|
2-1005-20442-2 |
STATE
OF
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCE
|
In the Matter of Mortgage Originator’s License of Your Mortgage Company |
FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION |
This matter came on before
Administrative Law Judge Raymond R. Krause (“ALJ”) on April 28, 2009, for a
prehearing conference at the Office of Administrative Hearings,
Christopher
M. Kaisershot, Assistant Attorney General,
The Notice and Order for Prehearing Conference and Statement of Charges were sent to the Respondent at the last known address filed with the Department.
STATEMENT OF ISSUE
1. Did
Respondent fail to maintain, at all times, either a net worth, net intangibles
of at least $250,000, or a surety bond or irrevocable letter of credit in the
amount of at least $50,000 in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 58.06, subd. 2(c)(v),
and 58.12, subd. 1(b)(2)(i) (2008)?
2. Did
the Respondent fail to notify the Commissioner of any change in its surety bond
within ten days in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 58.06 subd. 2(b)(2) and
(c)(iii), and 58.12, subd. 1(b)(2)(iii) (2008)?
3. Did the Respondent fail to respond to the
Department’s information request in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 45.027, subd.
7(a)(3), and 58.12, subd. 1(b)(2)(ix) (2008)?
Based upon all of the files, records and proceedings herein, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1.
On March 9, 2009, the Notice and Order for Prehearing
Conference, Statement of Charges, and Notice of Appearance was sent by first
class mail to Your Mortgage Company.
2.
The Respondent failed to appear at the prehearing
conference, did not obtain the ALJ’s prior approval to be absent from the
prehearing conference, did not file a Notice of Appearance, and did not request
a continuance or any other relief.
3.
The Notice and Order for Prehearing Conference contained the
following informational warning:
Respondent’s failure to appear at the prehearing conference, settlement
conference, or the hearing, or failure to comply with any order of the
Administrative Law Judge, may result in a finding that the Respondent is in
default, that the Department’s allegations contained in the Statement of
Charges may be accepted as true, and that Respondent may be subject to
discipline by the Commissioner, including debarment, revocation, suspension,
censure, or the imposition of civil penalties.
4.
Because Respondent failed to appear, it is in default.
5.
Pursuant to Minnesota Rules, part 1400.6000, the allegations
contained in the Notice and Order for Prehearing Conference are taken as true
and incorporated by reference into these Findings of Fact.
Based
upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the Administrative Law Judge makes the
following:
CONCLUSIONS
1.
The Administrative Law Judge and the Commissioner of Labor
and Industry are authorized to consider the charges against Respondent under
Minn. Stat. §§ 326.91, 45.027, subd. 1, 45.024, and 14.50 (2004).
2.
Respondent received due, proper and timely notice of the
charges against it, and of the time and place of the prehearing
conference. This matter is, therefore,
properly before the Commissioner and the Administrative Law Judge.
3.
The Department has complied with all relevant substantive
and procedural legal requirements.
4.
Under Minn. R. 1400.6000, a contested case may be decided
adversely to a party who defaults. On
default, the allegations of and the issues set out in that Notice and Order for
Prehearing Conference or other pleading may be taken as true or deemed proved
without further evidence.
5.
The Respondent is in default herein as a result of its
failure, without the Administrative Law Judge’s prior consent, to appear at the
prehearing conference.
6.
Respondent failed to maintain, at all times, either a net
worth, net intangibles of at least $250,000, or a surety bond or irrevocable
letter of credit in the amount of at least $50,000 in violation of Minn. Stat.
§§ 58.06, subd. 2(c)(v) and 58.12, subd. 1(b)(2)(i) (2008).
7.
Respondent failed to notify the Commissioner of any change
in its surety bond within ten days in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 58.06 subd.
2(b)(2) and (c)(iii), and 58.12, subd. 1(b)(2)(iii) (2008).
8.
Respondent failed to respond to the Department’s information
request, in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 45.027, subd. 7(a)(3), and 58.12, subd.
1(b)(2)(ix) (2008).
9.
Disciplinary action against the Respondent is in the public
interest.
Based upon the foregoing Conclusions, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
IT IS HEREBY
RECOMMENDED: that the Commissioner of the Department of Commerce impose
discipline upon the Respondent.
Dated this 30th day of April, 2009.
|
/s/ Raymond R. Krause |
|
RAYMOND R. KRAUSE |
|
Administrative Law Judge |
Reported: Digitally recorded
This Report is a recommendation, not a final decision. The Commissioner of Commerce will make the final decision after reviewing the record and may adopt, reject or modify these Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Recommendations. Under Minn. Stat. § 14.61, the Commissioner’s decision shall not be made until this Report has been available to the parties to the proceeding for at least ten (10) days. An opportunity must be afforded to each party adversely affected by this Report to file exceptions and present argument to the Commissioner. Parties should contact the Office of the Commissioner, to ascertain the procedure for filing exceptions or presenting argument to the Commissioner.
If the Commissioner fails to issue a final decision within 90 days of the close of the record, this report will constitute the final agency decision under Minn. Stat. § 14.62, subd. 2a. The record closes upon the filing of exceptions to the report and the presentation of argument to the Commissioner, or upon the expiration of the deadline for doing so. The Commissioner must notify the parties and the Administrative Law Judge of the date on which the record closes.
Under Minn. Stat. § 14.62, subd. 1, the agency is required to serve its final decision upon each party and the Administrative Law Judge by first class mail or as otherwise provided by law.