ALJDEC

01F-A012008(3)-BFS · Department of Building and Fire Safety · 2001-10-05

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: 5 October 2001 APPEARANCES: Complainant: None. Respondents: Scott Chambers, Operations Manager, Cavco Industries; James Zotika, Owner/Manager, Leisure Homes; Robert Anderson, Attorney for Leisure Homes; Peter Meluch, Owner, Country Pines Mobile Home Repair; Julie Meluch, wife of Peter Meluch; Christina and Jessica Meluch, daughters of Peter and Julie Meluch. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Maurice McWhirter _____________________________________________________________________ Complainant filed an appeal with the Arizona Department of Building and Fire Safety (“BFS”) appealing a BFS inspector’s non-verification of certain items contained in Complainant’s consumer complaint to BFS.

FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The above-entitled case was called to hearing on 5 October 2001 at 1:30 PM at the Office of Administrative Hearings in Phoenix, Arizona, pursuant to a duly promulgated Notice Of Hearing issued to the parties on 3 September 2001, for the purpose of hearing Complainant’s appeal of a BFS inspector’s non-verification of certain items contained in Complainant’s consumer complaint to BFS. Complainant failed to appear and, consequently, no evidence was presented in support of Complainant’s case.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This matter is within the jurisdiction of BFS pursuant to ARS §§ 41-2153, 41-2181 & 41-2186. 2. The burden of proof generally at an administrative hearing falls to the Complainant. Culpepper v. Arizona Board of Nursing, 187 Ariz. 431, 930 P.2d 508 (App. 1997). Further, the standard of proof at hearing is by a “preponderance of the evidence”. Smith v. Arizona Department of Transportation, 146 Ariz. 430, 706 P.2d 756 (App. 1985). Complainant, by the aforementioned default in appearance at the hearing, failed to sustain the burden of proving, by a preponderance of reliable, substantial and probative evidence, that any of the items unverified by the BFS inspector in Complainant’s consumer complaint to BFS should be verified.

RECOMMENDED DECISION It is recommended that BFS dismiss this case on the basis of Complainant’s default.

Done this day: 5 October 2001

______________________________________ Maurice McWhirter 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