WHEREAS, 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”;

WHEREAS, Fairfield Mortgage was a Delaware corporation that was licensed as a mortgage lender under Part I of Chapter 668, Sections 36a-485 et seq. of the Connecticut General Statutes;

WHEREAS, the Commissioner, through the Consumer Credit Division of the Department of Banking, conducted an investigation pursuant to Section 36a-17 of the Connecticut General Statutes of the renewal application and the activities of Fairfield Mortgage to determine if it met the minimum standards for renewal of its mortgage lender license for the 2010 licensing period and to determine if Fairfield Mortgage had violated, was violating or was about to violate the provisions of the Connecticut General Statutes within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner;

WHEREAS, on October 22, 2010, the Commissioner, acting pursuant to Sections 36a-494(a)(1) and 36a-489(a)(1)(C) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes, issued a Notice of Intent to Refuse to Renew Mortgage Lender License and Notice of Right to Hearing against Fairfield Mortgage (“Notice”);

WHEREAS, the Notice alleged that Fairfield Mortgage failed to pay the application fee required by Section 36a-491(a)(1) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes in connection with its mortgage lender license renewal application for the January 1 through December 31, 2010, licensing period, which constitutes a failure to meet the minimum standards for renewal set forth in Section 36a-489(a)(2)(A)(iii) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes.  Such failure to meet minimum standards constitutes sufficient grounds for the Commissioner to refuse to renew Fairfield Mortgage’s license to engage in the business of a mortgage lender in Connecticut from 110 Prospect Street, Stamford, Connecticut (“Stamford Office”), pursuant to Section 36a-494(a)(1) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes;

WHEREAS, the Notice also alleged that Fairfield Mortgage submitted repeated payments to the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System (“NMLS”) for the 2010 licensing period that were returned for insufficient funds, and also had a historical pattern of submitting other payments to the Department that were returned for insufficient funds.  Coupled with the failure to pay the 2010 renewal application fee, the Notice alleged that these allegations together caused Fairfield Mortgage to fail to demonstrate that Fairfield Mortgage’s character and general fitness will “command the confidence of the community and to warrant a determination that the applicant will operate honestly, fairly and efficiently within the purposes of sections 36a-485 to 36a-498f, inclusive, 36a-534a and 36a-534b”, which would be sufficient grounds for the Commissioner to deny an application for a mortgage lender license under Section 36a-489(a)(1)(C) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes, and constitutes an additional ground for the Commissioner to refuse to renew Fairfield Mortgage’s license to engage in the business of a mortgage lender in Connecticut from the Stamford Office pursuant to Section 36a-494(a)(1) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes;

WHEREAS, on November 2, 2010, the Commissioner, acting pursuant to Sections 36a-494(a)(1) and 36a-489(a)(1)(C) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-1-22 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies, issued an Amended and Restated Notice of Intent to Refuse to Renew Mortgage Lender License and Notice of Right to Hearing (“Amended Notice”) against Fairfield Mortgage solely to correct a technical error, which Amended Notice is incorporated herein by reference;

WHEREAS, on November 20, 2010, Fairfield Mortgage received the Notice and the Amended Notice;

WHEREAS, on December 9, 2010, Fairfield Mortgage requested a hearing relating to the Amended Notice, which hearing is presently scheduled for June 14, 2011;

WHEREAS, as a result of such investigation, the Commissioner further alleges that:  (1) Fairfield Mortgage’s designated qualified individual did not complete the required education and testing in violation of Section 36a-488(a)(3) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes; (2) Fairfield Mortgage did not file a bond that complies with Section 36a-492 of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes; (3) Fairfield Mortgage did not maintain the required net worth required by Section 36a-488(a) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes nor make prompt disclosure of a decrease in the net worth in violation of Section 36a-490(c)(9) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes; and (4) Fairfield Mortgage’s “no” answer to a disclosure question on the MU1 Form on NMLS regarding the presence of any unsatisfied judgments and liens was false or misleading in a material respect in violation of Section 36a-53a of the Connecticut General Statutes, and constituted a material misstatement in Fairfield Mortgage’s renewal application;

WHEREAS, the above allegations would have supported initiation of further proceedings against Fairfield Mortgage, including, proceedings to issue a cease and desist order against Fairfield Mortgage pursuant to Sections 36a-494(b) and 36a-52(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes, and to impose a civil penalty of up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) per violation on Fairfield Mortgage pursuant to Sections 36a-494(b) and 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes;

WHEREAS, such additional enforcement proceedings would have constituted a “contested case” within the meaning of Section 4-166(2) of the Connecticut General Statutes;

WHEREAS, Section 4-177(c) of the Connecticut General Statutes and Section 36a-1-55(a) of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies provide that a contested case may be resolved by consent order, unless precluded by law;

WHEREAS, Fairfield Mortgage’s license expired on December 31, 2010, and Fairfield Mortgage is not currently authorized to do business as a mortgage lender in Connecticut;

WHEREAS, Fairfield Mortgage is no longer in business and, on March 1, 2010, was declared involuntarily dissolved;

WHEREAS, Mr. John D. Wilson (“Wilson”) was the former Senior Vice President of Fairfield;

WHEREAS, Wilson represents that he was the only individual solely responsible for the day-to-day operations of Fairfield Mortgage during all times pertinent to the matters alleged in the Amended Notice and contained herein;

WHEREAS, Wilson acknowledges that Fairfield Mortgage, despite its dissolution, still advertises on the Internet;

WHEREAS, Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, admits that Fairfield Mortgage engaged in the alleged activities contained in the Amended Notice and herein, and desires, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, to voluntarily enter into this Consent Order to resolve such allegations;

WHEREAS, both the Commissioner and Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, acknowledge the possible consequences of formal administrative proceedings, and Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, voluntarily agrees to consent to the entry of the sanctions described below for the purpose of obviating the need for further formal administrative proceedings concerning the allegations contained in the Amended Notice and set forth herein;

WHEREAS, Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, acknowledges that this Consent Order is a public record and constitutes a finding by the Commissioner that Fairfield Mortgage has been involved in a violation of a financial services-related regulation or statute, and constitutes an order imposing sanctions against both Fairfield Mortgage and Wilson, individually on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, required to be disclosed in response to regulatory disclosure questions on the MU1 Form, MU2 Form or MU4 Form on the Nationwide Mortgage Licensing System and Registry (“NMLS”), as such forms are applicable;

WHEREAS, Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, represents that since January 1, 2009 to the present, Fairfield Mortgage has not engaged in the business of making residential mortgage loans, and that neither he nor any other individual employed or retained by Fairfield Mortgage has originated any residential mortgage loan in this state;

WHEREAS, Wilson has submitted evidence demonstrating economic hardship, such that the Commissioner believes that Wilson is incapable of paying any civil penalty on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage that otherwise would have been assessed against Fairfield Mortgage pursuant to the Amended Notice;

WHEREAS, the Commissioner has determined that no civil penalty will be imposed on Wilson on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, based on such economic hardship;

WHEREAS, Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, agrees that the Amended Notice may be used in construing the terms of this Consent Order, and agrees to the language in this Consent Order;

AND WHEREAS, Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, through his execution of this Consent Order, voluntarily agrees to waive any procedural rights, including but not limited to, a hearing on the allegations set forth in the Amended Notice and a right to notice and opportunity for hearing as it pertains to the additional allegations set forth herein, and voluntarily waives any right to seek judicial review or otherwise challenge or contest the validity of this Consent Order.

CONSENT TO ENTRY OF SANCTIONS

WHEREAS, Wilson, on behalf of Fairfield Mortgage, through execution of this Consent Order, consents to the Commissioner’s entry of a Consent Order imposing the following sanctions:

CONSENT ORDER

NOW THEREFORE, the Commissioner enters the following:

Dated at Hartford, Connecticut
this 13th day of June 2011.                 ________/s/_________
                                                     Howard F. Pitkin
                                                     Banking Commissioner

I, John D. Wilson, state that I have read the foregoing Consent Order; that I know and fully understand its contents; that I agree freely and without threat or coercion of any kind to comply with the sanction entered and the terms and conditions ordered herein; and that I voluntarily agree to enter into this Consent Order, expressly waiving the procedural rights set forth herein as to the matters described herein.                                           

                                            By:  ________/s/_________
                                                   John D. Wilson
                                                   
                                                   

State of:  Connecticut

County of:  Fairfield

On this the 8 day of June 2011, before me, Ourania Perdikis, the undersigned officer, personally appeared John D. Wilson, known to me (or satisfactorily proven) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged that he executed the same for the purposes therein contained.

In witness whereof I hereunto set my hand.

Administrative Orders and Settlements