ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2008A-21753805-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2010-05-18

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: May 18, 2010 at 8:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared on his own behalf. The Respondent appeared through its authorized representative, Louie Caruso. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for a Compliance Hearing to determine whether the Respondent has fully complied with the terms and conditions of the parties’ Settlement Agreement. Evidence and testimony were presented and the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order on Compliance Hearing are made:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. On February 25, 2010, the Registrar of Contractors issued an Order Reopening Complaint. The Order provides, in pertinent part, as follows: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a Compliance Hearing be scheduled in the expedited course of docketing in the Phoenix area to determine whether or not Respondent fully complied with the terms set forth in the parties’ Settlement Agreement, absent unreasonable interference or denial of access by Complainant. If it is determined that Respondent failed to fully comply with the terms of the settlement, absent unreasonable interference or denial of access by Complainant, then Respondent’s Class L-39 License No. 209578 shall be subject to the immediate imposition of discipline. 2. Undisputed credible testimony and evidence, presented at the compliance hearing, established that the Respondent has failed to fully comply with the terms of the parties’ Settlement Agreement. 3. There was no credible evidence or any unreasonable interference or denial of access by the Complainant. 4. Credible evidence established that the Respondent’s actions over a prolonged period of time are not indicative of a good faith desire to resolve this matter by complying with the terms and conditions of the parties’ Settlement Agreement. On the contrary, credible evidence of record establishes that the Respondent has repeatedly failed to properly accomplish compliance with the terms and conditions of the parties’ Settlement Agreement and that the Respondent’s efforts appear to have been directed to delay and excuse, rather than to achieve, full compliance with the terms of the parties’ Settlement Agreement. 5. A licensed contractor is not entitled to an unlimited period of time or an endless succession of opportunities to comply with specified conditions which reduce, eliminate, or terminate, disciplinary action against the contractor’s License. 6. Notice is taken of the Respondent’s prior License record with the Registrar of Contractors.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. Credible testimony and evidence presented during the compliance hearing supported findings that establish that the Respondent has not fully complied with the terms and conditions of the parties’ Settlement Agreement and the prior Order of the Registrar.

RECOMMENDed order on compliance hearing

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that Respondent’s Class L- License No. 209578 shall be revoked. In the event of certification of this 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 the certification.

Done this day, May 18, 2010.

/s/ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

William A. Mundell, Director Registrar of Contractors -----------------------

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