ALJDEC - Licensing
2022A-08147-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2023-02-13
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Mickie Bowe,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Manning Industries, LLC
DBA: Arizona Concrete Coatings
License No. ROC 197669,
RESPONDENT
No. 2022A-08147-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: January 25, 2023
APPEARANCES: Complainant Mickie Bowe appeared on her own behalf, with her husband, Jeff Bowe. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator Jack Grimm appeared as a witness. Respondent Manning Industries, LLC, doing business as Arizona Concrete Coatings, did not appear.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella
FINDINGS OF FACT
Manning Industries, LLC, doing business as Arizona Concrete Coatings (“Respondent”), is the holder of License No. 197669 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”).
In March 2021, Respondent installed concrete coating on all of the concrete surfaces in and around the home that was purchased by Mickie Bowe (“Complainant”).
On or about September 16, 2022, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging abandonment of the warranty work with respect to the project.
The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator Jack Grimm. On November 4, 2022, Investigator Grimm conducted a Jobsite Inspection. Investigator Grimm’s Jobsite Inspection Notes provide as follows:
Jobsite General Notes:
No one was present representing Manning Industries LLC dba Arizona Concrete Coatings.
Invoice and emails show that the respondent is working under the name Concrete Made New. Warning letter issued for working under a name not listed on the license. 32-1154(A)(14)
This license was suspended 8-1-22 for non-renewal.
Complaint Item #1: Concrete coating was installed incorrectly. They were
supposed to come and redo it.
Investigators Observation: Concrete coating that appears to be a painted on product is failing. Almost the entire application has fish mouth/bubbles/spots. Many locations are peeling off or wearing off. The entire installation is failing in all the applied locations that include the back patio, side yard walk, front walkway, driveway and garage.
Complaint Item #2: Called the day of and said they closed business in May and weren’t going to do the job.
Investigators Observation: The ROC has not had any contact with the
respondent on this complaint as they have failed to respond to the complaint that was phone called, emailed and mailed or attend the jobsite inspection. Complainant was told by respondent they will not make corrections and are out of business.
License is suspended for non-renewal on 8-1-22.
All errors in original.
On November 9, 2022, Investigator Grimm issued a Warning Letter to Respondent that set forth the following in pertinent part:
It appears that you may be operating under a name other than the name on your license. The name on your license is Manning Industries LLC DBA: Arizona Concrete Coatings, while your documents are listing your name as Concrete Made New LLC. Under A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(14), you must act in the capacity of a contractor under the name that is listed on your license.
A violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(14) would constitute grounds to suspend or revoke your license. Please review A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(14) and make sure you are complying with its requirements.
Thereafter, Investigator Grimm forwarded the matter to the Registrar’s Legal Department. The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(14).
Respondent filed an Answer to the Citation and the Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent State agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
The hearing was scheduled to convene on January 25, 2023, at 1:00 p.m., via Google Meet. On the date and at the time set for hearing, Complainant appeared on her own behalf. Investigator Grimm was present. Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Because Respondent failed to appear, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.
Investigator Grimm testified consistently with his findings contained in his Jobsite Inspection Notes and with the information contained in the Warning Letter issued to Respondent.
Investigator Grimm testified that the entire concrete coating installation was failing. The photographs taken by Investigator Grimm at the Jobsite Inspection depict the numerous deficiencies in the concrete coating installation.
Investigator Grimm testified that the son of Larry Manning, Respondent’s Qualifying party, has a similar business with a similar name. Respondent’s estimate dated February 3, 2021, as well as the invoice dated March 19, 2021, contain the name, Concrete Made New, not Respondent’s name, Manning Industries, LLC, doing business as Arizona Concrete Coatings.
Investigator Grimm further testified that Respondent’s license was suspended for nonrenewal on August 1, 2022, and that Respondent indicted in its Answer to the Citation that it was no longer in business and was not intending to effectuate any repairs. Consequently, Investigator Grimm did not issue a Written Directive to Respondent.
Complainant testified that she was in agreement with all of Investigator Grimm’s testimony and that the entire installation is failing and that she was unaware that Respondent was no longer in business.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on February 10, 2023. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. 197669 was first issued on July 13, 2004, and is suspended for nonrenewal effective August 1, 2022. Such prior License record also reflects that there are two open complaints, no resolved/settled complaints, and no discipline against Respondent’s license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.”
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(a).
The evidence established that Respondent was operating under the name, Concrete Made New, which is a name other than the name on Respondent’s license. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent is in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(14).
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. 197669 for a period of seven (7) days.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.
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 forty (40) days from the date of that certification.
Done this day, February 13, 2023.
/s/ Sondra J. Vanella
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted electronically to:
Martín Quezada, Director
Registrar of Contractors
[email redacted]
Manning Industries, LLC
DBA: Arizona Concrete Coatings
[email redacted]
Mickie Bowe
[email redacted]
Jack Grimm
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff