FINACT2019A-03012-NPC-ROC.pdf

2019A-03012-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2019-09-24

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Alliance Environmental Group LLC, Case No. 2019-03012

Docket No. 2019A-03012-NPC-ROC COMPLAINANT, v. FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION AND Arizona's Restoration Experts LLC ORDER DBA: Discount Water Fire Mold, License No. ROC 251178, 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 of each finding of

fact or conclusion of law.

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 accepts it.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

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 November 3, 2019.

FINAL NOTE

On page 1, line 20 replace “June 25, 2019” with “June 7, 2019”. On page 2, line 21 replace “January

5, 2015” with “December 31, 2014”.

///

of 2 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St.– Ste. 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 Toll Free (877)692-9762 Lg131 8/19 Dated September 24, 2019 By: /s/ Joseph Citelli Joseph Citelli Chief Counsel Chief of Legal Department and Recovery Fund Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail September 24, 2019 to: Respondent Arizona's Restoration Experts LLC DBA: Discount Water Fire Mold 22130 S Scotland Ct Queen Creek, AZ 85142 Complainant Alliance Environmental Group LLC 990 W 10th Street Azusa, CA 91702

Copy sent electronically 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 A. Geddes, Administrative Law Judge Case No. 2019-03012 / SA

of 2 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St.– Ste. 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 Toll Free (877)692-9762 Lg131 8/19 Received 9/16/2019 ROC Legal

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Alliance Environmental Group LLC, No. 2019A-03012-NPC-ROC COMPLAINANT v. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE Arizona's Restoration Experts LLC, DECISION DBA: Discount Water Fire Mold, ROC License: ROC 251178, RESPONDENT

HEARING: August 28, 2019, 9:00 A.M. APPEARANCES: Matt Niapas appeared on behalf of Complainant; no appearance was made on behalf of Respondent

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Roger A. Geddes

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURE

1. Arizona's Restoration Experts LLC, DBA: Discount Water Fire Mold (Respondent), is the holder of License Number 251178 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar). 2. On or about June 25, 2019, Alliance Environmental Group LLC (Complainant), filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent owed Complainant the sum of $5,155.00. This amount represented an unpaid invoice relating to Complainant’s asbestos abatement for Respondent. 3. On July 3, 2019, the Registrar then issued a Citation for Alleged Violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) for the alleged failure by Respondent to pay monies in excess of $750.00 when due for materials or services rendered in connection with

Respondent’s operations as a contractor. The Registrar referred the matter to the

Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary

hearing.

Office of Administrative Hearings 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826 Received 9/16/2019 ROC Legal

4. The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing that set a hearing for August 28, 2019, 9:00 A.M. The Registrar mailed a copy of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent on or about July 16, 2019, at its address of record. 5. The Notice of Hearing informed the parties that “[f]ailure to attend the scheduled hearing is likely to result in an adverse ruling against you.” The Notice of Hearing further advised of the procedure for requesting a continuance of the hearing. 6. At the hearing, Complainant presented the testimony of Matt Niapas, Branch Manager of the Phoenix office.1 7. Although the commencement of the hearing was delayed approximately minutes, Respondent did not appear at any time during the hearing through an authorized officer, employee, attorney, or any other person. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license. Respondent further did not request to appear telephonically nor did not request that the hearing be continued.

Matt Niapas testified on behalf of Complainant that Respondent

performed the work for Respondent in August 2018 and billed the Respondent in the

amount of $5,500.00. He stated that in October 2018 Respondent indicated that it was

waiting for an insurance payment but that Respondent has made no payment to Complainant. 9. Pursuant to Arizona Administrative Code Rule 4-9-117, administrative notice is taken of the Registrar’s public website. On January 5, 2015, Respondent voluntarily cancelled License No. 251178. The voluntary cancellation status of Respondent’s license is considered as a factor in aggravation of any determination of discipline. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The Tribunal also took administrative notice of the Registrar’s document submissions to the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings.. Received 9/16/2019 ROC Legal

1. The Registrar has jurisdiction over this matter, pursuant to A.R.S. § 32- 1101, et seq., which authorizes the Registrar to impose disciplinary sanctions against licenses for violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154. 2. The copy of the Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Respondent at its address of record and the continuance notice emailed to Respondent at its email address of record were reasonable and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of hearing. A.R.S. §§ 41-1092.4 and 41-1092.05(D). 3. The voluntary cancellation status of Respondent’s license does not deprive Complainant of the right to prosecute a Complaint against Respondent or prevent the Registrar from determining the merits of Complainant’s complaint. See A.R.S. § 32-1154(D) (“The expiration, cancellation, suspension or revocation of a license . . . shall not deprive the registrar of jurisdiction to proceed with any investigation of or action or disciplinary proceeding against such license, or to render a

decision suspending or revoking such a license . . .”).

4. 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. 5. To warrant such sanctions by the Registrar, a Complainant must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent violated the statutory section cited. Proof by a “preponderance” means that “the evidence is sufficient to persuade the finder of fact that the proposition is more likely true than not.” In re: Arnold and Baker Farms, 177 B.R. 648 (9th Cir. BAP (Ariz.) 1994). See also Culpepper v. State of Arizona, 187 Ariz. 431, 930 P.2d 508 (App. 1996). It is “evidence which is of greater weight or more convincing than the evidence which is offered in opposition to it; that is, evidence which as a whole shows that the fact sought to be proved is more probable than not.” BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY 1182 (Rev. 6th ed. 1990). Received 9/16/2019 ROC Legal

6. A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) includes among the grounds for suspension, revocation, or other disciplinary action against a contractor’s license:

[f]ailure by a licensee or agent or official of a licensee to pay monies in excess of seven hundred fifty dollars when due for materials or services rendered in connection with the licensee’s operations as a contractor when the licensee has the capacity to pay or, if the licensee lacks the capacity to pay, when the licensee has received sufficient monies as payment for the particular construction work project or operation for which the services or materials were rendered or purchased.

7. The evidence established that Respondent failed to pay the amount of $5,155.00 to Complainant for services rendered in connection with Respondent’s operations as a contractor. There was no evidence presented to rebut the existence or the extent of nonpayment. 8. In this matter, Complainant has established that Respondent’s license should be disciplined for a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10). RECOMMENDED ORDER Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of this order, Respondent’s License Number 251178 is revoked. It is further ordered, pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1161(C), that no future license shall be issued to any

person named on License Number 251178 for one year after final determination of

revocation, and then only on proper showing that all loss caused by the act or omission

for which the licenses are revoked has been fully satisfied. 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 five days from the date of the certification. Done this day, September 16, 2019. /s/ Roger Geddes Administrative Law Judge Received 9/16/2019 ROC Legal

Transmitted electronically to: Jeffrey Fleetham, Director Registrar of Contractors