Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

GALAXY POWERSPORTS, LLC D/B/A JCL INTERNATIONAL, LLC AND SOLANO CYCLE, INC. vs AUSTIN GLOBAL ENTERPRISES, D/B/A NEW SCOOTERS 4 LESS, 09-003039 (2009)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 09-003039 Visitors: 26
Petitioner: GALAXY POWERSPORTS, LLC D/B/A JCL INTERNATIONAL, LLC AND SOLANO CYCLE, INC.
Respondent: AUSTIN GLOBAL ENTERPRISES, D/B/A NEW SCOOTERS 4 LESS
Judges: LAWRENCE P. STEVENSON
Agency: Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
Locations: Gainesville, Florida
Filed: Jun. 05, 2009
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Thursday, December 24, 2009.

Latest Update: Jan. 21, 2010
Summary: The issue is whether Petitioners are entitled to a motor vehicle dealership that is proposed to be located in Gainesville, Florida.Respondent satisfied the statutory standing requirement, and Petitioners failed to appear. Recommend that the new franchise location be denied.
STATE OF FLORIDA

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


GALAXY POWERSPORTS, LLC d/b/a

)




JCL INTERNATIONAL, LLC and

)




SOLANO CYCLE, INC.,

)





)




Petitioners,

)

)




vs.

)

)

Case

No.

09-3039

AUSTIN GLOBAL ENTERPRISES,

)




d/b/a NEW SCOOTERS 4 LESS,

)





)




Respondent.

)




)





RECOMMENDED ORDER


On December 17, 2009, an administrative hearing in this case was held in Gainesville, Florida, before Lawrence P. Stevenson, Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH).

APPEARANCES


For Petitioners: (No appearance)


For Respondent: Collin Austin, pro se

Austin Global Enterprises, LLC

118 Northwest 14th Avenue, Suite D Gainesville, Florida 32601


STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE


The issue is whether Petitioners are entitled to a motor vehicle dealership that is proposed to be located in Gainesville, Florida.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT


On May 29, 2009, Galaxy Powersports, LLC d/b/a JCL International, LLC, and Solano Cycle, Inc. (Petitioners) published a Notice of Publication for a New Point Franchise Motor Vehicle Dealer in a County of Less than 300,000 Population in the Florida Administrative Weekly. Respondent Austin Global Enterprises, LLC d/b/a New Scooters 4 Less (Respondent) filed a protest with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (Department) on June 3, 2009. By letter dated June 3, 2009, the Department referred the matter to DOAH to assign an Administrative Law Judge to conduct a hearing "for the sole purpose of determining the propriety of the protest regarding issues specifically within the purview of Sections 320.642 and 320.699, Florida Statutes."

The hearing was convened as scheduled. Respondent was present and ready to proceed. Petitioners made no appearance.

Collin Austin, the owner of Austin Global Enterprises, LLC, testified at the hearing. Respondent's Exhibit 1, a map indicating the distance between the places of business of Solano Cycle, Inc., and New Scooters 4 Less, was admitted into evidence.

The hearing was not transcribed. Respondent waived the filing of a proposed recommended order. All references to the

Florida Statutes are to the 2009 edition unless otherwise indicated.

FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. Respondent is an existing franchised dealer of motorcycles manufactured by Shanghai Shenke Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (SHEN).

  2. Petitioners have proposed the establishment of a new dealership to sell the same line and make of motorcycles as those sold by Respondent.

  3. Respondent's dealership is located at 118 Northwest 14th Avenue, Gainesville, Florida 32601.

  4. Petitioners' proposed dealership would be located at 1024 South Main Street, Gainesville, Florida 32601.

  5. The proposed dealership is within a 20-mile radius of Respondent's dealership.

  6. Respondent has standing to protest the establishment of the proposed dealership.

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  7. DOAH has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this proceeding. §§ 120.569 and 120.57(1), Fla. Stat.

  8. The Department is the agency responsible for regulating the licensing and franchising of motor vehicle dealers.

    §§ 320.60-320.70, Fla. Stat.

  9. Subsection 320.642(1), Florida Statutes, requires a motor vehicle dealer who proposes to establish an additional motor vehicle dealership within an area already represented by the same line-make vehicle to give written notice to the Department of its intent to establish a new franchise. The statute also provides that any affected dealership may protest the establishment of a new franchise in its territory.

  10. Subsection 320.642(2), Florida Statutes, establishes the standards of review to determine if establishment of a new, competing motor vehicle franchise should be granted. Subsection 320.642(2)(a), Florida Statutes, provides in relevant part:

    An application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory shall be denied when:


    1. A timely protest is filed by a presently existing franchised motor vehicle dealer with standing to protest as defined in subsection (3); and


    2. The licensee fails to show that the existing franchised dealer or dealers who register new motor vehicle retail sales or retail leases of the same line-make in the community or territory of the proposed dealership are not providing adequate representation of such line-make motor vehicles in such community or territory. The burden of proof in establishing inadequate representation shall be on the licensee.


  11. Pursuant to Subsection (3)(a)2. of Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, "if the proposed additional . . . motor

    vehicle dealer is to be located in a county with a population of less than 300,000" as in the instant case, then any existing motor vehicle dealer of the same line-make whose licensed franchise location is within a radius of 20 miles of the proposed additional dealer has standing to file a protest within the meaning of Subsection (2)(a)1. of the statute.

  12. Respondent is an existing motor vehicle dealer who has standing to file a protest of the proposed new dealership in this case.

  13. The burden is therefore on Petitioners to prove that there is "inadequate representation" in the community or territory of the proposed new dealership, according to the criteria set forth in Subsection 320.642(2)(b), Florida Statutes.

  14. Petitioners made no appearance and presented no evidence at the final hearing. Petitioners failed to meet their burden of proof.

  15. The approval sought by Petitioners must therefore be denied.

RECOMMENDATION


Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is

RECOMMENDED:


That the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a final order denying the establishment of Petitioners' proposed franchise.

DONE AND ENTERED this 24th day of December, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

LAWRENCE P. STEVENSON

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

(850) 488-9675

Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us


Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 24th day of December, 2009.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Jennifer Clark

Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-308 2900 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0635


Martin Solano Solano Cycle, Inc.

1024 South Main Street, Suite A Gainesville, Florida 32601

Leo Su

Galaxy Powersports, LLC, d/b/a JCL International, LLC

2667 Northhaven Road

Dallas, Texas 75229


Collin Austin

Austin Global Enterprise, LLC

118 Northwest 14th Avenue, Suite D Gainesville, Florida 32601


Julie L. Jones, Executive Director

Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building

2900 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500


Robin Lotane, General Counsel

Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building

2900 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500


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.


Docket for Case No: 09-003039
Issue Date Proceedings
Jan. 21, 2010 Agency Final Order filed.
Dec. 24, 2009 Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
Dec. 24, 2009 Recommended Order (hearing held December 17, 2009). CASE CLOSED.
Dec. 17, 2009 CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
Nov. 24, 2009 Respondent's Response to Notification of Time Conflict filed.
Nov. 18, 2009 Respondent's Compliance with Pre-hearing Instructions filed.
Jul. 07, 2009 Order Acknowledging Failure of Parties to Provide Information.
Jul. 07, 2009 Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
Jul. 07, 2009 Notice of Hearing (hearing set for December 17, 2009; 10:00 a.m.; Gainesville, FL).
Jun. 24, 2009 Order and Notice.
Jun. 05, 2009 Notice of Publication for a New Point Franchise Motor Vehicle Dealer in a County of Less than 300,000 Population filed.
Jun. 05, 2009 Petition in response to the intent to establish a Shanghai Shenke Motorcycle Co. Ltd. dealership in Gainesville, Fl. filed.
Jun. 05, 2009 Agency referral
Jun. 05, 2009 Initial Order.

Orders for Case No: 09-003039
Issue Date Document Summary
Jan. 20, 2010 Agency Final Order
Dec. 24, 2009 Recommended Order Respondent satisfied the statutory standing requirement, and Petitioners failed to appear. Recommend that the new franchise location be denied.
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