STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, )

DIVISION OF LICENSING, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 93-3472

)

MARK P. STANISH, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, James E. Bradwell held a formal hearing in this case on March 25, 1994, in Brooksville, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Henry C. Cawthon, Esquire

Assistant General Counsel

Department of State, Division of Licensing The Capitol, Mail Station 4

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

For Respondent: Mark P. Stanish, pro se

8051 Canterbury Street

Spring Hill, Florida 34606 /1 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES

Whether Respondent engaged in misconduct in the investigative industry as is particularly set forth in the Administrative Complaint filed herein dated June 7, 1993.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

By its two count Administrative Complaint filed June 7, 1993, Petitioner seeks to impose disciplinary sanctions against Respondent including revocation of his securities license and imposition of an administrative fine.

Respondent contested the complaint allegations and filed a formal request for hearing.

At the hearing, Petitioner presented the testimony of Michael Straniere and Ted Nizza. Petitioner proffered the testimony of seven additional witnesses who paid Respondent a fee to receive training and employment as private investigators. The testimony of these witnesses were proffered however they were present at hearing and were sworn.

Petitioner introduced two exhibits which were received in evidence at the hearing.

On April 4, 1994, Petitioner submitted a proposed recommended order which is substantially incorporated in this recommended order.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent, Mark P. Stanish, during times material held a Class "C" private investigator license issued pursuant to Chapter 493, Florida Statutes.

   
   

2. During the period January, 1993 through April, 1993, Respondent advertised in local newspapers in and around Pasco County for "private investigators wanted". At least nine individuals responded to the advertisement placed by Respondent and appeared at meetings and seminars in Pasco County and were told by Respondent that, for a fee, his agency would train and license them and refer investigative cases to them subject to an independent contractor's agreement.

   
   

3. At least three individuals paid Respondent $2,000 for training and the promise of being set up in a branch office with enough investigative work to earn $40,000 annually.

   
   

4. After paying Respondent $3,000, Michael Straniere was given office space in Spring Hill, Florida and told to recruit as many investigators as possible. Straniere never received any investigative cases from Respondent or as a result of advertising in the local newspaper. Straniere received no training other than the sales pitch by Respondent to recruit as many investigators as possible, and that was the manner in which he could earn the salary that he was promised ($40,000 per annum).

   
   

5. Ted Nizza was also made a similar solicitation by Respondent; however upon reflection, Nizza declined the solicitation when Respondent became defensive when Nizza suggested that it sounded like a pyramid scheme.

   
   

6. Nizza, a former law enforcement officer in New York, did some background checks on Respondent's operations and learned that Respondent had no investigative work available, and that the manner in which monies would be earned, in the main, consisted of bringing in recruits and receiving a fee for each recruit selected, which recruits would pay a substantial fee ($1,000 or more) to be trained and licensed.

   
   

7. In soliciting recruits, Respondent sought $1,995 for training or $3,000 for a management position. Respondent had no contracts for private investigative work during times material.

   
   

8. At least four individuals gave Respondent down payments and deposits toward training, licensing and sponsorship for private investigative intern licenses. These deposits were in varying amounts from upwards of $200 to

   $1,000.

   
   

9. Although seven recruits paid Respondent a fee to receive training to become licensed, only Straniere's license application was submitted to Petitioner for processing.

10. In soliciting branch managers, Respondent told Nizza that the over- recruitment of private investigators and interns would not be problematic as there was a high turnover in the private investigation industry.

    
    

11. During times material, neither Michael Straniere, Ted Steven Triola, Harry H. Orta, Robby L. Keen, Dorcas L. Stafford, Curtis J. Huff, or Joel Smith received any private investigative work from Respondent or through advertisements nor were they refunded any of the monies paid to Respondent. (proffered testimony) /2

    
    

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

    
    

12. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter of and the parties to this action pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

    
    

13. The parties were duly noticed pursuant to Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.

    
    

14. The Petitioner has the authority to regulate the private investigative business in Florida and such authority and jurisdiction is derived from Chapter 493, Florida Statutes.

    
    

15. Respondent committed misconduct in the practice of regulated security investigative activities when he accepted fees from prospective private investigators for the promise of full time employment when in fact he knew, or should have known, that there was no investigative work or "employment" available. Respondent's further promotion of his private investigative agency and the solicitation offers were fraudulent in that he was a licensee who held a position of trust. Based on Respondent's activities as set forth herein, Respondent engaged in misconduct within the purview of Section 493.6118(1)(f), Florida Statutes.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that:

Petitioner enter a final order revoking Respondent's Class "C" private investigator license.

RECOMMENDED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 2nd day of May, 1994.

JAMES E. BRADWELL

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 2nd day of May, 1994.

ENDNOTES

1/ Although duly noticed of the hearing herein, Respondent, or a representative on his behalf did not appear to testify or otherwise contest or refute the charges in the administrative complaint.

2/ These witnesses were all sworn and were present at hearing. Their testimony was only proffered because it was concluded to be cumulative.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Henri C. Cawthon, Esquire Assistant General Counsel Department of State Division of Licensing

The Capitol, MS #4

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

Mr. Mark P. Stanish 8051 Canterbury Street

Spring Hill, Florida 34606

Phyllis Slater General Counsel Department of State The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

Honorable Jim Smith Secretary of State The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions to the Recommended Order. All agencies allow each party at least 10 days in which to submit written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit written exceptions. You should consult with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case concerning their rules on the deadline for filing exceptions to this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case.

Docket for Case No: 93-003472

Orders for Case No: 93-003472