ALJDEC

00F-A990021-BFS · Department of Building and Fire Safety · 2000-05-17

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: May 12, 2000. APPEARANCES: Matt Nino, Respondent’s representative; Jess Harris, Respondent’s representative. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Dorinda M. Lang. _____________________________________________________________________ Because Complainant failed to meet her burden of proving her complaint, I recommend that this appeal be denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Complainant filed a complaint with the Department of Building and Fire Safety regarding items needing repair at her manufactured home. On her complaint she named the above Respondents as responsible for completing the repairs. 2. Prior to hearing, Complainant requested that Respondent K & E Services be dropped as a Respondent as her complaint with that party had been resolved. 3. At the scheduled time of hearing, the other two Respondents were represented by employees authorized to appear on behalf of the companies. Complainant, however, did not appear at the hearing though the beginning time of the hearing was delayed 15 minutes to afford her additional time. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This administrative hearing was held under authority of and pursuant to A.R.S. §41-1092, and the Arizona Mobile Home Parks Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, A.R.S. §33-1401 et sequitur (“the Act”). 2. Subject-matter jurisdiction vests in the Department of Building and Fire Safety under authority of A.R.S. §33-1406 and A.R.S. §33-1408. 3. The burden of proof at an administrative hearing is generally upon the Complainant. Utah Construction Company v. Berg et al, 68 Ariz. 285, 205 P.2d 367 (1949). Further, the standard of proof at hearing is a “preponderance of the evidence”. Smith v. Arizona Dept. of Transportation, 146 Ariz. 430, 706 P.2d 756 (App. 1985). 4. In this case, Complainant has failed to appear for the hearing and submit evidence in support of her claim. Therefore, she has not established that her complaint merits discipline against Respondent’s licenses. RECOMMENDED DECISION Based upon the foregoing, I recommend that the complaint in this matter be denied. Done this day, May 17, 2000. OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

______________________________________ Dorinda M. Lang Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2000, to:

Department of Building and Fire Safety N. Eric Borg ATTN: Michelle M. Castaneda East Virginia, Suite 100 Phoenix, AZ 85004

By ___________________________

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826