ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-02535-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-09-17
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Martin Paredes,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Next Home Services, LLC
License No. ROC 334615,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-02535-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: September 5, 2024
APPEARANCES: Complainant Martin Paredes appeared on his own behalf. Respondent Next Home Services, LLC failed to appear. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator Doug Barrett appeared as a witness.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: None; Administrative Notice taken of Agency Record
FINDINGS OF FACT
Next Home Services, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License Number 334615 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”).
On or about February 15, 2022, Martin Paredes (“Complainant”) contracted with Respondent for Respondent to install a new air conditioning unit and new air conditioning vents, and to remodel a bathroom.
On or about March 1, 2024, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work with respect to the project.
The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator Doug Barrett. After an April 9, 2024 Jobsite Inspection, at which both parties were present, Investigator Barrett issued a Written Directive to Respondent that provided 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 Tuesday, April 30, 2024.
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Compliance Item: 1 - Remove old HVAC from side of house and in hallway closet.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed an old condenser unit on the side of the house and the old air handler in the hall utility closet. Both parties agreed these items were to be removed by the respondent. Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
Compliance Item: 2 - Remove old air vents and patch up the walls.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed abandoned HVAC registers in all rooms that were supposed to be removed and sealed with drywall. Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
Compliance Item: 3 - Patch up around new air ducts.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed the newly installed HVAC diffusers with the following ones having drywall holes/damage around them; the return vent in the hall ceiling, the diffuser in the dining room ceiling, and the diffuser in the kitchen ceiling. Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
Compliance Item: 4 - Complete hallway bathroom by replacing ceramic tile and grout them.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed two missing tiles in the hall bathroom shower wall where a towel bar was installed. There was new tile on site for the repair. Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
Compliance Item: 5 - Replace attic cover.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed the attic access in the garage area and the cover was not installed/closed. Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
Compliance Item: 6 - Complete the master bath remodel.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed the master bathroom shower and there were numerous tiles with excessive lippage and large grout variations throughout. The shower pan tile was crooked and the fixtures were not complete. The drywall was not complete, the toilet was not installed, the walls were not painted, the electrical was not completed and the bathroom door was not installed. Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
Compliance Item: 7 - Remove all debris from the backyard.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed piles of construction debris in the backyard. Both parties agreed the respondent is supposed to remove the debris. Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
Compliance Item: 8 - Run a functional condensate line from the new HVAC so water stops running down my roof.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed a condensate line running down the roof from the roof mounted HVAC system. The line did not appear to be secured and the end did not terminate past the roof line.
Contractor should correct by appropriate means.
All errors in original.
Following the expiration of the deadline in the Written Directive, Investigator Barrett ascertained that Respondent had not performed any corrective work.
Thereafter, Investigator Barrett 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)(16).
The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent State agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
The hearing was initially scheduled to convene on July 18, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. However, due to Investigator Barrett’s unavailability on the date of the hearing, on June 10, 2024, Complainant filed a Motion to Continue the hearing.
On June 12, 2024, the Tribunal issued a Minute Entry-Granting Continuance that advised the parties that the continued hearing was scheduled to convene on September 5, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. That Minute Entry contained the Google Meet link to join the hearing by video or by telephone and it was issued to Respondent’s email address of record.
On the date and at the time set for continued hearing, Complainant appeared on his own behalf. Investigator Barrett 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 Barrett testified consistently with his findings contained in the Written Directive and the Jobsite Inspection Notes. Investigator Barrett testified that all eight items of Complaint were verified and that there was a “disaster” in the shower. Investigator Barrett testified that Respondent is not licensed to perform work other than the work pertaining to the air conditioning as Respondent holds a CR-39 Air Conditioning and Refrigeration license. Investigator Barrett further testified that he advised Respondent to obtain the proper licensure to perform the corrective work, and that if Respondent did so, he would extend the period for compliance with the Written Directive. Investigator Barrett testified that Respondent made no attempt at compliance with the Written Directive.
Investigator Barrett testified that it was an oversight not to charge Respondent with a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22). Investigator Barrett further testified that the parties’ contract was verbal, however, at the Jobsite Inspection, Respondent confirmed the scope of the project. Respondent was not charged with a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12), namely A.R.S. § 32-1158.
Complainant testified regarding his dealings with Respondent, the delays caused by Respondent, and agreed with Investigator Barrett’s testimony.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on September 17, 2024. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License Number 334615 was first issued on August 27, 2021, and is active. Such prior License record also reflects that there is only the instant open Complaint, 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 professional and 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 holds a CR-39 Air Conditioning and Refrigeration license, yet contracted for and performed work on a bathroom remodel, which is beyond the scope of Respondent’s license. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent knowingly contracted beyond the scope of its license in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(16).
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License Number 334615 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, September 17, 2024.
/s/ Sondra J. Vanella
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
[email redacted]
Martin Paredes
[email redacted]
Next Home Services, LLC
[email redacted]
Doug Barrett
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff