A Massachusetts insurance producer has had his License revoked and been ordered to pay an $8,000 fine after the Division of Insurance (“DOI”) found he had committed a felony, engaged in fraudulent practices, had his License suspended in another state, and—critically—failed to report any of these events as required by Massachusetts law.
On July 7, 2025, a DOI Hearing Officer entered a Summary Decision and Order against Ramon Noronha of Framingham, revoking any and all licenses issued to him by the Division. The order was the culmination of a series of unaddressed compliance failures, including a felony drug charge, a for-cause termination by an insurer for altering policies, and a license suspension in Louisiana. Mr. Noronha’s case serves as a reminder for all producers that failing to report adverse actions can be as damaging as the underlying violations themselves.
The Federal Felony Conviction
The troubles for Mr. Noronha began on April 16, 2021, when he was charged in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida with one count of possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance, a felony. On March 24, 2022, Mr. Noronha pleaded guilty and was sentenced to two years of probation.
Under Massachusetts law, specifically M.G.L. c. 175, §162V(b), a producer must report any criminal prosecution to the Commissioner within 30 days of the initial pretrial hearing date. The DOI’s records showed that Mr. Noronha never reported the criminal proceeding, his first critical failure in compliance.
For-Cause Termination by Mutual of Omaha
Beyond the criminal conviction, Mr. Noronha’s conduct in the marketplace also drew regulatory scrutiny. On November 7, 2023, Mutual of Omaha Life Insurance Company notified the Division that it had terminated Mr. Noronha’s appointment for cause.
An investigation by the insurer determined that Mr. Noronha had:
- Changed the billing dates on three existing life insurance policies without the consent of the policyholders.
- Submitted a life insurance application without the customer’s permission.
These actions constitute the use of fraudulent and dishonest practices, providing a separate and distinct basis for disciplinary action under M.G.L. c. 175, §162R(a)(8).
The Louisiana License Suspension
The for-cause termination triggered action in other jurisdictions. The Louisiana Department of Insurance (LDI) launched an inquiry after receiving notice of the termination from Mutual of Omaha. The LDI sent Mr. Noronha an Administrative Order to Respond on March 5, 2024, but received no response. After a second notice also went unanswered, the LDI suspended his Louisiana producer license on June 27, 2024, for violating an order of the commissioner.
This suspension in another state created a new reporting obligation. M.G.L. c. 175, §162V(a) requires a producer to report any administrative action taken against them in another jurisdiction within 30 days. Again, DOI records show Mr. Noronha failed to report the Louisiana suspension, compounding his compliance failures.
Massachusetts Division of Insurance Takes Final Action
Faced with this cascade of violations, the DOI filed an Order to Show Cause (“OTSC”) against Mr. Noronha on February 12, 2025. True to form, Mr. Noronha failed to file an answer or make any filing in the matter.
This failure to respond allowed the Division to move for a summary decision, arguing that with no answer filed, the facts alleged in the OTSC were taken as fact. The Hearing Officer agreed, finding that Mr. Noronha’s conduct supported discipline under four separate clauses of M.G.L. c. 175, §162R(a):
- (a)(2): Violating insurance laws (specifically, the reporting requirements of §162V).
- (a)(6): Being convicted of a felony.
- (a)(8): Using fraudulent, coercive, or dishonest practices.
- (a)(9): Having a license suspended or revoked in another state.
Breakdown of the $8,000 Fine: A Costly Tally
The Hearing Officer granted the DOI’s request for the maximum civil penalty of $1,000 for each violation. The $8,000 total was calculated as follows:
- $2,000 for two violations of §162R(a)(2) for failing to report:
- One instance of failing to report the felony proceeding.
- One instance of failing to report the Louisiana administrative action.
- $4,000 for four violations of §162R(a)(8) for fraudulent and dishonest practices:
- Three instances for altering policy billing dates without consent.
- One instance of submitting a policy without consent.
- $1,000 for one violation of §162R(a)(6) for being convicted of a felony.
- $1,000 for one violation of §162R(a)(9) for having his Louisiana license suspended.
Final Orders and Compliance Takeaways
The Hearing Officer’s final order was unequivocal. In addition to revoking his producer license and imposing the fine, the order mandated that Mr. Noronha:
- Return any licenses in his possession to the Division.
- Cease and desist from the conduct that gave rise to the OTSC.
- Is prohibited from directly or indirectly transacting any insurance business in Massachusetts.
- Must dispose of any and all interests in a Massachusetts insurance agency, in compliance with M.G.L. c. 175, §166B.
- Pay the $8,000 fine within 30 days of the order.
This case underscores a fundamental principle of insurance regulation: disclosure is not optional. The initial violations—the felony and the policy alterations—were serious. However, the subsequent failures to report these events to the proper authorities created entirely separate violations that significantly increased the ultimate penalty. For producers and compliance officers in a regulated industry, the lesson is clear: ignoring a regulator is the surest path to the harshest outcome.
