ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final
2020A-00564-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2020-08-18
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Ben Searer
COMPLAINANT
v.
KLB HomeCrafters, LLC,
License No. ROC 316821,
RESPONDENT
No. 2020A-00564-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
DECISION
HEARING: August 11, 2020
APPEARANCES: Complainant Ben Searer appeared on his own behalf. Kelly Brown appeared on behalf of Respondent KLB HomeCrafters, LLC. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator Steve Klein was present.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella
FINDINGS OF FACT
KLB HomeCrafters, LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 316821 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).
In April 2019, Ben Searer (Complainant) contracted with Respondent for the remodel of his home to include the master bedroom, guest bathrooms, and kitchen, including but not limited to flooring, trim, drywall, and lighting. The total contract price was $92,000.00. The scope of work was to be completed within eight weeks from the start of the project.
On or about February 3, 2020, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work and abandonment with respect to the project.
The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator Steve Klein. A jobsite inspection was conducted on March 27, 2020. Complainant was present for the inspection. Respondent did not attend. On March 27, 2020, following the jobsite inspection, Investigator Klein issued a Written Directive to Respondent that provided as follows:
After investigation, the Registrar has verified that your work fails to meet minimum workmanship standards. A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); A.A.C. R4-9-108. Failure to comply with this Directive constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) and may result in the issuance of a citation, discipline of your license, and a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E) of up to $500.00. You must notify the Registrar’s assigned Investigator of your compliance with this Directive prior to 5:00 p.m. on 4-14-20.
RESTRICTIONS
You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license.
If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons1, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Respondent shall complete project per original contract agreement, plans, specifications, properly executed change orders, verbal agreements, local building codes and manufacturers installation instructions.
Complaint Item 1: Master Bath - incorrect countertop color delivered and installed.
Investigator’s Observation: Complainant supplies sample that was the color the counter was supposed to be.
Complaint Item 2: Master Bath - shower drain installation incomplete, worker broke
window - not replaced
Investigator’s Observation: Verified drain cover does not fit properly and window broken
Complaint Item 3: Guest Bath Upstairs - countertop/plumbing removed and not replaced, floor incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified the work is not completed.
Complaint Item 4: Guest Bath Upstairs - tub removal/replacement, tile surround/built in shelf - incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified the work is not completed.
Complaint Item 5: Guest Bath Upstairs - install shower fixtures and can light, exhaust fan electrical - incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified the work is not completed.
Complaint Item 6: Guest Bath Downstairs - countertop/plumbing removed and not replaced
Investigator’s Observation: Verified the work is not completed.
Complaint Item 7: Flooring - stairs incomplete, threshold finish some incomplete some wrong color
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work is not completed and threshold is a different color.
Complaint Item 8: Kitchen - everything on contract incomplete except demo
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work is not completed
Complaint Item 9: Kitchen - cabinet order error
Investigator’s Observation: Cabinets have not been delivered.
Complaint Item 10: Upstairs paint/texture - texture thicker than contract, overspray from ceiling texture on walls
Investigator’s Observation: Verified wall texture is inconsistent with existing texture.
Complaint Item 11: Electric - back porch/hall/pool not working after original work completed by electrician
Investigator’s Observation: No building permit was purchased for the remodel.
• Obtain the correct permit regarding the work and have the work inspected and approved by the proper governing authority.
Complaint Item 12: Electric - kitchen/family room incomplete, outlet/fan wiring upstairs incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified the electrical is not completed, also no building permit was purchased.
• Obtain the correct permit regarding the work and have the work inspected and approved by the proper governing authority.
Complaint Item 13: Front Door - metal plate order and install, tile around door/entry incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work has not been completed
Complaint Item 14: Living room - mantle and fire place tile incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work has not been completed
Complaint Item 15: Patio door - repair/replace not complete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work has not been completed
Complaint Item 16: Bay windows - window seats incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work has not been completed
Complaint Item 17: Outdoor Grill - new countertop/plywood decking incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work has not been completed
Complaint Item 18: Downstairs paint/texture - laundry room/downstairs guest bath - incomplete
Investigator’s Observation: Verified work has not been completed.
On April 15, 2020, after the expiration of the time for completion of work pursuant to the Written Directive, Investigator Klein contacted Complainant and was told that Respondent failed to complete any corrective work. Investigator Klein referred the Complaint to the Registrar’s Legal Department.
The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1); A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108; and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).
Investigator Klein testified that he contacted Complainant on August 7, 2020, who informed Investigator Klein that Respondent had installed some of the countertops, however, they were the incorrect color and the plumbing was missing. Investigator Klein testified that all items of Complaint were verified and all relate to abandonment. The photos taken my Investigator Klein and contained in the Agency Record correspond with the Complaint items and depict that the work for which Complainant contracted with Respondent was not complete.
Complainant testified that he contracted with Respondent in April 2019 and that the work was to be completed within eight weeks. Respondent began work on the project on May 8, 2019. Complainant testified that Respondent experienced numerous delays and the work that was performed was deficient. Respondent’s work eventually stopped and Respondent informed Complainant that the reason for the delays was attributable to Respondent not having any liquidity. Respondent offered to complete the project and asked Complainant to be patient with the process. Complainant attempted to work with Respondent however, minimal work as completed, and then all work stopped. Respondent told Complainant’s wife that Respondent was going out of business. However, Complainant discovered a Facebook post stating that Respondent was starting a house flipping business. One of Respondent’s employees told Complainant that Respondent was “busy 100% of the time.”
Complainant further testified that Respondent did not contact him regarding the Complaint until the day after the timeframe for the Written Directive expired. After the time expired for the Written Directive, Respondent paid for countertops, however, they were the incorrect color, there was no plumbing for the faucets, and the backsplash was not installed. The countertops were re-ordered, and again, were an incorrect color. Complainant testified that there was no plumbing in two bathrooms from November 2019 through May 2020.
Kelly Brown, Respondent’s qualifying party and member, was present for hearing. Ms. Brown did not present any controverting evidence.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on August 14, 2020. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. 316821 was first issued on December 5, 2017, and is current. Such prior License record also reflects that there is one other open complaint and two resolved/settled complaints.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See A.R.S. § 32-1101 et seq.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(1); see also Vazanno v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz. 369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952). “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960).
The evidence established that Respondent contracted with Complainant to perform a remodel project at Complainant’s home and did not complete the project. Accordingly, Complainant established that Respondent abandoned the contract in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1).
The evidence established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent did not complete the project in a workmanlike manner in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108.
The evidence established that Respondent did not attempt to complete the corrective work following the issuance of the Written Directive. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action following a Written Directive from the Registrar in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) .
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License No. 316821 for a period of seven (7) days.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E).
It is further recommended that if Respondent fails to pay the entire amount of the civil penalty on or before thirty days following the effective date of the Registrar’s final order, the Registrar revoke Respondent’s license, effective on such deadline date. No future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in A.R.S. § 32-1101(A)(7), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.
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.
-54864001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
-137160-45720000Done this day, August 18, 2020.
/s/ Sondra J. Vanella
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted electronically to:
Jeffrey Fleetham, Director
Registrar of Contractors
-54864001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
001
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
-137160-45720000