ALJDEC - Licensing
2022A-08563-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2023-03-23
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Geoff Renne
COMPLAINANT,
v.
J & N Contracting LLC
DBA: J & N Epoxy Services
License No. ROC 331572,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2022A-08563-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: March 3, 2023
APPEARANCES: Complainant Geoff Renne appeared on behalf of himself. Nathan Hayter appeared on behalf of Respondent J & N Contracting, LLC.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On or about June 7, 2022, Complainant Geoff Renne and Respondent
J & N Contracting, LLC entered into a contract wherein Respondent would install epoxy flooring in Mr. Reene’s home, for the amount of $10,000.
2. Nathan Hayter is an owner of Respondent.
3. Complainant paid Respondent $5,000 for the project.
4. On June 23, 2022, Respondent started work.
5. On June 27, 2022, Respondent stopped work.
6. On or about September 28, 2022, the Arizona Registrar of Contractors
(Registrar) received a complaint from Complainant alleging poor workmanship on the part of Respondent. See Investigator Michael Wiskow’s testimony on the Hearing Audio Record at 7:45 to 8:00 minutes.
7. On November 14, 2022, Investigator Wiskow conducted a job-site inspection.
8. On November 14, 2022, the Registrar issued a Directive to Respondent that provided, in relevant part, as follows:
After investigation, the Registrar determined that you failed to meet the requirements of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A), and now issues this Directive requiring you to take appropriate
corrective action. 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 November 30, 2022.
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:
Compliance Item: 1 - There are large craters in my flooring
Investigator’s Observation: There are different size circles visible in the floor. The circles are also concave.
The epoxy floor should be flat with no concave spots.
Contractor should repair by appropriate means.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; This Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
Compliance Item: 2 - There is debris (drywall, dirt, dust) sealed into the flooring, they recommend I just take a razor blade and cut out;
Investigator’s Observation: The edges of the floor have debris stuck in the epoxy. There should be no debris in the epoxy floor. Contractor should repair by appropriate means.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
Compliance Item: 3 - They got epoxy sealant on my sliding glass door and on the walls.
Investigator’s Observation: There was a spot of epoxy on the sliding glass door. There should be no epoxy splashes on any vertical surfaces around the floor.
Contractor should repair by appropriate means.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
Compliance Item: 4 - There is carpet in bedded into the floor that they sealed into the flooring
Investigator’s Observation: There is carpet embedded in the floor by the stairs. There should be no carpet or debris in the epoxy floor. Contractor should repair by appropriate means.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
Compliance Item: 6 - Fur sealed into floor from the rollers
Investigator’s Observation: The epoxy floor has what appears to be roller fuzz on the surface. The surface of the epoxy floor should be smooth and free of roller marks or
fuzz. Contractor should repair by appropriate means.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
....................................................
9. The deadline for compliance under the Directive was extended to December 15, 2022. See Investigator Wiskow’s testimony.
10. Respondent made repairs to the items listed in the Directive.
11. On December 21, 2022, Investigator Wiskow conducted a compliance job-site inspection. Investigator Wiskow concluded that Respondent had appropriately corrected Compliance Items 2, 3, 4, and 6. Investigator Wiskow concluded that the work that Respondent performed on Compliance Item 1 fell below minimum workmanship standards because the repair areas were highly visible and were not a part of the intended floor design.
12. On December 27, 2022, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent’s license alleging that Respondent violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. sections 32-1154(A)(3), (A)(22), and R4-9-108(A).
13. Respondent filed a timely answer to the Citation.
14. The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an evidentiary hearing.
15. At hearing, Complainant testified on behalf of himself. Mr. Hayter testified on behalf of Respondent.
16. Complainant explained that Respondent performed poor work in connection with the floor epoxy project. Complainant testified to the effect that Respondent failed to appropriately correct Compliance Item 1.
17. Mr. Hayter explained that Respondent made all of the repairs required
under the Directive, with the exception of the crapers. Regarding the crapers,
Mr. Hayter testified to the effect that although the finish is not cosmetically pleasing to Mr. Renne, the Directive did not specify that the finished look should be cosmetically pleasing. Mr. Hayter further contended that the flooring installed was unique and it would be difficult to hold installers to the actual design.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1101 et seq.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violation by a preponderance of the evidence. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. section
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 section 5 (1960).
3. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent did not perform the work described in Compliance Item 1 in a professional and workmanlike manner in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(A).
4. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent failed to
correct Compliance Item 1 without valid justification, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(22).
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar suspend License No. 331572 held by J & N Contracting, LLC DBA: J & N Epoxy Services, for one day.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $250.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(E).
It is further recommended that no future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1101(A)(5), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.
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, March 23, 2023.
/s/ Velva Moses-Thompson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted electronically to:
Geoff Renne
14864 N. 161 Ct
Surprise, AZ 85379
[email redacted]
J & N Contracting LLC
DBA: DBA: J & N Epoxy Services
1930 Ridgecrest Drive
Prescott, AZ 86301
[email redacted]
Martín Quezada
Registrar of Contractors
c/o Legal Department
1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105
Phoenix, AZ 85007
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff