decision of the hearing officer but yours incorporated in the state's final revocation orders as to titles on an all american the hearing officer determined there at all american was incompetent and untrustworthy in guaranteeing titles to endanger the public and th at owning thirty percent of apparel company well these these companies your honor were not the answer my question what abilities did oman not white possess the person you set up in a title company with time that these title agencies were set up there were actually seven of these agencies that were owned by all american or its principals at the time title agencies were being set up with mortgage companies and the mortgage companies were able then to derive a percentage of the profits based on their ownership in the title agency so the all of these title agencies with the exception of all american and college time title were partially owned by other mortgage companies and that program was a program that was done by the underwriters in the title company is throughout the country at that time so everybody the time was but that had no relation that he went to prison in iran or having to do with mortgages that he made and lies that he talked to the banks which had no relation to ship to his position he was these were selling spec transactions wrecked you know ok how many of them got their homes back how many people to you know and again you're not the attorney you're an attorney now you were an attorney when you set this up but your principal it calls for a number to you know the number no i wouldn't because they had nothing to do with the mortgage rescue transactions all american tile had nothing to do with the mortgage transaction correct oh it did was close the titles that's what all american was doing they were closers correct so they didn't have anything to do with the substance of it but the only substance of what they did was to make certain that their property close properly and that the monies were distributed in title is title companies you know they you should a title commitment and a title policy that was accurate and correct and they also did the school closings and had the escrow closings the closer would come to the clos they would not know the buyer they would not know the seller they would be operating out of instructions from the lender and instructions from the buyer in the seller and they would do with those instructions set if the seller had some claim that looked into it there were question about about the number of cars that were used in trees and sometimes three sometimes five it there so it was a moving target all the time box that was an owner of titles on his yes thirty percent right it didn't make any difference to the title company whether it was his grandmother or it was him we were furling joint ventures with mortgage companies where the mortgage company would have  passive minority interest and not have anything to do with the title operation and the only business in the title that the mortgage company would to be referred business here to try to find other mortgage companies that would do business with the mr white to do their for this mortgage rescue where they would give up all of their equity in exchange for possibly staying in their homes for one year you have no interest in that but you're right and we weren't part of his transactions number one and number two they didn't see one common toddlerhood each rescue so called money to rescue so so it's just common for everybody to do these horrific things and therefore you get enough before people stop doing what i know you call it a horrific thing but this the same things that fannie mae did and what did these resell respect programs that were copied their next happen whites but they were done by other entities as well that just white and to the extent that they would enable a homebuyer to have a smaller mortgage payment than he had before and save his home then it was a sensible program financing to song and and you run able to answer if anybody does help so i only do and secondly from doing just the title business it would be impossible to determine what the deal was between white and the client his client what the deal was between white and the transactions was going into each and that is that right now that all of the transactions were more need to rescue transactions but in the more need to rescue transactions a substantial part or all of the deal is when charles might signs these people up each and ass is to get their equity right when i don't know what the deal is when he signs them up ok the only thing i know is that there was licensed title that's where any claims ever made were paid out by all the american in the word titles or did you vet these yourselves didn't you go through due normally arise from the title companies but in the terms of claims by any of these sellers there was only one seller that showed up at the closing and made a claim and the wasn't determined to be credible by the hearing officer so none of the seller said that they were defrauded the problem i believe was that white was the fraud in the mortgage company and he was your place therefore on the stage but not in the hires in locker and you suggest above this no different than a lock box ticking up a bank or a seven eleven ah but if it's not disconnected mr white is ripping off people that he's in fall within getting mortgages all right that's the nature of this a deal with charles white but we were making deals simply would mortgage companies where we were doing title work well that that's that that's your explanation but it's not it's not but what happened here is is what you were accused  or what in the end after it hearing there were only two things that we were accused of by the court none of the other horrendous outrageous things that we were accused of were real were proven b and said the only thing they did wrong was not present final hud's in a timely basis to all purchase but every file show that there were final hugs presented signed by every party saying that they received the final hiden certify the that there's there's two separate sections here you've got you've got the convenience which is where you have a problem where you where you're actually doing the house closing yes go close but but the title company is you still through it through and yes the title of your work well nobody ever indicated there was any issue will in regard to the guarantor of the titles and that the policies or the commitments were in  the essence of the department's case is this their goal was to identify signs of untrustworthiness or incompetency in transacting the business of guaranteeing titles to real estate in such a manner as to endanger the public raise your voice i'm sorry their goal is to identify signs of untrustworthiness and incompetency in transacting the business of guaranteeing titles to real estate in such a manner as to endanger the public that section twenty one three of the act and the department took steps to protect the public to the extent possible before harm materialized when it received complaints from south star investigated and it found sufficient evidence to establish that the agencies were helping to conceal important information from the parties information that went to the very nature of the transaction the department did not need to go further with its proof because that demonstrated a danger to the public or the connection and he suggested all they had to do is shuffle the papers you want as we contend that that's not true they believe you did not have to scrutinize the origin of the employment reports and so on the way that the lender did but they did have a duty to coordinate the closing intelligently and they played an important role in maintaining the integrity of the system that's why they have to be licensed and that's why they're required to be trustworthy incompetent and what they do license  charles white did these things in a completely separate business here's what was happening it was evident from the material submitted by south star that what was actually happening is that these closings were occurring in charles white office at the scene and he control he had an interest in both the mortgage company mutual trust i mean the the mortgage broker mutual trust the company that was receiving the money i have not seen and the closing company which was most titles on an all american sport not the responsibility is a little artificial they are both clearly involved because titles own carried the game ownership interest and also the employees who conducted these transactions and they were done the name of all american and so here's how the department assigned the responsibilities in accordance with the agency's characterizations what all american did was   in relation to any manner covered by the state with the closings as opposed to title policy well i am i don't know why they chose twenty one eighty three rather than twenty one a one but one of the reasons may have been that they were concerned about what he was doing with god less of whether it was intentional that they they were creating a significant risk to the public by what they were doing and here's what was happening they were preparing to very different  in most of these cases one indicating the cash from the sale of the home representing the equity went to the seller the other indicating accurately that it went to i have not seen and the version indicates that the cash went to the sale it was presented to the lender for employees admitted at the hearing that sometimes they were not they were not included in the final had the disclosures to it and that's what happened afterwards and now mishandling this clip disclosures is not necessarily fraudulent but in the context of scrutiny and if the lender had given it closer scrutiny it may have discovered all the false vacations in the in the markets application and that was and because this it in fact they said don't worry here's a perfectly intentional misconduct there is a twenty one a three violation maybe based on unintentional just very very gross negligence and i don't want to say too much about that because as i said your honor i'm not sure why they made the decision to do that but there but there is that once one statement in twenty one a one that says it's intentional but i really can't tell you why they made that decision but it what they did was certainly covered by twenty one a three because it certainly demonstrated  untrustworthiness or incompetence and whatever they would prefer and it may be that white strategically held off to giving explicit directions until the closing but that doesn't excuse them submitting ahead but they had to know was incorrect because they had done numerous transactions they knew they were selling lease back and they know that the essence of it is that there's going to be a transfer of money to as runner suggested to us holding company because it's going to be escrow dense and they and they know this and then well they were part of they were they were here they were there at the closings with whiten with the buyer and seller and they also had done a number of these transactions before they knew it they admit that they knew he said he specialized in sale leaseback if there's transactions  if he does say hypothetically there lots of reasons to change it but he's not contending that the reason why they at the difference here was the difference in rip whether or not they reported the ice the money i have not seen that decision the lender is looking at that they've already they've already approved a preliminary had and then the closer calls them up and says i'm about to send you the final hud i've got a buyer and seller here waiting and we'll wait on the phone while you approve it and in that in that context they're inviting what happens and and and it is our position that that that that is part of the untrustworthy conduct that existed in this case because by doing yet they may could if the lender could have found that if they had been scrutinizing more carefully they could have found it but it's our position that even though the lender could have done that there's still no excuse for what he's title isn't c instead you're making are not in every case but we did find a pattern of this happening in a number of cases and that was significant to me is a concern for us because we need to if if you know if he's only cheating people thirty percent of the time that's still something we don't want to have addressed i'm not sure i did i'm not sure what you have get i just i'm just back to the point again it's not over till it's over and if you find there's something wrong you go back to you you're ok you're saying you have some i'm no quantity here that that puts the burden on all american idols as though this was a conscious practice of theirs to do something that was incorrect well they even admitted that one point there was a letter written by patricia jepson to type corps and that is that page seven hundred sixty six steps in sixty seven of the record and she acknowledges there that they should have sewn the involved and what they're doing and their work it's a system that should have checks and balances within itself and sometimes they are discussing their five star you just you just less well we don't we don't  well the reason why the problem was concerned here is because we had this constellation of factors we had them not only were they concerned the nature the transactions on the hud but they were also concealing white financial interest in the transactions and these companies were were all mingled together in operating out of the same offices and have as i've just said they were also another thing that they that that was a stress but which they must have known is in a number of places there are declarations of where that the buyer is going to live and again that goes to the very nature of the transaction they know the purpose of these transactions is to let the seller stay there and so it should have rung a bell at some point when they see that gratian statement after declaration that says that the buyer is going to live there or says nothing at all some of them were incomplete and then they also knew that charles white was engaged in a highly risky kind of transaction they knew he was completing multiple transactions of this kind and they knew that he had significant financial interest and control these there are other people who participated in the same scheme there was another employee of titles on a woman named felicia ford who was also convicted for participating in this scheme there also was an attorney named norton houghton who what he would do is when when when they were about to do the closing charles white would meet with these people and that we was the buyer and seller and they'd norton helton is this eternity and they would say you can consult with him and he'd tell them it was a good deal and he also in a number of cases offered fraudulent bankruptcy proceedings and he would help them go through bankruptcy but he wouldn't tell them he wouldn't tell the bankruptcy courts about the sale of the property that he just participated in host this whole scheme the function of the department was not to trace all the details of this fraud for them it was enough when they found a new pattern of deceptive things that were going on and they also found that despite everything the titles of knew it had an employee relationship and ownership in that was there was continuing that relationship with charles it was not the mother's i mean that the grandmother's interest the fact that the capital contribution listed in the operating agreement for title zone listed three hundred dollars and use of the office copier telephones and personnel of the offices of charles white and the agreement itself was p printed in the name of charles whiten the name charles was crossed out in the name written in titles owns two thousand and five tax return gives a hundred south wells which is as annoying as a dress which happens to be the office for eyes have not what they have they testified that that was not true at least at that time that he was not the executor of the state in the past but i'm saying that the department looked at a number of these factors and said you know they  law does not require that he have a legal interest law also requires it's enough if he has a beneficial interest and only for that law for other states but if the person has reason to believe and entitles on an all american had a least reason to believe that charles white had the effect of interest in in this thirty percent because he was the one who had the mortgage company and also the person you know that's what i'm looking  that addresses all moral whites interest in the in titles on points straight to charles white and at the personnel list he had there were other there were two other individual minority shareholders those people also had tie in businesses those people were listed with the same title as closer title clean up marketing and they're also listed as managers in the respective agencies incorporation paper but the effect of interest the beneficial interest he had the benefits of the responsibilities of this interest it wasn't elnora writes in name only and the law says that's not you got to make the disclosure in that case he was a manager he wasn't sure well it is our position that even if he wasn't the legal shareholder he was still the effect of person and interest and therefore he had to make a they had to make a disclosure of brad and they didn't excuse me for  deference is owed to the agency's determination on this issue registrations of all american titles thank you five minutes there's there was a five or six day trial in front of the hearing officer at the department and when the trial was over all the things that are being recast now were decided by the hearing officer closing which is contrary to all of the evidence in the file and even the hearing officer recommended that all americans revocation be terminated and the case of titles on the only thing that title song did wrong according to the hearing officer is make white a marketing representative of titles and give a thirty percent interest to his grandmother and again from my point of view whether it was his grandmother a wh is that for what it's worth under the statute seven thirty five by all c s five three one ten three of you are in court is to take into consideration only the record so evidence or anything stated regarding the in the briefs or anywhere owsley guarding the conviction of whites or felicia for should not be considered under the statute is well since or that were this court is allowed to consider take one cannot be held responsible for the acts of another and without knowledge of the other would indicate that the titles own the terminations by the hearing officer was