ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final
2022A-01099-NPC-ROC-RHG · Registrar of Contractors · 2022-07-28
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Pro Lift Rental LLC,
COMPLAINANT
v.
Kustum Digz LLC
License No. ROC 332036,
RESPONDENT
No. 2022A-01099-NPC-ROC-RHG
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: July 21, 2022
APPEARANCES: Justin Hagerty appeared via Google Meet on behalf of Complainant Pro Lift Rental LLC. Toni Gant appeared via Google Meet on behalf of Kustum Digz, LLC.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Adam D. Stone
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
Kustum Digz LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 3332036 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).
On or about February 20, 2022, Pro Lift Rental LLC (Complainant) filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant the sum of $1,620.00 for equipment provided.
The parties were unable to resolve their differences, and Complainant requested an administrative hearing. The Registrar then issued a Citation for Alleged Violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) on March 9, 2022.
On March 23, 2022, Respondent e-mailed a Response to the Citation stating, “[s]tarting a new business has been tough learning all the ins and outs. Over bidding under bidding etc. Getting paid not getting paid.”
The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing at 1:00 p.m. on July 21, 2022.
At hearing, Mr. Hagerty testified that on December 9, 2021 he rented a CAT 226D Skid Steer to Respondent for the amount of $870.00. Mr. Hagerty also testified that Respondent requested to rent the equipment for another week, this time at a rate of $750.00. Next, Mr. Hagerty testified that he had to retrieve the equipment three days later. Finally, Mr. Hagerty testified that despite not charging late fees or interest, Respondent has failed to pay $1,620.00.
Ms. Gant testified for Respondent. She testified that she acknowledged the debt and that Respondent was a first year start-up company trying to get up and running. In addition, Ms. Gant testified that Respondent was supposed to pay in May, but had cash flow problems because a company truck was in an accident. Finally, Ms. Gant testified that there was no excuse for not paying.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
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 a preponderance of the evidence. See A.A.C. R2-19-119.
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).
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 $750 when due for materials or services rendered in connection with the licensee's operations as a contractor unless the licensee proves that the licensee lacks the capacity to pay and has not received sufficient monies as payment for the particular construction work project or operation for which the services or materials were rendered or purchased.
The evidence established that Respondent owed a total of $1,620.00 for equipment supplied, and there was no persuasive justification for failing to pay the agreed upon amount.
Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) by failing to pay Complainant $1,620.00 for equipment rendered in connection with Respondent’s contracting business.
Based upon Respondent’s violation of the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10), grounds exist to impose discipline against Respondent’s license.
RECOMMENDed order
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that the Registrar suspend Kustum Digz LLC’s License No: 332036 issued by the Registrar until it has provided to the Registrar, and the Registrar has accepted, documents that establish that it has paid Complainant $1,620.00 in certified funds.
It is further recommended that when and if the Registrar receives and accepts Respondent’s evidence that it has paid Complainant $1,620.00 in certified funds, the Registrar may close the Complaint in Case No. 2022-01099.
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 20 days from the date of the 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, July 28, 2022.
/s/ Adam D. Stone
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
-137160-45720000By Miranda R. Alvarez
Legal Secretary