ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

06F-T1249-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2007-03-15

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: March 12th, 2007; 9:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: Complainant, Ms. Ellen P. Donnelly, appeared and represented herself. Respondent, Mr. Patrick Morgan Nolan, appeared and represented himself. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Grant Winston ____________________________________________________________________ The administrative hearing of this matter was held in the Office of Administrative Hearings, Tucson. Testimony was heard and other evidence admitted to the record, and, based on the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order are made.

FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Respondent herein, Mr. Patrick Morgan Nolan, doing business as Pat Nolan Cooling and Heating, is, and during all time material hereto was, a contractor licensed by and doing business in the State of Arizona, holding Class C-39 License number 067675. 2. Complainant, Ms. Ellen P. Donnelly, is a homeowner residing in Tucson, Arizona, who contracted Respondent to perform repair work to her home’s evaporative cooler in May, 2006. The Respondent’s repair work was successful. 3. This controversy is solely to do with the reasonableness of the amount of money Respondent charged Complainant for the repair work. At the administrative hearing only the two parties testified. 4. Complainant contends that the charges are exorbitant; Respondent contends that his charges were reasonable. The charges are contained in two separate invoices; one for $75.76, which Complainant paid, and a second for $791.96, which Complainant refused and still refuses to pay. Complainant stated at the hearing that she would be willing to pay $250.00 for the work described in the second invoice. 5. It appears from the record as a whole that the parties have a good faith monetary and/or contract dispute which would be more properly resolved, if at all, in a civil court of competent jurisdiction.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This administrative hearing was held under authority of and pursuant to A.R.S. 32-1156, and A.R.S. 41-1092. 2. Respondent is charged in the instant Citation and Complaint with a possible violation of A.R.S. 32-1154.A.7, wrongful or fraudulent conduct which has substantially injured another person. 3. A good faith monetary and/or contract dispute, absent evidence of other wrongdoing, does not warrant disciplinary action upon a licensee. See: Bentivegna v. Powers Steel & Wire Products, Inc., 206 Ariz. 581, 81 P.2d 3d 1040 (Ariz. App. Div. 1, 2003).

RECOMMENDED ORDER The parties have a good faith monetary and/or contract dispute which should be more properly resolved, if at all, in a civil court of competent jurisdiction. Wherefore, it is hereby recommended that Citation and Complaint No. T06-1249 be dismissed on the effective date of this Order (40 days after the date of service appearing on the Registrar’s certification on the Order). In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge’s Decision and Order by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, then the effective date of the Order shall be 40 days after the date of that certification. Done this day, March 15th, 2007.

______________________________________ Grant Winston Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2007, to:

Registrar of Contractors Fidelis V. Garcia Legal Department 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

By ___________________________

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

Office of Administrative Hearings 100 N. Stone Ave., Suite 704 Tucson, Arizona 85701 (520) 628-5488