ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

06A-197-INS · Department of Insurance · 2006-12-19

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: December 14, 2006 APPEARANCES: Assistant Attorney General Jennifer Boucek for the Arizona Department of Insurance; Christina Marie Menke did not appear at the hearing ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Lewis D. Kowal _____________________________________________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT 1. At all times material to this matter, Christina Marie Menke (“Respondent”) was and currently is licensed by the Arizona Department of Insurance (“Department”) as a life producer and variable life and variable annuities producer. 2. On March 1, 2006, the Department issued Respondent a life producer license and variable life and variable annuities producer license, license number 859338 (“License”), which expires on February 28, 2010. 3. On March 23, 2006, the Department received written notification from Respondent that her mailing and business address had changed to 1739 E. Broadway Rd., #166, Tempe, AZ 85282 (“Address of Record”). 4. On May 11, 2006, the Department issued a letter to Respondent that was mailed to the Address of Record, informing her that her fingerprint card could not be processed and had been returned by the Arizona Department of Public Safety (“DPS”) as illegible. In that letter, the Department requested that Respondent submit a replacement set of fingerprints and enclosed a blank replacement fingerprint form. The Department provided a deadline of June 14, 2006 for the return of the completed replacement fingerprint form.

5. Because the Department did not receive the requested replacement fingerprint form from Respondent as requested at the Address of Record, the Department sent another letter to Respondent on July 14, 2006, certified mail, return receipt requested, giving Respondent a deadline of fifteen days from the date of the letter to file a replacement fingerprint form with the Department. 6. The Department submitted as an exhibit a receipt card that showed the certified letter of July 14, 2006 was returned to the Department as undeliverable. See Exhibit 6. 7. Steven Fromholtz (“Mr. Fromholtz”), Producer Licensing Administrator for the Department, testified that, to date, the Department has not received any communication from Respondent in response to the above- mentioned letters and the Department has not received a replacement fingerprint form from Respondent. 8. Mr. Fromholtz testified that when an application for a producer’s license is received, the application is processed, the fingerprint card is reviewed to make sure there are no blank spaces. The fingerprint card is then forwarded to the DPS for processing, which includes processing by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. 9. According to Mr. Fromholtz, until the fingerprint card is processed and returned to the Department, and a criminal background history search is conducted, with the results provided to the Department, the license application process has not been completed. 10. The envelope containing the Notice of Hearing issued in this matter was sent to Respondent by certified mail, return receipt requested, was returned to the Department by the United States Postal Service as undeliverable. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This matter is a disciplinary proceeding wherein the Department must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated the State’s Insurance Laws. See A.A.C. R2-19-119. 2. During the application process, the Director of the Department required Respondent to submit a full set of fingerprints and Respondent’s illegible fingerprint submission did not satisfy that requirement. See A.R.S. § 20-285(F)(2). 3. Respondent’s conduct, as set forth above, constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 20-295(A)(1), by having failed to provide complete information in the license application. 4. The evidence of record established that after March 23, 2006, Respondent changed her business and mailing address and did not notify the Department in writing of any change of those addresses, in violation of A.R.S. § 20-297(C). 5. Respondent’s conduct, as set forth above, constitutes the violation of any provision of A.R.S., Title 20, within the meaning of A.R.S. § 20- 295(A)(2). 6. Grounds exist for the Director of the Department to suspend, revoke, or refuse to renew the License pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 20-295(A). ORDER Based upon the above, the License shall be revoked on the effective date of the Order entered in this matter. Done this day, December 27, 2006.

______________________________________ Lewis D. Kowal Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2006, to:

Department of Insurance Christina Urias, Director 2910 North 44th Street, Ste. 210 Phoenix, AZ 85018

By ___________________________

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826