Section 35.103. [Reserved]  

Abuse of Discretion

State Real Estate Commission did not abuse its discretion in revoking broker’s licenses for violation of this section as well as provisions of the Real Estate Licensing and Registration Act (63 P. S. § 455.60(a)(1)—(3), (15) and (20)), where broker was aware of seriousness of the risk of his actions, and had been previously reprimanded for failing to maintain proper records, notwithstanding Commission’s finding of good reputation or failure to specifically address every mitigating factor. Shenk v. State Real Estate Commission, 527 A.2d 629 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987).

Capacity

The fact that a realtor violated sections of the act in the capacity of a seller did not absolve him of responsibility for violations of ethical standards. Wagner v. State Real Estate Commission, 559 A.2d 999 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1989); appeal denied 574 A.2d 761 (Pa. 1990).

Misrepresentations

A salesperson’s representation to Commission investigators that time share plan had been approved by Pennsylvania Attorney General, when salesperson knew or should have known that representation to be incorrect was conduct imputable to the salesperson’s principal broker thereby, constituting a violation of this section. Kalins v. State Real Estate Commission, 500 A.2d 200 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1985).

Misrepresentations made by a broker may demonstrate incompetency or bad faith, even if such misrepresentations are not knowingly made. Smith v. State Real Estate Commission, 450 A.2d 301 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1982).