ALJDEC - Licensing

2024A-03925-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-08-21

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Jovana Pivac ,

COMPLAINANT

v.

AJL Glass LLC

License No. ROC 326761,

RESPONDENT

No. 2024A-03925-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: August 1, 2024

APPEARANCES: Jovana Pivac appeared on her own behalf. Respondent failed to appear.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Amy M. Haley

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Administrative Notice was taken of the Notice of Hearing packet and all of its documents contained therein.

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

AJL Glass LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 326761 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).

On or about December 2, 2023, Jovana Pivac (Complainant) entered into a verbal contract with Respondent for, among other things, the purchase of new windows which would be installed at a later date for a cost of over $1,000.00.

On or about April 4, 2024, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging abandonment with respect to the project.

The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator David Fagerburg. After a jobsite inspection, Investigator Fagerburg 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 May 28, 2024.

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 reasons, 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.

Investigator Notes:

1: Based on the written statement regarding a written contract submitted by the complainant I am able to verify there was no contract provided by the respondent and this was a verbal agreement between the 2 parties for more than $1,000.00 violating ARS §32-1158 (A) Minimum elements of a contract.

2: Upon reviewing the status of ROC 326761 CR-65 Glazing I am able to verify the license is currently suspended for lack of bond and non-renewal as of November 24, 2023 and the deposit of $1,900.00 was provided to the respondent on December 2, 2023. The respondent is contracting while suspended violating ARS §32-1154 (A) (17) (Contracting While Suspended or Inactive).

Complaint Narrative: On 12/2/23, Mr. Curie collected $2,000 to purchase windows, which he would later install. Mr. Curie gave me multiple excuses of why he has failed to perform any work. I requested a refund or the product. On 3/19/24 he said my windows would be delivered to me on 3/24/24. It did not happen.

DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS

You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:

Compliant Item 1: After taking $2,000 on 12/2/2023, Mr. Curie failed to complete work. refund the money, or give me the product (windows).

Investigator’s Observation: At this jobsite investigation the complainant informed me that the respondent was to provide new windows and the installation would be completed on a separate contract with the respondent at a later date. During this jobsite investigation I observed and am able to verify the windows are older aluminum framed windows and there are no new windows installed or on the jobsite. See P (1) and P (3) thru P (5). After this jobsite investigation the complainant provided a timeline of events along with a copy of a text message from the respondent verifying a cash payment of $1,900.00 was received on December 2, 2023. The respondent shall resolve the matter by appropriate means.

All errors contained in original.

After the deadline in the directive expired, Investigator Fagerburg was notified no corrective work had been performed.

The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(1); Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(8); Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(12), namely Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158; Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(17); and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(22).

The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.

The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing at 9:00 a.m. on August 1, 2024. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record. A June 14, 2024 order from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties of how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet. The hearing was held via Google Meet on August 1, 2024.

Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed 10 minutes, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.

Investigator Fagerburg testified consistently with his written directive and jobsite inspection notes. He further testified that he spoke with who he believed to the spouse of the Respondent’s principle. Investigator Fagerburg stated that she informed him that her husband had been collecting money for projects and not performing any work. She was unaware of what was occurring and had tried to gather money to repay the customers, but eventually ran out of money.

Complainant did not provide any additional testimony.

Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on August 1, 2024. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. 326761 was first issued on November 6, 2019, and is currently revoked. Such prior License record also reflects that there was this open complaint and 1 prior disciplined case against Respondent’s license.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.

The Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Respondent at its address and email address of record was reasonable, and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing.

Respondent’s revoked license does not deprive Complainant of her right to prosecute her 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.

“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 refused to perform on the projected without legal excuse for the abandonment. Accordingly, Complainant established that Respondent abandoned the contract without legal excuse for the abandonment in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(1).

The evidence established that Respondent failed to complete the operation included in its verbal contract with Complainant in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(8).

The evidence established that Respondent entered into a verbal contract with Complainant for an amount of more than one thousand dollars in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(12), namely Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158.

The evidence established that Respondent contracted with Complainant while its license was under suspension, in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(17).

The evidence established that Respondent did not attempt to complete the corrective work following the Directive being issued. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action following a written directive from the Registrar in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(22).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall revoke Respondent’s License No. 326761.

It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(E).

It is further recommended that if Respondent fails to pay the entire amount of the civil penalty on or before thirty days following the effective date of the Registrar’s final order, the Registrar revoke Respondent’s license, effective on such deadline date. No future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1101(A)(7), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.

It is further recommended that, on or before thirty (30) days after the effective date of the final order, Respondent shall provide a sample contract to the Registrar to demonstrate that it has amended its contracts to include the nine terms required by Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158(A). If Respondent fails to establish to the Registrar that it has brought its contracts into compliance with Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158(A) within thirty days, its contractor’s license shall be suspended until it demonstrates that it has done so.

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, August 21, 2024.

/s/ Amy M. Haley

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

By: OAH Staff