DOB: Dratel Group Inc - Revocation Order

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


IN THE MATTER OF:

THE DRATEL GROUP, INC.

CRD No. 8049


("Respondent")

    

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

ORDER REVOKING

REGISTRATION AS

A BROKER-DEALER


DOCKET NO. NR-16-8163-S

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

WHEREAS, the Banking Commissioner (“Commissioner”) is charged with the administration of Chapter 672a of the General Statutes of Connecticut, the Connecticut Uniform Securities Act (“Act”), and Sections 36b-31-2 to 36b-31-33, inclusive, of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies (“Regulations”) promulgated under the Act;
 
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2016, the Commissioner, acting pursuant to Section 36b-15 of the Act and Section 4-182(c) of the General Statutes of Connecticut, issued a Notice of Intent to Revoke Registration as a Broker-dealer and Notice of Right to Hearing (collectively “Notice”) against Respondent, which Notice is incorporated by reference herein;
 
WHEREAS, the Commissioner alleged in the Notice that the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) sanctions of Respondent therein described, including the expulsion of Respondent by FINRA, formed a basis for the revocation of Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut pursuant to Section 36b-15(a)(2)(F)(iii) of the Act;
 
WHEREAS, the Commissioner further alleged in the Notice that the revocation order issued against Respondent by the securities administrator of the State of New Jersey constituted a basis for the revocation of Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut pursuant to Section 36b-15(a)(2)(F)(i) of the Act;
 
WHEREAS, the Notice stated, inter alia, that the Commissioner had reason to believe that grounds existed to revoke Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut pursuant to Sections 36b-15(a)(2)(F)(iii) and 36b-15(a)(2)(F)(i) of the Act; that notice was thereby given to Respondent that Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut would be revoked, subject to Respondent’s right to request a hearing on the allegations set forth in the Notice; that Respondent would be afforded an opportunity for a hearing on the allegations set forth in the Notice if a written request for a hearing were received by the Department of Banking within fourteen (14) days following Respondent’s receipt of the Notice; and that if Respondent failed to request a hearing within the time period prescribed or failed to appear at any such hearing, the allegations in the Notice would be deemed admitted, and the Commissioner would issue an order revoking Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut;
 
WHEREAS, on September 19, 2016, the Notice was sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to Respondent at P.O. Box 1026, Southold, New York 11971, and 53345 Route 25, Building 10, #3, Southold, New York 11971;
 
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2016 and September 30, 2016, the Notice was received by Respondent at each of the above addresses, respectively;
 
WHEREAS, Respondent has failed to request a hearing within the prescribed time period;
 
WHEREAS, Section 36a-1-31(a) of the Regulations provides, in pertinent part, that:

      When a party fails to request a hearing within the time specified in the notice, the allegations against the party may be deemed admitted.  Without further proceedings or notice to the party, the commissioner shall issue a final decision in accordance with section 4-180 of the Connecticut General Statutes and section 36a-1-52 of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies[;]

WHEREAS, Section 36b-15 of the Act provides, in pertinent part, that:
 
     (a)        The commissioner may, by order . . . revoke any registration . . . if the commissioner finds that (1) the order is in the public interest, and (2) the . . . registrant . . . (F) is the subject of any of the following sanctions that are currently effective or were imposed within the past ten years:  (i) An order issued by the securities administrator of any other state . . . revoking registration as a broker-dealer . . . [or] (iii) a suspension, expulsion or other sanction issued by a national securities exchange or other self-regulatory organization registered under federal laws administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission . . . if the effect of the sanction has not been stayed or overturned by appeal or otherwise[.]
          
     
   * * * 
        
  (f)  No order may be entered under this section except as provided in subsection (c) of this section without (1) appropriate prior notice to the . . . registrant . . . (2) opportunity for hearing, and (3) written findings of fact and conclusions of law[;]
 
WHEREAS, Section 36b-31(a) of the Act provides, in pertinent part, that “[t]he commissioner may from time to time make . . . such . . . orders as are necessary to carry out the provisions of sections 36b-2 to 36b-34, inclusive”;
 
AND WHEREAS, Section 36b-31(b) of the Act provides, in pertinent part, that “[n]o . . . order may be made . . . unless the commissioner finds that the action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors and consistent with the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of sections 36b-2 to 36b-34, inclusive.”

II. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The Commissioner finds that the facts as set forth in paragraphs 3 through 17, inclusive, of the Notice shall constitute findings of fact within the meaning of Section 4-180(c) of the General Statutes of Connecticut and Section 36a-1-52 of the Regulations, and that the Statutory Basis for Revocation of Registration as a Broker-dealer set forth in paragraphs 18 through 21, inclusive, of the Notice shall constitute conclusions of law within the meaning of Section 4-180(c) of the General Statutes of Connecticut and Section 36a-1-52 of the Regulations.
2. The Commissioner finds that grounds exist to revoke Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut pursuant to Sections 36b-15(a)(2)(F)(iii) and 36b-15(a)(2)(F)(i) of the Act.
3. The Commissioner finds that the facts require the issuance of an order revoking Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut.
4. The Commissioner finds that the Notice complied with the requirements of Section 36b-15(f) of the Act and Sections 4-177 and 4-182(c) of the General Statutes of Connecticut.
5. The Commissioner finds that the issuance of an order revoking Respondent’s registration as a broker-dealer in Connecticut is necessary and appropriate in the public interest and for the protection of investors and consistent with the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of Sections 36b-2 to 36b-34, inclusive, of the Act.

III. ORDER

Having read the record, I hereby ORDER, pursuant to Section 36b-15 of the Act, that:

1. The registration of The Dratel Group, Inc. as a broker-dealer in Connecticut is hereby REVOKED; and
2. This Order shall become effective when mailed.



Dated at Hartford, Connecticut,       ____/s/_____________
this 4th day of November 2016.      Jorge L. Perez
         Banking Commissioner 


This Order was sent by certified
mail, return receipt requested, to
Respondent on November 4, 2016.

The Dratel Group, Inc.
53345 Route 25, Building 10, #3
Southold, New York 11971
Certified mail no. 7012 3050 0000 6997 6339

The Dratel Group, Inc.
P.O. Box 1026
Southold, New York 11971
Certified mail no. 7012 3050 0000 6997 6346


Administrative Orders and Settlements