The Issue Whether the Department of Financial Services should issue Petitioner, Alejandro Javier Friguls (“Petitioner”), a license as a resident personal lines insurance agent.
Findings Of Fact On September 11, 2015, the Department received an application from Petitioner seeking a license as a resident personal lines insurance agent. A personal lines insurance agent is an insurance agent who transacts business related to property insurance and casualty insurance sold to individuals and families for noncommercial purposes. See § 626.015(5) and (15), Fla. Stat. The Department has jurisdiction over licensing procedures for personal lines agents in the State of Florida. See § 626.016(1), Fla. Stat. On November 23, 2015, pursuant to its statutory responsibility, the Department issued a Notice of Denial notifying Petitioner of its intent to deny his application.2/ The Department denied Petitioner’s application based on his criminal history record. On January 19, 2012, in Seminole County Circuit Court, Petitioner pled nolo contendere to one charge of possession of Oxycodone, a third-degree felony under section 893.13(6)(a), Florida Statutes. The court accepted Petitioner’s plea but withheld adjudication of guilt for the crime. (The Notice of Denial states that Petitioner was “adjudicated guilty” of the felony. The Department conceded at the final hearing that this allegation in the Notice of Denial was incorrect and that Petitioner’s adjudication of guilt was withheld.) The court placed Petitioner on probation for one year. The court notified Petitioner that if he violated the terms of his probation, the court could revoke his probation and adjudicate him guilty. Petitioner served his probation without incident. He completed his probation on January 18, 2013. After receiving Petitioner’s application on November 12, 2015, the Department completed a form entitled Effect of Criminal History Record Worksheet (“Worksheet”). On this Worksheet, the Department classified Petitioner’s crime as a third-degree felony. Thereafter, citing to section 626.207, Florida Statutes, the Department determined that Petitioner’s felony subjected him to a 7-year disqualifying period from applying for a license. The Worksheet also recorded that the Department calculated that Petitioner would not become eligible to apply for an insurance license until January 18, 2021.3/ Based on the competent substantial evidence received in the record, Petitioner proved, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Department should not have denied his application as a personal lines insurance agent.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Financial Services enter a final order rescinding the Notice of Denial issued to Petitioner on November 23, 2015, and grant Petitioner’s application for licensure as a resident personal lines insurance agent. DONE AND ENTERED this 1st day of June, 2016, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S J. BRUCE CULPEPPER 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 1st day of June, 2016.
The Issue Whether the Petitioner's application for licensure as a resident customer representative insurance agent should be approved.
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner is an applicant seeking to be licensed as a resident customer representative insurance agent. The Respondent is the state agency charged with the responsibility of reviewing and issuing licenses governed by Chapter 626, Florida Statutes. On or about May 29, 2003, the Petitioner filed an internet application that required responses to questions regarding the Petitioner's fitness to be licensed. Among the screening questions listed on the application was the following inquiry: Have you ever been charged, convicted, found guilty, or pled guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) to a crime under the laws of any municipality, county, state, territory or country, whether or not adjudication was withheld or a judgment of conviction was entered? The options to the question noted above required the Petitioner to choose "Y" for affirmative or "N" for a negative response. The Petitioner selected "N." Thus, the Petitioner represented to the Respondent that she had not ever been charged, convicted, found guilty, or pled guilty to a crime. In fact, the Petitioner was charged with a crime and did enter a plea to a crime. On May 25, 1984, the Petitioner filed a Plea Agreement wherein she agreed to plead guilty to the offense of unlawful use of a communication facility. Judge Orrick in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, then accepted the plea and found the Petitioner guilty of a violation of 21 U.S.C. Section 843(b). The Petitioner was placed on probation for a period of three years. With regard to the instant case, the Petitioner admitted she failed to disclose the conviction. The Petitioner maintained her grandchildren distracted her when she was completing the form and checked the wrong response by mistake. The Petitioner did not review the error and advise the Department of the erroneous entry. Additionally, the Petitioner claimed that she did not realize the screening question related to activities in all jurisdictions and thought it meant only criminal conduct in the State of Florida. Again, the Petitioner did not seek any clarification as to the question's meaning prior to submitting an incorrect answer. Moreover, it is determined that the question is unambiguously stated to include jurisdictions beyond the State of Florida. The Petitioner believes that because she was able to successfully achieve citizenship after the criminal incident noted above she should similarly be favorably considered for the instant license. There is no evidence that supports a conclusion that the naturalization and immigration regulations for citizenship comport with the Florida laws regulating the licensure of insurance agents. Moreover, the Petitioner acknowledged that she disclosed the criminal history on her application for citizenship. The omission of pertinent facts regarding her criminal history was therefore not an issue in whether or not she should achieve citizen status.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Financial Services enter a Final Order denying the Petitioner's application for licensure. DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of April 2004, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ___________________________________ 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 27th day of April 2004. COPIES FURNISHED: Honorable Tom Gallagher Chief Financial Officer Department of Financial Services The Capitol, Plaza Level 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Mark Casteel, General Counsel Department of Financial Services The Capitol, Plaza Level 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Ladasiah Jackson, Esquire Department of Financial Services 612 Larson Building 200 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0333 Nora Delgadillo 11432 Southwest 75th Terrace Miami, Florida 33173
The Issue The issue in this proceeding is whether Petitioner, Daniel James Bradley's, application for licensure as a resident life including variable annuity and health insurance agent should be denied for the reasons stated in Respondent, Department of Financial Services', Notice of Denial dated April 26, 2004.
Findings Of Fact Respondent is the state agency responsible for the licensure of insurance agents in the State of Florida pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 626, Florida Statutes (2004). On January 3, 2004, Mr. Bradley filed an on-line application with the Department seeking licensure as a resident life including variable annuity and health insurance agent. The on-line application form included the following question: Have you ever been convicted, found guilty, or pled guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) to a crime punishable by imprisonment of one (1) year or more under the laws of any municipality, county, state, territory or country, whether or not adjudication was withheld or a judgment of conviction was entered?. Mr. Bradley answered "No," which was a false answer. The Department conducted an internal investigation during the application process, and the criminal history check obtained by the Department revealed that in 1995 Mr. Bradley was charged with two counts of Obtaining Property for Worthless Check(s) (one check in an amount over $150 and one check in an amount less than $150). On May 31, 1995, in State of Florida v. Daniel J. Bradley, Case No. 94-2473F, in the Circuit Court in and for Sarasota County, Florida, Mr. Bradley appeared before Judge Robert B. Bennett and entered a plea of nolo contendere to the charge of Obtaining Property For a Worthless Check (over $150), which is a third degree felony in violation of Subsection 832.05(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1995). Judge Bennett withheld adjudication of guilt and imposed a fine and court cost in the amount of $250 that was paid by Mr. Bradley. Mr. Bradley testified that during the 1995 period, he was in the midst of a domestic dispute that was finalized in a dissolution of marriage, when he wrote two checks to Sears. He explained further that at the time the checks were written, sufficient funds were in the joint checking account at the bank, but his then-estranged wife withdrew all bank funds without his knowledge or consent resulting in the overdrafts. Explaining his "no" response to the criminal history question on his on-line licensure application form, Mr. Bradley asserted a lack of fully understanding the (intended) meaning of the term "punishable by imprisonment of one (1) year or more." Mr. Bradley testified that he "did not know, and had no reason to know, [or be concerned] that the worthless check charge to which he pled nolo contendere was punishable by imprisonment of one year or more," even though he knew the crime was a third- degree felony. Continuing, Mr. Bradley explained in detail his ongoing domestic entanglement then, as well as his financial obligations now. Mr. Bradley explained that he has undertaken the obligation to care for his parent(s) and his need for income to pay for his children's education. In effect, Mr. Bradley offered an "excusable neglect and a lack of knowledge" explanation for the "no" answer on his on-line licensure application form. Mr. Bradley earnestly insisted that it was not his "intent" to mislead, conceal, or lie about the criminal background question. He explained in detail that he "did not understand nor was he advised by his attorney, Susan Maulucci, or the Sarasota County Circuit Court that any offense that he had been accused or pled guilty to was punishable by a term of incarceration of one or more years." In conclusion, Mr. Bradley stated, "[I]f I had previous knowledge of such information I would never have answered incorrectly. If the question had addressed a felony charge punishable by one or more years, I would have certainly answered yes based on the assumption of a felony being the subject of the question not the period of punishment." It appears from his post-hearing submittal that he was under the impression that the term "felony" is missing from the question and that by the omission, he was somehow misled. The blame-shifting inference Mr. Bradley sought is that it was the omission by the Department to include the word "felony" in its application form that misled him. This suggestion is rejected. Mr. Bradley's explanation becomes even more suspect when one considers: his knowledge and experience as a military police officer; at the time he signed the plea document, it was clear that he was facing up to five years in prison for the crime(s) with which he was charged; when arrested on both misdemeanor and felony check charges, he spent the night in jail; and finally, he signed two bonds, one for the misdemeanor charge and a separate bond for the felony charge before he was released from jail. Mr. Bradley was individually and personally responsible for the accuracy of his answer. His misrepresentation of the truth by answering "no," if not intentional, supports the inference of a reckless or careless disregard as to the truth of the matter asserted. At the time he answered "no" on his application form, Mr. Bradley knew, without a doubt, that he had pled "no contest" to a felony worthless check charge in the Sarasota County Circuit Court in Florida. During his court appearance, he was identified and was personally informed by the presiding judge that he faced a felony charge, and he agreed to enter his plea of nolo contendere to that felony charge. On May 31, 1995, in open court, Mr. Bradley signed an "Acknowledgement and Waiver of Rights" form that contained in paragraph 1, the following statement: "I am pleading to the charge of worthless check (2 counts), and I understand the maximum penalty provided by law is five (5) years prison." (Emphasis added.) After the court accepted his plea, sentenced him, and imposed court costs, Mr. Bradley signed the court's acknowledgement reflecting the disposition of the proceeding. Only after completion of the foregone process was Mr. Bradley free to leave the courtroom.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Financial Services enter a final order dismissing the Petition herein filed by Petitioner, without prejudice, for Petitioner to reapply as provided in the Florida Administrative Code Rule 69B-211.042(4). DONE AND ENTERED this 31st day of August, 2004, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S FRED L. BUCKINE 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 31st day of August, 2004.
Findings Of Fact On or about September 24, 1982, the Petitioner, Donald Ray Shelton, submitted his application to the Department of Insurance in order to become licensed as an Ordinary Life including Disability agent in the State of Florida. On January 21, 1983, the Department of Insurance, by letter, notified Petitioner that his application for examination and licensure as an Ordinary Life including Disability agent had been denied. That letter, in summarizing the grounds for denial, stated: The reason for the denial is because on your application for license you failed to note that you had been charged with a felony, your record of issuing worth- less checks and your record of traffic offenses. Additionally, on a previous application for license processed by the Department of Insurance for examination, you gave false information, i.e., social security number, birthplace, residence address, employment history and license history as insurance agent. One of the grounds for denial related to an application filed with the Department by American Republic Insurance Company in March, 1981. (See Respondent's Exhibit 1.) The social security number, birthplace, residence address, employment history, and license history as an insurance agent were all false. This information had been entered on the application by the Petitioner during a job interview with American Republic. The petitioner signed the application but did not sign in the presence of a notary. Petitioner also signed an additional application form titled Application for State and County License as Life/Disability Agent. (See Joint Exhibit No. 2.) This form did not require a notary. The interview with American Republic had been arranged by a close friend and the Petitioner gave the false information in order to not appear disinterested. He, however, did not want his friends, relatives, and business associates being bothered by a background investigation for a job he was not going to accept. The Petitioner had not intended for the March, 1981, application to be filed with the Department of Insurance, because he had no intention of going to work for American Republic. He learned that the application had been filed when he received notification that he had been approved for taking the examination. He did not take the examination. He did not notify the Department of Insurance that the application was filed without his knowledge or authorization. In October, 1982, Petitioner sent a letter of explanation to the Department after inquiry was made about the March, 1981, application in connection with the processing of the current application. (See Petitioner's Exhibit No. 1.) Another ground for denial by the Department was the Petitioner's failure to disclose he had been arrested for a felony, auto theft. Petitioner unequivocally denied ever having been arrested or charged with auto theft or any other felony. The evidence offered by the Department did not establish that the Petitioner had ever been arrested for larceny of an auto or that larceny of an auto as set forth in the Index to Criminal Records (Respondent's Exhibit 3) was a felony. petitioner did not fail to disclose an arrest for or charge of larceny of an auto. The application form does not ask for nor provide a space for the disclosure of traffic, bad check offenses, or other non-felony offenses. On October 29, 1980, the Petitioner pled guilty and was found guilty of the crime of worthless checks. The offense arose out of a check written to the Army Store on June 8, 1980, in the amount of $149.46, and returned due to the account being closed. The check was signed by Petitioner and was check number 126. The face of the check reveals that the account was in the name of "Donald R. Shelton" and "Vickie Shelton". Petitioner was sentenced to six months imprisonment which was suspended for two years, two years probation, and payment of restitution, and court costs. This conviction occurred in Case Number 80 Cr 4469, 30th District Court, Baywood County, North Carolina. Also, on October 29, 1980, Petitioner pled guilty to six other worthless check charges. Court records reveal the following information with regard to those convictions. Case No. 3205 involved Check No. 107 written to Bilo in the amount of $60.57 on March 1, 1980, and returned not paid because of insufficient funds. Case No. 80 Cr 2639 arose out of Check No. 3 written to Ingles on February 22, 1980, in the amount of $37.49 and returned not paid because of insufficient funds;. This check is a counter check without the name and address of Petitioner and Vickie Shelton printed on it. The check number is written on the check rather than pre-printed. Case No. 80 Cr 4053 arose out of Check No. 108 written on March 4, 1980, to Gas & Groceries in the amount of $21.30 and returned not paid because of insufficient funds. Case No. 80 Cr 4054 involved Check No. 105 written on March 1, 1980, to Gas & Groceries in the amount of $23.60 and returned not paid because of insufficient funds. Case No. 80 Cr 6027 involved Check No. 120 written to Potts Texaco on June 7, 1980, in the amount of $25.50 and returned not paid because of account closed. Case Nos. 80 Cr 2639, 80 Cr 4053, 80 Cr 4054, and 80 Cr 6027 were consolidated and for the conviction in these four cases, Petitioner was sentenced 30 days imprisonment suspended for two years with two years probation and restitution on each check and court costs in each case. This sentence was to begin following completion of the sentence in Case No. 80 Cr 4469 discussed in Paragraph 7 above. In Case No. 3205, Petitioner was sentenced to six months imprisonment, suspended for two years with two years probation and payment of restitution and court costs. All of the checks in these cases were written on the same account. This account was a joint account with Petitioner and his ex-wife as signatures on the account. On January 9, 1981, the Petitioner pled guilty and was convicted of worthless checks. That charge arose out of Check No. 109 written on March 4, 1980, to John Graham's in the amount of $259.98 and returned not paid because of insufficient funds. He was sentenced to pay court costs plus restitution. On February 16, 1981, the Petitioner pled guilty to the crime of worthless checks. The charge involved Check No. 101 written to Sky City on February 28, 1980, in the amount of $33.58 and returned not paid because of insufficient funds. Petitioner was convicted and sentenced to pay court costs plus restitution. On February 25, 1981, after making full restitution, the two year probation was terminated by the Court. Each of the worthless checks discussed above was written in February, March, or June, 1980. During the period August, 1979, to July, 1980, the Petitioner was unemployed. During this period, Petitioner was also going through a hotly contested divorce and checks were being written on the joint account by his now ex-wife without his knowledge. During this time, Petitioner did not make an effort to determine the balance in his checking account. The Petitioner has been convicted of the following traffic offenses: September 24, 1970: Speeding. September 18, 1970: Violation of quiet zone ordinance. September 23, 1971: Expired inspection sticker. October 19, 1972: Driving under the influence. Petitioner was 17, 18, and 19 years old when the offenses occurred. From April, 1977, to August, 1979, the Petitioner was employed by Globe Life Insurance Company in the State of North Carolina. Until August 1, 1979, Petitioner was a licensed Life and Accident and Health Agent in the State of North Carolina. The Petitioner is an agent in good standing with the Department of Insurance of the State of North Carolina. He had no complaints made against him or his license while selling insurance for Globe Life. He was a good, reliable agent while with Globe Life.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Petitioner's application for licensure be granted conditioned upon passing the required examination and payment of the necessary fees. DONE and ENTERED this 15th day of August, 1983, in Tallahassee, Florida. MARVIN E. CHAVIS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 15th day of August, 1983. COPIES FURNISHED: Honorable Bill Gunter Insurance Commissioner and Treasurer The Capitol, Plaza Level Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Donald Ray Shelton Post Office Box 155 Grand Island, Florida 32735 Ruth Gokel, Esquire Department of Insurance 413-B Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
The Issue Whether the Respondent committed the offenses alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated October 1, 2002, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.
Findings Of Fact Based on the oral and documentary evidence presented at the final hearing and on the entire record of this proceeding, the following findings of fact are made: The Department is the state agency charged with the administration of the Insurance Code of the State of Florida, including Chapter 626, Florida Statutes. See Section 20.121, Florida Statutes (2002). At the times material to this proceeding, Mr. Klein was licensed in Florida as an insurance agent for several lines of insurance. Mr. Klein was an authorized agent for Freedom Life. On or about February 6, 2002, the Department received a Termination of Appointment Form from Freedom Life, in which Freedom Life notified the Department that Mr. Klein's appointment as its agent had been terminated. Documentation attached to the form included four applications for health insurance and four checks for premium submitted with the applications. After receiving the Termination of Appointment Form, the Department initiated an investigation into the matter. Applicants Steven and Nancy Schwinn. The first questionable application for health insurance provided to the Department by Freedom Life named Steven and Nancy Schwinn as applicants, carried a signature purporting to be that of Mr. Klein, and was dated November 23, 2001. In the application, Mr. Schwinn's address was listed as Post Office Box 256 in Fort Lauderdale; his employer was identified as M.L.K. Inc. Investments; and Blue Cross/Blue Shield was identified as his current health insurance carrier. The Department's investigation revealed the following: The telephone number given for Steven and Nancy Schwinn is disconnected and neither Bellsouth nor AT&T has any record of having ever assigned a telephone number to Steven and/or Nancy Schwinn. A computer search failed to turn up a telephone number in Florida for Steven and/or Nancy Schwinn. The United States Postal Service reported that Post Office Box 256 in Fort Lauderdale is not assigned to Steven and/or Nancy Schwinn, but is, and has been, assigned to another individual unaffiliated with the transaction at issue herein. A search of property records in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties failed to show any real property listed in the names of Steven and/or Nancy Schwinn. The Social Security Administration reported that the Social Security numbers listed on the application for Steven and Nancy Schwinn are invalid; that is, the Social Security numbers do not exist. The Florida Department of Revenue reported that a search of its records did not reveal any wage information for Steven or Nancy Schwinn under the Social Security numbers provided on the application. Blue Cross/Blue Shield reported that it could find no evidence that it had ever provided health insurance coverage to Steven Schwinn. Applicants Cary and Bonnie Washington. The second questionable application for health insurance provided to the Department by Freedom Life named Cary and Bonnie Washington as applicants, carried a signature purporting to be that of Mr. Klein, and was dated November 23, 2001. In the application, Mr. Washington's address was listed as Post Office Box 256 in Fort Lauderdale; his employer was identified as M.L.K. Investments; and Blue Cross/Blue Shield was identified as his current health insurance carrier. The Department's investigation revealed the following: The telephone number given for Cary and Bonnie Washington is disconnected and neither Bellsouth nor AT&T has any record of having ever assigned a telephone number to Cary and/or Bonnie Washington. A computer search failed to turn up a telephone number in Florida for Cary and/or Bonnie Washington. The United States Postal Service reported that Post Office Box 256 in Fort Lauderdale is not assigned to Cary and/or Bonnie Washington, but was, and has been, assigned to another individual unaffiliated with the transaction at issue herein. A search of property records in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties failed to show any real property listed in the names of Cary and/or Bonnie Washington. The Social Security Administration reported that, although the Social Security numbers listed on the application for Cary and Bonnie Washington are valid, they are not issued to persons named Cary and Bonnie Washington. The Florida Department of Revenue reported that a search of its records did not reveal any wage information for Cary or Bonnie Washington under the Social Security numbers provided on the application. Blue Cross/Blue Shield reported that it could find no evidence that it had ever provided health insurance coverage to Cary Washington. Applicants Robert and Kathy Antetomer. The third questionable application for health insurance provided to the Department by Freedom Life named Robert and Kathy Antetomer as applicants, carried a signature purporting to be that of Mr. Klein, and was dated November 23, 2001. In the application, Mr. Antetomer's address was listed as Post Office Box 256 in Fort Lauderdale; his employer was identified as M.L.K. Investments; and Blue Cross/Blue Shield was identified as his current health insurance carrier. The Department's investigation revealed the following: The telephone number given for Robert and Kathy Antetomer is disconnected and neither Bellsouth nor AT&T has any record of having ever assigned a telephone number to Robert and/or Kathy Antetomer. A computer search failed to turn up a telephone number in Florida for Robert and/or Kathy Antetomer. The United States Postal Service reported that Post Office Box 256 in Fort Lauderdale is not assigned to Robert and/or Kathy Antetomer, but is, and has been, assigned to another individual unaffiliated with the transaction at issue herein. A search of property records in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties failed to show any real property listed in the names of Robert and/or Kathy Antetomer. The Social Security Administration reported that, although the Social Security number listed on the application for Kathy Antetomer is valid, it is not issued to a person named Kathy Antetomer. The Social Security Administration reported that the Social Security number listed on the application for Robert Antetomer is invalid; that is, the Social Security number does not exist. The Florida Department of Revenue reported that a search of its records did not reveal any wage information for Robert or Kathy Antetomer under the Social Security numbers provided on the application. Blue Cross/Blue Shield reported that it could find no evidence that it had ever provided health insurance coverage to Robert Antetomer. Applicants Karen and Paul Holock. The fourth questionable application for health insurance provided to the Department by Freedom Life named Karen and Paul Holock as applicants, carried a signature purporting to be that of Mr. Klein, and was dated November 29, 2001. In the application, Mrs. Holock's address was listed as Post Office Box 431 in Fort Lauderdale; her employer was identified as M.L.K. Investments; and Foundation Health was identified as her current health insurance carrier. The Department's investigation revealed the following: The telephone number given for Karen and Paul Holock is disconnected and neither Bellsouth nor AT&T has any record of having ever assigned a telephone number to Karen and/or Paul Holock. A computer search failed to turn up a telephone number in Florida for Karen and/or Paul Holock. The United States Postal Service reported that Post Office Box 431 in Fort Lauderdale is not assigned to Karen and/or Paul Holock, but is, and has been, assigned to another individual unaffiliated with the transaction at issue herein. A search of property records in Miami-Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties failed to show any real property listed in the names of Karen and/or Paul Holock. The Social Security Administration reported that, although the Social Security numbers listed on the application for Karen and Paul Holock are valid, they are not issued to persons named Karen and Paul Holock. The Florida Department of Revenue reported that a search of its records did not reveal any wage information for Karen or Paul Holock under the Social Security numbers provided on the application. Foundation Health reported that it could find no evidence that it had ever provided health insurance coverage to Karen Holock. According to the records of the Florida Division of Corporations, M.L.K. Inc. was administratively dissolved in September 1997; Mr. Klein is listed as the only director of the corporation. The four checks that accompanied the four health insurance applications were written on an account purportedly belonging to "M.L.K. Inc."; three of the checks were returned to Freedom Life with "Account Closed" stamped on the front; Freedom Life did not submit the fourth check for deposit. Mr. Klein admitted in the letter sent to the Department's counsel on or about April 11, 2003, that he had written "bad checks" for the four policies.4 The evidence presented by the Department is sufficient to establish with the requisite degree of certainty that Mr. Klein is not trustworthy or fit to engage in business as an insurance agent, and he has committed dishonest and fraudulent practices as an agent licensed by the State of Florida and appointed by Freedom Life: Mr. Klein completed and submitted four health insurance applications to Freedom Life when he knew that the persons named as applicants were fictitious and that the information contained in the applications was false; Mr. Klein knowingly and deliberately sent with the applications four checks for the policy premiums that were drawn on a bank account that he knew was closed and contained no funds.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Financial Services enter a final order finding that Matthew Lawrence Klein violated Section 626.611(7) and (9), Florida Statutes (2001), and suspending his license(s) to engage in the business of insurance for a period of 36 months. DONE AND ENTERED this 21st day of May, 2003, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. PATRICIA HART MALONO 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 21st day of May, 2003.
Findings Of Fact Respondent, Edward Willison Carroll, III, is currently eligible for licensure and is licensed in this state as a Credit Life, including Credit Disability Insurance Agent; General Lines - Property, Casualty, Surety and Miscellaneous Lines Agent; General Lines - Motor Vehicle Physical Damage and Mechanical Breakdown Agent; Ordinary Life, including Health Insurance Agent; Health Insurance Agent; and Automobile and Inspection and Warranty Association Salesman. On March 10, 1980, respondent filed a verified application with petitioner for examination as a General Lines Agent (Property, Casualty, and Miscellaneous Lines) . Question number 13 of the application asked the following: Have you ever been charged with or convicted of a felony? If so, complete the following and submit a full and detailed report on a separate sheet. Date Name of Court Address of Court Nature of Charge and Outcome Respondent answered no to this question. On May 28, 1982, respondent filed a verified application with petitioner for examination as an Ordinary Life including Disability Agent. Question number 15 of the application asked the following: Have you ever been charged with or convicted of a felony? If so, complete the following and submit a full and detailed report on a separate sheet. Date Name of Court Address of Court Nature of Charge and Outcome Respondent answered no to this question. Respondent's answers to question 13 on the March 10, 1980, application and question 15 on the March 28, 1982, application were false. On December 11, 1970, the State Attorney for the Second Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida, filed an information with the circuit court which charged that respondent did on December 3, 1970, in Leon County, Florida ... knowingly commit a lewd or lascivious act in the presence of Alice Leigh Divita, a female child under the age of fourteen years, to-wit: of the age of six years, without intent to commit rape upon said child, contrary to Section 800.04, F.S. On March 9, 1971, respondent entered a plea of guilty to the crime of fondling, as charged in the information. The court withheld adjudication of guilty and imposition of sentence, and placed respondent on probation for a period of three years. At hearing, respondent conceded that he had been charged with the aforementioned felony. He averred, however, that his failure to disclose such charge on his applications was not intended to be deceitful but was premised on his belief that he could properly answer no to such inquiries because adjudication of guilty had been withheld. While respondent may reasonably have believed that he could respond in the negative to an inquiry concerning felony convictions, his contention that he held an honest belief that he could also respond in the negative to inquiries about whether the had ever been charged with a felony is not persuasive. But for the foregoing charge, respondent has not been charged or convicted of any other felonies. Nor, has the respondent been shown to have engaged in any improprieties as an insurance agent.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered suspending respondent's licensure and eligibility for licensure for three months. DONE AND ENTERED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 16th day of August, 1988. WILLIAM J. KENDRICK Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 16th day of August, 1988. APPENDIX Petitioner's proposed findings of fact are addressed as follows: 1. Addressed in paragraph 1. 2 & 3. Addressed in paragraph 2. 4 & 5. Addressed in paragraph 3. 6. Addressed in paragraph 5. 7 & 8 Addressed in paragraph 6. 9 & 10. Addressed in paragraphs 7 and 8. 11. Addressed in paragraph 9. 12-14. Rejected as not relevant. COPIES FURNISHED: S. Marc Herskovitz, Esquire Office of Legal Services 413-B Larson Building Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Thomas L. Neilson, Esquire 105 West Fifth Avenue Tallahassee, Florida 32303 The Honorable William Gunter State Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner The Capitol, Plaza Level Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Don Dowdell, Esquire General Counsel The Capitol, Plaza Level Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300
The Issue Whether the Respondent's license as a life insurance agent should be suspended or revoked based on the allegations set forth in the Department's Amended Administrative Complaint.
Findings Of Fact Respondent is currently licensed by the Department as a life insurance agent. On or about January 29, 1987, Respondent was charged with the felony, Misapplication of Funds, in the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in and for the County of Hillsborough, Florida, Case No. 86-10485B. On or about February 12, 1987, Respondent was charged with the felony, Misapplication of Funds, in the Circuit Court of the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit in and for the County of Hillsborough, Florida, Case No. 87-1826B. On or about March 27, 1987, Respondent pled nolo contendre to two counts of Misapplication of Funds, a felony. The court withheld adjudication and placed Respondent on five years' probation for each count, to run concurrently; required Respondent to perform community service; and to pay restitution and court costs. On or about June 1, 1988, Respondent submitted an application to the Department for licensure as a health agent. Question 8 of the application asked, "Have you ever been charged with a felony?" Respondent answered "no" to that question. On or about September 20, 1988, Respondent submitted an application to the Department for licensure as a life insurance agent. Question 8 of the application asked, "Have you ever been charged with a felony?" Respondent answered "no" to that question. On the application dated June 1, 1988, and on the application dated September 20, 1988, Respondent signed and swore to the statement that read: I do solemnly swear that I will not directly or indirectly divide my commissions with any person other than a qualified life and/or health insurance agent, licensed by the State of Florida; that all answers to the foregoing questions are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief; that I will in good faith conduct myself in a manner befitting the insurance profession as set forth in the Code of Ethics; that I have not or will not withhold any information on myself that will in any way affect my qualifications as an insurance agent. (emphasis supplied) On or about August 15, 1991, the court revoked Respondent's probation because of a probation violation and Respondent was convicted of a felony, Misapplication of Funds, in Case Nos. 86-10485 and 87-1826. Respondent was sentenced to three and one-half years in prison followed by community control and probation. Respondent was incarcerated in both county jail and state prison for this felony conviction. Respondent's civil rights have not been restored. On or about May 21, 2000, Respondent completed and submitted an application for a health insurance agent license to the Department as his health agent license apparently had expired. Respondent answered "yes" to questions 3 and 4 on the application which inquired whether the applicant had ever been convicted, found guilty, or pled nolo contendre to a felony or to a crime punishable by imprisonment of one year or more. From November 1998 to March 2000, Respondent resided in Tucson, Arizona. Respondent did not notify the Department of his address change or his move from Florida to Arizona until May of 2000, when he submitted his health agent application.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth herein, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Department of Insurance enter a final order finding that Respondent violated Sections 626.611, 626.621, and 626.551, Florida Statutes, and revoking Respondent's life insurance agent license. DONE AND ENTERED this 10th day of August, 2001, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. Hearings Hearings BARBARA J. STAROS Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative 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 this 10th day of August, 2001.
The Issue Whether the Respondent properly denied the Petitioner's application for licensure as a Resident All Lines Insurance Adjuster for a material misstatement on her application?
Findings Of Fact The Petitioner, Krista Rose Navarro, filed an application with the Respondent for licensure as a Resident Independent All Lines Insurance Adjuster (05-20) by letter dated December 30, 2004. This application was filed on line. As part of that application the Petitioner answered, "no," to the question: Have you ever been convicted, found guilty, or pled guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) to a felony or crime punishable by imprisonment of one (1) year or more under the law of any municipality, county, state, territory or country, whether or not adjudication was withheld or a judgment of conviction was entered? The Respondent conducted a criminal records file check that revealed that the Petitioner had entered a plea to a count of mail fraud in the Federal District Court for the Central District of California in 1986. The records of this proceeding under the seal of the records custodian of the National Archives and Records Administration were introduced as Department's Composite Exhibit 2. Based upon this information, the Respondent determined that (1) the period an applicant would have to wait to be licensed for the offense involved was 15 years, and that this had run; and (2) the Petitioner's failure to disclose the offense resulted in extending the licensure eligibility date until December 30, 2005. Based upon this latter determination, the Respondent denied the Petitioner's application for licensure. The Petitioner testified that the portion of the question that stated, "pled guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) to a felony or crime punishable by imprisonment of one (1) year or more under the law" was confusing to her. She took the question to require reporting an offense for which one was imprisoned for a year or more, and that she had not intentionally failed to reveal the offense. In support of this contention, the Petitioner pointed out that she was currently a licensed real estate broker and held this license for ten years, and had revealed the subject offense and plea on the application for that license. She also introduced a letter from her child's school, the Petitioner's Exhibit 2, which indicated that the Petitioner had shared the information about her plea with the principal of the school as part of the vetting of parental chaperones. The Petitioner passed that vetting process. Although the underlying facts of the offense to which the Petitioner entered the plea are not relevant to the matters under consideration, they show the Petitioner engaged in a telephone marketing ploy in which businesses and offices were called and copier products were offered for sale at current prices before an anticipated price increase. Although not stated, an impression was given that the salesperson was a representative of the supplier usually used by the office being called, and the "price hike" was not factual, but a sales gimmick. The "handling charges" and similar fees in these transactions were very high, although the products were delivered to the purchasers. Such practices are specifically prohibited today, but were not specifically proscribed at the time. The Petitioner was cooperative with authorities when arrested, and is now remorseful about her conduct at the time considering this is an embarrassing epiphany in her life; however, she has fully disclosed the facts as indicated above when she perceived it was necessary. The Petitioner has her own real estate brokerage; has never been the subject of disciplinary action by those licensing authorities; and is a long-time resident of her community. She is married, has two children, and takes part volunteering at her children's school, as indicated above.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law set forth herein, it is RECOMMENDED: That the Department of Financial Services issue the Petitioner as a Resident Independent All Lines Insurance Adjuster. DONE AND ENTERED this 2nd day of June, 2005, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S __ STEPHEN F. DEAN 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 2nd day of June, 2005. COPIES FURNISHED: Krista Rose Navarro 111 Placido Place Panama City Beach, Florida 32413 Dana M. Wiehle, Esquire Department of Financial Services 200 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0333 Honorable Tom Gallagher Chief Financial Officer Department of Financial Services The Capitol, Plaza Level 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Carlos G. Muniz, General Counsel Department of Financial Services The Capitol, Plaza Level 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300
The Issue The issue is whether Respondent properly denied Petitioner's application for a license as a resident independent all-lines insurance adjuster.
Findings Of Fact In June 2002, Petitioner was an 18-year-old high student. Early in the morning of June 1, 2002, Petitioner and two friends entered three unoccupied vehicles and stole several items, including a couple of cell phones. On October 9, 2002, in the Circuit Court in and for Santa Rosa County, Florida, Case No. 02-518, Petitioner entered a guilty plea to two counts of Burglary of an Unoccupied Conveyance, each count being a third-degree felony, and Petit Theft, a second-degree misdemeanor. On October 9, 2002, in the Circuit Court in and for Santa Rosa County, Florida, Case No. 02-720, Petitioner entered a guilty plea to one count of Burglary of an Unoccupied Conveyance, a third-degree felony, and Petit Theft, a second- degree misdemeanor. On November 1, 2002, the circuit court Judge entered an Order Withholding Adjudication of Guilt and Placing Defendant on Probation in Circuit Court Case Nos. 02-518 and 02-720. Petitioner was placed on probation for 18 months for each felony and 12 months for each misdemeanor, to be served concurrently. On or about April 14, 2004, Petitioner successfully completed his probation. From May 7, 2004, until October 5, 2004, Petitioner attended the Pensacola School of Massage Therapy. Petitioner is now a licensed massage therapist. On February 14, 2006, Petitioner completed a class for professional training as an accredited claims adjuster. On February 15, 2006, Petitioner filed an application for a license as a resident independent all-lines insurance adjuster. One question on the application stated as follows: Have you ever been convicted, found guilty, or pled guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) to a felony or crime punishable by imprisonment of one (1) year or more under the laws of any municipality, county, state, territory or country, whether or not adjudication was withheld or a judgment of conviction was entered? Yes/No Petitioner answered the question in the negative based on erroneous information provided to him by someone in his probation office. An attorney subsequently advised Petitioner that he should have answered the question affirmatively. In a letter dated March 23, 2006, Petitioner advised Respondent that he had incorrectly answered the question about his criminal record. Petitioner expressed his regret that he failed to disclose his criminal record on the application. He also requested consideration of his professional accomplishments and clean record since 2002. According to Petitioner, he never intended to make a false or misleading statement when he signed his application, indicating that he did not have a criminal record. By letter dated April 14, 2006, Respondent requested a written explanation, outlining the events which led to each of the arrests/charges. In a letter dated June 15, 2006, Respondent denied Petitioner's application based on his felony convictions and his failure to disclose his criminal record. Despite his poor judgment as a young adult, which resulted in a criminal record, Petitioner has matured into a productive citizen. In addition to massage therapy, Petitioner has two other business interests. He works as an interior contractor and invests in real estate. Additionally, he is married and the father of a child.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: That Respondent enter a final order denying Petitioner's application. DONE AND ENTERED this 11th day of October, 2006, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S SUZANNE F. HOOD 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 11th day of October, 2006. COPIES FURNISHED: William G. Kitchen, Esquire Department of Financial Services Division of Legal Services 200 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0333 Randall Lee Woodall, Sr. 6300 Saragon Lane Milton, Florida 32583 Honorable Tom Gallagher Chief Financial Officer Department of Financial Services The Capitol, Plaza Level 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Carlos G. Muniz, General Counsel Department of Financial Services The Capitol, Plaza 11 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300
The Issue Whether Respondent's licenses as a health insurance agent, a life and health insurance agent, and a life including variable annuity agent should be suspended or revoked based on the allegations set forth in the Department's Administrative Complaint.
Findings Of Fact Respondent Gary L. Koniz (Respondent) is currently licensed by the Department as a health insurance (2-40) agent, a life and health insurance (2-18) agent, and a life including variable annuity (2-14) agent. On August 17, 1988, Respondent plead guilty to operating a vehicle while under the influence of alcohol (DUI), a felony, in the County Court in and for Ulster County, New York, Case No. 88-57. Respondent was sentenced to five years' probation, license revocation, and payment of a fine. On or about September 30, 2000, Respondent submitted an application to the Department for licensure as health agent, a life and health agent, and a life including variable annuity agent, on which he was asked the following two questions: Have you ever been convicted, found guilty, or pleaded guilty or nolo contendere to a felony under the laws of any municipality, county, state, territory, or country, whether or not adjudication was withheld or a judgment of conviction was entered? Have you ever been convicted, found guilty, or pleaded guilty or nolo contendere to a crime punishable by imprisonment of one year or more under the laws of any municipality, county, state, territory, or country, whether or not adjudication was withheld or a judgment of conviction was entered? Respondent answered each of the aforementioned questions, "no." On the application dated September 30, 2000, Respondent signed and swore to the statement that read: Under penalty of perjury, I declare that I have read the foregoing application for licensure, related information and related attachments, and that the facts as stated in it are true. I understand that misrepresentation of any fact required to be disclosed through this application is a violation of the Florida Insurance and Administrative Code and may result in the denial of my application and/or the revocation of my insurance license. Respondent testified at hearing. Respondent made a court appearance at which he entered a plea as part of a plea bargain to a misdemeanor. He did not comply with one of the conditions and the matter was called back up before the court. At this second hearing, the court asked how he plead. Respondent indicated he had already plead. The court took this response as a plea to the DUI felony and imposed the aforementioned penalties. Respondent did not knowingly answer the questions on the application for licensure incorrectly.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Insurance enter a final order finding Respondent Gary L. Koniz guilty of violating Sections 626.611 and 626.621, Florida Statutes, and suspending his licensure as a health insurance agent, a life and health insurance agent, and a life including variable annuity agent for a period of up to 18 months. DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of April, 2002, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STEPHEN F. DEAN 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 23rd day of April, 2002. COPIES FURNISHED: Gary L. Koniz 9480 Princeton Square Boulevard, South Apartment 815 Jacksonville, Florida 32256 Matthew A. Nowels, Esquire Department of Insurance 612 Larson Building 200 East Gaines Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0333 Honorable Tom Gallagher State Treasurer/Insurance Commissioner Department of Insurance The Capitol, Plaza Level 02 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300 Mark Casteel, General Counsel Department of Insurance The Capitol, Lower Level 26 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0307
