South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

CAPTION:
Dale Olin vs. SCDOCA

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs

PARTIES:
Petitioner:
Dale Olin

Respondent:
South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
05-ALJ-30-0459-CC

APPEARANCES:
For Petitioner: Pro Se

For Respondent: Charles M. Knight, Esquire
 

ORDERS:

FINAL ORDER AND DECISION

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

This is a contested case brought by Petitioner Dale Olin challenging the decision of the South Carolina Department of Consumer Affairs (“Department”) which denied Petitioner’s Originator License for Mortgage Broker Company Originators based on Petitioner’s application and the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division’s (“SLED”) criminal records check. A hearing was held before me on December 14, 2005 at the offices of the Administrative Law Court (“ALC” or “Court”) in Columbia, South Carolina.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Having observed the witnesses and exhibits presented at the hearing and closely passed upon their credibility, taking into consideration the burden of persuasion of parties, I make the following findings of fact by a preponderance of evidence:

1. Notice of the time, date, place and subject matter of the hearing was given to Petitioner and Respondent.

2. Petitioner Olin, in completing his application, Supplemental Form O for an originator’s license, submitted a sworn statement that all information contained in the application is true, current and correct. Petitioner answered “YES” to the question on the form, “Have you ever been convicted of a felony or an offense involving breach of trust, moral turpitude or dishonest dealings within the last ten years?”

3. Petitioner’s arrest record (Respondent’s Exhibit #3) shows a felony conviction for Manufacture/Distribute CDS (Controlled Dangerous Substance) in Ocean City, New Jersey on April 22, 2002.

4. Petitioner admitted on the record that he was convicted for committing a felony within the last ten years. Petitioner testified that he pled guilty to one charge, while the accompanying charges from the incident were dropped.

5. Petitioner was sentenced to three years probation and a six month suspension of his driver’s license. He served one year probation before his sentence was commuted.

6. Petitioner is sorry for his mistakes in the past. He has matured since the time of his conviction and plans to get married in the near future. Petitioner wants to leave the restaurant service industry for a more stable professional career. Petitioner believes he should not continue to be punished for a crime he committed in the past for which he has already received punishment.

7. While this Court is sympathetic with Petitioner, we are bound by the South Carolina Code, the information contained in the criminal records check, and the testimony at the hearing.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Based upon the above findings of fact, I conclude the following as a matter of law:

1. Jurisdiction over this case is vested with the South Carolina Administrative Law Court pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. 37-6-414 (eff. July 1, 2005), S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-600(B) (Supp. 2004), and S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310 et seq. (1986 & Supp. 2004).

2. S.C. Code Ann. § 40-58-50(C) (eff. January 13, 2005) sets forth:

The application for an originator license must designate the employing mortgage broker and must include descriptions of the business activities, educational background, and general character and fitness of the applicant as required by this chapter, including consent to a criminal records check…

3. S.C. Code Ann. § 40-58-55 (eff. July 1, 2005) sets forth:

(A) The department may refuse to license an applicant or refuse to renew a license if it finds, after notice and a hearing pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, that the applicant or his agent has:

(1) violated a provision of this chapter or an order of the department;

(2) withheld material information in connection with an application for a license or its renewal, or made a material misstatement in connection with the application;

(3) been convicted of a felony or of an offense involving breach of trust, moral turpitude, fraud, or dishonest dealing within the past ten years.

(B) A person who was in business as a mortgage broker or is an agent of a broker before October 1, 1998, and who has been convicted of a felony or an offense involving breach of trust, moral turpitude, fraud, or dishonest dealing within the past ten years may continue in business as a mortgage broker or agent, but if a mortgage broker or an agent of a broker is convicted of an offense enumerated in item (3) of subsection (A) on or after October 1, 1998, that person is subject to the provisions of this chapter.

(Emphasis added.)

4. The record shows Petitioner has a felony conviction for Manufacture/Distribute CDS on April 22, 2002. Accordingly, since Petitioner has a felony conviction within the last ten years, pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. § 40-58-55 (eff. July 1, 2005), the Department’s refusal to license Petitioner was proper.

ORDER

Based upon the above Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby ORDERED that Petitioner Dale Olin is not entitled to an Originator License for Mortgage Broker Company Originators.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

 

_________________________________

John D. McLeod

Administrative Law Judge

December 15, 2005

Columbia, South Carolina


 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2025 South Carolina Administrative Law Court