ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-01588-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-01-30
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Donald Wayne Vaughan,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
The Creta Group LLC,
License No. ROC 318688,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-01588-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: January 10, 2025. Record held open until January 10, 2025.
APPEARANCES:
For Complainant: Donald Wayne Vaughan.
For Respondent: Vasile Creta.
For the Registrar of Contractors: Lisa Melton.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Samuel Fox
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Administrative notice was taken of the Notice of Hearing Packet (Not. of Hr’g Pkt) submitted by the Registrar of Contractors. Respondent’s Exhibits 1–5.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Creta Group (Respondent) was the holder of License No. 318688 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) on March 23, 2018.
On or about March 22, 2023, Donald Vaughan (Complainant) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, building a sun room and a kitchen renovation.
On December 6, 2023, Respondent’s license was suspended for non-renewal, specifically Respondent did not have a qualifying party.
On or about February 6, 2024, Complainant filed a Licensed Complaint Form with the Registrar, claiming abandonment, poor work, and theft.
The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Melton, who issued a Jobsite Inspection Notice on March 4, 2024, scheduling the inspection for April 9, 2024. Investigator Melton conducted the jobsite inspection on April 9, 2024, and Respondent was present.
On April 18, 2024, and April 22, 2024, Complainant requested to add items to his complaint. Investigator Melton issued another Jobsite Inspection Notice on April 23, 2024, scheduling an inspection for May 14, 2024. Another jobsite inspection was conducted on May 4, 2024, and Respondent was present. Complainant further amended his complaint, and Investigator Melton issued another Jobsite Inspection Notice on May 24, 2024, scheduling an inspection for June 6, 2024. On June 7, 2024, Complainant amended his complaint again, and Investigator Melton issued a further jobsite Inspection Notice on June 14, 2024, scheduling an inspection for July 3, 2024. Another jobsite inspection was conducted on July 3, 2024, and Respondent was present.
Following the inspection, Investigator Melton issued a Written Directive From the Registrar to Respondent on July 31, 2024, requiring correction of the following Compliance Items: 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 39, 41, 42, 43, and 44. The Directive provided thorough descriptions of each issue and the compliance problems associated with those issues.
The Written Directive required Respondent to notify Investigator Melton of Respondent’s compliance with the directive prior to 5:00 p.m. on August 19, 2024.
Because Respondent was suspended, the scope of corrective work they could perform was limited. On August 19, 2024, Complainant informed Investigator Melton that no work had been completed and no resolution had been reached.
On August 21, 2024, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, finding cause to charge Respondent with violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), specifically R4-9-108(B), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).
Respondent submitted an Answer to the Citation on September 4, 2024. Respondent’s Answer stated that Respondent believed that the situation was unfair; specifically, Respondent believed that they should be given an opportunity to correct the work even though their license was suspended. Respondent expressed discontent with the situation.
The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
On September 10, 2024, the Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing on Contested Case setting the hearing for October 23, 2024. On October 21, 2024, Complainant requested a continuance. In an order dated October 24, 2024, the hearing was rescheduled for January 6, 2025, and the Office of Administrative Hearings provided Google Meet information.
The hearing was held via Google Meet on January 6, 2025. Complainant testified on his own behalf. Vasile Creta and David Tipe testified on behalf of Complainant. Investigator Melton testified for the Registrar of Contractors.
Investigator Melton testified in support of her investigation.
Complainant testified his agreement with Investigator Melton.
Mr. Creta testified that all of the inspections were completed and all of the work was properly done in accordance with permits and plans.
Mr. Tipe testified about the complications in correcting the work.
After the hearing, the record remained open to allow Mr. Creta to provide some documents. Mr. Creta provided a permit for “Vaughn Residence Addition – Convert Existing 240 SF Patio Into Livable.” The Directive indicates that Investigator Melton considered this permit when making her determinations. No other permits were provided. Mr. Creta also provided plans for “Patio to Livable Conversion,” and the Directive also indicates that Investigator Melton considered these plans when making her determinations. Mr. Creta provided a screenshot which purported to show that a final inspection had been successfully passed; the source of the screenshot is unclear, and it fails to provide credibly meaningful information.
It was unclear whether Respondent failed to understand its significant errors throughout the project at issue in this matter or made misrepresentations to the Tribunal.
Administrative notice was taken of Respondent’s prior License record on January 28, 2025. According to that record, Respondent’s License No. 318688 was suspended on December 6, 2023. The license had one open complaint, three disciplined complaints, and four resolved/settled complaints.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
Respondent’s suspended license does not deprive Complainant of his right to prosecute his complaint or prevent the Registrar from determining the merits of the complaint.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. Respondent bears the burden of proof to establish an affirmative defense 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.”
When a contractor does not have an active license, their inability to perform corrective work does not constitute denial of access or obviate the contractor’s disciplinary liability within the Registrar’s complaint process.
The preponderance of the evidence established that Respondent failed to perform all work in accordance with applicable building codes and professional industry standards in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(B), specifically the following Compliance Items: 7, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 36, 39, 41, 42, 43, and 44.
The preponderance of the evidence established that Respondent failed to take any appropriate corrective action following a written directive from the Registrar in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, the following is recommended:
If Respondent’s License No. 318688 is reinstated as active, the Registrar should suspend that license for 30 days at that time.
In the alternative, the Registrar should revoke Respondent’s License No. 318688 when its final order becomes effective.
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, January 30, 2025.
/s/ Samuel Fox
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
The Creta Group LLC
[email redacted]
Lisa Melton
[email redacted]
Donald Wayne Vaughan
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff