ALJDEC - Licensing
23A-008-INS · Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions - Insurance · 2023-10-04
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
In the Matter of:
Khonsavan Vongdara
(National Producer License No. 19591111),
Respondent.
No. 23A-008-INS
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: September 20, 2023
APPEARANCES: Assistant Attorney General James Rolstead represented the Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions. Respondent Khonsavan Vongdara failed to appear. Wendy Greenwood appeared as a witness.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella
FINDINGS OF FACT
Khonsavan Vongdara (“Respondent”) was at all material times licensed in the State of Arizona as a non-resident insurance producer, National Producer License Number 19591111, with lines of authority in accident and health or sickness insurance, and in life insurance. The Arizona Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions (“Department”) issued Respondent’s license on April 16, 2022. The license is scheduled to expire on December 31, 2025. Respondent’s home state is Florida.
On December 1, 2022, Transamerica Life Insurance Company (“Transamerica”) notified the Department that it had terminated its appointment of Respondent for cause for the following reasons: i) suspected application fraud; ii) failing to obtain proper signature from applicants or policyholders; iii) altering or falsifying company documents; and iv) violation of company policies and procedures.
On December 20, 2022, in response to a request from the Department for supporting documentation concerning Respondent’s termination, Transamerica sent a copy of a consumer life insurance application submitted by Respondent.
Wendy Greenwood, the Department’s Investigations Supervisor, testified that the victim in this matter is Christina Toth.
Ms. Greenwood testified that page 17 of the application dated April 22, 2022, reflects “Signature of Proposed Insured” as Christina Toth, and “Producer I signature” as Respondent. The application also lists Ms. Toth’s city and state as “jacksonville, AZ.”
On December 20, 2022, Department Investigator Michael Vukson called Ms. Toth, who is a Phoenix resident, to verify if she submitted the application with Transamerica. Ms. Toth indicated that she was not familiar with Respondent and did not sign an application for insurance on April 22, 2022, with Transamerica.
Ms. Greenwood testified that on page one of the application, the last four digits of Ms. Toth’s social security number are identical to the last four digits of the listed beneficiary, her brother, Nicholas Toth, on page four of the application.
On December 27, 2022, the Department sent an email to Respondent notifying him of Transamerica’s complaint and requesting a response by January 17, 2023. Respondent did not respond to the email.
On January 9, 2023, the Department sent a certified letter to Respondent requesting a response to Transamerica’s complaint. The United States Post Office Tracking Service shows that the certified letter was delivered to Respondent’s address of record, 339 Summer Springs Ct., Jacksonville, FL 32225-4187, and signed for by an individual with Respondent’s last name, on January 13, 2023, at 1:42 p.m.
Ms. Greenwood testified that Respondent did not respond to the certified letter sent by the Department.
On January 24, 2023, Ms. Toth provided the Department with a signed affidavit stating that the signature on the application was not hers, that she did not authorize anyone to sign the application on her behalf, and that the signature is a forgery.
On January 24, 2023, Ms. Toth’s brother, Nick Toth, filed a complaint against Respondent with the Department on behalf of Ms. Toth for “Forgery – fraudulent application.”
Ms. Greenwood testified that the Department cannot regulate Respondent as evidenced by Respondent failing to provide responses to the Department’s requests. In this case, there was the potential for consumer harm had the policy been issued without Ms. Toth’s knowledge and consent. Moreover, the application was fraudulent and due to Respondent’s actions and for the protection of the public, the Department argued that Respondent’s license should be revoked.
Respondent did not appear at the hearing. Therefore, Respondent did not present any evidence to refute or rebut the evidence presented by the Department.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
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.
The Notice of Hearing that the Department sent to Respondent at his address of record and at his email address of record were reasonable and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing.
Respondent’s conduct, as described above, constituted having been found to have committed any insurance fraud within the meaning of A.R.S. § 20-295(A)(7).
Respondent’s conduct, as described above, constituted using fraudulent, coercive or dishonest practices, or demonstrating incompetence, untrustworthiness or financial irresponsibility in the conduct of business in this State or elsewhere, within the meaning of A.R.S. § 20-295(A)(8).
Respondent’s conduct, as described above, constituted forging another’s name to any document related to an insurance transaction, within the meaning of A.R.S. § 20-295(A)(10).
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).
Further, Respondent’s failure to respond to the Department’s requests and failure to appear at the hearing demonstrate that Respondent is not able to be regulated at this time.
ORDER
Based upon the above, Respondent’s National Producer License Number 19591111 shall be revoked on the effective date of the Order entered in this matter.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.
In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be forty (40) days from the date of that certification.
Done this day, October 4, 2023.
/s/ Sondra J. Vanella
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by e-mail to:
Barbara D. Richardson
Department of Insurance and Financial Institutions - Insurance
[email redacted]
[email redacted]
Khonsavan Vongdara
[email redacted]
James Rolstead
Assistant Attorney General
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff