ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-04862-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-10-21
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Hazel Beckham
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Turf Monsters LLC
License No. ROC 323643,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-04862-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: October 1, 2024
APPEARANCES: Complainant Hazel Beckham represented herself (Complainant). Samuel Richardson, Esq. represented Respondent Turf Monsters, LLC (Respondent).
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
On August 19, 2024, the Registrar of Contractors, (Registrar or ROC),
issued a Notice of Hearing setting the above-captioned matter for hearing on October 1, 2024.
Respondent holds license number 323643 issued by the ROC.
Michael Freeland is Respondent’s qualifying party.
The Notice of Hearing shows that the hearing was set to consider the
charges made in the Citation and Complaint.
5. Through the Citation, the ROC alleges that Respondent may have violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32- 1154(A)(3),(12),(22); A.R.S. § 32-1158 and Ariz. Admin. Code § R4-9-108(A).
6. On or about October 17, 2020, Complainant and Respondent entered into a residential landscaping contract for the amount of $25,452.47. Complainant paid Respondent $12,750.00 for the project.
7. Respondent did not provide Complainant with a written contract that advised Complainant of her right to file a complaint with the Registrar against Respondent for an alleged violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A).
8. On or about April 11, 2024, Respondent started construction.
9. On or about April 13, 2024, Respondent stopped work.
10. Complainant subsequently filed a complaint with the ROC alleging poor work on the part of Respondent.
11. On or about May 22, 2024, ROC Investigator Mike Wiskow conducted a job-site inspection.
12. On May 22, 2024, the Registrar issued a Directive directing Respondent to correct the following complaint items, by appropriate means, no later than 5:00 p.m. on June 11, 2024:
Compliance Item: 1 - Hardscape lines are not straight Investigator’s Observation: Confirmed. The complainant pointed out the south side of the 18x18 is crooked. The edge of the tile 18x18 pad should not be crooked. 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: 2 - Travertine cuts uneven, unnecessary, jagged, mult fill in, cracked, and jagged cuts
Investigator’s Observation: Confirmed. The perimeter 6x6 tiles are not uniform. All of the perimeter tiles should match the intended nominal size and be consistent. Furthermore, the north side of the 18x18 pad has tiles that creep larger from west to east. The layout of the pad should be such that these tiles are consistent in size. The north border of the walkway and 18x18 pad should be straight. Holes and cracks in tile should be filled. 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 - Mismatched travertine
Investigator’s Observation: Confirmed. Some tiles at the southeast corner of the 18x18 pad are a drastically different color. The tiles can vary in color somewhat, but should not be drastic. 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.
13. On July 15, 2024, the Investigator Wiskow conducted a compliance job-site inspection. Investigator Wiskow observed that Respondent had corrected all of the complaint items, except complaint item 2. Regarding complaint item 2, Investigator Wiskow found that some of the tiles in the perimeter of the 18x18 pad and the sidewalk were smaller than the required size of 6x6.
14. On July 18, 2024, the ROC issued a Citation against Respondent’s license for alleged violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 32-1154(A)(3), (12),and (22); Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108(A) and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158.
15. Respondent filed a timely answer to the Citation.
16. The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an evidentiary hearing.
17. At hearing, Complainant testified on behalf of herself. Mr. Freeland testified on behalf of Respondent. Investigator Wiskow testified regarding his investigation of the complaint.
18. Complainant explained that Respondent performed poor work in connection with the landscaping project. Mr. Freeland stated that Respondent offered to make additional repairs after the compliance job-site inspection. However, Complainant did not allow Respondent to return to her home after the compliance job-site inspection.
19. Administrative notice is taken of the Registrar’s public website. According to the information available on the website on October 21, 2024, Respondent’s license was first issued on February 22, 2019 and is active. Such prior License record also shows that there are two open complaints against Respondent’s license. Such prior License record further shows that one complaint has resulted in discipline against Respondent’s license and two complaints were closed after the matters were resolved.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the ROC’s jurisdiction. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1101 et seq.
The burden of proof at an administrative hearing falls to the party asserting a claim, right, or entitlement and the standard of proof on all issues in these matters is by a preponderance of the evidence. Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-19-119.
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 § 5 (1960).
4. The Administrative Law Judge may consider the ROC’s administrative record. See Ariz. Admin. Code § R4-9-118.
5. The undisputed evidence established that Respondent’s contract did not include a statement that the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the Registrar for alleged violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A), which is a violation of Ariz. 5Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(12) and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158.
6. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent did not perfom the work in a professional and workmanlike manner, which is a violation of Ariz. Admin. Code § R4-9-108, and thereby Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(3).
7. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent failed to correct the Directive items without valid justification, which is a 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 suspend Turf Monsters, LLC’s license number 323643 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. § 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.
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, October 21, 2024.
/s/ Velva Moses-Thompson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
Hazel Beckham
[email redacted]
Samuel Richardson, Esq.
[email redacted]
Turf Monsters LLC
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff