ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2010A-308472680-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2011-02-23

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: February 3, 2011 APPEARANCES: Eric and Lorelei Sin appeared personally. L D Construction Services, L.L.C., doing business as Mack Remodeling and Construction, was represented by its member and qualifying party, Larry Mack. 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: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. L D Construction Services, L.L.C., doing business as Mack Remodeling and Construction (“Respondent”), is the holder of License No. 228322, a Class B-3 contracting license issued by the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). 2. Eric and Lorelei Sin (“Complainants”) filed a written Complaint with the Registrar alleging numerous workmanship deficiencies by Respondent during Complainants’ kitchen remodeling project. The Registrar designated the Complaint as Case No. 2010-[number redacted]. 3. The Registrar issued a Citation and Complaint in Case No. 2010- [number redacted] charging Respondent with violating the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (1) and (13), specifically A.R.S. § 32-1124(B). 4. The Registrar forwarded Case No. 2010-[number redacted] to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent agency, for an evidentiary hearing. 5. On October 1, 2009, Complainants entered into a written agreement with Respondent for their kitchen-remodeling project. 6. Respondent’s contract did not list its contracting license number preceded by the acronym “ROC.” 7. During the project, Complainants paid Respondent the total sum of $20,565.00, which exceeded the original contract price. 8. Larry Mack is Respondent’s member and qualifying party. 9. On December 23, 2009, Mr. Mack sent Complainants an email that advised Complainants of the following: I am very sorry to have to write this note to inform you that as of this moment I am closeing [sic] my doors. The economy has finally crippled me to the point that I can’t afford to continue any longer. This is no fault of yours; and I am very sorry and embarrassed that I have let you and others down! I just can’t do any more….You guys are great people and dnt [sic] deserve this and i [sic] tried to get you as close as I could to complete but due to delays and my personal/financial situation I just couldn’t hang in. I’m deeply sorry and although it will cost more to finish it shouldn’t be too much more. My cell phone will probably be on for another 4 or 5 days before it is shut off. Thank you Larry Mack / Mack Remodeling

10. Respondent never returned to the Complainants’ unfinished project. Complainants had to hire additional contractors to complete the project at an additional cost to Complainants. 11. Complainants’ request for monetary compensation due to Respondent’s abandonment of their project should be resolved in either a court of competent jurisdiction or a claim to the Residential Contractors’ Recovery Fund.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The Registrar has jurisdiction over Respondent and the subject matter in this case. 2. Pursuant to A.A.C. R2-19-119(B), Complainants have the burden of proof in this matter. The standard of proof is by a preponderance of the evidence. A.A.C. R2-19-119(A). 3. Respondent violated the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1), as charged in the Citation and Complaint issued by the Registrar. Respondent abandoned Complainants’ project without legal justification resulting in additional costs and damages sustained by Complainants. 4. Respondent violated the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (13), specifically A.R.S. § 32-1124(B). 5. The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the evidence of record does not support a recommendation of restitution by Respondent to Complainants pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1156.01. RECOMMENDATION Respondent’s License No. 228322 shall be revoked on the effective date of the Order entered in Case No. 2010-[number redacted]. 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, February 23, 2011.

/s/ Brian Brendan Tully 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