ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2009A-6941778-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2011-12-16

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: December 16, 2011, at 8:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared on her own behalf. The Respondent failed to appear. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for a Compliance Hearing to determine whether the Respondent had fully complied with the terms of the November 25, 2009 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 Order Setting Compliance Hearing provides, in pertinent part as follows: Upon review and consideration of the above-referenced submissions, as well as the entire file in this matter, and with good cause appearing, IT IS ORDERED that a Compliance Hearing be scheduled in the expedited course of docketing in the Tucson area. At the Compliance Hearing, the parties may offer evidence and testimony as to whether or not Respondent complied with the terms and conditions of the Registrar’s November 25, 2009 Order issued in this matter. If it is determined that Respondent failed to fully comply with the Registrar’s written directives, absent unreasonable interference or denial of access by Complainant, then Respondent’s B.101250-R License shall be subject to the immediate imposition of discipline. If it is determined that Complainant has unreasonably interfered or denied access to Respondent or its representatives in their attempts to comply with the Registrar’s November 25th Order, then Respondent’s License shall not be disciplined and the matter shall be closed.

2. The assigned Agency Inspector testified that he had conducted a pre- hearing compliance inspection and observed that no corrective work had been performed. 3. Undisputed credible testimony and evidence established that there has been no unreasonable denial of access in this matter. 4. Undisputed credible testimony and 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 November 25, 2009 Order of the Registrar. On the contrary, credible evidence of record established that the Respondent has repeatedly failed to properly accomplish compliance with the terms of the November 25, 2009 Order of the Registrar and that the Respondent’s efforts appear to have been directed to delay and excuse, rather than to achieve, compliance with the November 25, 2009 Order of the Registrar. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Undisputed credible testimony and evidence presented during the compliance hearing supported findings which establish that the Respondent has not fully complied with the terms of the November 25, 2009 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. 3. The November 25, 2009 Order of the Registrar determined that the Respondent had violated the charged provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A) (abandonment or refusal to perform), A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A) (2) (departure from or disregard of plans or specifications or any building codes), A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A) (7) (wrongful or fraudulent act), A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A) (18) (contracting or offering to contract while the license is under suspension or on inactive status), A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A) (23) (failure to take appropriate corrective action), A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A) (13), namely A.R.S. § 32-1124 (B) (display of license), A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A) (13), namely A.R.S. § 32-1158 (minimum elements of a contract), and A.R.S. § 32- 1154 (A) (3), namely, A.A.C. rule R4-9-108 (failure to perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner). RECOMMENDed order In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s License 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, December 16, 2011.

/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