ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2008A-9170907-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2010-07-08

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: July 7, 2010 at 8:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared through his attorney, Mark Hanson. The Respondent appeared through its authorized representative, Sean Alexander. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for a Compliance Hearing to determine whether the Respondent has fully complied with the terms of the previously entered Order of the Registrar. 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. The Registrar’s Order denying Extension of Time and Setting a Compliance Hearing provides, in relevant part, as follows: IT IS FRUTHER ORDERED that a Compliance Hearing be scheduled in the expedited course of docketing in the Phoenix area to determine whether or not Respondent has fully complied with the terms set forth in the Registrar’s April 16, 2009 Order, absent unreasonable interference or denial of access by Complainants. 2. The Registrar’s April 16, 2009, Order provides, in pertinent part, as follows: On the effective date of the Order entered in this matter, Blooming Vista’ Class B-05 License (No. 212320) shall be suspended until the Registrar of Contractors receives written proof that Blooming Vista has performed either of the following options to be chosen by the Braeggers: i. enlarging the catch basin to accommodate the size of the Braeggers’ pool or ii. installing a separate surge tank. 3. There was no dispute that the Respondent has not enlarged the catch basin to accommodate the size of the Braeggers’ swimming pool. 4. There was no dispute that the Respondent has not installed a separate surge tank. 5. There was no credible evidence of unreasonable interference or denial of access by the Complainants. 6. Credible testimony and evidence established that the Respondent has failed to fully comply with the terms and conditions of the prior Order. 7. 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 of the prior Order of the Registrar. On the contrary, credible testimony and evidence established that the Respondent has repeatedly failed to properly accomplish compliance with the terms and conditions of the prior Order and that the Respondent’s efforts appear to have been directed to delay and excuse, rather than to achieve, compliance with the prior Order of the Registrar.

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 of the prior Order of the Registrar. 2. 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.

RECOMMENDed order on compliance hearing

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Class B-05 (No. 212320) 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, July 8, 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