Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE vs. ARTHUR STEINHARDT, 75-001779 (1975)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 75-001779 Visitors: 14
Judges: DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND
Agency: Department of Financial Services
Latest Update: Mar. 09, 1977
Summary: Whether the Respondent should be denied a mortgage solicitor's license under Chapter 494, Florida Statutes.Deny Respondent's application for mortgage solicitor license because he did not reveal his arrest record for forgery on his application.
75-1779.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT ) OF BANKING AND FINANCE, )

DIVISION OF SECURITIES, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 75-1779

)

ARTHUR STEINHARDT, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


A hearing was held pursuant to notice at the Office of the Comptroller, State of Florida, 1515 Northwest Seventh Street, Miami, Florida, on the 15th day of January, 1976, commencing at 9:00 a.m. before Delphene C. Strickland, Hearing Officer, Division of Administrative Hearings.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: PHILIP J. SYNDERBURN, Esquire

General Counsel

Office of the Comptroller The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32304


For Respondent: ARTHUR STEINHARDT,

appeared on his own behalf Adirolf Mortgage Enterprises Inc. 8134 Northwest 103 Street

Hialeah, Florida 33016


ISSUE


Whether the Respondent should be denied a mortgage solicitor's license under Chapter 494, Florida Statutes.


FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. Mr. Steinhardt, the Respondent, requested an application for registration as mortgage solicitor and made application on the proper form.


  2. The Department of Banking and Finance denied the application for issuance of a mortgage solicitor license and as grounds for said denial stated:


    1. Arthur Steinhardt failed to attach to his application for registration as a mortgage solicitor, a signed, notarized statement of the charges and facts as to his arrest or indictment for a crime. Said omission is a violation of Section 494.05, Florida Statutes;

    2. Arthur Steinhardt failed to attach to his application for registration as a mortgage solicitor, a signed statement of the charges and facts as to why a license was denied, suspended or revoked. Said omission is a violation of Section 494.05(1)(g), Florida Statutes;


    3. On or about March 13, 1969, Arthur Steinhardt was convicted of uttering a forged Instrument and sentenced to six (6) months to three (3) years in prison. Said criminal conviction demonstrated fraudulent or dishonest dealings by Arthur Steinbardt. Said criminal conviction is a ground for denial of license pursuant to Section 494.05, Florida Statutes.


    4. The acts and conduct of Arthur Steinhardt in the foregoing three paragraphs demonstrates deficiencies in the qualities of honesty, truthfulness, integrity, and competency. Said qualities are an essential requirement for the issuance of a mortgage solicitor license. Since these qualities are necessary in negotiating financial transactions involving primary and subordinate mortgages, the paramount interest of the public are best served by denial of the application of Arthur Steinhardt based upon the foregoing grounds.


  3. The Respondent requested a public hearing and at this hearing showed:


    1. That he had responded affirmatively to the question on the form "Have you eyer been arrested or indicted for a crime?"


    2. Admitted that he had failed to attach a complete notarized statement of the charges and facts together with the name and location of the court in which the proceedings were had or were pending, but showed that he had sent in a notarized statement as required stating that he had sent these in when he had been told to send them in.


  4. Mr. Steinhardt, the Respondent, admitted that he had failed to attach to his application notarized statements as required in questions numbers 5 and 9 on the application form, stating that he had overlooked said requirements although he had answered affirmatively to the questions: Question 5, "Have you ever been arrested, or indicted for crime?" Question 9, "Has your license of any kind ever been denied, suspended or revoked?"


  5. Respondent admitted that he had been convicted of uttering a forgery in Case No. 65-9450, State of Florida v. M. A. Steinhardt.


  6. The Respondent did not contest the charges of the Department of Banking and Finance, however, he contended: that the trouble he had been involved in for which he had been convicted of a crime and had served time arose purely from family problems; that the fingerprint card of the FBI showed that the only arrest he had been involved in was in regard to this family problem and one vehicular accident; that he was known for his honesty and integrity; and that he had been rehabilitated since his conviction of a crime.


  7. The Department of Banking and Finance contends: that its chief purpose as required by the legislature is to review an applicants background and make a determination to protect the public; that upon such investigation the determination was made that the public would not be best protected by granting a license to the Respondent.

  8. The Hearing Officer further finds:


    1. That Respondent's application for registration was ultimately completed properly, but not until the Department had sent out the notice of denial;


    2. The Respondent did not "overlook" the requirements of question 5 and question 9, but intentionally failed to properly complete the application by failing to attach notarized statements as to his arrest and his indictment for crime and the denial of a license.


    3. The license of applicant should have been denied.


      CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  9. The Department of Banking and Finance has the responsibility under Chapter 494, Florida Statutes, to investigate the actions of any persons engaged in the business or acting in the capacity of a licensee under the Mortgage Brokerage Act within the State of Florida. The application for registration as a mortgage solicitor signed and sent in by the Respondent was not properly completed with the required attachments at the time his application for registration was denied. The application was subsequently completed and was completed at the time of this hearing.


  10. The conviction of Respondent of uttering a forgery is grounds for denial of a mortgage solicitor license.


RECOMMENDATION


Deny the application.


DONE and ORDERED this 11th day of March, 1976.


DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675


COPIES FURNISHED:


Philip J. Snyderburn, Esquire General Counsel

Office of the Comptroller The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32304


Arthur Steinhardt

Adirolf Mortgage Enterprises, Inc. 8134 N.W. 103 Street

Hialeah, Florida 33016

Joseph M. Ehrlich, Deputy Director Division of Finance

335 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304


Docket for Case No: 75-001779
Issue Date Proceedings
Mar. 09, 1977 Final Order filed.
Mar. 11, 1976 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 75-001779
Issue Date Document Summary
Jun. 15, 1976 Agency Final Order
Mar. 11, 1976 Recommended Order Deny Respondent's application for mortgage solicitor license because he did not reveal his arrest record for forgery on his application.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer