ALJDEC

01F-A012005(3)-BFS · Department of Building and Fire Safety · 2001-11-05

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|VAL JO KRUSH, | | Case No. AAA 01-2/005 | | | |Docket No. 01F-A012005(1)-BFS | |Appellant, | | | | | | | |-v- | | | | | |RECOMMENDED DECISION | |CAVCO INDUSTRIES, L.L.C., dba | |OF ADMINISTRATIVE | |CAVCO INDUSTRIES-DURANGO DIVISION, | |LAW JUDGE | |LICENSE NO. 7098, CLASS M-9E, | | | | | | | |Respondent. | | | | | | |

HEARING: November 5, 2001. APPEARANCES: APPELLANT: did not appear. CAVCO INDUSTRIES, INC.: by Mike Edwards, authorized representative. PRESTIGE HOMES, INC.: did not appear. APEX MOBILE HOME SERVICE: by Romelia Campbell, qualifying party and authorized representative, with Les Campbell, owner.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Anthony Halas. _____________________________________________________________________ In this matter, Appellant Val Jo Krush filed Notice of Appeal of certain of the “Not Verified” items as addressed in the VERIFIED COMPLAINT & SIGN-OFF FORM issued by the inspector of the Office of Manufactured Housing (OMH), Arizona Department of Building and Fire Safety (Department). On the basis of her appeal, hearing was duly scheduled (then continued at her request) and convened on November 5, 2001. The following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Decision are now made: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. At the time and place set for continued hearing in this matter, Appellant Val Jo Krush did not appear, nor did anyone on her behalf. 2. Respondent manufacturer Cavco Ind. LLC appeared through its Service Manager and authorized representative, Mike Edwards. 3. Respondent dealer Prestige Homes, Inc. did not appear. 4. Respondent Apex Mobile Home Service appeared through its qualifying party and authorized representative, Romelia Campbell.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The burden of proving the allegations made in her Notice of Appeal is on Appellant Krush, by a preponderance of the substantial evidence. No evidence having been presented in this case, Appellant has not met that burden.

RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, IT IS RECOMMENDED that Appellant’s Notice of Appeal in Case No. AAA 01-2/005 be dismissed. Done this day, November 5, 2001.

______________________________________ Anthony Halas Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2001, to:

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

By ___________________________

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

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