WHEREAS, the Banking Commissioner (“Commissioner”) is charged with the administration of Part II of Chapter 668, Sections 36a-535 to 36a-546, inclusive, of the Connecticut General Statutes, “Finance Companies”;

WHEREAS, Respondent is a New York corporation with an office at 165 Oser Avenue, Hauppauge, New York (“Hauppauge Office”) that is licensed to act as a sales finance company in Connecticut from the Hauppauge Office for the October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2015 renewal period;

WHEREAS, the Commissioner, through the Consumer Credit Division (“Division”) of the Department of Banking, conducted an investigation pursuant to Section 36a-17(a) of the Connecticut General Statutes into the activities of Respondent to determine if it had violated, was violating or was about to violate the provisions of the Connecticut General Statutes within the jurisdiction of the Commissioner;

WHEREAS, on May 8, 2014, the Commissioner, acting pursuant to Section 4-182(c) of the 2014 Supplement to the General Statutes and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the Connecticut General Statutes, issued an Order of Summary Suspension, Notice of Intent to Revoke Sales Finance Company License and Notice of Right to Hearing (collectively “Notice”) against Respondent, which Notice is incorporated herein by reference;

WHEREAS, on May 9, 2014, the Notice was sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to Respondent (Certified Mail No. 70121010000172647278);

WHEREAS, on May 12, 2014, Respondent received the Notice, and on May 20, 2014, requested a hearing, which hearing was scheduled for November 20, 2014, and was continued pending settlement negotiations;

WHEREAS, the Commissioner alleged in the Notice that the filing of a civil complaint by the Superintendent of Financial Services of the State of New York against Respondent and Stephen Baron (“Baron”), the President and sole shareholder of Respondent (“Complaint”), which complaint alleged, among other things, that Respondent wrongfully retained customers’ positive credit balances and took active steps to conceal such balances from customers and regulators, and the issuance of an Ex Parte Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause for Preliminary Injunction against Respondent and Baron (“Restraining Order”), constituted a basis for the Commissioner to conclude that Respondent failed to demonstrate that the financial responsibility, character, reputation, integrity and general fitness of Respondent were such as to warrant belief that the business would be operated soundly and efficiently, in the public interest and consistent with the purposes of sections 36a-535 to 36a 546, inclusive, of the Connecticut General Statutes.  Such failure constituted grounds for the Commissioner to deny an application for a license as a sales finance company under Section 36a-541 of the Connecticut General Statutes, which would be sufficient grounds for the Commissioner to revoke Respondent’s license to engage in the business of a sales finance company pursuant to Section 36a 543(a)(4) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the Connecticut General Statutes;

WHEREAS, the Commissioner also alleged in the Notice that the filing of the Complaint and issuance of the Restraining Order against Baron constituted a basis for the Commissioner to conclude that Baron failed to demonstrate that the financial responsibility, character, reputation, integrity and general fitness of an officer, director or principal employee of Respondent were such as to warrant belief that Respondent’s business would be operated soundly and efficiently, in the public interest and consistent with the purposes of Sections 36a-535 to 36a 546, inclusive, of the Connecticut General Statutes.  Such failure constituted grounds for the Commissioner to deny an application for a license as a sales finance company under Section 36a-541 of the Connecticut General Statutes, which would be sufficient grounds for the Commissioner to revoke Respondent’s license to engage in the business of a sales finance company pursuant to Section 36a 543(a)(4) and subsections (a) and (b) of Section 36a-51 of the Connecticut General Statutes;

WHEREAS, Section 4-177(c) of the Connecticut General Statutes and Section 36a-1-55(a) of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies provide that a contested case may be resolved by consent order, unless precluded by law;

WHEREAS, on January 29, 2015, Respondent and the Commissioner entered into a Consent Order, which Consent Order required Respondent, among other things, to surrender its Connecticut sales finance company license to the Commissioner, which surrender shall only become effective upon remittance of all payments required by the Consent Order and the issuance of an Order Accepting Surrender by the Commissioner;

WHEREAS, the Consent Order also required that no later than thirty (30) days following the date the Consent Order was executed by Respondent, Respondent shall (a) remit to each client all monies erroneously retained by Respondent from such client’s account(s) which had a positive credit balance, and (b) provide to the Consumer Credit Division Director evidence of such payments and an affidavit that all such payments have been made;

WHEREAS, on January 28, 2015, Respondent surrendered its Connecticut sales finance company license to the Commissioner;

WHEREAS, on March 6, 2015, Respondent provided to the Consumer Credit Division Director evidence that it has remitted to each client all monies erroneously retained by Respondent from such client’s account(s) which had a positive credit balance, and an affidavit that all such payments have been made;

AND WHEREAS, Section 36a-51(c) of the Connecticut General Statutes provides, in pertinent part, that “[a]ny licensee may surrender any license issued by the commissioner under any provision of the general statutes by surrendering the license to the commissioner in person or by registered or certified mail . . . .  If, prior to receiving the license, . . . the commissioner has instituted a proceeding to . . . revoke . . . such license, such surrender . . . will not become effective except at such time and under such conditions as the commissioner by order determines”.

NOW THEREFORE, the Commissioner ORDERS the following:

Issued at Hartford, Connecticut
this 23rd day of April 2015.
                                                                  __________/s/___________
                                                                  Jorge L. Perez
                                                                  Banking Commissioner



This Order was mailed by certified mail,
return receipt requested, to Respondent
on April 23, 2015.

Condor Capital Corp.                                      Certified Mail No. 7013 3020 0000 4226 9784
c/o James J. Reardon, Esq.
Reardon Scanlon Vodola Barnes LLP
45 South Main Street, 3rd Floor
West Hartford, CT 06107