FINACT2018A-04544-ROC.pdf

2018A-04544-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2019-02-21

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Quality One Shotcrete Inc., Case No. 2018-04544 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2018A-04544-ROC v. FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION Mirage Pools & Spas Inc., AND ORDER License No. ROC 156814, RESPONDENT.

Under A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B), the Registrar may review and accept, modify, or reject an administrative law judge’s written decision. If the Registrar modifies or rejects that decision, then the Registrar must provide written justification setting forth the reasons for the modification or rejection. REGISTRAR’S ACCEPTANCE In this case, a hearing was held, and the administrative law judge issued a written decision. See Administrative Law Judge Decision, attached. The Registrar reviewed that decision and hereby accepts it. CONCLUSION Because the Registrar has accepted the administrative law judge’s decision, that decision is the final administrative decision in this case and becomes effective on April 1, 2019.

Dated February 20, 2019.

Registrar of Contractors

/s/ Joseph Citelli Joseph Citelli Chief Counsel Chief of Legal Department and Recovery Fund

of 2 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail February 20, 2019 to: Respondent Mirage Pools & Spas Inc 5616 E McKellips Rd Ste 103 Mesa, AZ 85215 Complainant Quality One Shotcrete Inc 634 S Drew St Mesa, AZ 85210 AND copy electronically mailed this same date to: Respondent at email address on record with the Registrar Complainant at email address on record with the Registrar

Office of Administrative Hearings Roger Geddes, Administrative Law Judge Case No. 2018-04544 / AN

of 2 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 RECEIVED 2.4.2019 ROC LEGAL

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Quality One Shotcrete, Inc., No. 2018A-04544-ROC

COMPLAINANT ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION v.

Mirage Pools & Spas, Inc., License No. ROC 156814,

RESPONDENT

HEARING: January 16, 2019, 8:30 A.M. APPEARANCES: No appearance was made on behalf of Complainant; Al

Neujahr, owner, appeared on behalf of Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Roger A. Geddes

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURE

1. Complainant did not appear at the hearing; Al Neujahr, owner, appeared on behalf of Respondent 2. The Notice of Hearing on this matter, dated December 12, 2018, and mailed to Complainant on or about that same date informed the parties that “[f]ailure to attend the scheduled hearing is likely to result in an adverse ruling against you.”

3. The Notice of Hearing further advised of the procedure for requesting a

continuance of the hearing.

4. Although the commencement of the hearing was delayed approximately 20 minutes, Complainant did not appear at any time during the hearing through an authorized officer, employee, attorney, or any other person. Consequently, Complainant did not present any evidence against Respondent to warrant disciplinary

Office of Administrative Hearings 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826 RECEIVED 2.4.2019 ROC LEGAL

action. Complainant further did not request to appear telephonically nor did it request that the hearing be continued. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The copy of the original Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Complainant at his address of record was reasonable and Complainant is deemed to have received notice of hearing. A.R.S. §§ 41-1092.4 and 41-1092.05(D). 2. The burden of proof at an administrative hearing falls to the party

asserting a claim, right, or entitlement and the standard of proof on all issues in these

matters is by preponderance of the evidence. See Arizona Administrative Code Rule 2-

19-119. By failing to appear at the hearing, Complainant did not meet the burden to present evidence in support of the Complaint. RECOMMENDED ORDER Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Registrar of Contractors’ Order, Complainant’s Complaint against Respondent be dismissed. 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

five days from the date of that certification.

Done this day, February 4, 2019. /s/ Roger Geddes Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Jeffrey Fleetham, Director Registrar of Contractors