ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2010A-308474213-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2011-03-15

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: February 23, 2011 APPEARANCES: Mieke Van Dyk and Donald Schneider appeared personally. 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. Ronald Douglas Schneider, doing business as Cavalry Service (“Respondent”), is the holder of License No. 064189, a Class C-39R contracting license issued by the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). 2. On June 4, 2008, Respondent entered into a written agreement with Mieke Van Dyk (“Complainant”) for the performance of work on Complainant’s air conditioning unit. Respondent failed to properly list his contracting license number on his invoice. Complainant paid Respondent the sum of $100.00 for the service call. 3. On June 23, 2008, Williamson’s Heating & Cooling, Inc. entered into a written agreement with Complainant for the performance of a furnace inspection of Complainant’s air conditioning unit. Complainant paid Williamson’s Heating & Cooling, Inc. the sum of $90.00 for the service call. 4. On July 24, 2008, Respondent entered into a second written agreement with Complainant for the performance of additional work on Complainant’s air conditioning unit. Respondent failed to properly list his contracting license number on his invoice. Complainant paid Respondent the sum of $470.33 for the service call. 5. On July 31, 2008, Riteway Ventilating Co. entered into a written agreement with Complainant for the performance of work on Complainant’s air conditioning unit. Complainant paid Riteway Ventilating Co. the sum of $2,191.95 for the service call. 6. On July 30, 2010, Complainant filed a written Complaint with the Registrar alleging workmanship deficiencies by Respondent in his repairs to Complainant’s air conditioning unit. 7. The Registrar designated Complainant’s Complaint as Case No. 2010- [number redacted]. 8. 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) (3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108, and (13), specifically A.R.S. § 32-1124(B). 9. The Registrar forwarded Case No. 2010-[number redacted] to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent agency, for an evidentiary hearing. 10. At the hearing, Complainant presented the invoices for the work performed by Respondent, Riteway Ventilating Co., and Williamson’s Heating & Cooling, Inc. to support her allegations that Respondent had not properly repaired her air conditioning unit in 2008. However, Complainant did not present any technical expert witnesses. 11. Respondent provided technical testimony. He testified that Riteway Ventilating Co. had taken advantage of Complainant by overcharging her for work not needed. Respondent testified that he had properly performed the repairs to Complainant’s air conditioning unit.

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), Complainant has 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. Complainant failed to sustain her burden of proving that Respondent violated the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A), namely A.A.C. R4-9- 108, as charged in the Citation and Complaint issued by the Registrar.

4. Respondent violated the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (13), specifically A.R.S. § 32-1124(B), as charged in the Citation and Complaint issued by the Registrar. Respondent failed to properly list his contracting license number preceded by the acronym “ROC” on his invoices given to Complainant. RECOMMENDED ORDER Respondent’s License No. 064189 shall be suspended on the effective date of the Order entered in Case No. 2010-[number redacted] until Respondent provides proof to the Registrar that he has become fully compliant with the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1124(B), and the Registrar approves proof of such compliance. If Respondent provides proof to the Registrar that he has become fully compliant with the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1124(B) on or before the effective date of the Order entered in Case No. 2010-[number redacted], and the Registrar approves such proof of compliance, then the above-provided license suspension shall not take place and the Citation and Complaint shall be closed. 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 15, 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