ALJDEC

98F-238-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-01-22

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: January 19, 1999 APPEARANCES: Plaintiff appeared through its personal representative, Jere Mileusnich. Defendant failed to appear at the hearing. The Contractors’ Recovery Fund was not represented at the hearing. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Mark A. Silver _____________________________________________________________________

Evidence and testimony were presented and, based upon the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Order are made:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Defendant’s contracting license has been previously revoked by final Order of the Registrar of Contractors. Such revocation is determined to render this Defendant unable to remedy the violation of the State’s contracting laws, which gave rise to the instant claim for damages.

2. The Registrar of Contractors has received advance notification of the existence and amount of the above named Plaintiffs’ claim for an administrative payout from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund.

3. This hearing was convened following Plaintiff’s express request therefor, subsequent to denial of the claim by the Contractors’ Recovery Fund.

4. Plaintiff seeks to recover the sum of $1,333.80 from the fund.

5. The following uncontroverted facts were determined at the hearing and are important to note:

a. Sylverean Lacey’s (hereinafter referred to as “Lacey”) roof sustained specified damage as a direct result of a significant storm. b. Lacey’s insurance company approved payment of a specified sum of money to Lacey for the purpose of repairing the storm damage sustained by the roof. c. Defendant was recommended by Lacey’s insurance company and ultimately contacted to bid on the repair for the roof. Pursuant to an oral contract with Lacey and her son (Jere Mileusnich, who also resided in the home at the time), Respondent agreed to not only repair the roof damage but also to replace damaged fascia, soffits, and rain gutters. Defendant agreed that the total price for all of the work would be the amount previously approved by the insurance company. d. Defendant completed the roof repair and was paid in full, notwithstanding the fact that he failed to complete the contracted work on the fascia, soffits and rain gutters. e. When Defendant refused to complete the project, Lacey contacted the Registrar of Contractors in order to file an administrative complaint against Defendant. Lacey was advised that Defendant’s Class C-42 license had been previously revoked and that she could make a claim directly to the Contractors’ Recovery Fund. f. Lacey received several bids to complete the work in question and the low bid was in the amount of $1,333.80. These bids were submitted to the Contractors’ Recovery Fund. g. Lacey passed away prior to the time that the Contractors’ Recovery Fund claim could be resolved. Plaintiff thereupon continued with the Contractors’ Recovery Fund claim that had been commenced by Lacey. f. Plaintiff ultimately sold the home in question and testified that the sale price reflected a $5,000.00 reduction in price due to, among other items, the unfinished work on the fascia, soffits, and rain gutters.

6. By their failure to appear for the scheduled hearing, Defendant and the Contractors’ Recovery Fund failed to present any matters in opposition to the requested payout.

7. The sum of $1,333.80 was not shown to be an unreasonable sum to accomplish the work on the fascia, soffits and rain gutters. Accordingly, it is adjudicated and determined that the total sum of $1,333.80 represents an appropriate award to be paid to Plaintiff from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. Plaintiff is determined to be injured persons as that term is defined in A.R.S. § 32-1131(3).

2. Under the facts and circumstances of this case, the Registrar of Contractors is empowered to determine and award proper payment to Plaintiff from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E).

3. The undisputed evidence of record supports an award to Plaintiff in the amount of $1,333.80, all of which shall be appropriately chargeable against Defendant and/or persons on the license as set forth in A.R.S. § 32- 1139(B).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended on the effective date of the Order entered in this matter the Registrar of Contractors shall commence and finalize payment procedures from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund to Plaintiff in the amount of $1,333.80.

Done this day, January 22, 1999

_________________________________ Mark A. Silver Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 1999, to:

Michael P. Goldwater, Director Registrar of Contractors 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

ATTN: Joyce Armijo

By _______________________________

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1700 West Washington, Suite 602 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826