09-004102 El Sol Trading, Inc., And Eco Green Machine, Llc vs. Finish Line Scooters, Llc
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Tuesday, March 9, 2010.


View Dockets  
Summary: No evidence was presented that protestor has standing. New dealership application is approved.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8EL SOL TRADING, INC., AND ECO )

15GREEN MACHINE, LLC, )

19)

20Petitioners, )

22)

23vs. ) Case No. 09-4102

28)

29FINISH LINE SCOOTERS, LLC, )

34)

35Respondent. )

37)

38RECOMMENDED ORDER

40On February 10, 2010, an administrative hearing in this

49case was conducted in Tallahassee, Florida, before William F.

58Quattlebaum, Administrative Law Judge, Division of

64Administrative Hearings (DOAH).

67APPEARANCES

68For Petitioners: (No appearance)

72For Respondent: (No appearance)

76STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

80The issue in the case is whether an application for a new

92point franchise motor vehicle dealership filed by El Sol

101Trading, Inc., and Eco-Green Machine, LLC (Petitioners), should

109be approved.

111PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

113By Notice published in the Florida Administrative Weekly

121(Volume 35, Number 27; July 10, 2009), the Department of Highway

132Safety and Motor Vehicles (Department) gave notice that El Sol

142Trading, Inc., was seeking to establish a new point franchise

152motor vehicle dealership for the sale of motorcycles

160manufactured by Zhejiang Leike Machinery Co. Ltd. (ZLMI) at

169Eco-Green Machine, LLC, at 7000 Park Boulevard, Suite A,

178Pinellas Park, Florida 33781.

182Finish Line Scooters, LLC (Respondent), filed a challenge

190to the establishment of the dealership. By letter dated

199July 31, 2009, the Department forwarded the challenge to DOAH.

209On the same date, DOAH issued an Initial Order, directing the

220parties to identify the anticipated length of the hearing, dates

230upon which the parties were available for hearing, and a

240suggested hearing location. The Initial Order stated that the

249failure to respond would result in the hearing being scheduled

259in Tallahassee, Florida. No responses to the Initial Order were

269filed, and the hearing was scheduled accordingly.

276Neither party appeared at the time scheduled for

284commencement of the hearing. There were no witnesses or

293exhibits admitted into evidence. No transcript of the hearing

302was filed. No proposed recommended orders were filed.

310FINDINGS OF FACT

3131. There was no evidence presented at the hearing to

323establish that the Respondent has a franchise agreement to sell

333or service ZLMI motor vehicles, the line-make to be sold by

344Eco-Green Machine, LLC.

3472. There was no evidence presented at the hearing that the

358Respondent's dealership is physically located so as to meet the

368statutory requirements for standing to protest the establishment

376of the new point franchise motor vehicle dealership.

384CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

3873. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

394jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this

404proceeding. §§ 120.569 and 120.57, Fla. Stat. (2009).

4124. Section 320.642, Florida Statutes (2009), provides in

420relevant part as follows:

424320.642 Dealer licenses in areas previously

430served; procedure.--

432(1) Any licensee who proposes to establish

439an additional motor vehicle dealership or

445permit the relocation of an existing dealer

452to a location within a community or

459territory where the same line-make vehicle

465is presently represented by a franchised

471motor vehicle dealer or dealers shall give

478written notice of its intention to the

485department. . . .

489* * *

492(2)(a) An application for a motor vehicle

499dealer license in any community or territory

506shall be denied when:

5101. A timely protest is filed by a presently

519existing franchised motor vehicle dealer

524with standing to protest as defined in

531subsection (3); and

5342. The licensee fails to show that the

542existing franchised dealer or dealers who

548register new motor vehicle retail sales or

555retail leases of the same line-make in the

563community or territory of the proposed

569dealership are not providing adequate

574representation of such line-make motor

579vehicles in such community or territory.

585The burden of proof in establishing

591inadequate representation shall be on the

597licensee.

598* * *

601(3) An existing franchised motor vehicle

607dealer or dealers shall have standing to

614protest a proposed additional or relocated

620motor vehicle dealer when the existing motor

627vehicle dealer or dealers have a franchise

634agreement for the same line-make vehicle to

641be sold or serviced by the proposed

648additional or relocated motor vehicle dealer

654and are physically located so as to meet or

663satisfy any of the following requirements or

670conditions:

671* * *

674(b) If the proposed additional or relocated

681motor vehicle dealer is to be located in a

690county with a population of more than

697300,000 according to the most recent data of

706the United States Census Bureau or the data

714of the Bureau of Economic and Business

721Research of the University of Florida:

7271. Any existing motor vehicle dealer or

734dealers of the same line-make have a

741licensed franchise location within a radius

747of 12.5 miles of the location of the

755proposed additional or relocated motor

760vehicle dealer; or

7632. Any existing motor vehicle dealer or

770dealers of the same line-make can establish

777that during any 12-month period of the 36-

785month period preceding the filing of the

792licensee's application for the proposed

797dealership, such dealer or its predecessor

803made 25 percent of its retail sales of new

812motor vehicles to persons whose registered

818household addresses were located within a

824radius of 12.5 miles of the location of the

833proposed additional or relocated motor

838vehicle dealer; provided such existing

843dealer is located in the same county or any

852county contiguous to the county where the

859additional or relocated dealer is proposed

865to be located.

8685. The licensees in this case are El Sol Trading, Inc.,

879and Eco-Green Machine, LLC. See §§ 320.60(8) and 320.61, Fla.

889Stat. (2009).

8916. The Respondent is the alleged existing franchised motor

900vehicle dealer. The Respondent failed to present any evidence

909at the hearing to establish that it meets the statutory

919requirements to establish standing, by location or sales volume,

928to protest the establishment of the new point franchise motor

938vehicle dealership at issue in this case.

945RECOMMENDATION

946Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

956Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department enter a final order

967dismissing the protest filed in this case by Finish Line

977Scooters, LLC, and granting the Petitioners' request to establish

986a new point franchise motor vehicle dealership for the sale of

997ZLMI motorcycles.

999DONE AND ENTERED this 9th day of March, 2010, in

1009Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

1013S

1014WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM

1017Administrative Law Judge

1020Division of Administrative Hearings

1024The DeSoto Building

10271230 Apalachee Parkway

1030Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

1033(850) 488-9675

1035Fax Filing (850) 921-6847

1039www.doah.state.fl.us

1040Filed with the Clerk of the

1046Division of Administrative Hearings

1050this 9th day of March, 2010.

1056COPIES FURNISHED :

1059Patcharee Clark

1061ECO Green Machine, LLC, d/b/a

1066ECO Green Machine

10697000 Park Boulevard, Suite A

1074Pinellas Park, Florida 33781

1078John V. Leonard

1081Finish Line Scooters, LLC

10856600 Gulf Boulevard

1088St. Pete Beach, Florida 33706

1093Jennifer Clark

1095Department of Highway Safety

1099and Motor Vehicles

1102Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-308

11072900 Apalachee Parkway

1110Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0635

1113Gloria Ma

1115El Sol Trading, Inc., d/b/a

1120Motobravo, Inc.

112219877 Quiroz Court

1125City of Industry, California 91789

1130Carl A. Ford, Director

1134Division of Motor Vehicles

1138Department of Highway Safety

1142and Motor Vehicles

1145Neil Kirkman Building, Room B-439

11502900 Apalachee Parkway

1153Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500

1156Robin Lotane, General Counsel

1160Department of Highway Safety

1164and Motor Vehicles

1167Neil Kirkman Building

11702900 Apalachee Parkway

1173Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0500

1176NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

1182All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

119215 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

1203to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

1214will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 05/21/2010
Proceedings: Appendix to Final Order Ruling on Exceptions to Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/21/2010
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/18/2010
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 03/18/2010
Proceedings: Letter to Whom it may Concern from J. Leonard requesting that you not allow a or uphold the rocommended order filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/09/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 03/09/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held February 10, 2010). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 03/09/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
Date: 02/10/2010
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 08/19/2009
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 08/19/2009
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for February 10, 2010; 9:30 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 07/31/2009
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 07/31/2009
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/31/2009
Proceedings: Request for Administrative Hearing filed filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/31/2009
Proceedings: Agency action letter filed.

Case Information

Judge:
WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM
Date Filed:
07/31/2009
Date Assignment:
07/31/2009
Last Docket Entry:
05/21/2010
Location:
Tallahassee, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
 

Counsels

Related DOAH Cases(s) (1):

Related Florida Statute(s) (5):