ALJDEC

00F-RF0225-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2000-06-26

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: June 21, 2000, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Plaintiff appeared on her own behalf. The Defendant failed to appear. The Registrar of Contractors failed to appear.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

Evidence and testimony were presented and, based upon the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order are made: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Plaintiff is found to be an “injured person” as defined by statute and is found to be entitled to receive payment from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund for damages sustained as a result of the Defendant’s acts or omissions. 2. The Defendant’s contracting license has been previously revoked by Order of the Registrar of Contractors. Such revocation is determined to render this Defendant unable to remedy the violations of the State’s contracting laws which gave rise to the instant claim for damages. 3. The Plaintiff’s testimony established that she has litigated the same issues in a civil court of competent jurisdiction and that she was awarded a judgment against the Defendant in the sum of $700.00 plus costs. 4. The Plaintiff testified that when the Defendant failed to satisfy the judgment the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant with the Registrar of Contractors complaining that the Defendant had failed to satisfy the judgment against it. 5. The Registrar of Contractors then issued an Order for the Defendant to properly satisfy the judgment. The Defendant failed to comply with the Order and the Registrar revoked the Defendant’s License on October 29, 1999. 6. The Plaintiff submitted three bids from properly licensed contractors that range from the low bid of $3,294.14 through the high bid of $7,200.00. There was no dispute that the assigned agency inspector recommended that the low bid of $3,294.14 be accepted. 7. Credible evidence and testimony established that a civil court of competent jurisdiction has already heard the same workmanship issues involved in this matter and issued a judgment in the sum of $700.00 plus costs. This judgment is found to be binding upon the Registrar of Contractors and any modification of the judgment could be constructed to be a collateral attack on the civil judgment. The Registrar of Contractors is found to be bound by the doctrine of res judicata from modifying or reconsidering the judgment issued by the civil court. 8. There was no dispute that the Complainant’s disciplinary complaint specified that the reason for the Complaint was the Respondent’s failure to pay the civil judgment that had been issued against it. Credible evidence established that had the Defendant properly satisfied the civil judgment its contracting license would not have been revoked. 9. Based upon credible evidence produced at hearing, it is found that a proper and reasonable amount payable to the Plaintiff from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund, for the Plaintiff’s actual damages, is the sum of $ 720.00 representing sum of $700.00 set forth in the Civil judgment and the sum of $20.00 shown as costs. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. It is a well settled doctrine and policy of law that final judgments of civil courts may not be subject to collateral attack in subsequent proceedings. The findings and judgment in Superior Court case no. CV 98- 500066 are res judicata as to the issues and allegations in the instant claim for damages. 2. A.R.S. §32-1132(A) provides, in part, as follows: “There is established the residential contractors’ recovery fund,…, from which any person injured by an act, representation, transaction or conduct of a residential contractor, which is in violation of this chapter or the rules adopted pursuant to this chapter, may award in the county where the violation occurred an amount of not more than twenty thousand dollars for damages sustained by the act, representation, transaction or conduct. An award from the fund is limited to the actual damages suffered by the claimant as a direct result of the residential contractor’s violation but shall not exceed an amount necessary to complete or repair a residential structure or appurtenance within residential property lines…,” 3. Under the facts and circumstances of this matter, the Registrar of Contractors is empowered to determine and award proper payment to the Plaintiff from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund pursuant to A.R.S. §32- 1154(E). 4. The credible evidence of record supports an award from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund to the Plaintiff in the sum of $720.00 all of which shall be appropriately chargeable against the Defendant and/or persons on the Defendant’s license as set forth in A.R.S. §32-1139(B) RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Registrar of Contractors shall commence and finalize payment procedures from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund to the Plaintiff in the total amount of $720.00 for damages. Done this day, July 7, 2000.

________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

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

Michael P. Goldwater, Director Registrar of Contractors ATTN: Joyce Armijo 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

By _______________________________ -----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 100 North Stone Avenue, Suite 704 Tucson, Arizona 85701 (520) 628-5488