Respectfully, I must disagree with several of Angelina’s suggestions (as I did with her back in February at the onset of my learning some of these difficulties).

Personally I think she has been treated egregiously but then I have been given more background that its possible of prudent to print here.

BREA IS in my personal opinion a corrupt organization. I base THAT statement on my own experiences with them that I’ve previously written about. Specifically related to the outright fabricated allegations made up by Elisabeth Seaters (former head of Enforcement for BREA); and the direct perjury in testimony (twice) committed by BREA Sr. Review Appraiser John Scmidt during the Administrative Law Hearing on my own case (which we WON).

Having said this, I cannot in good conscience recommend any appraiser NOT submit their required work files when directed to do so by BREA.

This is a fundamental state license requirement. It’s my understanding Angelina was acting on advice of legal counsel when she agreed conditionally to send her work file.

AGA does not and has not given or offered legal advice to Angelina. We represent her in her case in any way. (She’s not actually an AGA member); though I’ve spoken with her at length. I am highly impressed by her willingness to take on a giant bureaucracy; but I’m sure she’d be the first to admit the price for doing so is high. There are pending issues in that regard and I can say no more.

In all cases as complex as this, or before challenging the BREA I always urge parties to obtain competent California legal representation. It’s my understanding she has done so.

All appraisers should be aware that prosecuting a case against BREA as well as defending against them can be very costly.

The BEST solution for cost conscious appraisers is to avoid incurring such costs completely – IF it is possible to do so.

You have all read the language from the state as as noted by other posters, it IS meant to be intimidating. I am in awe of her willingness to fight back knowing in advance the cost could be high. I disclosed early that our own successful defense costs were in excess of $140,000 (& BREA tried to claim their own investigatory costs of $87,000 which the JUDGE DENIED! (for any California taxpayers out there).

Can ANYONE reading this imagine a civil or criminal case in which the accusations against one would not be spelled out AND the accuser identified BEFORE a formal legal ‘answer’ to a complaint is given? Oddly, Administrative Law appears to exempt itself from the most fundamental of U.S. Constitutional protections. The right to confront one’s accusers.

BTW – Anyone remember Peter Christensen’s recent article posted here in AB? California Appellate Court has NEGATED the right or ability of third parties to sue an appraiser, for very valid reasons…yet BREA continues to allow such third parties to abuse the process in order to bolster possible civil suits for monetary damage claims against appraisers or to augment their own solutions to budgetary burdens arising from declining license revenues.

I’ve said it before and repeat it now. California’s Bureau of Real Estate Appraisers needs to be disbanded immediately. They are in my opinion, beyond redemption or the ability to be cleaned up from within state government. Even if that would require waivers on federally regulated loans out here. The corruption is deeply embedded in the managerial culture of BREA. One Former Agency Head was removed & lost his own license. Apparently THAT disgrace in the Bureau has been long forgotten. Lessons ignored.

There are credible allegations that the bureau’s corruption has tainted the State Attorney General’s Office as well. Considering my own experiences with both, I do not doubt for a minute that it is possible or even probable.

Based on due process and the Constitution, an accused has the right to face their accuser and answer the allegations. As can be clearly indicated by the 2016 correspondence above, BREA’s officers were on nothing more than a fishing expedition. When challenged to the nature of the complaint, BREA officers refused to identify the parties to the complaint, the nature of the complaint or the alleged regulations violated. Under the Constitution, without a bonafide complaint, I did not consent to handing any documentation over to them in 2016.

Every appraiser needs to understand they have rights under the Constitution and if they do not exercise their rights of due process and choose to volunteer information, they then waive their rights and have none. They would then have contracted by their free will and legal ignorance, entering into a contract separate from USPAP or public policy; most appraisers have little understanding of contract law as it relates to perjury charges.

While my certified license was neither revoked nor suspended in 2016 or 2017, BREA refused to renew my license on Feb. 5, 2018 – which is clearly a sign of retaliation. BREA’s officers even refused to hold an administrative hearing as required under their own regulations. My final advice:

1) Do not grant an agency [BREA] authority or jurisdiction they do not have;

2) Do not volunteer evidence;

3) Confirm there is a valid complaint;

4) Have the agency show cause and show evidence;

5) Do not sign a consent decree; and

6) It is all done by contract (read the fine print and know your rights).