An unkept promise to make repairs to a house before new purchasers take hold of it does not, by itself, amount to fraudulent behavior that would subject a licensee to discipline, a Maryland appellate court ruled April 2. In order to find fraud in such a case, a board must introduce evidence that the licensee intended to deceive at the time they made the promise.
In 2017, Jerry Jewell, a licensed real estate agent, listed a property that he jointly owned. An inspection of the house on the property showed several problems. The eventual purchasers claimed Jewell informed them he . . .