ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final
2021A-05830-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2022-02-18
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Above and Beyond Renovations LLC,
COMPLAINANT
v.
Arizona Pure Custom LLC
License No. ROC 239705,
RESPONDENT
No. 2021A-05830-NPC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
DECISION
HEARING: February 15, 2022
APPEARANCES: Mark Outeiral for Complainant; no one appeared for Respondent
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Thomas Shedden
FINDINGS OF FACT
On January 7, 2022, the Registrar of Contractors (“ROC”) issued a Notice of Hearing on Contested Case setting the above-captioned matter for hearing at 1:00 p.m. on February 15, 2022 at the Office of Administrative Hearings.
Through its Notice of Hearing ROC alleges that Respondent Arizona Pure Custom LLC may have violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(10). Respondent holds License No. 239705 issued by ROC.
No representative appeared for Respondent and the matter was convened in its absence at about 1:15 p.m.
Mark Outeiral, Complainant Above and Beyond Renovations LLC’s owner appeared and testified for Complainant.
On September 4, 2021, Complainant filed with ROC a complaint against Respondent alleging that Respondent owed Complainant $4268 for painting that Complainant performed at Respondent’s request.
Respondent had been hired by the project owner, Pillar Properties.
Complainant performed the work at issue on or about January 27, 2022. The work was performed at unit numbers 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11. Complainant acknowledged that there may have been touch-up work required, but it was prepared to do any touch-up.
On or about May 28, 2021, Mr. Outeiral met with Pillar Properties’ project manager, Clayton Williams.
Mr. Williams raised concerns about some of the painting on the project, but Mr. Outeiral showed him that those issues were in units that Complainant had not been responsible to paint. Mr. Outeiral testified to the effect that Mr. Williams then excused Complainant from any further obligation.
Respondent filed with ROC an answer showing its position that Complainant had not performed the work for which it is alleging Respondent failed to pay.
On November 30, 2021, ROC issued to Respondent a citation through which it alleged that Respondent may have violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(10).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Unless otherwise provided by law, a party asserting a claim, right, or entitlement bears the burden of proof; a party asserting an affirmative defense has the burden of establishing the affirmative defense. The standard of proof on all issues in this matter is that of a preponderance of the evidence. Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-19-119.
“At a hearing on an agency action to suspend, revoke, terminate or modify on its own initiative material conditions of a license or permit, the agency has the burden of persuasion.” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.07(G)(2).
A preponderance of the evidence is:
The greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still sufficient to incline a fair and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.
Black’s Law Dictionary 1373 (10th ed. 2014).
Statutes should be interpreted to provide a fair and sensible result. Gutierrez v. Industrial Commission of Arizona, 226 Ariz. 395, 249 P.3d 1095 (2011)(citation omitted); State v. McFall, 103 Ariz. 234, 238, 439 P.2d 805, 809 (1968) ("Courts will not place an absurd and unreasonable construction on statutes.").
“Statutes shall be liberally construed to effect their objects and to promote justice.” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 1-211(B).
The purpose of the Registrar’s licensing statutes is to protect the public from unscrupulous, unqualified, and financially irresponsible contractors. See Aesthetic Property Maintenance v. Capital Indem. Corp., 183 Ariz. 74, 900 P. 2d 1210 (1995).
Among the grounds for suspension or revocation of a contractor’s license is a “[f]ailure by [the] 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 ....” Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10).
The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent owes Complainant $4268 for work provided in connection with Respondent’s operations as a contractor. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent has violated section 32-1154(A)(10).
Ariz. Rev. Stat. subsection 32-1154(B)(3) provides that ROC “May temporarily suspend with or without imposition of specific conditions ... or permanently revoke any or all licenses issued under this chapter if the holder of the license ... commits any of the acts or omissions set forth in” subsection 32-1154(A).
Under these facts and circumstances, Respondent’s license should be suspended until it pays Complainant $4268.
RECOMMENDED ORDER
IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Registrar of Contractors suspend Respondent Arizona Pure Custom LLC’s license number 239705 until ROC receives proof that Respondent has paid to Complainant Above and Beyond Renovations LLC $4268.
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 is forty days after 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, February 18, 2022.
/s/ Thomas Shedden
Thomas Shedden
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