ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-03259-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-07-22
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Maurice David Wayne Maples,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
iVee League Solar Inc.
License No. ROC 334447,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-03259-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: Convened and concluded on July 2, 2024.
APPEARANCES:
For Complainant: Maurice David Wayne Maples.
For Respondent: No appearance.
For the Registrar of Contractors: No appearance.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Samuel Fox
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Administrative notice was taken of the Hearing Packet submitted by the Registrar of Contractors.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
iVee League Solar Inc. (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 334447 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).
On or about January 19, 2024, Maurice David Wayne Maples (Complainant) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, the design and installation of a solar system for a commercial property.
Complainant paid a deposit of $13,500.00 for the project.
On or about March 19, 2024, Complainant filed a Licensed Complaint Form with the Registrar, claiming abandonment of the project.
The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Edwards, who issued Jobsite Inspection Notices on March 21 and March 22, 2024, scheduling the inspection for March 26, 2024.
On March 24, 2024, Respondent informed Investigator Edwards that it would not be attending the inspection. Additionally, Respondent informed him that the company was permanently closed and was going to declare bankruptcy.
Investigator Edwards conducted the jobsite inspection on March 26, 2024, and Respondent was not present. Following the inspection, Investigator Edwards issued a Written Directive From the Registrar to Respondent on March 28, 2024 that provided as follows:
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Compliance Item: - Additional 26 Solar Panels have yet to be installed
Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated. Respondent has been paid a deposit to install a solar system onto the west structure located on this commercial property. As of date of inspection, it does not appear that any work has started on this project. Additionally, no permits appear to have been submitted to the local municipality (City of Phoenix) for this work. Job appears abandoned. Respondent shall complete this project per the underlying contract, ensuring all needed permits are acquired and system is energized and operating as intended.
Governing Rule: Abandonment of a contract or refusal to perform after submitting a bid on work without legal excuse for the abandonment or refusal.
The Written Directive required Respondent to notify Investigator Edwards of Respondent’s compliance with the directive prior to 5:00 p.m. on April 13, 2024.
On April 16, 2024, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1) and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).
On April 26, 2024, Respondent submitted an Answer, stating that the company was declaring bankruptcy and would not be remediating the issues in the Citation.
The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
On May 23, 2024, the Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing on Contested Case setting the hearing for July 2, 2024, at 9:00 AM.
The Registrar mailed the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record, and the Office of Administration emailed the Google Meet order to Respondent’s known email address. During the investigation, Investigator Edwards achieved communication with Respondent using the same address or email address.
The hearing was held via Google Meet on July 2, 2024.
Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.
Investigator Edwards did not appear.
Complainant testified that Respondent did not perform any work on the project. He also stated that the property was a commercial property.
Respondent failed to appear at the Hearing. Respondent’s communications with Investigator Edwards and Answer admitted to abandoning the project and failing to do corrective work.
Administrative notice was taken of Respondent’s prior License record on July 15, 2024. According to that record, Respondent’s License No. 334447 was first issued on August 19, 2021; it remains active; and there were two open complaints and no prior complaints against Respondent’s license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Respondent is deemed to have received the Notice of Hearing by methods reasonably calculated to effect notice. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing on Contested Case to its address and email address of record, and the Office of Administrative Hearings sent the order setting the virtual hearing to Respondent at its email address of record.
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 entered into a contract for Complainant’s project, accepted a deposit of $13,500.00, and failed to perform any work in the contract. Therefore, Respondent abandoned the project in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1).The evidence established that Respondent failed to take 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, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend for 14 days Respondent’s License No. 334447.
It is recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $13,500.00 as restitution pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1156.01.
It is recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E). No future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in A.R.S. § 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, July 22, 2024.
/s/ Samuel Fox
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
[email redacted]
iVee League Solar Inc.
[email redacted]
Maurice David Wayne Maples
[email redacted]
Daniel Edwards
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff