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”.

Pursuant to the authority granted by Section 36a-17 of the Connecticut General Statutes, the Commissioner, through the Consumer Credit Division of the Department of Banking, has investigated the activities of Respondent to determine if he has violated, is violating or is about to violate the provisions of the Connecticut General Statutes within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner.

Section 36a-17(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:

Section 36a-52(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:

Section 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:

1.	Respondent is an individual whose address last known to the Commissioner is 228 Stonewall Lane, Fairfield, Connecticut.
2.	At all times relevant hereto, Respondent was licensed as a mortgage loan originator in Connecticut with William Raveis Mortgage, LLC (“Raveis”), which at all times relevant hereto was licensed by the Commissioner as a mortgage correspondent lender.
3.	On June 27, 2009, Respondent completed a Uniform Residential Loan Application for a potential borrower (“Applicant 1”) with respect to a mortgage loan to be secured by real property located in Connecticut (“June 27 Application”).
4.	In connection with the June 27 Application, Respondent advised Applicant 1 to provide a telephone number of a co-worker who could pretend to be the manager of Applicant 1 when called and who would indicate that Applicant 1 had at least two years of employment at the job listed on the June 27 Application.  Applicant 1 provided such telephone number.
5.	By e-mail dated July 14, 2009, Applicant 1, through her attorney, requested a copy of the June 27 Application from a loan processor employed by Raveis to enable Applicant 1 to verify the information on the June 27 Application that had been submitted by Respondent.
6.	By e-mail dated July 16, 2009, Respondent instructed the loan processor not to provide the information requested by Applicant 1, as more fully described in paragraph 5 above.
7.	On or before July 6, 2009, Respondent completed a Uniform Residential Loan Application for another potential borrower and co-borrower (“Co-Applicant”) with respect to a mortgage loan to be secured by real property located in Connecticut (“July 6 Application”).
8.	The July 6 Application listed the Co-Applicant as “unmarried” and did not reflect that a condominium listed as an asset was less than 100% owned by the Co-Applicant, when, in fact, Respondent had been informed by the Co-Applicant that he was still married.
9.	On August 4, 2009, a third potential borrower (“Applicant 3”) for a mortgage loan to be secured by residential property located in Connecticut provided Respondent with a copy of an offer letter that Applicant 3 had received from his current employer indicating that he had been hired recently at an annual salary of $66,000.
10.	On August 11, 2009, Respondent completed a Uniform Residential Loan Application for Applicant 3, which reflected a monthly salary of $6,166.67 (“August 11 Application”).
11.	On August 12, 2009, Applicant 3 corrected the monthly salary amount on page one of the August 11 Application to reflect a monthly income of $5,500.
12.	Applicant 3 received a commitment letter dated August 18, 2009 from Raveis, which had a condition requirement that Applicant 3 provide his most recent year-to-date paystub covering a minimum of 30 days’ earnings to support income of $6,166 per month.
13.	Upon being questioned by Applicant 3 as to the accuracy of the monthly income requirement on the commitment letter, Respondent replied that he was doing something so that he could count a $7,000 salary advance that Applicant 3 had received from his employer as additional income.  Applicant 3 informed Respondent that such advance was not additional income.
14.	On September 17, 2009, Applicant 3 gave Respondent a paystub reflecting his actual salary of $2,750 for Respondent to make a copy.  The paystub submitted by Respondent to Raveis for Applicant 3 reflected a salary of $3,083.33.
15.	Subsequent investigation disclosed that Applicant 3’s offer letter, as described in paragraph 9 above, that was filed with Raveis reflected an annual salary of $74,000.

Section 36a-56 of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:

Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that:

1.

Respondent’s acts and conduct, as more fully described in paragraphs 2 through 15, inclusive, of the Matters Asserted, constitutes knowingly making false statements with intent to defraud and for the purpose of influencing the action of a licensed mortgage correspondent lender, in violation of Sections 36a-56 of the Connecticut General Statutes.  Such violation forms the basis to issue an order to cease and desist pursuant to Section 36a-52(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes, and to impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes.  Section 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes authorizes the Commissioner to impose a civil penalty upon Respondent in an amount not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) per violation.  The Commissioner intends to impose a civil penalty upon Respondent not to exceed Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000), subject to Respondent’s right to a hearing on the allegations set forth above.

2.

Respondent’s acts and conduct, as more fully described in paragraphs 2 through 15, inclusive, of the Matters Asserted, constitutes acts of fraud or misrepresenting, concealing, suppressing, intentionally omitting or otherwise intentionally failing to disclose material particulars of residential mortgage loan transactions to someone entitled to such information, as provided in Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes.  Such conduct forms the basis to issue an order to cease and desist pursuant to Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-52(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes, and to impose a civil penalty pursuant to Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes.  Section 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes authorizes the Commissioner to impose a civil penalty upon Respondent in an amount not to exceed One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) per violation.  The Commissioner intends to impose a civil penalty upon Respondent not to exceed Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000), subject to Respondent’s right to a hearing on the allegations set forth above.

WHEREAS, the Commissioner has reason to believe that Respondent has engaged in acts or conduct which forms a basis to issue an order to cease and desist against Respondent pursuant to Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-52(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes and to impose a civil penalty upon Respondent pursuant to Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes and Section 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes.

NOW THEREFORE, notice is hereby given to Respondent that the Commissioner intends to issue an order requiring Respondent to CEASE AND DESIST from violating Section 36a-56 of the Connecticut General Statutes and from committing acts of fraud or misrepresenting, concealing, suppressing, intentionally omitting or otherwise intentionally failing to disclose material particulars of residential mortgage loan transactions to someone entitled to such information, as provided in Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes, and that the Commissioner intends to impose a CIVIL PENALTY upon Respondent as set forth herein, subject to Respondent’s right to a hearing on the allegations set forth above.

A hearing will be granted to Respondent if a written request for a hearing is received by the Department of Banking, Consumer Credit Division, 260 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, Connecticut 06103-1800 within fourteen (14) days following Respondents receipt of this Notice of Intent to Issue Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Impose Civil Penalty and Notice of Right to Hearing as set forth in Sections 36a-52(a) and 36a-50(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes.  This Notice of Intent to Issue Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Impose Civil Penalty and Notice of Right to Hearing shall be deemed received on the earlier of the date of actual receipt, or seven days after mailing or sending.  The enclosed Appearance and Request for Hearing Form must be completed and mailed to the above address.  If Respondent will not be represented by an attorney at the hearing, please complete the Appearance and Request for Hearing Form as “pro se”.  Once a written request for a hearing is received, the Commissioner may issue a notification of hearing and designation of hearing officer that acknowledges receipt of a request for a hearing, designates a presiding officer and sets the date of the hearing in accordance with Section 4-177 of the Connecticut General Statutes and Section 36a-1-21 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies.  If a hearing is requested, the hearing will be held on September 9, 2010, at 10 a.m., at the Department of Banking, 260 Constitution Plaza, Hartford, Connecticut.

The hearing will be held in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 54 of the Connecticut General Statutes, unless Respondent fails to appear at the requested hearing.  At such hearing, Respondent will have the right to appear and present evidence, rebuttal evidence and argument on all issues of fact and law to be considered by the Commissioner.

If Respondent does not request a hearing within the time prescribed, the Commissioner will issue an order that Respondent cease and desist from violating Section 36a-56 of the Connecticut General Statutes and committing acts of fraud or misrepresenting, concealing, suppressing, intentionally omitting or otherwise intentionally failing to disclose material particulars of residential mortgage loan transactions to someone entitled to such information, as provided in Section 36a-494(b) of the 2010 Supplement to the General Statutes, and may order that the maximum civil penalty be imposed upon Respondent.

Issued at Hartford, Connecticut
this 30th day of July 2010.               ________/s/_________
                                                   Howard F. Pitkin
                                                   Banking Commissioner

I hereby certify that on this 30th day of July 2010, the foregoing Notice of Intent to Issue Order to Cease and Desist, Notice of Intent to Impose Civil Penalty and Notice of Right to Hearing was sent by registered mail, return receipt requested, to John Mazza, 228 Stonewall Lane, Fairfield, Connecticut 06824, registered mail no. RB028037249US.

                                                   ________/s/_________

                                                   Doniel Kitt
                                                   Prosecuting Attorney

---