ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2022A-04039-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2022-09-14

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Gordon Lee Grandy,

COMPLAINANT

Valor Pools and Landscape Design, LLC

License No. ROC 329742,

RESPONDENT

No. 2022A-04039-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: August 25, 2022

APPEARANCES: Complainant Gordon Lee Grandy appeared on his own behalf. Respondent Valor Pools and Landscape Design, LLC did not appear.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Tammy L. Eigenheer

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

Valor Pools and Landscape Design, LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 329742 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).

On or about February 19, 2022, Gordon Lee Grandy (Complainant) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, the replastering of a swimming pool, resurfacing of the pool deck, and installation of new concrete for a total contract price of $15,500.00

On or about May 17, 2022, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging abandonment with respect to the project.

The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Doug Barrett.

On or about June 21, 2022, Investigator Barrett conducted a jobsite inspection.

Investigator Barrett’s jobsite inspection notes indicated that, as to Complainant’s claims that Respondent failed to complete pool replaster and failed to complete pool deck resurfacing, the claims were “[u]nverified” and noted that “Complainant has had [these] item[s] completed by a different contractor since the project was abandoned by the Respondent.”

Because Respondent’s license was suspended at that time, Investigator Barrett did not issue a written directive to Respondent.

The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1).

Respondent filed an answer in which it stated as follows:

Abandonment was not the issue I called him gave him the two subs that were left and they completed the job with less than I said it would cost the homeowner. I explained to Mr. Grandy that I just got in trouble for working after my license was suspended which I did not even know was so serious so I advised him I was not comfortable receiving any additional funds nor finishing the job so I let him have the two contacts the pebble tec licensed installer and the gentleman that would lace his already poured deck. He thanked me then filed a complaint since this complaint I followed up to confirm work was complete and it was.

All errors in original.

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 9:00 a.m. on August 25, 2022. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record. An August 19, 2022 order from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties of how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet. The hearing was held via Google Meet on August 25, 2022.

Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed 15 minutes, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.

Investigator Barrett testified that Complainant had a different contractor complete the project after Respondent failed to perform all the work under the contract.

Complainant testified that he understood Respondent had a valid license at the time of the agreement. Complainant stated that he had to pay other contractors $4,000.00 to have the pebble sheen completed and $2,500.00 to have the decking completed. Complainant acknowledged that he had only paid $9,200.00 on the contract with Respondent, leaving a balance due of $6,300.00. Because Complainant paid other contractors a total of $6,500.00 to complete Respondent’s work, Complainant paid $200.00 more than the original contract price.

Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on September 14, 2022. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. 329742 was first issued on July 17, 2020, and was suspended on August 31, 2021 for lack of a qualifying party and failure to renew. Such prior License record also reflects that there were no other open or prior complaints against Respondent’s license.

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 Vazzano 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 uncontroverted evidence established that Respondent submitted a bid for Complainant’s project and did not complete the work in the bid. Respondent acknowledged in its answer that it did not complete the project. Accordingly, Complainant established that Respondent abandoned the contract in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1).

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. 329742 for a period of five days.

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

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, September 14, 2022.

/s/ Tammy L. Eigenheer

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Jeffrey Fleetham, Director

Registrar of Contractors

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000By Miranda Alvarez

Legal Secretary