10-004769 Office Of Financial Regulation vs. Isaiah Check Cashing Store, Inc.
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Tuesday, November 23, 2010.


View Dockets  
Summary: The OFR proved that money service business failed to have copies of checks with thumbprints; failed to have copies of checks with its endorsement, and failed to have an electronic payment log in compliance with statute and rule. Recommend a $3,000 fine.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8OFFICE OF FINANCIAL REGULATION , )

13)

14Petitioner, )

16)

17vs. ) Case No. 10 - 4769

24)

25ISAIAH CHECK CASHING STORE, )

30INC., )

32)

33Respondent. )

35_________________________________)

36RECOMMENDED ORDER

38Pursuant to notice, a for mal hearing was held in this case

50on August 30, 2010 , by video teleconference, with the parties

60appearing in Miami, Florida, before Patricia M. Hart, a duly -

71designated Administrative Law Judge of the Division of

79Administrative Hearings, who presided in Tal lahassee, Florida.

87APPEARANCES

88For Petitioner: Diane E. Leeds, Esquire

94Office of Financial Regulation

983111 South Dixie Highway, Suite 302

104West Palm Beach, Florida 33405

109For Res pondent: Frantz Chery, pro se

11619501 Northeast 19th Avenue

120Miami, Florida 33179

123STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

127Whether the Respondent committed the violations alleged in

135the Administrative Complaint for Imposition of Sanctions and

143Notice of Rights ("Administrative Complaint") dated June 10,

1532010, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.

163PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

165On Jun e 10, 2010, the Office of Financial Regulation

175("OFR") issued an Administrative Complaint, in which it charged

186the Is aiah Check Cashing Store, Inc., with several rule and

197statutory violations, which are summarized as follows:

204a. Failure to have in place a n anti - money laundering

216program with policies, procedures, and internal controls

223addressing check cashing activities, in violation of Title 3 1,

233Section 103.125, Code of Fede ral Regulations, and

241Sections 560.114(1)(y) and 560.1235(2), Florida Statutes (2009 ) 1 ;

250b. Failure to maintain a t humbprint of the customer in

26156 of the 163 samples of payment instruments with a face value

273of $1,000.00 or more that were accepted between February 1,

2842009, through April 30, 2009 , in violation of

292Section 560.310(1)(b)2., Fl orida Statutes, and Florida

299Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704(4)(a) ;

305c. Failure to maintain for five years copies of payment

315instruments endorsed with the legal name of Isaiah Check Cashing

325Store at the time the instruments were accepted, in violation of

336Section 560.1105, Florida Statutes, and Florida Admini strative

344Code Rule 69V - 560.704(2 )(a); and

351d. Failure to include in the el ectronic payment instrument

361log the name of the conductor and the amount of currency

372provided for transactions occurring between January 13 , 2009,

380and May 28, 2009, in violation of Section 560.310(1)(c), Florida

390Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V -

398560.704(5)(a).

399Isaiah Check Cashing Store timely requested an

406administrative hearing to resolve disputed issues of material

414fact, and the OFR transmitted the matter to the Division of

425Administrative Hearings for assignment of an administrative law

433judge.

434The final hearing was held on August 30, 2010. The OFR

445presented the testimony of Maykel Rico, and Petitioner's

453Ex hibits A, B, and C were offered and received into evidence.

465Isaiah Check Cashing Store presented the testimony of Frantz

474Chery, Carline Charles , and Colette Cesar Chery ; Respondent's

482Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 were offered and received into evidence.

493The one - vo lume transcript of the proceedings was filed with

505the Division of Administrative Hearings on September 20, 2009,

514and the parties timely filed proposed findings of fact and

524conclusions of law, which have been considered in the

533preparation of this Recommende d Order.

539FINDINGS OF FACT

542Based on the oral and documentary evidence presented at the

552final hearing and on the entire record of this proceeding, the

563following findings of fact are made:

5691. The OFR is the state agency responsible for licensing

579and regula ting money services business es in Florida. See

589§§ 560.105(1) and 560.141(2), Fla. Stat.

5952 . At the times material to this proceeding, Isaiah Check

606Cashing Store was a Florida corporation, with its principal

615place of business located at 5905 Northeast Seco nd Avenue,

625Miami, Florida.

6273 . At the times material to this proceeding, Isaiah Check

638Cashing Store was licensed to engage in the business of cashing

649payment instruments, pursuant to Chapter 560, Part III, Florida

658Statutes.

6594 . The OFR conducted an examina tion of Isaiah Check

670Cashing Store beginning on May 26, 2009 , and concluding on

680May 29, 2009.

6835 . At the Isaiah Check Cashing Store office, t he OFR

695examiner found a hard copy of a Western Union manual that

706contained anti - money laundering policies and procedures related

715to money transmissions and money orders . Upon review, the

725examiner determined that the Western Union Manual did not

734include anti - money laundering policies and procedures related to

744Isaiah Check Cashing Store's check cashing activities.

7516 . Isaiah Check Cashing Store also had available to its

762employees a manual containing anti - money laundering policies and

772procedures specifically relating to check cashing activities .

780Additionally, t he Internal Revenue Service conducted a Bank

789Secrecy Act examination of Isaiah Check Cashing Store's anti -

799money laundering compliance program for the period extending

807from March 1, 2009, through August 31, 2009, and notified Isaiah

818Check Cashing Store in a letter dated January 26, 2010, that

" 829[b] ased on the scope and depth of our examination and the

841evaluation and testing of the implementation of your Anti - Money

852Laundering (AML) compliance program, no violations were

859identified during the examination period." 2 The letter

867specifically referenced the f inancial service of "check casher"

876as one of the activities subject to its examination.

8857 . As part of his examination, the OFR examiner requested

896on May 28, 2009, that Isaiah Check Cashing Store produce copies

907of original thumbprints on all payment instru ments of $ 1,000.00

919or more that it cashed between January 13, 2009, and May 26,

9312009. Out of a total of 163 payment instruments of $1,000.00 or

944more that were cashed by Isaiah Check Cashing Store du ring the

956specified time period , only 107 of the payment i nstrume nts

967produced to the examiner included an original thumbprint.

9758 . With respect to the 56 payment instruments of $1,000.00

987or more that did not contain thumbprints, Frantz Chery, on

997behalf of his wife Col ette Cesar, attested on May 28, 2009, that

1010he had diligent ly search ed all the records maintained by Isaiah

1022Check Cashing Store but was unable to locate copies of the

103356 payment instruments that included an original thumbprint.

1041Isaiah Check Cashing Store did, however, su bsequently locate and

1051produce c opies of five of the 56 payment instruments that did

1063contain original thumbprints , but it failed to produce c opies of

1074the 51 remaining payment instruments . 3

10819 . The OFR examiner reviewed all of the records made

1092available to him by Isaiah Check Cashing Store during the

1102examination and was unable to find copies of any payment

1112instruments that exhibited the endorsement of Isaiah Check

1120Cashing Store. Even though Isai ah Check Cashing Store had a

1131stamp with which to endorse checks that were accepted for

1141payment, Mr. Chery, on behalf of his wife Colette Cesar,

1151attested on May 28, 2009, that he had diligently searched all

1162the records maintained by Isaiah Check Cashing Sto re but was

1173unable to locate copies of the se documents.

118110 . Isaiah Check Cashing Store maintained an electronic

1190payment instrument log for checks of $1,000.00 or more that it

1202cashed between January 13, 2009, and May 28, 2009, but , at the

1214time of the OFR ex amination in May 2009, the log failed to

1227include fields for the name of the conductor, if the check was

1239made payable to a corporation, 4 and for the amount of currency

1251provided to the person cashing the check.

125811 . Isaiah Check Cashing Store relied on a sof tware

1269company to provide the format for the electronic log it

1279maintained. When the software was updated, the company failed

1288to include fields for the conductor and for the amount of

1299currency paid. In the presence of the OFR examiner, Mr. Chery

1310telephoned the software company, which subsequently added the

1318required fields to the electronic log format used by Isaiah

1328Check Cashing Store.

1331Summary

1332A. Violation of Title 31 , Section §103.125 , Code of

1341Federal Regulations and Sections 560.114 (1) (y) and 560.1235(2),

1350Florida Statutes .

135312 . The evidence presented by the OFR is not sufficient to

1365establish that Isaiah Check Cashing Store failed to maintain,

1374review, and update an anti - money laundering compliance program

1384in accordance with T itle 31, Sec tion 103.125, Code of Federal

1396Regulations . T he OFR examiner testified that he did not find a

1409manual governing Isaiah Check Cashing Store's check cashing

1417activities during his examination, but this is not sufficient to

1427establish that Isaiah Check Cashing S tore did not have anti -

1439money laundering policies and procedures in place at the tim e of

1451the examination . Indeed, Isaiah Check Cashing Store presented

1460evidence establishing that , after an examination, the Internal

1468Revenue Service had found that Isaiah Chec k Cashing Store's

1478anti - money laundering policies and procedures were in compliance

1488with the requirements of federal law during the period extending

1498from March 1, 2009, through August 31, 2009 . The policies and

1510procedures that the Internal Revenue Service had approved

1518included those relating to Isaiah Check Cashing Store's check

1527cashing activities.

152913 . On rebuttal, t he OFR examiner testified that the Bank

1541Secrecy Act examination of Isaiah Check Cashing Store conducted

1550by the Internal Revenue Service was "totally different " from the

1560examination conducted by the OFR and that the finding by the

1571Internal Revenue Service that Isaiah Check Cashing Store's anti -

1581money laundering compliance program satisfied federal law was

1589not determinative of whether Isaiah Chec k Cashing Store violated

1599provisions of Florida law. 5 The examiner identified several

1608items required by Florida law that were not required under

1618federal law, such as filing suspicious activity reports; due

1627diligence activities that must be performed by cas hiers when

1637cashing checks of $1,000.00 or more for corporations or third

1648party customers; affixing thumbprints to checks of $1,000.00 or

1658more ; endorsing checks by the money service business at the time

1669they are accepted ; and keepi ng an electronic log of ch ecks of

1682$1,000.00 or more . 6

168814 . Significantly , the violation alleged in the OFR's

1697Administrative Complaint was that Isaiah Check Cashing Store

1705failed "to maintain, review, and update an anti - money laundering

1716program in accordance with 31 C.F.R. s. 103.125 ." This

1726violation did not reference the requirements of Florida law

1735enumerated by the OFR examiner, and t he examiner did not offer a

1748persuasive explanation of the alleged difference between the

1756requirements of the Florida and federal laws governing anti -

1766m oney laundering compliance program s related to check cashing

1776activities .

177815 . In addition, the testimony that the Internal Revenue

1788Service 's examination and the OFR's examination were different

1797begs the question of whether a finding by the Internal Revenue

1808Service that the Isaiah Check Cashing Store's anti - money

1818laundering compliance program satisfied federal requirements is

1825persuasive evidence that the anti - money laundering compl iance

1835program satisfied the requirements of Florida law. The

1843testimony of the OFR examiner was , therefore, not persuasive and

1853did not support the OFR's contention that Isaiah Check Cashing

1863Store did not have in place anti - money laundering policies,

1874proced ures, and internal controls with respect to its check

1884cashing activities.

1886Violations of Sections 560.310(1)(b)2 . and (c) and 560.1105,

1895Florida Statutes, and of Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V -

1905560.704(2)(a), (4)(a), and (5)(a) .

191016 . The evidence prese nted by the OFR is sufficient to

1922support findings that , between January 13, 2009, and May 26,

19322009, Isaiah Check Cashing Store failed to maintain copies with

1942thumb prints for some of the payment instruments of $ 1,000.00 or

1955more that it accepted and cashed; that, between January 13,

19652009, and May 26, 2009, Isaiah Check Cashing Store failed to

1976keep copies of payment instruments of $1,000.00 or more that it

1988accepted and cashed that carried the endorsement of Isaiah Check

1998Cashing Store; and that, between Januar y 13, 2009, and May 28,

20102009, Isaiah Check Cashing Store did not maintain an electronic

2020log that included the name of the conductor or the amount of

2032currency paid on payment instruments of $1,000.00 or more .

2043CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

204617 . The Division of Adminis trative Hearings has

2055jurisdiction over the subject matter of this proceeding and of

2065the parties thereto pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57(1),

2074Florida Statutes (20 10 ).

207918 . In its Administrative Complaint, the OFR seeks to

2089impose penalties against Isa iah Check Cashing Store that include

2099suspension or revocation of its license and/or the imposition of

2109an administrative fine. Therefore, it has the burden of proving

2119by clear and convincing evidence that Isaiah Check Cashing Store

2129committed the violations alleged in the Administrative

2136Complaint. Department of Banking & Finance, Division of

2144Securities & Investor Protection v. Osborne Stern & Co. , 670 So.

21552d 932 (Fla. 1996); Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla.

21671987).

216819 . In Evans Packing Co. v. Department of Agriculture and

2179Consumer Services , 550 So. 2d 112, 116, n. 5 (Fla. 1st DCA

21911989), the court explained:

2195[C]lear and convincing evidence

2199requires that the evidence must be found to

2207be credible; the facts to which the

2214witnesses testify must be distinctly

2219remembered; the evidence must be precise and

2226explicit and the witnesses must be lacking

2233in confusion as to the fac ts in issue. The

2243evidence must be of such weight that it

2251produces in the mind of the trier of fact

2260the firm belief of conviction, without

2266hesitancy, as to the truth of the

2273allegations sought to be established.

2278Slomowitz v. Walker , 429 So. 2d 797, 800

2286(Fl a. 4th DCA 1983).

2291Judge Sharp, in her dissenting opinion in Walker v. Florida

2301Department of Business and Professional Regulation , 705 So. 2d

2310652, 655 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(Sharp, J., dissenting), reviewed

2319several pronouncements on clear and convincing evide nce:

2327Clear and convincing evidence requires more

2333proof than preponderance of evidence, but

2339less than beyond a reasonable doubt. In re

2347Inquiry Concerning a Judge re Graziano ,

2353696 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 1997). It is an

2362intermediate level of proof that entails

2368both qualitative and quantative [sic]

2373elements. In re Adoption of Baby E.A.W. ,

2380658 So. 2d 961, 967 (Fla. 1995), cert.

2388denied , 516 U.S. 1051, 116 S. Ct. 719, 133

2397L. Ed. 2d 672 (1996). The sum total of

2406evidence must be sufficient to convince the

2413trier of fact without any hesitancy. Id.

2420It must produce in the mind of the trier of

2430fact a firm belief or conviction as to the

2439truth of the allegations sought to be

2446established. Inquiry Concerning Davie , 645

2451So. 2d 398, 404 (Fla. 1994).

2457Violation One: Title 3 1, Section 103.125, Code of Federal

2467Regulations and Sections 560.114(1)(y) and 560.1235(2), Florida

2474Statutes .

247620 . Section 560.114, Florida Statutes, provides in

2484pertinent part:

2486(1) The following actions by a money

2493services business, authorized vendor, o r

2499affiliated party constitute grounds for the

2505issuance of a cease and desist order; the

2513issuance of a removal order; the denial,

2520suspension, or revocation of a license; or

2527taking any other action within the authority

2534of the office pursuant to this chapter:

2541* * *

2544(y) Violations of 31 C.F.R. ss. 103.20,

2551103.22, 103.23, 103.27, 103.28, 103.29,

2556103.33, 103.37, 103.41, and 103.125, and

2562United States Treasury Interpretive Release

25672004 - 1.

257021 . Section 560.1235(2), Florida Statutes, provides:

" 2577A licensee and authorized vendor must maintain an anti - money

2588laundering program in accordance with 31 C.F.R. s. 103.125. The

2598program must be reviewed and updated as necessary to ensure that

2609the program continues to be effective in detecting and deterring

2619money launderin g activities."

262322 . Title 31, Section 103.125, Code of Federal

2632Regulations, provides in pertinent part:

2637(a) Each money services business, as

2643defined by § 103.11(uu), shall develop,

2649implement, and maintain an effective anti -

2656money laundering program. An ef fective

2662anti - money laundering program is one that is

2671reasonably designed to prevent the money

2677services business from being used to

2683facilitate money laundering and the

2688financing of terrorist activities.

2692(b) The program shall be commensurate with

2699the risks posed by the location and size of,

2708and the nature and volume of the financial

2716services provided by, the money services

2722business.

2723(c) The program shall be in writing, and a

2732money services business shall make copies of

2739the anti - money laundering program av ailable

2747for inspection to the Department of the

2754Treasury upon request.

2757(d) At a minimum, the program shall:

2764(1) Incorporate policies, procedures, and

2769internal controls reasonably designed to

2774assure compliance with this part.

2779(i) Policies, procedures, and internal

2784controls developed and implemented under

2789this section shall include provisions for

2795complying with the requirements of this part

2802including, to the extent applicable to the

2809money services business, requirements for:

2814(A) Verifying customer ide ntification;

2819(B) Filing reports;

2822(C) Creating and retaining records; and

2828(D) Responding to law enforcement requests.

2834(ii) Money services businesses that have

2840automated data processing systems should

2845integrate their compliance procedures with

2850such s ystems.

2853* * *

2856(2) Designate a person to assure day to day

2865compliance with the program and this part.

2872The responsibilities of such person shall

2878include assuring that:

2881(i) The money services business properly

2887files reports, and creates and retains

2893rec ords, in accordance with applicable

2899requirements of this part;

2903(ii) The compliance program is updated as

2910necessary to reflect current requirements of

2916this part, and related guidance issued by

2923the Department of the Treasury; and

2929(iii) The money services business provides

2935appropriate training and education in

2940accordance with paragraph (d)(3) of this

2946section.

2947(3) Provide education and/or training of

2953appropriate personnel concerning their

2957responsibilities under the program,

2961including training in the detection of

2967suspicious transactions to the extent that

2973the money services business is required to

2980report such transactions under this part.

2986(4) Provide for independent review to

2992monitor and maintain an adequate program.

2998The scope and frequency of the re view shall

3007be commensurate with the risk of the

3014financial services provided by the money

3020services business. Such review may be

3026conducted by an officer or employee of the

3034money services business so long as the

3041reviewer is not the person designated in

3048paragr aph (d)(2) of this section.

305423 . Based in the findings of fact herein, the OFR has

3066failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Isaiah

3076Check Cashing Store violated Title 31, Section 103.125, Code of

3086Federal Regulations. The Internal Revenue Serv ice evaluated and

3095tested the implementation of Isaiah Check Cashing Store's anti -

3105money laundering program for check cashing for the period of

3115March 1, 2009, through August 31, 2009, and found that Isaiah

3126Check Cashing Store was in compliance with federal l aw. Given

3137this finding by the Internal Revenue Service, it is reasonable

3147to infer that the federal law to which the Internal Revenue

3158Service referred includ ed Title 31, Section 103.125, Code of

3168Federal Regulations , and the OFR did not prove otherwise.

3177Be cause the OFR failed to carry its burden of proving a

3189violation of Title 31, Section 103.125, Code of Federal

3198Regulations, it has also failed to prove that Isaiah Check

3208Cashing Store violated Sections 560.114(1)(y) and 560.1235(2),

3215Florida Statutes.

3217Violat ion Two: Section 560.310(1)(b)2. , Florida Statutes, and

3225Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704(4)(a) .

323324 . Section 560.310, Florida Statutes, provides in

3241pertinent part

3243(1) In addition to the record retention

3250requirements specified in s. 560.1105, a

3256licensee engaged in check cashing must

3262maintain the following:

3265* * *

3268(b) For any payment instrument accepted

3274having a face value of $1,000 or more:

3283* * *

32862. A thumbprint of the customer taken by

3294the licensee.

329625 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704 provides

3306in pertinent part:

3309(4) In addition to the records required in

3317subsections (1) and (2), for payment

3323instruments exceeding $ 1,000.00, the check

3330casher shall:

3332(a) Affix an original thumbprint of the

3339conductor to the origina l of each payment

3347instrument accepted which is taken at the

3354time of acceptance;

335726 . Based on the findings of fact herein, the OFR has

3369proven by clear and convincing evidence that Isaiah Check

3378Cashing Store failed to include, in all cases, the thumb print s

3390of persons cashing payment instruments with a face value of

3400$1,000.00 or more. The OFR has, therefore, carried its burden

3411of proving that Isaiah Check Cashing Store violated

3419Section 560.310(1)(b)2., Florida Statutes, and Florida

3425Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704(4)(a).

3431Violation Three: Section 560.1105, Florida Statutes, and

3438Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704(2)(a) .

344627 . Section 560.1105, Florida Statutes, provides: "Each

3454licensee and its authorized vendors must maintain all books,

3463accounts, documents, files, and information necessary for

3470determining compliance with this chapter an d related rules for

34805 years unless a l onger period is required by other state or

3493federal law.

349528 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704 provides

3505in pertinent part:

3508(2) Every check casher shall maintain

3514legible records of all payment instruments

3520cashed. The records shall include the

3526f ollowing information with respect to each

3533payment instrument accepted by the

3538registrant:

3539(a) A copy of all payment instruments

3546accepted and endorsed by the licensee to

3553include the face and reverse (front and

3560back) of the payment instrument. Copies

3566shall be made after each payment instrument

3573has been endorsed with the legal name of the

3582licensee. Endorsements on all payment

3587instruments accepted by the check casher

3593shall be made at the time of acceptance.

360129 . Based on the findings of fact herein, the OFR has

3613proven by clear and convincing evidence that Isaiah Check

3622Cashing Store failed to maintain copies of checks endorsed with

3632its legal name. Consequently, the OFR has carried its burden of

3643proving that Isaiah Check Cashing Store violated

3650Section 560.110 5, Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative

3658Code Rule 69V - 560.704(2)(a).

3663Violation Four: Section 560.310(1)(c), Florida Statutes, and

3670Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704(5)(a) .

367830 . Section 560.310, Florida Statutes, provides in

3686pertinent pa rt :

3690(1) In addition to the record retenti on

3698requirements specified in s. 560.1105, a

3704licensee engaged in check cashing must

3710maintain the following:

3713* * *

3716(c) A payment instrument log that must be

3724maintained electronically as prescribed by

3729rule. For pu rposes of this paragraph,

3736multiple payment instruments accepted from

3741any one person on any given day which total

3750$1,000 or more must be aggregated and

3758reported on the log.

376231 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704 provides

3772in pertinent part:

3775(5)(a ) In addition to the records required

3783in subsections (1) an d (2) for payment

3791instruments $ 1,000.00 or more, the check

3799casher shall create and maintain an

3805electronic log of payment instruments

3810accepted which includes, at a minimum, the

3817following informatio n:

38201. Transaction date;

38232. Payor name;

38263. Payee name;

38294. Conductor name, if other than the payee;

38375. Amount of payment instrument;

38426. Amount of currency provided;

38477. Type of payment instrument;

3852a. Personal check;

3855b. Payroll check;

3858c. Government check;

3861d. Corporate check;

3864e. Third party check; or

3869f. Other payment instrument;

38738. Fee charged for the cashing of the

3881payment instrument;

38839. Branch/Location where instrument was

3888accepted;

388910. Identification type presented by

3894conductor; and

389611. Identification number presented by

3901conductor.

390232 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704(1)(b)

3911defines "conductor" as " a natural person who presents a payment

3921instrument to a check casher for the purpose of receiving

3931currency. "

393233 . Based on the findings of fact herein, the OFR has

3944proven by clear and convincing evidence that, on the date of the

3956OFR examination, the electronic payment instrument log

3963maintained by Isaiah Check Cashing Store did not include a field

3974for the name of the conductor, if other than the payee, or for

3987the amount of currency provided . Consequently, the OFR has

3997carried its burden of proving that Isaiah Check Cashing Store

4007violated Section 560.310(1)(c), Florida Statutes, and Florida

4014Administrative Code Rule 69V - 560.704(5)(a)4. and 6.

4022Penalties

402334 . Section 560.114 , Florida Statutes, provides in

4031pertinent part:

4033(1) The following actions by a money

4040services business, authorized vendor, or

4045affiliated party constitute grounds for the

4051issuance of a cease and desist order; the

4059issuance of a removal order; the denial,

4066suspension, or revocation of a license; or

4073taking any other action within the authority

4080of the office pursuant to this chapter:

4087(a) Failure to comply with any provision of

4095this chapter or related rule or order, or

4103any written agreement entered into with the

4110office.

411135 . The OFR has proven that Isaiah Check Cashing Store

4122violated Sections 560.1105 and 560.310(1)(b)2. and (c), Florida

4130Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V -

4138560.704(2)(a), (4)(a), and (5)(a). Isaiah Check Cashing Store

4146is, therefore, subject to disciplinary action pursuant to

4154Section 560.114 (1) , Florida Statutes.

415936 . Section 560.114(7), Florida Statutes, provides: "The

4167office may, in addition to or in lieu of the denial, suspension,

4179or revocation of a license, impose a fine of at least $1,000 but

4193not more than $10,000 for each violation of this chapter."

420437 . In its Proposed Recommended Order, the OFR has

4214suggested that the appropriate penalties in this case ar e entry

4225of an order directing Isaiah Check Cashing Store to cease and

4236desist the above - referenced unlawful activities and imposition

4245of a $1,000.00 administrative fine for each violation . The

4256undersigned agrees that the penalties suggested by the OFR are

4266reasonable under the circumstances and adopts these penalties.

4274RECOMMENDATION

4275Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

4285Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Office of Financial Regulation

4295enter a final order finding that Isaiah Che ck Cashing Store ,

4306Inc., violated Sections 560.1105 and 560.310(1)(b)2. and (c),

4314Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 69V -

432356 0.704(2)(a), (4)(a), and (5)(a); directing Isaiah Check

4331Cashing Store, Inc., to cease and desist this unlawful acti vity;

4342and imposing an administrative fine in the amount of $3,000.00.

4353DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of November , 2010, in

4363Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

4367S

4368_______________________________ ____

4370PATRICIA M. HART

4373Administrative L aw Judge

4377Division of Administrativ e Hearings

4382The DeS oto Building

43861230 Apa lachee Parkway

4390Tallahassee, Florida 3 2399 - 3060

4396(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

4404Fax F iling (850) 921 - 6847

4411www.doah.state.fl.us

4412Fil ed w ith the Clerk of the

4420Division of Administrative Hearings

4424this 23rd day of November , 2010.

4430ENDNOTES

44311 / All references herein to the Florida Statutes are to the 2009

4444edition unless indicated otherwise.

44482 / Respondent's Exhibit 1.

44533 / An employee of Isaiah Check Cashing Store testified that the

4465OFR may have been mistakenly provided with copies of some of the

4477sample payment instruments that had been made before the

4486instruments were cleared for payment. The employee explained

4494that, when a check was presented to Isaiah Check Cashing Store,

4505a copy of the endorsed check was made before the check was

4517cl eared for payment. Once the check was cleared and the payee

4529agreed to the check - cashing fee, the payee's thumb print was

4541placed on the check and a copy of the thumb - printed check was

4555made. This explanation is not persuasive because Isaiah Check

4564Cashing S tore apparently undertook a diligent search of its

4574records and failed to find copies of 51 payment instruments in

4585the sample examined by the OFR that contained thumb prints.

45954 / According to the OFR examiner, a "conductor" is the person

4607cashing a check ma de payable to a corporation.

46165 / Transcript at page 62.

46226 / See Transcript at pages 61 - 63.

4631COPIES FURNISHED:

4633Diane E. Leeds, Esquire

4637Office of Financial Regulation

46413111 South Dixie Highway, Suite 302

4647West Palm Beach, Florida 33405

4652Colette Cesar

465419501 Northeast 19th Avenue

4658Miami, Florida 33179

4661J. Thomas Cardwell, Commissioner

4665Office of Fina ncial Regulation

4670200 East Gaines Street

4674Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0350

4679Robert Beitler, General Counsel

4683Department of Financial Services

4687200 East Gaines Street, Suite 526

4693Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0350

4698NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

4704All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

471415 days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions

4725to this recommended order should be filed with the agency that

4736will issue the final order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 03/14/2011
Proceedings: Amended Agency FO
PDF:
Date: 03/14/2011
Proceedings: Amended Agency Final Order and Notice of Rights filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/31/2011
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 01/31/2011
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/02/2010
Proceedings: Transmittal letter from Claudia Llado forwarding Petitioner's proposed exhibits, to the agency.
PDF:
Date: 11/23/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 11/23/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 11/23/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held August 30, 2010). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 09/29/2010
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Hart from C. Cesar requesting you to enter a recommendation filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/27/2010
Proceedings: Letter to Colette Cesar from Joan Renzetti regarding examination of financial institution filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/27/2010
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Hart from Respondent regarding recommendation filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/27/2010
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 09/23/2010
Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings filed.
Date: 09/20/2010
Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/03/2010
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Hart from Diane Leeds regarding Petitioner's Exhibits (exhibits not available for viewing) filed.
Date: 08/30/2010
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 08/27/2010
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Hart from C. Cesar added exhibits (exhibits not available) filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/26/2010
Proceedings: Petitioner's Exhibits (not available for viewing) filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/19/2010
Proceedings: Letter to DOAH from D. Leeds regarding receipt of letter dated August 12th filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/19/2010
Proceedings: Notice of Ex-parte Communication.
PDF:
Date: 08/17/2010
Proceedings: Partial Joint Response to Pre-Hearing Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/16/2010
Proceedings: Letter to DOAH from C. Cesar regarding going alone with the plan filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/20/2010
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 07/20/2010
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for August 30, 2010; 1:00 p.m.; Miami and Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 07/13/2010
Proceedings: Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/13/2010
Proceedings: Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/07/2010
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 07/06/2010
Proceedings: Request for Administrative Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/06/2010
Proceedings: Administrative Complaint for Imposition of Sanctions and Notice of Rights filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/06/2010
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.

Case Information

Judge:
PATRICIA M. HART
Date Filed:
07/06/2010
Date Assignment:
07/07/2010
Last Docket Entry:
03/14/2011
Location:
Miami, Florida
District:
Southern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN PART OR MODIFIED
 

Counsels

Related DOAH Cases(s) (1):

Related Florida Statute(s) (10):

Related Florida Rule(s) (1):