ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

07F-M2373-ROC-com · Registrar of Contractors · 2009-03-16

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: February 25, 2009. APPEARANCES: Charleen L. Hawksley appeared personally. R Tek Services, LLC did not appear. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Brian Brendan Tully _____________________________________________________________________ Based upon the evidence of record, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order on Compliance:

FINDINGS OF FACT 1. On or about October 24, 2008, the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”) issued an Order Reopening Complaint and Setting for Compliance Hearing in Case No. M07-2373. 2. On or about January 20, 2009, the Registrar issued a Notice of Compliance Hearing in Case No. M07-2373 advising the parties of the time, date and location of the compliance hearing. The Notice of Compliance Hearing was sent to the parties at their addresses of record with the Registrar. 3. The purpose of the compliance hearing was to determine whether Respondent substantially complied with the terms and conditions of the Decision and Order issued by the Registrar on May 16, 2008. 4. The Registrar’s Decision and Order issued on May 16, 2008, adopted the parties’ settlement agreement reached during the hearing in the underlying disciplinary hearing. 5. The essence of the settlement agreement was Complainant agreed that she owed Respondent the sum of $2,500.00, which was to be rolled into financing provided by Respondent in the total amount of $11,855.00. Respondent was then to complete the remainder of the remodeling project at Complainant’s residential group home. 6. The commencement of the compliance hearing was delayed 15 minutes to allow for the late arrival of an authorized representative for Respondent. After the delay, the Administrative Law Judge conducted the compliance hearing in Respondent’s absence. 7. Complainant testified that Respondent refused to return to the jobsite to complete the scope of work. The garage being remodeled into additional resident rooms remains in shambles. 8. Complainant has sought other financing. 9. Respondent failed to perform its obligations under the parties’ settlement agreement. 10. A review of the Registrar’s official records reveals, among other things, that Respondent’s License No. 206729 was revoked on October 17, 2008 in Case No. M06-1119. As a result of that revocation, Respondent is prohibited from performing any contracting, including Complainant’s project. Respondent’s license was revoked a second time on January 15, 2009 in Case No. G08-0719.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(C), the revocations of Respondent’s contracting license does not deprive the Registrar of the authority to impose additional disciplinary penalties against the license in this matter. 2. Respondent’s failure to perform its contractual obligations under the parties’ settlement agreement warrants the imposition of disciplinary action against its contracting license.

RECOMMENDED ORDER ON COMPLIANCE Respondent’s License No. 206729 shall be revoked in Case No. M07-2373 on the effective date of the Order entered in this matter. In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be 40 days from the date of that certification.

Done this day, March 16, 2009

______________________________________ Brian Brendan Tully Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2009, to:

William A. Mundell, Director Registrar of Contractors c/o Legal Department 3838 N. Central Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85012

By ___________________________ -----------------------

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