ALJDEC
01F-A012024(1)-BFS · Department of Building and Fire Safety · 2002-04-16
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
|BLAKE AND ROBBIN NELSON, | | Case No. AAA 01-2/024 | | | |Docket No. 01F-A012024-BFS | |Appellants, | | | | | | | |-v- | | | | | |RECOMMENDED DECISION | |FLEETWOOD HOMES OF ARIZONA, INC., | |OF ADMINISTRATIVE | |LICENSE NO. 6184, CLASS M-9E, et | |LAW JUDGE | |al. | | | | | | | |Respondents. | | | | | | |
HEARING: April 16, 2002. APPEARANCES: APPELLANTS: did not appear. RESPONDENT: Fleetwood Homes of Arizona, Inc.: by Douglas Cripe, authorized representative. RESPONDENT: Busbee’s Mobile Home Sales, Inc.: by Tim Busbee, authorized representative. RESPONDENT: Robert W. Riddle, dba AZM: by Bob Riddle, with Joe Riddle. RESPONDENT: Sunrise Mobile Home Service, Inc. dba Sunrise Home Service: by Josh Wendt.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Anthony Halas. _____________________________________________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On the basis of Appellants’ Notice of Appeal of a VERIFIED COMPLAINT & SIGN OFF FORM issued by the Arizona Department of Building and Fire Safety (Department), hearing in this matter was scheduled to convene in Phoenix, Arizona, on April 16, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., pursuant to Notice of Hearing issued via certified mail on February 28, 2002, by the Assistant Director of the Department. 2. At the time and place scheduled for hearing, and for an additional one-half hour, no appearance was made by Appellants Nelson, nor was any information received to explain their nonappearance. Respondent manufacturer Fleetwood Homes of Arizona, Inc., was represented by Douglas Cripe; Respondent dealer Busbee’s Mobile Home Sales, Inc., by Tim Busbee; Respondent installer Robert W. Riddle, dba AZM, by Bob Riddle; and Respondent installer Sunrise Mobile Home Service, Inc. dba Sunrise Home Service, by Josh Wendt.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW The burden of proving that the Department’s determination to NOT VERIFY items raised by Appellants’ consumer complaint is improper or contrary to law is on the complaining party, and in this matter that party is Appellants. That burden is by a preponderance of the probative evidence. Because Appellants did not appear at hearing, either on their own behalf or through a representative, they have failed to present any evidence and their burden has not been met.
RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the appeal in Case No. AAA 01-2/024 be dismissed.
Done this day, April 16, 2002.
______________________________________ Anthony Halas Administrative Law Judge
Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2002, 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