STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF BANKING )
AND FINANCE, )
)
Petitioner, )
)
vs. ) Case No. 99-0489
) CASH COW F1 LLC; CASH COW F2 LLC; ) CASH COW F3 LLC; CASH COW F4 LLC; ) CASH COW F5 LLC; CASH COW F6 LLC; ) CASH COW F7 LLC; CASH COW F8 LLC; ) CASH COW F9 LLC; CASH COW F10 LLC; ) CASH COW F11 LLC; CASH COW F12 LLC; ) CASE COW F13 LLC; CASH COW F14 LLC; ) CASH COW F15 LLC; EZ CASH, INC., ) a/k/a EZ CASH OF GEORGIA, TITLE ) LOAN, INC., d/b/a CASH COW; )
JEFFREY C. SWANK, individually and )
as President and Owner of Title ) Loan, Inc., EZ Cash, Inc., and as ) Manager and Owner of Cash Cow F1 ) through F15 LLC; and PAUL J. ) SHOVLAIN, individually and as ) Owner of Title Loan, Inc., EZ Cash, ) Inc. and Cash Cow F1 through ) F15 LLC; and CHARTER INVESTMENTS, ) INC. and CASH COW SERVICES OF ) FLORIDA LLC, )
)
Respondents. )
____________________________________)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to written notice, a formal hearing was held in the above-styled case on July 12 through 14, 2000, by Don W. Davis, an Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, in Tallahassee, Florida.
APPEARANCES
For Petitioner: Robert Alan Fox, Esquire
Thomas C. Cibula, Esquire Department of Banking and Finance Suite 526, The Fletcher Building
101 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399
For Respondent: Richard M. Powers, Esquire
315 South Calhoun Street, Suite 308 Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Lorence Jon Bielby, Esquire Greenberg Traurig, P.A.
101 East College Avenue Tallahassee, Florida 32302
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
The issue in this proceeding is whether Respondents committed the offenses set forth in the Administrative Complaint and, if so, what penalties should be imposed.
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
On January 7, 1999, Petitioner served upon Respondents an Emergency Final Order to Cease and Desist Unlicensed and Usurious Lending Activities (Emergency Final Order).
Simultaneously, Petitioner served upon Respondents an Administrative Complaint for the Entry of a Cease and Desist Order, Order of Imposition of Fines and a Notice of Rights (Administrative Complaint).
The Administrative Complaint set forth allegations that Respondents had violated provisions of Chapter 516, Florida Statutes. Specifically, Respondents were alleged to have made
consumer loans without a license in violation of Section 516.02(1), Florida Statutes; to have charged interest rates on consumer finance loans in excess of 18 percent per annum in violation of Section 516.02(2)(a), Florida Statutes; to have knowingly, or without the exercise of due care, to have made consumer finance loans without a license in violation of Section 516.02(1), Florida Statutes; to have knowingly or without exercise of due care charged interest on consumer finance loans which exceeded 18 percent per annum in violation of Section 515.02(2)(a), Florida Statutes; and to have willfully imposed illegal or excessive charges on its customers in violation of Section 516.07(1)(e), Florida Statutes.
Respondents disputed the allegations contained in the Administrative Complaint and requested a formal hearing pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes. The case was duly referred to the Division of Administrative Hearings.
Prior to the final hearing scheduled for September 15 through 19, 1999, Respondents appealed this tribunal's denial of their request for continuance, effectively staying the proceeding. Subsequently, the appeal was duly heard by the First District Court of Appeal and denied without opinion.
Upon issuance of mandate, the matter was again scheduled for hearing July 12 through 14, 2000.
At the hearing, Petitioner presented the testimony of eleven witnesses and twelve exhibits. Respondents presented the testimony of fourteen witnesses and fifteen exhibits.
There was one joint exhibit.
A Transcript of the hearing was filed with the Division of Administrative Hearings on August 4, 2000. The parties requested and were granted leave to file proposed recommended orders no later than September 5, 2000. Both parties filed Proposed Recommended Orders which have been reviewed and utilized in the preparation of this Recommended Order.
FINDINGS OF FACT
General Findings of Fact
The Department of Banking and Finance (the Department) is the agency responsible for the administration of Chapter 516, Florida Statutes, the Florida Consumer Finance Act (the Act).
At all times material hereto, Respondents were not licensed by the Department as required by the Act.
Cash Cow F1 LLC is located at 1362 Lake Bradford Road, Tallahassee.
Cash Cow F2 LLC is located at 220 West Tennessee Street, Tallahassee, Florida.
Cash Cow F3 LLC is located at 1 West Jefferson Street, Quincy, Florida.
Cash Cow F4 LLC is located at 2107 South Bryon Butler Parkway, Perry, Florida.
Cash Cow F5 LLC is located at 2002 South Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida.
Cash Cow F6 LLC is located at 4157 Lafayette Street, Marianna, Florida.
Cash Cow F7 LLC is located at 1246 North Jefferson Street, Monticello, Florida.
Cash Cow F8 LLC is located at 2705 Northwest 10th Street, Ocala, Florida.
Cash Cow F9 LLC is located at 601 Ridgewood Avenue, Holly Hill, Florida.
Cash Cow F10 LLC is located at 700 Eglin Parkway Northeast, Fort Walton Beach, Florida.
Cash Cow F11 LLC is located at 234A Miracle Strip Parkway, Fort Walton Beach, Florida.
Cash Cow F12 LLC is located at 606-A Beal Parkway, Fort Walton Beach, Florida.
Cash Cow F13 LLC is located at 146 West John C. Sims Boulevard, Valparaiso, Florida.
Cash Cow F14 LLC is located at 750 John Sims Parkway, Niceville, Florida.
Cash Cow F15 LLC is located at 618 South Ferdon Boulevard, Crestview, Florida.
Respondent Jeffery Swank is the manager of Cash Cow F1 LLC, Cash Cow F2 LLC, Cash Cow F3 LLC, Cash Cow F4 LLC, Cash Cow F6 LLC, Cash Cow F7 LLC, Cash Cow F8 LLC, Cash Cow F9 LLC, Cash Cow F10 LLC, Cash Cow Fll LLC, Cash Cow F12 LLC, Cash Cow F13 LLC, Cash Cow F14 LLC, and Cash Cow F15 LLC (herein after collectively referred to as "Cash Cow".)
Cash Cow engaged in Discount Title Voucher transactions (DTV transactions) within the State of Florida.
EZ Cash, Inc., a/k/a EZ Cash Inc. of Georgia (EZ Cash) is a Georgia corporation. Respondent Swank is the president of EZ Cash. EZ Cash also engaged in DTV transactions with the State of Florida, as evidenced by corporate checks bearing that name issued to customers and customer checks made payable to that entity.
Description of Typical Transaction
Cash Cow and EZ Cash received a check from a customer typically in the amount of $122.00. In exchange for the customer's $122.00 check, Cash Cow and EZ Cash tendered its corporate check in the amount of $100.00, which the customer could cash anywhere but at Cash Cow, and provided the customer with a piece of paper entitled "discount title voucher." The 22-dollar difference between the customer's
check and the Cash Cow/EZ corporate check is described in the customer agreement as the "purchase price" of the discount title voucher.
Originally, the discount title voucher entitled the bearer to a 50 percent reduction in the first month's interest on a new title loan. Subsequently, the discount title voucher entitled the bearer to 100 percent reduction in the first month's interest on a new title loan.
Cash Cow/EZ Cash provided checks to a customer in
$100.00 increments. Should the customer have wished to receive $200.00, the customer would have received two $100.00 checks from Cash Cow/EZ Cash in return for writing two $122.00 personal checks.
The customer agreement further provides "that the personal check used to purchase the 'Discount Title Voucher' may be redeemed by the customer within 15 days of purchase."
Essentially, the customer had two options. A customer could present a cashier's check or money order to Cash Cow in the amount of 122 dollars per 100 dollars borrowed on or before the 15th day, or the customer could extend the date the check could be picked up for an additional 15 days by paying an additional 22 dollars per 100 dollars borrowed on or before the 15th day. If the customer elected to extend the date, an additional discount travel voucher was given to the
customer. The amount of times that a customer could extend a transaction was unlimited.
The annual percentage interest rate charged by Cash Cow/EZ Cash on a typical transaction equates to 535 percent. In some earlier transactions, customers were charged 25 dollars per 15-day period which equates to an interest rate of 608 percent.
Respondents Swank and Shovlain participated in the creation of the DTV transaction. Swank possesses in-depth knowledge of the mechanics of the DTV transaction.
Respondents Swank, Cash Cow, and EZ Cash designed and implemented the DTV transaction as a replacement for a previous lending scheme invalidated by the Department. The appearance of the present DTV transaction appeared just two months following the cessation of the previous method of operation.
The manager of the Perry, Florida store from April of 1996 until July of 1998 was Beth Hotvedt. Although not involved in the creation of the DTV transaction, she heard Swank refer to the DTV transaction as a "check loan." Internal documents of Cash Cow also characterize the DTV transaction as a loan. A "DTV Checklist" was distributed to various Cash Cow/EZ Cash stores before the stores began
engaging in DTV transactions, explaining procedures to be followed when engaging in the transactions.
The DTV Checklist was included in the Policy and Procedures Manual, the formulation and writing of which involved the efforts of Respondent Swank.
Operational Notes distributed to Cash Cow/EZ Cash stores contained statements that DTV's could be re-written "continually" at 25 dollars interest for 15 days. The Notes emphasized that "[a]ny increase in DTV time must be Refinanced!" The 25 dollar amount was later lowered to 22 dollars.
His conversational description of the DTV transaction as a "check loan"; the script which he prepared for stores' use which detailed how the DTV transactions should be described to customers so that "check loans" could be made under the guise of discount title voucher sales; and his involvement in the writing of the Policy and Procedures Manual with its DTV check list emphasizing "Receive check for Loan and Interest," provides ample evidence that Swank knew that each DTV transaction was a loan and that the 22 dollars charged to customers was interest.
Cash Cow and EZ Cash knew the DTV transaction was a loan. Each entity was aware that the 22 dollars charged per
loan was interest. The Policy and Procedures Manual
contains the DTV Checklist which emphasizes that checks are received for "Loan and Interest." Operational Notes state that DTV's "can be re-written continually" at 25 dollars "interest for 15 days." Additionally, Swank, Cash Cow's manager and EZ Cash's President, knew the DTV transaction was a loan.
Swank, as Cash Cow's manager and EZ Cash's President knew that Cash Cow and EZ Cash were not registered pursuant to the Act and consequently, Cash Cow and EZ Cash knew they were not registered.
Swank knew that the annualized interest rate charged DTV customers was greater than 18 percent. He demonstrated his interest calculation abilities at regulatory proceedings in Georgia where he testified in regard to title pawn loan interest contrasted with DTV costs, reciting calculations and noting a savings with DTVs.
Again, Swank's knowledge that the annualized interest rate for DTV customers exceeded 18 percent per annum must be imputed to Cash Cow, which he managed, and EZ Cash, of which he was the President.
Swank, and thereby Cash Cow and EZ Cash, intentionally charged, contracted for and received interest of more than 18 percent per annum on DTV transactions.
Respondents were subject to joint investigation by the Department, the Office of Statewide Prosecution, and the Department of Florida Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. As a result of this investigation, a joint investigation of David Arrington and Edward Easterly, and companies owned by them, was begun. The joint investigation of Arrington, Easterly, and their companies has not yet concluded or resulted in charges. Consequently, no administrative proceedings have been initiated against them by the Department.
The Department has refused licensure to Southern Cash Man, Inc., as a consequence of Arrington's association with the company. A successor corporation, Check Man, Inc., has been licensed by the Department upon review and determination that Arrington is not now associated with that company.
Companies owned by Easterly that have applied for licensure have not been licensed. The applications have been withdrawn.
The Department has served an Emergency Final Order to Cease and Desist Unlicensed and Usurious Lending Activities (EFO) and an Administrative Complaint for Entry of a Cease and Desist Order, Order of Imposition of Fines and Notice of Rights (Complaint) against International Title Loan, Inc., John Pierce McDonald, and others (ITC). The Complaint in that
case is virtually identical to the Administrative Complaint in the instant case.
Specific Transactions
Kevin Bundage, a four-year resident of Leon County, Florida, engaged in DTV transactions with Cash Cow and EZ Cash. His intent in going to both businesses was to obtain a loan. He evidenced this intent by asking "How do I go about exchanging or getting a loan for a check?" Bundage did not go to Cash Cow or EZ Cash to obtain a DTV and never entered into a title loan with either entity.
Gretchen Seigler, formerly known as Gretchen Boggs, is a 32-year resident of Leon County. She engaged in DTV transactions with Cash Cow. Her intent was to obtain a loan. She did not go to Cash Cow to purchase a discount title voucher. In fact, Seigler entered into the DTV transaction with Cash Cow at a time when she did not even have title to a car.
Cheryl Winbourne is a 16-year resident of Leon County, Florida. She engaged in DTV transactions with Cash Cow and EZ Cash. Both with Cash Cow and EZ Cash, her intent was to obtain a loan. She engaged in approximately 20 transactions with Cash Cow. She did not intend to purchase a DTV and never entered into a title loan.
Janice Sperry is a five-year resident of Leon County, Florida, and engaged in a DTV transaction with Cash Cow. She intended to obtain a loan. She did not go to Cash Cow to purchase a discount title voucher. She never entered into a title loan with Cash Cow or EZ Cash.
Gloria Rowls, a 14-year resident of Leon County, Florida, engaged in DTV transactions with Cash Cow and EZ Cash. She intended to obtain a loan but was required to sign the customer agreement and accept the voucher in order to get the money she needed. She does not own a vehicle and never entered into a title loan with Cash Cow or EZ Cash.
The universal intent of the foregoing individuals was to obtain a loan from Cash Cow or EZ Cash. None intended to purchase a discount title voucher. Their receipt of a discount title voucher was not germane to their decision.
While there were occasional anomalies where an individual actually used the discount title voucher on a title loan, most people involved in a DTV transaction either threw their discount title vouchers in the trash can, gave them to friends, left them on the counter, or simply accepted the voucher as a requirement to getting the loan.
During three months, August 1997 to October 1997, the Cash Cow/EZ Cash store located on Tennessee Street in Tallahassee, Florida, engaged in at least 4,634 DTV
transactions. In 1997 alone, the Perry store engaged in at least 1,859 DTV transactions.
These two locations therefore engaged in a total of at least 6,493 transactions.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter in this case.
Because the Department has sought penalties which include a permanent cease and desist order, and an order imposing fines and other sanctions, the Department has the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that Respondents committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint. Department of Banking and Finance v. Osbourne Stern, 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996); Ferris v. Turlington, 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1987); Section 120.57(1)(h), Florida Statutes.
Section 516.23(2)(b), Florida Statutes, provides that the Department may:
Issue and serve upon a person an order requiring such person to cease and desist and take corrective action whenever the department finds that such person is violating, has violated, or is about to violate any provision of this chapter, any rule or order adopted under this chapter, or any written agreement entered into with the department
Section 516.01(2), Florida Statutes, defines "consumer finance loan" as a loan of money, credit, goods, or choices in action" of twenty-five thousand dollars or less "for which a lender charges, contracts for, collects or receives interest" at a rate greater than 18 percent per annum.
Section 516.01(4), Florida Statutes, defines "interest" to be "the cost of obtaining a consumer finance loan and includes any profit or advantage of any kind whatsoever that a lender may charge, contract for, collect, receive or in anywise obtain including by means of any collateral sale, purchase or agreement, as a condition for a consumer finance loan."
Additionally, "Interest . . . is the cost of hiring money or from the lender's point of view, the return for loaning it. It is compensation paid by a borrower to a lender for the use of . . . money. . . [.]" Parker v. Brinson Construction Co., 78 So. 2d 873, 874 (Fla. 1955); see also Black's Law Dictionary 812 ("Interest is the compensation allowed by law or fixed by the parties for the use or forbearance of borrowed money.").
In determining whether an item is to be treated as interest "the court may disregard the form of the agreement and consider the substance of the transaction." Antonelli v.
Neumann, 537 So. 2d 1027, 1029 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). The
Florida Supreme Court stated in the case of Beacham v. Carr, 166 So. 2d 456, 458 (Fla. 1936):
The cupidity of lenders, and the willingness of borrowers to concede whatever may be demanded or to promise whatever may be exacted in order to obtain temporary relief from financial embarrassment, as would naturally be expected, have resulted in a great variety of devices to evade the usury laws; and to frustrate such evasions the courts have been compelled to look beyond the form of a transaction to its substance, and they have laid it down as an inflexible rule that the mere form is immaterial, but that it is the substance which must be considered.
Section 516.02(1), Florida Statutes, provides that a person must be licensed by the Department to make and collect consumer finance loans. Subsection 516.02(2)(a), Florida Statutes, provides that an unlicensed lender may not charge an interest rate in excess of 18 percent per annum. None of the exemptions or exceptions contained in the statute are applicable to Cash Cow, EZ Cash, or the DTV transaction itself.
Section 516.02(2)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that loans which exceed allowable limits, i.e., 18 percent per annum, are not enforceable in Florida. Additionally, any person who participates within the state in such lending is subject to constraints of Chapter 516, Florida Statutes.
The facts show, clearly and convincingly, that the DTV transaction is a loan, and the 22 dollars charged to customers is interest as is the extension fee of 22 dollars.
Respondents clearly and convincingly did knowingly make at least 6,493 unlicensed consumer finance loans. Further, the evidence shows clearly that the interest charged on such loans exceeded the limit of eighteen percent per annum. Such interest charges were illegal and excessive.
Section 516.23(2)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that the Department may:
Impose and collect an administrative fine against any person found to have violated any provision of this chapter, any rule or order adopted under this chapter, or any written agreement entered into with the department, in an amount not to exceed
$1,000 for each violation.
Respondents asserted that they relied on advice of counsel and that they have been selectively prosecuted. Additionally, Respondents presented testimony purporting to ascribe value to the discount title voucher. None of these claims is credible or persuasive and must be rejected.
It is appropriate for the Department to enter a permanent cease and desist order against Respondents prohibiting Respondents from making additional consumer finance loans in violation of Florida law or from attempting
to collect amounts due on transactions which have not been repaid.
Respondents may be fined $1000.00 for each violation; however, this would be excessive. To take the profit out of the activity conducted in violation of Florida law and serve as notice to others, a fine of $200.00 per transaction is recommended, i.e., an amount of $1,298,600.
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth herein, it is
RECOMMENDED:
That the Department of Banking and Finance enter a Final Order to
Cease and desist Cash Cow, EZ Cash and Swank from violating Chapter 516, Florida Statutes, and from further efforts to collect moneys allegedly due to Cash Cow, EZ Cow or Swank on DTV transactions which have not been repaid by the customer;
Fine Cash Cow, EZ Cash and Swank, jointly and severally, the sum of $1,298,600.00.
DONE AND ENTERED this 29th day of September, 2000, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
___________________________________ DON W. DAVIS
Administrative Law Judge
Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675
Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 29th day of September, 2000.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Robert Alan Fox, Esquire Paul C. Stadler, Esquire Assistant General Counsels
Department of Banking and Finance Suite 526, The Fletcher Building
East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0350
Richard M. Powers, Esquire
315 South Calhoun Street, Suite 308 Tallahassee, Florida 32301
Honorable Robert F. Milligan Comptroller
Office of the Comptroller The Capitol, Plaza Level 09
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0350
Robert Beitler, Acting General Counsel Department of Banking and Finance Fletcher Building, Suite 526
101 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0350
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15 days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions to this recommended order should be filed with the agency that will issue the final order in this case.
| Issue Date | Proceedings |
|---|---|
| Dec. 26, 2000 | Final Order and Notice of Rights filed. |
| Sep. 29, 2000 | Recommended Order issued (hearing held July 12 through 14, 2000) CASE CLOSED. |
| Sep. 05, 2000 | Department`s Proposed Recommended Order filed. |
| Sep. 05, 2000 | Respondent`s Proposed Recommended Order filed. |
| Aug. 11, 2000 | Order Granting Extension of Time Within Which to File Recommended Order issued. |
| Aug. 04, 2000 | Respondent`s Reply filed. |
| Aug. 04, 2000 | Motion for Extension of Time Within Which to File Recommended Order (filed via facsimile). |
| Aug. 04, 2000 | Transcript (Volume 1 through 5) filed. |
| Jul. 26, 2000 | Petitioner`s Response to Strike Respondent`s Supplemental Argument and Proffer Due to Respondents` Late Filing in Excess of this Tribunal`s Order. (filed via facsimile) |
| Jul. 24, 2000 | Respondent`s Supplemental Argument and Proffer. (filed via facsimile) |
| Jul. 14, 2000 | CASE STATUS: Hearing Held; see case file for applicable time frames. |
| Jun. 29, 2000 | Respondents` Amended Prehearing Stipulation filed. |
| Jun. 29, 2000 | Respondent`s Response to Petitioner`s Motion in Limine filed. |
| Jun. 26, 2000 | Notice of Filing Final Hearing Transcripts Volume 1 and 2 ; Department`s Additional Exhibit List ; Notice of Filing Deposition Transcript; Deposition of Santos Perez filed. |
| Jun. 23, 2000 | Department`s Revised Pre-Hearing Stipulation w/exhibits ; Department`s Revised Witness List filed. |
| Jun. 23, 2000 | Amended Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for July 12 through 14, 2000; 9:30 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL, amended as to location) |
| Jun. 15, 2000 | Petitioner`s Motion in Limine filed. |
| Jun. 13, 2000 | Order sent out. (petitioner`s motion for immediate production of documents is granted) |
| Jun. 13, 2000 | Ltr. to R. Powers from T. Cibula Re: Motion for Immediate Production (filed via facsimile). |
| Jun. 08, 2000 | Ltr. to Judge D. Davis from R. Powers Re: Motion for Immediate Production of Documents (filed via facsimile). |
| Jun. 08, 2000 | Motion for Immediate Production of Documents (Petitioner filed via facsimile) filed. |
| Apr. 28, 2000 | Amended Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for July 12 through 14, 2000; 9:30 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL, amended as to Date) |
| Apr. 26, 2000 | Respondents` Notice of Availability for Final Hearing With Reservation of Rights filed. |
| Apr. 26, 2000 | Third Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for May 31, 2000; 9:30 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL) |
| Apr. 24, 2000 | Department`s Second Notice of Availability for Final Hearing (filed via facsimile). |
| Apr. 20, 2000 | Department`s Notice of Availability for Final Hearing (filed via facsimile). |
| Apr. 18, 2000 | Opinion and Mandate from the First DCA (Petition to Review Non-Final Administrative Action, Per Curiam, DENIED) filed. |
| Apr. 17, 2000 | Substitution of Counsel (Thomas Cibula, filed via facsimile) filed. |
| Apr. 17, 2000 | Department`s Motion to Reset Case for Final Hearing (filed via facsimile). |
| Sep. 27, 1999 | Department`s Notice of Abandonment of Alleged Violation of 687.03. Fla.Stat. (filed via facsimile). |
| Sep. 15, 1999 | BY ORDER OF THE COURT (Petitioner motion for stay is granted) filed. |
| Sep. 14, 1999 | Department`s Response in Opposition to Respondents` Notice of Bankruptcy Filing and Notice of Automatic Stay (filed via facsimile). |
| Sep. 14, 1999 | (L. Bielby) Notice of Filing and Notice of Automatic Stay; Exhibit filed. |
| Sep. 13, 1999 | Order Denying Motion for Stay Pending Review of Non-Final Agency Action sent out. |
| Sep. 13, 1999 | Department`s Response in Opposition to Respondents` Motion for stay Pending Review of Non-Final Agency Action (filed via facsimile). |
| Sep. 10, 1999 | Petition for Review of Non-Final Action (Petitioner, Tagged) filed. |
| Sep. 10, 1999 | Withdrawal of Motion for Substitution of Counsel and Notice of Appearance as Co-Counsel filed. |
| Sep. 10, 1999 | Petition for Review of Non-Final Action (Petitioner, Tagged) filed. |
| Sep. 10, 1999 | Motion for Stay Pending Review of Non-Final Agency Action (Respondent) filed. |
| Sep. 10, 1999 | Respondents` Prehearing Stipulation filed. |
| Sep. 10, 1999 | (8) Subpoena ad Testificandum; (7) Affidavit; Affidavit of Non-Service; Respondents` Motion for Reconsideration of Order Granting Department`s Motion to Take Judicial Notice filed. |
| Sep. 03, 1999 | Respondent`s Witness and Exhibit List filed. |
| Sep. 03, 1999 | Letter to Judge D. Davis from Robert Alan Fox (re: department is submitting the transcript for the Georgia hearing (exhibit Nos. 34 & 35 on the departments exhibit list) filed. |
| Sep. 03, 1999 | Department`s Prehearing Stipulation filed. |
| Sep. 02, 1999 | Department`s Witness List; Cover Letter filed. |
| Sep. 02, 1999 | Department`s Exhibit List; Department`s Exhibits filed. |
| Sep. 01, 1999 | Order Denying Continuance sent out. |
| Sep. 01, 1999 | Department`s Response in Opposition to Respondents` Motion for Continuance of Final Hearing filed. |
| Aug. 31, 1999 | (R. Powers, F. Baggett) Motion for Substitution of Counsel; Emergency Motion to Continue Final Hearing and Request for Oral Argument filed. |
| Aug. 30, 1999 | Letter to R. Powers from D. Binder (Unsigned) Re: Subpoena (filed via facsimile). |
| Aug. 25, 1999 | Order Granting Department`s Motion to Take Judicial Notice sent out. |
| Aug. 23, 1999 | Department`s Motion to Take Judicial Notice w/exhibit filed. |
| Jun. 07, 1999 | Petitioner`s Response to Respondents` Third Set of Production of Documents (filed via facsimile). |
| May 21, 1999 | Order on Motions to Compel and Order Providing New Hearing Notice sent out. (hearing set for September 15-17, 1999; 9:30am; Tallahassee) |
| May 20, 1999 | Department`s Response in Partial Opposition to Respondents` Third Motion to Compel Discovery filed. |
| May 20, 1999 | Department`s Response in Partial Opposition to Respondents` Fourth Motion to Compel Discovery filed. |
| May 17, 1999 | (Respondents) Stipulated Motion for Continuance of the Final Hearing filed. |
| May 14, 1999 | Department`s Response in Opposition to Respondents` Second Motion to Compel Discovery (w/exhibits A-D) filed. |
| May 14, 1999 | Respondent`s Fourth Motion to Compel Discovery, Respondent`s Third Motion to Compel Discovery, Respondent`s Third Request for Production of Documents Directed to Petitioner filed. |
| May 07, 1999 | Respondents` Second Motion to Compel Discovery filed. |
| May 05, 1999 | Department`s Response in Opposition to Respondents` Motion to Compel Discovery filed. |
| May 04, 1999 | (M. Fletcher Allaman) Notice of Limited Appearance as Counsel for Respondents to Take Deposition filed. |
| May 03, 1999 | Department`s Response to Respondents` Second Request for Production of Documents (filed via facsimile). |
| May 03, 1999 | Petitioner`s Notice of Serving Answers to Respondents` First Set of Interrogatories Directed to Petitioner (filed via facsimile). |
| Apr. 30, 1999 | Respondents` Motion to Compel Discovery filed. |
| Apr. 28, 1999 | (Respondent) Third Amended Notice of Taking Deposition filed. |
| Apr. 26, 1999 | Department`s Response to Respondents` First Request for Production of Documents (filed via facsimile). |
| Apr. 23, 1999 | (Respondents) Second Amended Notice of Taking Deposition; Amended Notice of Taking Depositions filed. |
| Apr. 21, 1999 | Order Changing Location of Hearing sent out. (hearing will be held at the DeSoto Building) |
| Apr. 08, 1999 | Order Granting Continuance and Rescheduling Hearing sent out. (hearing set for June 16-18, 1999; 9:30am; Tallahassee) |
| Apr. 06, 1999 | Order Denying Protective Order Request sent out. |
| Apr. 06, 1999 | (Petitioner) Exhibits A & B w/cover letter (filed via facsimile). |
| Apr. 05, 1999 | Order Cancelling Final Hearing and Requesting Parties Response sent out. (parties are requested to respond no later than 4/6/99, regarding whether the final hearing should be rescheduled) |
| Apr. 05, 1999 | Order Denying Motion for Protective Order sent out. |
| Apr. 05, 1999 | Notice of Service of Respondents` First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner; Respondents` Second Request for Production of Documents Directed to Petitioner filed. |
| Apr. 02, 1999 | Respondents` Response to Witness Edward Easterly`s Motion for Protective Order w/cover letter filed. |
| Apr. 01, 1999 | Letter to R. Powers from R. Fox Re: Dates available for hearing (filed via facsimile). |
| Apr. 01, 1999 | Motion for Protective Order by Edward Easterly filed. |
| Mar. 26, 1999 | (4) Subpoena ad Testificandum (R. Powers); (3) Affidavit; Respondents` First Request for Production of Documents Directed to Petitioner; Amended Notice of Taking Deposition filed. |
| Mar. 25, 1999 | Respondents` Response to Witnesses Motion for Protective Order filed. |
| Mar. 23, 1999 | (H. Richmond) Witnesses Motion for Protective Order filed. |
| Mar. 12, 1999 | (Respondents) Notice of Taking Depositions; Notice of Taking Deposition (filed via facsimile). |
| Mar. 04, 1999 | Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for May 25-28, 1999; 9:30am; Tallahassee) |
| Mar. 04, 1999 | Order of Prehearing Instructions sent out. |
| Mar. 02, 1999 | Respondents` Response to the Initial Order filed. |
| Mar. 02, 1999 | Department`s Response to Initial Order (filed via facsimile). |
| Feb. 05, 1999 | Initial Order issued. |
| Feb. 01, 1999 | Agency Referral Letter; Petition for Formal Hearing; Administrative Complaint for Entry of A Cease and Desist Order, Order of Imposition of Fines and Notice of Rights rec`d |
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Dec. 22, 2000 | Agency Final Order | |
| Sep. 29, 2000 | Recommended Order | Discount title vouchers are an artifice for exceeding 18 percent interest and since Respondents are unlicensed, this is a violation of Section 516.02(2)(a), Florida Statutes. |
