check posted
to Complainants Sluiks’ bank account on June 2, 2015. e check was endorsed by “Jimmy Payne.” Complainants’
bank, Arvest Bank, stamped the check as an “On Us CK”, which indicated the check was either cashed or deposited
to another Arvest Bank Account. Respondent Payne’s Trust Account on le with AREC is at Liberty Bank of Ar-
kansas. Complainants Sluik had the utilities turned on at the subject property for the inspection and appraisal. No
damages were incurred to the property during the inspection and appraisal.
Complainants Sluik agreed to extend closing to July 15, 2015.
Complainants Sluik were unable to close on or about July 15, 2015, due to the inability of all parties to contact
Respondent Payne who was supposed to be holding the $4,000 down payment funds. Pemco Limited’s contract,
Forfeiture and Extension policy, stated a second extension of fteen (15) days would be granted upon the payment
of $25 per day for a total of $375. Complainants Sluik paid the extension fee to Pemco Limited with cashier check
number 3889890 in the amount of $375 to extend the closing date.
Sometime between July 15, 2015, and July 24, 2015, Complainants Sluik met Respondent Payne’s wife, Michelle
Payne at a parking lot where she gave them, in cash, the $4,000 down payment Complainants Sluik had given to
Respondent Payne on or about April 23, 2015.
On July 24, 2015, Complainants Sluik closed on the purchase of the subject property at First National Title Com-
pany, Bentonville, Arkansas. e HUD-1 reected a credit to Complainants Sluik for $1,000 earnest money, a
credit for $125 for a refund of ve (5) days of the extension fee paid to Pemco Limited, and a Commission paid to
(continued from page 3)
(continued on page 5)