Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
MILTON DODGE-CHRYSLER-PLYMOUTH, INC., AND CHRYSLER CORPORATION vs DON DAWSON JEEP EAGLE, INC., AND DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, 91-003714 (1991)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Jun. 14, 1991 Number: 91-003714 Latest Update: Jan. 30, 1992

Findings Of Fact The Parties. Chrysler is a manufacturer of trucks and automobiles, including Jeep trucks and Eagle automobiles. Milton Dodge is a proposed dealer/operator of a proposed new Jeep-Eagle dealership. Milton Dodge currently sells Chrysler, Plymouth, Dodge and Dodge trucks. Don Dawson is an existing franchised Jeep-Eagle dealership located on U. S. 29, Pensacola, Escambia County, Florida. Don Dawson is located approximately 17.5 miles from the proposed Milton Dodge dealership location. Santa Rosa County, where the new dealership is to be located, has a population of less than 300,000 persons. All of the parties have standing to participate in this proceeding. The Application for A New Dealership. Chrysler has sought a permit to establish an additional Jeep-Eagle dealership for the sale of Jeep trucks and Eagle automobiles in Milton, Santa Rosa County, Florida. Don Dawson filed a timely protest to Chrysler's application pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes. The Community or Territory. The Milton Dodge proposed new dealership is to be located on U. S. 90, West of Milton, Santa Rosa County, Florida. Chrysler assigns its franchised dealerships a primary area of responsibility called a "sales locality." The sales locality of each dealer is specified in the dealer agreement between the dealer and Chrysler. Each sales locality consists of post office towns. A post office town is an area within which mail is delivered from a particular post office. Post office towns are not limited to political boundaries. The sales locality for Milton Dodge, the Milton sales locality, consists of the towns of Milton, Bagdad, and Harold, all of which are located in Santa Rosa County, Florida. To the west and southwest of the Milton sales locality is the Pensacola sales locality. The Pensacola sales locality consists of the towns of Molino, Cantonment, Gonzalez, Gulf Breeze, Lillian and Pensacola. All of the towns, except Lillian, Alabama, are located in Escambia County, Florida. Pursuant to its dealer agreement with Chrysler, Don Dawson is located in the Pensacola sales locality. To the east and southeast of the Milton sales locality is the Fort Walton Beach sales locality. This sales locality consists of the towns of Niceville, Shalimar, Destin, Mary Esther, Valparaiso and Fort Walton Beach, and Eglin Air Force Base, all of which are located in Okaloosa County, Florida. There is a Jeep-Eagle dealership, Lee Jeep Eagle, located in Fort Walton Beach. The sales locality assigned to a dealer is representative of the area in which the dealer is expected to have a competitive advantage over the same line-make dealers simply because of location. The Milton sales locality and the Pensacola sales locality are separate and distinct markets. The evidence proved, and the Petitioners and Don Dawson both agreed in their proposed recommended orders, that the relevant community or territory in this proceeding is the Milton sales locality. Adequacy of Representation. General. Once the community or territory has been identified, Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, requires a determination as to whether existing dealers have been providing "adequate representation" of the line-make of the new dealership. In order to determine whether there has been adequate representation in the Milton sales locality of Jeep trucks and Eagle automobiles, eleven factors set out in Section 320.642(2)(b), Florida Statutes, are to be considered. In order to determine whether existing dealers have been providing adequate representation, a reasonable standard of performance may be determined as a measure of proper performance. The standard(s) for comparison in this matter is described, infra, in section II.D. of this Recommended Order. Section 320.642(2)(b)1, Florida Statutes; Impact on Existing Dealers. Only the possible impact on Don Dawson, the protesting dealer in this proceeding, may be considered in applying this factor. New vehicle transactions, including sales, servicing, parts' sales and financing and insurance, represent approximately 70% of Don Dawson's income. In 1990, Don Dawson sold new motor vehicles to persons whose addresses were within the Milton sales locality. In 1989, Don Dawson sold nine automobiles and trucks (5% of its total 178 sales) to customers whose addresses were within the Milton sales locality. In 1989, approximately 59% of Don Dawson's total sales were to persons whose addresses were within the Pensacola sales locality. During 1990, approximately 55% of Don Dawson's new motor vehicle sales were to persons whose addresses were within 20 miles of the proposed new dealership location. In 1989, Don Dawson had a gross profit per new vehicle of $1,322.00. Don Dawson lost $101,004.00 on the sale of 179 new vehicles. Don Dawson was profitable in 1990 ($13,102.00; gross profit per new vehicle of $1,503.00 on 195 new vehicles) and the first eight months of 1991. During 1990, Don Dawson paid a total of $75,000.00 to $80,000.00 to its equity owners. Although the evidence supports a conclusion that it is possible that Don Dawson may suffer some loss in sales of Jeep trucks and/or Eagle automobiles, the weight of the evidence failed to prove what the total or general financial impact of the proposed new dealership might be on Don Dawson. Based upon the findings of fact, infra, concerning inadequate market penetration in the Milton sales locality, it is likely that the addition of the proposed new dealership will not negatively impact on Don Dawson's sales opportunities. Section 320.642(2)(b)2, Florida Statutes; Investment and Obligations of Existing Dealers. Don Dawson has a considerable investment in tools, parts and improvements to the property it leases from Chrysler. The evidence failed to prove that Don Dawson's investment is inadequate. Section 320.642(2)(b)3, Florida Statutes; Reasonably Expected Market Penetration for the Community or Territory. In analyzing the proper performance in a market, it is appropriate to compare the market share or market penetration of vehicle registrations within a target market with the share of vehicle registrations in an appropriate comparison market. It is appropriate to use a "segmented" approach in comparing markets. For example, in order to determine Jeep truck (or Eagle automobiles) market share, the total truck industry (or similar automobiles to those manufactured by Eagle) are compared. Jeep and Eagle market penetration in the nation as a whole and in Florida sales localities is represented by national averages and Florida sales locality averages. National markets and markets in the Florida sales localities include adequately and inadequately represented Jeep and Eagle represented markets. Therefore, these averages are very conservative. In light of the fact that the averages are the conservative it is reasonable to use the higher of the national or the Florida sales localities averages as a starting point. For Jeep, the higher standard is the national average penetration. For Eagle, the higher standard is the Florida sales localities average penetration. Florida penetration is based upon all of Florida except four small towns which are included in Alabama sales localities. It also includes one town in Alabama included in the Pensacola sales locality. After determining the national and Florida averages, it is appropriate to compare how other areas lived up to these standards. Of 68 sales localities in Florida, 32 performed above national averages for Jeep. Thirty of those that performed above national average and all that are above the Florida average (12 sales localities) have Jeep representation. A similar result is reached when Eagle penetration is reviewed. A consideration of demographics and lifestyle characteristics, based upon a comparison of the relative popularity of various vehicle types in the Milton sales locality, independent of brand type, compared to the relative popularity of the same vehicle types in Florida and nationally, confirms the reasonableness of the use of Florida and national average penetration rates as a standard. A reasonable market share expectation for Jeep for the Milton sales locality is 4.74%. A reasonable market share expectation for Eagle for the Milton sales locality is 0.95%. As is discussed, infra, Jeep-Eagle penetration in the Milton sales locality has been below these expected penetration rates indicating inadequate representation in the community or territory. The proposed new dealership location is part of a geographic area designated by Chrysler as the New Orleans Zone. This zone consists of part of the panhandle area of Florida (the northwest portion of Florida), Alabama, Mississippi and Louisiana. Like Florida and the nation as a whole, there are areas within the New Orleans Zone that do not have Jeep-Eagle dealers. Unlike Florida, where there are only 38 sales localities and 20 markets without a Jeep-Eagle dealer, there are 111 sales localities and 47 markets in the New Orleans Zone where there is no Jeep-Eagle dealer. Each Jeep-Eagle dealership is in effect assigned a minimum sales responsibility review. This review is based upon a comparison of a dealer's sales with average sales in the zone the dealer is assigned to. The weight of the evidence, however, failed to prove that dealers who meet their minimum sales responsibility are necessarily providing adequate representation. Although a comparison of sales performance of each dealer in the New Orleans Zone is made by Chrysler with the average performance within the zone as a whole, and the proposed new dealership location is within the New Orleans Zone, the weight of the evidence failed to prove that the penetration rate in the New Orleans Zone is the appropriate standard for measurement of adequate representation. The New Orleans Zone is an area established for administrative convenience. The New Orleans Zone was not established for marketing comparisons. The evidence did not prove that, other than geographic proximity, the zone is comparable. Section 320.642(2)(b)4, Florida Statutes; Actions of the Licensee Denying Existing Dealers Opportunity for Reasonable Growth, Market Expansion or Relocation. The weight of the evidence failed to prove that Chrysler has taken any action to deny Don Dawson or any other exiting dealer opportunity for reasonable growth, market expansion or relocation. The site that Don Dawson is located at is controlled by Chrysler. Don Dawson must negotiate a lease of its facilities from Chrysler and must get approval from Chrysler to add additional vehicle types. Don Dawson has had difficulty at times getting certain vehicle types from Chrysler. The weight of the evidence, however, failed to prove that any of these facts constituted any action by Chrysler to prevent Don Dawson from growing or expanding its market, or that these facts relate to any request of Don Dawson to relocate. Section 320.642(2)(b)5, Florida Statutes; Attempts by the Licensee to Coerce Existing Dealers into Consenting. The weight of the evidence failed to prove that this factor is relevant in this proceeding. Section 320.642(2)(b)6, Florida Statutes; Geographic Factors. It is approximately 17.5 miles from the proposed Milton Dodge dealership location and Don Dawson. It takes approximately 29 minutes to travel by automobile from Milton Dodge to Don Dawson. It takes approximately 51 minutes to drive the 40.4 miles from Milton Dodge to Lee Jeep Eagle in Fort Walton Beach. Jeep Eagle buyers in Pensacola and Fort Walton Beach must travel fairly extensive distances to comparison shop. Evidence concerning relevant geographic factors support approval of the new Milton Dodge dealership. Section 320.642(2)(c)7, Florida Statutes; Benefits to Consumers. Consumers in the Milton sales locality will benefit because they will not have to travel to Pensacola or Fort Walton Beach if they are interested in Jeep-Eagle vehicles. It will be easier for consumers in Pensacola to comparison shop. There will be some slight benefit to consumers in the Milton sales locality because Jeep trucks and Eagle automobiles will be more readily accessible to them if a new dealership is located in the proposed new location. The possible benefits to consumers supports approval of the proposed new dealership. Section 320.642(2)(b)8, Florida Statutes; Compliance with Dealer Agreements. The weight of the evidence failed to prove that any existing dealers are not in full compliance with the dealer agreements with Chrysler. Section 320.642(2)(b)9, Florida Statutes; Adequate Inter- and Intra-Brand Competition. There is a lack of intra-brand competition in the Milton sales locality. This contributes to inadequate representation for Jeep-Eagle vehicles in the Milton sales locality. The negative impact of the lack of proximity of a Jeep-Eagle dealer to the Milton sales locality on representation is evidenced, in part, by a comparison of market penetration in Milton compared with market penetration in Pensacola, where a dealer is located. Existing Jeep-Eagle dealers are not providing adequate intra-brand competition in the Milton sales locality. Because of high population growth in Santa Rosa County and high inter- brand competition in the Milton sales locality, representation of Jeep-Eagle is inadequate based upon inter- and intra-brand competition. Adding a Jeep-Eagle dealership to the Milton sales locality is a reasonable solution to the inadequate representation in the Milton sales locality when the performance of similar line-makes with dealerships located in the Milton sales locality are compared to national and Florida average penetration rates. Line-makes not represented in the Milton sales locality have low penetration rates. Section 320.642(2)(b)10, Florida Statutes; Economic and Marketing Conditions. On a nationwide basis there have been significant declines of approximately 21% in the sales of Jeep trucks and Eagle automobiles between 1989 and 1990. Looking at the trend in sales of Jeep and Eagle vehicles over a longer period of time, however, indicates the very cyclical nature of vehicle sales. Although the current condition of vehicle sales and the economy as a whole gives reason to consider the new dealership with some skepticism, the weight of the evidence failed to prove that the recent trend in the economy or vehicle sales should be determinative in this case. Pensacola, Milton and the surrounding areas have experienced a significant growth between 1980 and 1990. Santa Rosa County, where Milton is located, is projected through 1995 to experience substantial growth in total population, population 16 (the driving age) and over, and in household trends. Although much of the projected growth will occur along the Gulf of Mexico coast, as opposed to around Milton, Santa Rosa, including Milton, should continue to be an attractive area for vehicle sales. This finding is based upon the data concerning income of the population and the favorable economic conditions existing and forecasted for the area (see Petitioner's proposed finding of fact 73). Section 320.642(2)(b)11, Florida Statutes; Volume of Registrations By the Existing Dealer in the Community or Territory of the Proposed Dealer. The penetration by Jeep in the Milton sales locality during the period 1987-1990 was significantly less that the penetration which reasonably could be expected (see finding of fact 39) based upon national and Florida penetration rates. Although Eagle performed a little better in more recent years than Jeep, the penetration by Eagle during the period 1987-1990 was also significantly less that the penetration which reasonably could be expected based (see finding of fact 39) upon national and Florida penetration rates. Conclusion. Based upon a balanced consideration of the factors of Section 320.642(2)(b), Florida Statutes, the proposed new Jeep-Eagle dealership should be approved.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED the Department enter a Final Order approving the application to establish a new Jeep-Eagle dealership on 800 West Highway 90, Milton, Santa Rosa County, Florida. DONE and ENTERED this 18th day of December, 1991, in Tallahassee, Florida. LARRY J. SARTIN 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 18th day of December, 1991. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER The parties have submitted proposed findings of fact. It has been noted below which proposed findings of fact have been generally accepted and the paragraph number(s) in the Recommended Order where they have been accepted, if any. Those proposed findings of fact which have been rejected and the reason for their rejection have also been noted. Chrysler's Proposed Findings of Fact Proposed Finding Paragraph Number in Recommended Order of Fact Number of Acceptance or Reason for Rejection 2 and 6. 3 and 6. 3 3-5 and 7. Conclusions of law. See 19-21. Conclusions of law. Hereby accepted. 7 9-10. 8 12-13. 9 11 and 14. Cumulative. 16 and hereby accepted. 12-14 Cumulative. 15 24 and hereby accepted. 16-18 Hereby accepted. 19-22 Although these findings of fact are correct, it is unnecessary to consider the alternative community or territory of the Milton/Pensacola area identified by Chrysler. 23 See 18. Don Dawson did not have the burden of proof. 24 19. 25 See 47, 53-54 and 57. See 47. Hereby accepted. See 57. No a finding of fact. 30 32-33. 31 Don Dawson did not have the burden of proof. Don Dawson did provide some proof concerning this issue. 32 32-34. 33 35. 34 37. 35 37 and hereby accepted. 36-38 Subordinate facts. 39-41 See 38. 42 39. 43-44 Not necessary. See proposed findings of fact 19-22. 45-46 39 and hereby accepted. Not necessary. See proposed findings of fact 19-22. Subordinate fact. See 69. 50 69. 51-53 Cumulative facts. Not necessary. See proposed findings of fact 19-22. Cumulative facts. Not necessary. See proposed findings of fact 19-22. Hereby accepted. 58 See 41-44. 59 43-44. 60 41. 61 Hereby accepted. 62 See 41-44. 63-64 Hereby accepted. 65 See section K. 66 61. 67 Hereby accepted. 68 See 61, 66-67. 69 66-67. 70 67. 71-72 68 and hereby accepted. Cumulative facts. 66 and hereby accepted. 75-76 59 and hereby accepted. 77 58 and 60. 78-79 Too speculative. 80 48-49. 81 51. 82 61. See 58-62 and hereby accepted. See 59 and hereby accepted. 85 62. 86 Hereby accepted. 87 See 45-46. 88 22. 89 26. 90 See 28. 91 29. 92-93 Hereby accepted. Cumulative facts. See 35. 96 See 30-31. 97 Not relevant. Don Dawson's Proposed Findings of Fact Proposed Finding Paragraph Number in Recommended Order of Fact Number of Acceptance or Reason for Rejection 1 9. 2 11-12. 3 Hereby accepted. 4 17. 5* 24. 6* 48. 6* See 18. 5* 32. 6* 33 and hereby accepted. 7 40. See 42. Hereby accepted. Not supported by the weight of the evidence. See 42- 44. Not relevant. Not supported by the weight of the evidence. Based on hearsay. Not relevant. See 42-44. Not relevant. 15 63. 16 Not relevant. At issue is the penetration rate in the Milton sales locality. 17 25-26. 18 27. 19 See 46. 20 23. 21 30. 22 Not relevant. Nor did the evidence prove why the offer was withdrawn. 23 2. 24-26 Not supported by the weight of the evidence. 27 See 25-26. The last sentence is not supported by the weight of the evidence. * These duplicative numbered findings of fact all appear on page 4 of Don Dawson's proposed recommended order.e COPIES FURNISHED: Dean Bunch, Esquire Cabaniss, Burke & Wagner, P.A. 851 East Park Avenue Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Edward H. Weeby, Esquire Office of General Counsel Chrysler Corporation 12000 Chrysler Drive Detroit, Michigan 48288 John L. Fiveash, Jr., Esquire Rhodes Building, Suite 106 41 North Jefferson Street Pensacola, Florida 32501-5643 Daniel E. Myers, Esquire Walter E. Forehand, Esquire Myers & Forehand 402 North Office Plaza Drive Suite B Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Michael J. Alderman Assistant General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Room A432 Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Charles J. Brantley, Director Division of Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room B-439 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500

Florida Laws (2) 120.57320.642
# 1
VENTO NORTH AMERICA, LLC AND H LONG INVESTMENTS CORP. vs BEST BUY VEHICLES, INC., 08-003988 (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Vero Beach, Florida Aug. 18, 2008 Number: 08-003988 Latest Update: Apr. 16, 2009

The Issue Whether the proposed dealership should be approved.

Findings Of Fact On August 1, 2008, in the Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 34, Number 31, a Notice of Publication for a New Point Franchise Motor Vehicle Dealer in a County of Less than 300,000 Population was published. The notice provided that Vento North America, LLC, intended to allow the establishment of H. Long Investments Corp. d/b/a Tropical Scooters of Vero, as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Qianjaing Motorcycle Group Corp. (QINJ) at 4901 North U.S. Highway 1, Unit J, Vero Beach (Indian River County), Florida. On August 12, 2008, the Respondent timely filed a protest of the establishment of the Petitioner's dealership and represented that 25 percent of its retail sales were within a 20-mile straight line distance of the proposed dealership during any 12-month period out of the 36-month period immediately preceding the filing of the protest. Based upon the Petitioner's evidence, its proposed dealership location is not less than 21.51 miles from the Respondent's dealership. The Respondent did not establish that any of its sales are within 20 miles of the proposed dealership. The Respondent did not establish that it currently markets any motorcycle to be sold by the proposed dealership. More specifically, the Respondent did not offer evidence that it has an agreement for the same line-make vehicle to be sold by the proposed dealer. Vento North America, the distributor of the motorcycle brand/model to be sold at the proposed dealership, did not attend the hearing. Notice of the formal hearing was provided to all parties of record at their addresses of record. The Respondent did not timely contest the location, date, or time for the hearing.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a Final Order dismissing the protest filed by the Respondent and approving the dealership proposed by this Petitioner. DONE AND ENTERED this 16th day of December, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. J. D. PARRISH 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 16th day of December, 2008. COPIES FURNISHED: Electra Theodorides-Bustle, 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 Michael J. Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-432 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0635 Jim Buchheit Best Buy Vehicles, Inc. 3525 South US Highway 1 Fort Pierce, Florida 34982 Heidi S. Long H. Long Investments, Corp. Tropical Scooters of Vero 4901 North US highway 1, Unit J Vero Beach, Florida 32967 Alma Gonzalez Vento North America 6190 Cornerstone Court E, Suite 200 San Diego, California 92121

Florida Laws (4) 120.569120.57320.605320.642
# 2
CHRYSLER CORPORATION AND CARUSO CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH, INC., D/B/A CARUSO CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH vs LAKE CHRYSLER PLYMOUTH DODGE, INC.; CLARENCE H. CURBOW; AND JOSEPH H. NOLETTE, 90-006014 (1990)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Sep. 24, 1990 Number: 90-006014 Latest Update: Apr. 19, 1991

Findings Of Fact On July 26, 1990, Lake filed an intent to sell said dealership to Nolette. On September 13, 1991, the Petitioner filed a verified complaint with the Department rejecting the proposed transfer between Lake and Nolette. The Petitioner was also informed that the proposal included relocation of the dealership from its current location to 710 South Bay Street, Eustis, Florida. The Petitioner moved to dismiss that portion of the matter related to relocation of the dealership. By Order dated December 19, 1990, that portion of the complaint relating to the approval of the change of location was dismissed. The only matters before the Division of Administrative Hearings are those related to the change of ownership. The Petitioner's basis for opposing the proposal is the failure of Nolette, a Jeep Eagle dealer (another Chrysler subsidiary), to meet existing customer satisfaction standards for Chrysler dealers. The Petitioner's agreements with its dealers require them to maintain certain objective customer satisfaction standards. The Petitioner asserts its standards are reasonable; Nolette failed to meet those standards; and the Petitioner has rejected other proposed transfers for the acquiring dealer's failure to meet those standards. The Petitioner markets Chrysler, Plymouth, Dodge, and Dodge Trucks, which are the line-makes sold by Lake. (TR-7). Nolette, the proposed purchaser of Lake, is the current owner and operator of Plaza Jeep Eagle, located in Lake County, Florida. (TR-8; EX-2, pg. 1). Jeep was manufactured by American Motors. The Petitioner purchased American Motors and entered into uniform dealer agreements with American Motors' Jeep and Eagle dealers, including Plaza Jeep Eagle. (TR-9; EX-2). Upon entering into the agreement with Plaza Jeep Eagle, the Petitioner, through its subsidiary, American Motor Sales Corporation, relied "on the active, substantial and continuing personal participation in the management of Dealer's organization by Joseph H. Nolette". (EX-2, pg. 1, paragraph 2). As a part of the Jeep Eagle sales agreement, Nolette agreed, in paragraph 11B, on page 4, as follows: Dealer shall at all times during this agreement meet its minimum service satisfaction requirements by maintaining a rating on American Motors Sales Corporations' Customer Satisfaction Index, Prep-It-Right and Deliver-It-Right evaluations, as determined by American Motors Sales Corporation from time to time based upon surveys conducted of the dealer's customers, which is equal to or greater than the average Customer Satisfaction Index, Prep-It-Right and Deliver-It-Right ratings for the National sales group levels as those groups are determined by AMSC from time to time in which the dealer is included. (emphasis supplied). The sales group referred to in the dealer agreement are determined by the sales volume of the dealership so that similar size dealers may be compared. (TR-11). The system by which dealers are measured is explained to the dealer through booklets detailing the operation of the surveys and their results. (EX- 3). Customer satisfaction is sampled by questionnaires to the dealer's customers. Only questions relating to the operation of the dealership are used to assess the dealership, including courtesy of dealership personnel, convenience of scheduling, vehicle ready when promised, work done right the first time, the availability of parts, explanation of service, repairs, charges, and service and maintenance work after the sale. (TR-30). Other questions dealing with the vehicle itself, such as "Would you buy another vehicle from Chrysler Corporation?", are asked; however, the dealer is not scored on those questions. (TR-30). Nolette's operation at Plaza Jeep Eagle does not comply with the standards set out in its dealer agreement for Customer Satisfaction Index (hereinafter referred to as the Prep-It-Right, and the Deliver-It-Right standards. (TR-13). In the CSI survey, Plaza Jeep Eagle scored a 2.70 on a 0 to 4 scale, compared to 3.40 for similar dealers throughout the nation ("National Sales Group") for the twelve (12) month period ending June of 1989. (EX-4, pg. 6). Utilizing other standards to review Plaza Jeep Eagle's performance, similar results appear. Plaza Jeep Eagle is also substantially below the national average for all dealers (3.12); the average for dealers in the Orlando zone (3.00); the average for the Orlando zone for Similarly-sized dealers ("Zone Sales Group")(2.83); and for all dealers in the central Florida district near Plaza Jeep Eagle (3.19). Since June of 1989, Plaza Jeep Eagle's cumulative twelve (12) month average score has decreased, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of the National Sales Group standard, as follows: 6/89 12/89 6/90 Plaza Jeep Eagle 2.70 2.63 2.29 National Sales Group 3.40 3.40 3.38 Plaza, as a percentage of National Sales Group 79% 77% 68% Similarly, Plaza Jeep Eagle is consistently below other measures of CSI performance which, although not contractually mandated for comparison, demonstrate the reasonableness of the National Sales Group standard, as follows: 6/89 12/89 6/90 Plaza Jeep Eagle 2.70 2.63 2.29 National Average 3.12 3.15 3.14 Orlando Zone Average 3.00 3.02 3.01 Orlando Zone Sales Group 2.83 3.04 2.95 Central Florida District Average 3.19 3.12 3.12 With regard to the Prep-It-Right and Deliver-It-Right questions of consumers, a consistent and substantially lower percentage of buyers were satisfied with Plaza Jeep Eagle than with the national group of similarly-sized dealers. For the period ending in Juice of 1989, 71% of Plaza Jeep Eagle's customers were satisfied with the preparation of their vehicle and 71% with the delivery of the vehicle, compared to 97% for both measures in the National Sales Group. In December of 1989, Plaza Jeep Eagle's percentage of satisfied customers was 75% for both preparation and delivery, compared to 96% on both measures in the national group. For June of 1990, Plaza Jeep Eagle's percentage of satisfied customers was 71% for preparation, compared to 97% for the national group, and 77% for delivery, compared to 96%. The Petitioner has established written, reasonable, and uniformly- applied standards with respect to performance of a dealership. These standards are published in the dealer sales and service agreements and related documents concerning a dealer's obligation with respect to customer satisfaction. The Petitioner has rejected other proposed applicants because of their failure to meet such standards. (TR- 42)

Recommendation Having considered the foregoing Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, the evidence of record, the candor and demeanor of the witnesses, and the pleadings and arguments of the parties, it is therefore, RECOMMENDED that the Department enter a Final Order denying the Respondents' proposal to change the ownership of Lake. DONE AND ENTERED this 19th day of April, 1991, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 19th day of April, 1991. COPIES FURNISHED: Charles J. Brantley, Director Division of Motor Vehicles Room B439, Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, FL 32399-0500 Enoch Jon Whitney, Esq. General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, FL 32399-0500 Dean Bunch, Esq. RUMBERGER, KIRK, ET AL. 106 E. College Street Suite 700 Tallahassee, FL 32301 Lawrence J. Semento, Esq. STONE & SEMENTO P.O. Drawer 2048 Eustis, FL 32727 J. Robert Duggan, Esq. P.O. Box 490208 Leesburg, FL 34749

Florida Laws (3) 120.57320.643320.644
# 3
GALAXY POWERSPORTS, LLC, D/B/A JCL INTERNATIONAL, LLC AND J AND F SOUTH FLORIDA INVESTMENTS, INC., D/B/A TREASURE COAST SCOOTERS AND THINGS vs WENMARK, INC. D/B/A ALL THE WHEEL TOYS, 09-003010 (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Pierce, Florida Jun. 03, 2009 Number: 09-003010 Latest Update: Dec. 03, 2009

The Issue The issue is whether the Petitioners' proposal for a dealer to sell two new lines of motorcycles should be approved.

Findings Of Fact On October 10, 2008, in the Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 34, Number 41, two separate Notices of Publication for a New Point Franchise Motor Vehicle Dealer in a County of More than 300,000 Population were published. The first notice provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, notice is given that [Galaxy] intends to allow the establishment of [Treasure Coast] as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie (St. Lucie County) Florida 34952 on or after September 26, 2008. The second notice provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, notice is given that [Galaxy] intends to allow the establishment of [Treasure Coast] as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd (ZHEJ) at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie (St. Lucie County) Florida 34952 on or after September 26, 2008. On October 16, 2008, Respondent filed the following letters of protest with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles: In regards to the intent of [Galaxy] to establish a Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) with [Treasure Coast] for the sale of motorcycles at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie, Fl [sic] 34952. This letter represents a written complaint to their application for this dealership, because we already represent said dealership. and In regards to the intent of [Galaxy] to establish a Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd (ZHEJ) with [Treasure Coast] for the sale of motorcycles at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie, Fl [sic] 34952. This letter represents a written complaint to their application for this dealership, because we already represent said dealership. Both letters made the following additional representations: The proposed dealership would be within 20 miles of our dealership, as measured by straight line distance. They are 8.61 miles away per mapquest. The proposed dealership is to be located within the contractual area outlined in our dealer agreement, as we have a 20 mile exclusivity. We have made more than 25% of our retail sales to persons whose registered household addresses are within 20 straight line miles of the proposed dealership during the past 12 month period. By letter dated October 22, 2008, the Department apparently tried to refer this matter to DOAH. For reasons that were not explained, however, this matter was not received at DOAH until it was referred again by letter dated June 3, 2009. The protest filed by Respondent was timely. The parties agreed that the population of St. Lucie County is over 300,000, and that Respondent's dealership is 8.61 miles from the proposed site. Respondent has dealer agreements to sell various lines of motorcycles, including motorcycles manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co., Ltd. (ZHEJ); and motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG). At the hearing, Mr. Young agreed that the evidence showed that, as a dealer for Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ), Respondent has adequately promoted that line and has made 25 percent or more of its retail sales to household addresses within 12.5 miles of the proposed dealership. At the hearing, Mr. Young said that the only motorcycles at issue were those manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG). Specifically, he questioned whether the line represented sufficient numbers of sales within the territory. Mr. Mourning explained that the ZHNG line was also called ZNEN before 2009. He produced records that confirm that Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd., used ZNEN as the make of its vehicles in 2008. Taken together, his sales records for ZHNG and ZNEN motorcycles demonstrated that he also adequately and successfully represents that line in the territory.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a Final Order denying Treasure Coast's applications to become the licensee to sell motorcycles line-makes manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ); and by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) at the proposed site. DONE AND ENTERED this 2nd day of November, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ELEANOR M. HUNTER 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 2nd day of November, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Electra Theodorides-Bustle, Executive Director Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles 4052 Bald Cypress Way, BIN A02 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1701 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Guy Young J & F South Florida Investments, Inc. d/b/a Treasure Coast Scooters and Things 7320 South US 1 Port St. Lucie, Florida 34952 Mark Mourning WenMark Inc., d/b/a All The Wheel Toys 1540 Northwest Federal Highway Stuart, Florida 34994 Jennifer Clark, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-308 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0635 Leo Su Galaxy Powersports, LLC, d/b/a JCL International, LLC 2667 Northhaven Road Dallas, Texas 75229

Florida Laws (4) 120.569120.57320.605320.642
# 4
GALAXY POWERSPORTS, LLC, D/B/A JCL INTERNATIONAL, LLC, AND KEB TRANS, INC., D/B/A EZ RIDERS SCOOTERS vs POWER AND PLAY WAREHOUSE, INC., 08-005866 (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Lauderdale Lakes, Florida Nov. 24, 2008 Number: 08-005866 Latest Update: Jul. 20, 2009

The Issue The issues are whether Galaxy Powersports, LLC, is entitled to three licenses to establish new dealerships for the sale of motorcycles, pursuant to Sections 320.642 and 320.699, Florida Statutes (2008).

Findings Of Fact Respondent operates a dealership at 1828 North Dixie Highway, Lake Worth, Florida, at which it offers for sale the complete line of ZHNG motorcycles. The proposed dealership at 1335 Okeechobee Boulevard, West Palm Beach, Florida, is located less than six miles from Respondent's Lake Worth dealership. Due to inadvertence, Respondent failed to present evidence to establish the location of its Pompano Beach dealership; the distance from the Pompano Beach dealership to the proposed dealership at 7600 Wiles Road, Coral Springs, Florida; and that the Pompano Beach dealership sells the ZHNG and ZHEJ line makes. Obviously addressing only DOAH Case No. 08-5865, counsel for Respondent moved, toward the end of the hearing, for a favorable order dismissing the case (i.e., denying applications), and the Administrative Law Judge indicated that he would enter a recommended order essentially granting the relief that Respondent sought. Only after the hearing did the Administrative Law Judge realize that Respondent had failed to present the evidence identified in the preceding paragraph.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a final order denying the application in each of these three cases. DONE AND ENTERED this 18th day of June, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. ROBERT E. MEALE 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 18th day of June, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Carl A. Ford, Director Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety And Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room B-439 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0635 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety And Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500 Michael James Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-432 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344 Paul J. Lane, Esquire 2755 East Oakland Park Boulevard, Suite 300 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33306 Rick Marabini MX Motor Toys, Inc., d/b/a MX Motorsports 300 South Austrailian Avenue, No. 1507 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Leo Su Galaxy Powersports, LLC, d/b/a JCL International, LLC 2667 Northhaven Road Dallas, Texas 75229

Florida Laws (4) 120.569120.57320.642320.699
# 5
NISSAN DIESEL AMERICA, INC. vs AMERICAN IMPORT CAR SALES, INC., D/B/A JUMBO AUTO AND TRUCK PLAZA OF FORT PIERCE, 10-001946 (2010)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Orlando, Florida Apr. 13, 2010 Number: 10-001946 Latest Update: Aug. 20, 2010

Conclusions This matter came before the Department for entry of a Final Order upon submission of an Order Closing File by Jeff B. Clark, an Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, a copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference in this order. The Department hereby adopts the Order Closing File as its Final Order in this matter. Said Order Closing File was predicated upon the Respondent’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, filed on August 05, 2010. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Franchise Agreement between Nissan Diesel America, Inc. and American Import Car Sales, Inc. d/b/a Jumbo Auto and Truck Plaza of Fort Pierce is terminated. Filed August 20, 2010 1:15 PM Division of Administrative Hearings. DONE AND ORDERED this J? = day of August, 2010, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. CARL A. FORD, Direct6r Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Motor Vehicles this_F2#hday of August, 2010. . . Ni , Dealer Administrator NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS Judicial review of this order may be had pursuant to section 120.68, Florida Statutes, in the District Court of Appeal for the First District, State of Florida, or in any other district court of appeal of this state in an appellate district where a party resides. In order to initiate such review, one copy of the notice of appeal must be filed with the Department and the other copy of the notice of appeal, together with the filing fee, must be filed with the court within thirty days of the filing date of this order as set out above, pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure. CAF: vig Copies furnished: John W. Forehand, Esquire Kurkin Forehand Brandes LLP 800 North Calhoun Street, Suite 1B Tallahassee, Florida 32303 Matthew Porter Julian, Esquire Baker & Hostetler LLP 200 South Orange Avenue, Suite 2300 Orlando, Florida 32803 David R. Jarrett, Esquire Baker & Hostetler LLP 1000 Louisiana Avenue, Suite 2000 Houston, Texas 77002 Jeff B. Clark Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 Nalini Vinayak Dealer License Section

# 6
JMSTAR POWERSPORTS, INC., AND JOHN T. FAULKNER, D/B/A FAULKNER MOTORSPORTS vs PINE WOODS CENTER, INC., D/B/A PASCO CYCLE, 09-003354 (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Tallahassee, Florida Jun. 18, 2009 Number: 09-003354 Latest Update: Jul. 28, 2009

Conclusions This matter came before the Department for entry ofa Final Order upon submission of an Order Closing File by Daniel Manry,, Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, pursuant to Petitioner’s request for withdrawal, a copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference in this order. The Department hereby adopts the Order Closing File as its Final Order in this matter. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this case is CLOSED and no license will be issued to JMSTAR Powersports, Inc. and John T. Faulkner d/b/a Faulkner Motorsports to sell motorcycles manufactured by Shanghai Honling Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (HONL) at 4237 US Highway 19, New Port Richey (Pasco County), Florida 34652. DONE AND ORDERED this 22%y of July, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. LA. FORD, Direct6r Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Motor Vehicles this 2&4E day of July, 2009. NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS Judicial review of this order may be had pursuant to section 120.68, Florida Statutes, in the District Court of Appeal for the First District, State of Florida, or in any other district court of appeal of this state in an appellate district where a party resides. In order to initiate such review, | one copy of the notice of appeal must be filed with the Department and the other copy of the notice of appeal, together with the filing fee, must be filed with the court within thirty days of the filing date of this order as set out above, pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure. CAF/vlg Copies furnished: John T. Faulkner Faulkner Motorsports 4237 US Highway 19 New Port Richey, Florida 34652 Andrew Hennosy Connie Hennosy Pine Woods Center, Inc., d/b/a Pasco Cycle 10312 State Road 52 Hudson, Florida 34669 Yenong Xie JMSTAR Powersports, Inc. 796 Sunflower Circle Weston, Florida 33327 Michael J. Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway, Room A432 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Daniel Manry Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 Nalini Vinayak Dealer License Administrator Florida Administrative Law Reports Post Office Box 385 Gainesville, Florida 32602 Jul.08 69 08:47a john "9643896138 p.1 UM le Dom'el Manry Abignde IMSTAR POWERSPORTS INC 0624.06 ry 796 SUNFLOWER CIR, WESTON, FL 33327 VY { TEL: 954 684 9724, FAX: 954 B389 6138, E-MAIL: PANDAINDUSTRY@MSN.COM CANCEL THE APPOINTMENT OF ADDITIONAL DEALER Daniel Manry, Administrative Law Judge 06.26.09 Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Buid, 1230 Apalachee Pwy Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 Tel: 850 488 9675, Fax: 850 921 6847 s Dear Mr. Manry: odd Kat Case No. 09-3354 I decide to cancel my appointment of pp woo CENTER INC, d/b/a PASCO CYCLE as my franchise dealer of products of JMST, ZXYV, HONL? Due to this company never buy any products from my company since was approved as my franchise dealer. So, there is no need for any hearing any mere. » Sincerely, AM Yenong Xie President CC: Pine woods center, Inc John T. Faulkner “pear Wr. Daniel Many : tees . Re. Sor [eller of Jane 20 2009. his dealer Pre ey f Fe can J wy AM has no ight Be retest iy pidition , Due, it never “f ; we con wos cpanel os my dealer Aer two years A even From x, eud an pilction Fo PML Cone never co mumranieetes with me. Mow 5S terminal th dealershwp . yer ong xe 67.08.09

# 7
TROPICAL SCOOTERS, LLC vs PINELLAS POWERSPORTS, LLC, AND MOTRAC MOTORCYCLES, LLC, 18-002025 (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Clearwater, Florida Apr. 18, 2018 Number: 18-002025 Latest Update: Aug. 27, 2018

The Issue The issues in this case are whether Petitioner has standing to protest the establishment of an additional motorcycle dealership; and, if so, whether Petitioner is adequately representing this line of motorcycles in the relevant territory or community pursuant to section 320.642, Florida Statutes (2018).1/

Findings Of Fact Tropical Scooters is located at 11594 Seminole Boulevard, Largo, Florida 33778. It has been in the business of selling scooters and other motorized vehicles for ten years. Michele Stanley is the owner and manager of Tropical Scooters and she has knowledge regarding its purchasing and franchise agreements, inventory, and sales figures. Although no franchise agreement was offered into evidence, Ms. Stanley testified Petitioner has an agreement with a distributor, Pacific Rim International, d/b/a Ice Bear ATV (Ice Bear), to sell YNGF motorcycles. Ice Bear has been supplying Petitioner with YNGF motorcycles for approximately two and a half years. Tropical Scooters has had a good relationship with this distributor and has encountered no problems selling the YNGF line. In the last 18 months, Tropical Scooters has sold 137 YNGF units and currently has 23 units at its showroom. Ms. Stanley discovered that Respondents had applied with the Department to establish a YNGF motorcycle dealership at 9145 66th Street North, Pinellas Park, Florida 33782, from the February 22, 2018, notice published by the Department in the Florida Administrative Register.2/ Subsequently, Tropical Scooters filed a timely complaint with the Department challenging Respondents’ application. Ms. Stanley was familiar with the proposed location of the new dealership and stated that it was four miles “as the crow flies” from the Tropical Scooters showroom. Tropical Scooters is an existing dealership that sells YNGF motorcycles and is within 12.5 of the location proposed by Powersports and Motrac for the new dealership. Therefore, Tropical Scooters has standing to bring this challenge pursuant to section 320.642(3). There was no evidence that Tropical Scooters’ representation of the YGNF line of motorcycles was inadequate in its community or territory as described in section 320.642(2)(b).

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered by the Department denying the new dealership application of Respondents for the sale and service of Sanmen County Youngfu Machine Co., Ltd., vehicles at 9145 66th Street North, Pinellas Park, Pinellas County, Florida. DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of July, 2018, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S HETAL DESAI 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 27th day of July, 2018.

Florida Laws (7) 120.569120.68320.60320.642320.699320.7090.202
# 8
GALAXY POWERSPORTS, LLC D/B/A JCL INTERNATIONAL, LLC AND J & F SOUTH FLORIDA INVESTMENTS, INC. D/B/A TREASURE COAST SCOOTERS AND THINGS vs WENMARK, INC. D/B/A ALL THE WHEEL TOYS, 08-005365 (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Stuart, Florida Oct. 24, 2008 Number: 08-005365 Latest Update: Jun. 02, 2009

The Issue Whether the Petitioners' proposed dealership should be approved.

Findings Of Fact On October 10, 2008, in the Florida Administrative Weekly, Volume 34, Number 41, three separate Notices of Publication for a New Point Franchise Motor Vehicle Dealer in a County of More than 300,000 Population were published. The first notice provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, notice is given that [Galaxy] intends to allow the establishment of [Treasure Coast] as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group Co. Ltd. (SHWI) at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie (St. Lucie County) Florida 34952 on or after September 26, 2008. The second notice provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, notice is given that [Galaxy] intends to allow the establishment of [Treasure Coast] as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ) at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie (St. Lucie County) Florida 34952 on or after September 26, 2008. The third notice provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, notice is given that [Galaxy] intends to allow the establishment of [Treasure Coast] as a dealership for the sale of motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie (St. Lucie County) Florida 34952 on or after September 26, 2008. By letter dated October 16, 2008, Respondent filed the following letter of protest with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles: In regards to the intent of [Galaxy] to establish a Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group LTD (SHWI) with [Treasure Coast] for the sale of motorcycles at 7320 South U.S. 1, Port St. Lucie, Fl [sic] 34952. This letter represents a written complaint to their application for this dealership, because we already represent said dealership. This letter also represents a complaint on the following conditions: The proposed dealership would be within 20 miles of our dealership, as measured by straight line distance. They are 8.61 miles away per mapquest. The proposed dealership is to be located within the contractual area outlined in our dealer agreement, as we have a 20 mile exclusivity. We have made more than 25% of our retail sales to persons whose registered household addresses are within 20 straight line miles of the proposed dealership during the past 12 month period. We have established three out of four of the conditions exist, so we are submitting this complaint protesting the establishment of the above dealership. By letter dated October 22, 2008, the Department referred this matter to DOAH. The letter of referral provided, in relevant part, as follows: Pursuant to the provisions of section 120.57, Florida Statutes, we are enclosing a Complaint and supporting documents pursuant to 320.642, Florida Statutes, filed by Wendy and Mark Mourning, on behalf of the above Respondent, thus requiring a hearing under the term of this statute. [Respondent] is protesting the establishment of [Treasure Coast] for the line-make Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group Co. Ltd. (SHWI) at 7320 South US 1, Port St. Lucie, Florida 34952. The protest filed by Respondent was timely. Respondent's dealership is within 8.61 miles of the proposed site. Mr. Mourning verified the driving distance and presented the measured distance as computed by the website Mapquest. Further, the driving time between the two points is less than 30 minutes. Respondent has dealer agreements to sell various lines of motorcycles, including the following: motorcycles manufactured by Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group Co. Ltd. (SHWI); motorcycles manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ); and motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG). Although Respondent still has a valid dealer agreement as to motorcycles manufactured by Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group Co. Ltd. (SHWI), Respondent has discontinued the sale of those motorcycles. Mr. Mourning testified that Respondent has no objection to permitting Treasure Coast to sell motorcycles manufactured by Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group Co. Ltd. (SHWI). As to motorcycles manufactured by Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ), and motorcycles manufactured by Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG), Respondent has served the area for not less than two years and has successfully promoted those two lines of motorcycles within its territory or community. Respondent established that its sales of those motorcycles are within 12.5 miles of the proposed dealership. Respondent adequately represents Zhejiang Taizhou Wangye Power Co. Ltd. (ZHEJ) and Taizhou Zhongneng Motorcycle Co. Ltd. (ZHNG) in Respondent’s community or territory.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles enter a Final Order authorizing Treasure Coast to sell motorcycles manufactured by Benzhou Vehicle Industry Group Co. Ltd. (SHWI) at Petitioners' proposed dealership. DONE AND ENTERED this 16th day of April, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. CLAUDE B. ARRINGTON 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 16th day of April, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Leo Su Galaxy Powersports, LLC, d/b/a JCL International, LLC 2667 Northhaven Road Dallas, Texas 75229 Mark Mourning and Wendy Mourning WenMark Inc., d/b/a All The Wheel Toys 1540 Northwest Federal Highway Stuart, Florida 34994 Michael James Alderman, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-432 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344 Guy Young J & F South Florida Investments, Inc. d/b/a Treasure Coast Scooters and Things 7320 South US 1 Port St. Lucie, Florida 34952 Electra Theodorides-Bustle, Executive Director Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344 Robin Lotane, General Counsel Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32344

Florida Laws (4) 120.569120.57320.605320.642
# 9
DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES vs RV HAVING FUN YET, INC., 09-005877 (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Jacksonville, Florida Oct. 23, 2009 Number: 09-005877 Latest Update: May 19, 2010

Conclusions This matter came before the Department for entry of a Final Order upon submission of an , Order Closing File by Barbara J. Staros, Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, a copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference in this order. The Department hereby adopts the Order Closing File as its Final Order in this matter. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this case is moss / DONE AND ORDERED this “7, day of May, 2010, in Tallahassee, Leon County, } Florida. CARL A. FORD, Directo: Division of Motor Vehicles Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399 May 20 2010 10:06 08/20/2010 08:55 Fax Boog /o05 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Motor Vehicles this day of May, 2010. Nalini Gneek: Dealer Administrator NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS Judicial review of this order may be had pursuant to section 120.68, Florida Statutes, in the District Court of Appeal for the First District, State of Florida, or in any other district court of appeal of this state in an appellate district where a party resides. In order to initiate such review, one copy of the notice of appeal must be filed with the Department and the other copy of the notice of appeal, together with the filing fee, must be filed with the court within thirty days of the filing date of this order as set out above, pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure. Copies furnished: Phillip Orenstein, President RV Having Fun Yet, Inc. 614-1 Pecan Park Road Jacksonville, Florida 32218 James K. Fisher, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building 2900 Apalachee Parkway, Room A308 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Barbara J. Staros Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 Nalini Vinayak Dealer License Administrator Florida Administrative Law Reports Post Office Box 385 Gainesville, Florida 32602

# 10

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