| * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
IN THE MATTER OF: ANILOM MORTGAGE ("Respondent") * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * |
* * * * * * * * * * * |
AMENDED NOTICE OF INTENT |
I. LEGAL AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION
The Banking Commissioner (“Commissioner”) is charged with the administration of Part I of Chapter 668, Sections 36a-485 to 36a-534c, inclusive, of the Connecticut General Statutes, “Mortgage Lenders, Correspondent Lenders, Brokers and Loan Originators”.
Pursuant to the authority granted by Section 36a-17 of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-498f of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Commissioner, through the Consumer Credit Division (“Division”) of the Department of Banking, has investigated the activities of Respondent to determine if it continues to meet the minimum qualifications for licensure under the provisions of the Connecticut General Statutes within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner.
Section 36a-17(a) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes provides that:
The commissioner, in the commissioner’s discretion, may make such public or private investigations or examinations within or outside this state, concerning any person subject to the jurisdiction of the commissioner, as the commissioner deems necessary to carry out the duties of the commissioner.
Section 36a-498f(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:
In addition to any authority provided under this title, the Banking Commissioner shall have the authority to conduct investigations and examinations as follows:
(1) For purposes of . . . license renewal, . . . license revocation or termination, or general or specific inquiry or investigation to determine compliance with sections 36a-485 to 36a-498f, inclusive, 36a-534a and 36a-534b, the commissioner may access, receive and use any books, accounts, records, files, documents, information or evidence including, but not limited to: (A) Criminal, civil and administrative history information; (B) personal history and experience information including independent credit reports obtained from a consumer reporting agency described in Section 603(p) of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 USC 1681a; and (C) any other documents, information or evidence the commissioner deems relevant to the inquiry or investigation regardless of the location, possession, control or custody of such documents, information or evidence.
Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes provide, in pertinent part, that:
(a) The commissioner may . . . revoke or refuse to renew any license issued by the commissioner under any provision of the general statutes by sending a notice to the licensee by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, or by any express delivery carrier that provides a dated delivery receipt. The notice shall be deemed received by the licensee on the earlier of the date of actual receipt or seven days after mailing or sending. Any such notice shall include: (1) A statement of the time, place, and nature of the hearing; (2) a statement of the legal authority and jurisdiction under which the hearing is to be held; (3) a reference to the particular sections of the general statutes . . . involved; (4) a short and plain statement of the matters asserted; and (5) a statement indicating that the licensee may file a written request for a hearing on the matters asserted within fourteen days of receipt of the notice. . . .
(b) If a hearing is requested within the time specified in the notice, the commissioner shall hold a hearing upon the matters asserted in the notice unless the licensee fails to appear at the hearing. After the hearing, the commissioner shall . . . revoke or refuse to renew the license for any reason set forth in the applicable licensing provisions of the general statutes if the commissioner finds sufficient grounds exist for such . . . revocation or refusal to renew. If the licensee does not request a hearing within the time specified in the notice or fails to appear at the hearing, the commissioner shall . . . revoke or refuse to renew the license. No such license shall be . . . revoked except in accordance with the provisions of chapter 54.
Section 4-182 of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:
(b) When a licensee has made timely and sufficient application for the renewal of a license . . . , the existing license shall not expire until the application has been finally determined by the agency . . . .
(c) No revocation, suspension, annulment or withdrawal of any license is lawful unless, prior to the institution of agency proceedings, the agency gave notice by mail to the licensee of facts or conduct which warrant the intended action, and the licensee was given an opportunity to show compliance with all lawful requirements for the retention of the license. . . .
As a result of the investigation, on June 21, 2012, the Commissioner issued a Notice of Intent to Revoke and Refuse to Renew Mortgage Broker License and Notice of Right to Hearing (“Original Notice”). Respondent requested a hearing in response to the Original Notice, and such hearing is presently scheduled for August 30, 2012, at 10 a.m.
Section 36a-1-22 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies provides, in pertinent part that:
The commissioner may amend the notice of hearing at any stage of the contested case prior to the close of evidence. The presiding officer shall provide parties . . . with notice of the amendment and shall provide them with sufficient time to prepare their case in light of the amendment. A party that has requested a hearing on the original notice need not request a hearing on the amended notice and any such hearing shall proceed on the amended notice as if it were the original notice.
II. MATTERS ASSERTED
| 1. |
Respondent is a Connecticut corporation with an office at 9 Mott Avenue, Suite 306, Norwalk, Connecticut. |
| 2. |
Respondent has been licensed as a mortgage broker in Connecticut on the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry (“NMLS”) since 2008. Respondent’s request for renewal of its mortgage broker license for the 2011 licensing period was approved on March 7, 2011. |
| 3. |
In April and May of 2011, the Division posted seven deficiencies to Respondent’s NMLS account requesting certain information necessary to confirm that Respondent was maintaining the required statutory tangible net worth. |
| 4. |
On May 26, 2011, Respondent filed, through NMLS, a required financial statement with the Commissioner for the period ending March 31, 2011.
|
| 5. |
On November 15, 2011, NMLS posted an automated deficiency for Respondent’s failure to have filed its third quarter standard mortgage call report. |
| 6. |
On December 20, 2011, Respondent requested renewal of its license to act as a mortgage broker in Connecticut under Part I of Chapter 668, Sections 36a-485 to 36a-534c, inclusive, of the Connecticut General Statutes on NMLS for the 2012 licensing period (“2012 licensing period”). |
| 7. |
As of January 9, 2012, Respondent had not provided all of the information requested in the deficiencies, as more fully described in paragraph 3 above, relating to its financial statement and maintenance of the required statutory tangible net worth, and Respondent had not filed the third quarter mortgage call report, as more fully described in paragraph 5 above, and accordingly, Respondent’s renewal request was placed “on hold”. |
| 8. | On January 23, 2012, Respondent filed a financial statement with the Commissioner, through NMLS, for the period ending November 30, 2011. |
| 9. | On January 25, 2012, in response to Respondent’s filing described in paragraph 8 above, the Commissioner, through the Division, posted five deficiencies to Respondent’s NMLS account requesting certain information necessary to confirm that Respondent was maintaining the required statutory tangible net worth. |
| 10. | On February 15, 2012, NMLS posted an automated deficiency for Respondent’s failure to have filed its fourth quarter standard mortgage call report. |
| 11. | On February 16, 2012, pursuant to Section 4-182(c) of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Division sent a letter to Respondent’s designated contact employee at Respondent’s designated mailing address giving Respondent an opportunity to show compliance with all lawful requirements for retention of its mortgage broker license in Connecticut (“Compliance Letter”). The Compliance Letter required Respondent to respond to the requests for supplemental documentation regarding its submitted financial statements, to file outstanding mortgage call reports, and to provide a written response no later than March 2, 2012. |
| 12. | As of March 2, 2012, Respondent had not filed a written response to or provided any of the information requested in the Compliance Letter. |
| 13. | On March 5, 2012, the Compliance Letter was returned to the Department marked “Return to Sender – Unclaimed – Unable to Forward.” |
| 14. | On March 13, 2012, a copy of the Compliance Letter was sent via first class mail to a post office box address provided by Respondent via telephone. |
| 15. | On March 31, 2012, NMLS posted an automated deficiency for Respondent’s failure to have filed the financial condition section of the standard mortgage call report for 2011. |
| 16. | On April 26, 2012, pursuant to Section 4-182(c) of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Division sent a letter to Respondent’s designated contact employee at Respondent’s designated mailing address, and sent a copy of the Compliance Letter to Respondent’s designated contact employee at the post office box address Respondent had provided via telephone, as described in paragraph 14 above, giving Respondent an opportunity to show compliance with all lawful requirements for retention of its mortgage broker license in Connecticut (“Second Compliance Letter”). The Second Compliance Letter required Respondent to file the financial condition section of the standard mortgage call report for 2011 no later than May 4, 2012. |
| 17. | On May 17, 2012, the Second Compliance Letter sent to the post office box address was returned to the Division marked “Return to Sender – Unclaimed – Unable to Forward”. On May 22, 2012, the Second Compliance Letter sent to the designated mailing address was returned to the Division marked “Returned to Sender – Unclaimed”. |
| 18. | As of May 4, 2012, Respondent had not filed any information in response to the Second Compliance Letter. |
| 19. | On May 9, 2012, Respondent amended the designated mailing address for the licensed office to reflect the post office box address referenced in paragraph 14 above. |
| 20. |
On June 20, 2012, Respondent amended its licensed office address and its designated mailing address to 9 Mott Avenue, Suite 306, Norwalk, Connecticut. |
| 21. |
To date, Respondent has failed to file the information required by either the Compliance Letter or the Second Compliance Letter.
|
III. STATUTORY BASIS FOR REVOCATION AND REFUSAL
TO RENEW MORTGAGE BROKER LICENSE
Section 36a-494(a)(1) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:
The commissioner may . . . revoke or refuse to renew any . . . mortgage broker license or take any other action, in accordance with the provisions of section 36a-51, for any reason which would be sufficient grounds for the commissioner to deny an application for such license under sections 36a-485 to 36a-498f, inclusive, 36a-534a and 36a-534b, or if the commissioner finds that the licensee . . . has done any of the following: . . . (C) violated any of the provisions of this title . . . .
Section 36a-489(a)(2) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:
(A) The minimum standards for license renewal for a . . . mortgage broker shall include the following: (i) The applicant continues to meet the minimum standards under subdivision (1) of this subsection . . . .
(B) The license of a . . . mortgage broker failing to satisfy the minimum standards for license renewal shall expire. . . .
Section 36a-489(a)(1) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:
The commissioner shall not issue an initial license for a . . . mortgage broker unless the commissioner, at a minimum, finds that: (A) The applicant meets the requirements of subsection (a) of section 36a-488 . . . .
Section 36a-488 of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:
(a)(1) The commissioner shall not issue a . . . mortgage broker license to any person unless such person meets the following tangible net worth . . . requirements, as applicable: (A) . . . the minimum tangible net worth requirement for . . . a mortgage broker shall be . . . (ii) on and after March 2, 2009, fifty thousand dollars . . . .
(2) Each licensee shall maintain the net worth required by this subsection.
(b) . . . On and after July 1, 2008, an application for a license as a . . . mortgage broker office or renewal of such license shall be filed, in a form prescribed by the commissioner, with the system. . . . The following supplementary information shall be filed directly with the commissioner: . . . (3) such other information pertaining to the applicant, . . . as the commissioner may require. . . .
Section 36a-534b(c)(3) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:
Any person making any filing or submission of any information on the system shall do so in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the system . . . . Each . . . mortgage broker . . . shall submit to the system reports of condition that shall be in such form and shall contain such information as the system may require.
| 1. |
As set forth in paragraphs 1 through 4, inclusive, 6 through 9, inclusive, and 11 through 21, inclusive, of the Matters Asserted, Respondent has failed to maintain the statutory tangible net worth requirement, which constitutes a violation of Section 36a-488(a)(2) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes, which constitutes sufficient grounds to revoke or refuse to renew Respondent’s license to act as a mortgage broker in Connecticut for the 2012 licensing period under Section 36a-494(a)(1)(C) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes. |
| 2. |
As set forth in paragraphs 1 through 4, inclusive, 6 through 9, inclusive, and 11 through 21, inclusive, of the Matters Asserted, the failure of Respondent to establish that it has the minimum tangible net worth would constitute sufficient grounds to deny a mortgage broker license under Sections 36a-489(a)(1) and 36a-488(a)(1) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes, which constitutes sufficient grounds to revoke or refuse to renew Respondent’s license to act as a mortgage broker in Connecticut for the 2012 licensing period under Section 36a-494(a)(1) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes. Such failure by Respondent also constitutes sufficient grounds to refuse to renew Respondent’s mortgage broker license under Section 36a-489(a)(2)(A) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes, which would cause such license to expire pursuant to Section 36a-489(a)(2)(B) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes. |
| 3. |
As set forth in paragraphs 1, 2, 5 through 7, inclusive, and 10 through 21, inclusive, of the Matters Asserted, Respondent’s failure to timely file its third and fourth quarter mortgage call reports for 2011 and its failure to file the financial condition section of the standard mortgage call report for 2011, each constitute violations of Section 36a-534b(c)(3) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes. Such violations constitute sufficient grounds to revoke or refuse to renew Respondent’s mortgage broker license in Connecticut for the 2012 licensing period under Section 36a-494(a)(1)(C) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes. |
IV. NOTICE OF INTENT TO REVOKE AND
REFUSE TO RENEW MORTGAGE BROKER LICENSE
WHEREAS, Respondent’s conduct constitutes sufficient grounds for the Commissioner to revoke or refuse to renew Respondent’s license to act as a mortgage broker in Connecticut for the 2012 licensing period under Sections 36a-494(a)(1), 36a-494(a)(1)(C) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes, and causes the Commissioner to be unable to find that Respondent meets the minimum standards for renewal under Section 36a-489(a)(2)(A) of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes.
NOW THEREFORE, notice is hereby given to Respondent that the Commissioner intends to REVOKE and REFUSE TO RENEW Respondent’s license to act as a mortgage broker in Connecticut pursuant to Sections 36a-494(a)(1), 36a-494(a)(1)(C) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2012 Supplement to the General Statutes, and such license shall be deemed EXPIRED subject to Respondent’s right to a hearing on the allegations set forth above.
Issued at Hartford, Connecticut
this 6th of August 2012. ________/s/_________
Howard F. Pitkin
Banking Commissioner
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that on this 6th day of August 2012, the foregoing Amended Notice of Intent to Revoke and Refuse to Renew Mortgage Broker License was sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to: Anilom Mortgage Corporation, Attention: Samuel Molina, President, 9 Mott Avenue, Suite 306, Norwalk, Connecticut 06850, certified mail no. 70110470000225728949.
________/s/_________
Stacey Valerio
Prosecuting Attorney