ALJDEC

99F-P0148-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2000-12-13

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: December 6, 2000; at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared on his own behalf. The Respondent appeared on his own behalf. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

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. Respondent is the holder of a Class B License issued by the Registrar of Contractors. The Respondent’s Class B License was canceled on May 4, 2000. 2. This is a residential matter where the Respondent constructed a new residence for the Complainant. 3. The Complainant was dissatisfied with the Respondent’s workmanship and failure to correct his work despite repeated requests that he do so. The Complainant then filed a formal complaint, against the Respondent, with the Registrar of Contractors. 4. Pursuant to the filing of the formal complaint, an assigned Agency Inspector conducted an on-site inspection and issued a written corrective work order directing the Respondent to perform designated corrective work on the Complainant’s residence. 5. The Respondent failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the corrective work order. 6. Credible testimony and evidence established that the items set forth in the written corrective work order are valid items that fail to comply with applicable workmanship standards and that the items still require proper correction. 7. The Respondent did not dispute the fact that the items set forth in the corrective work order had not been corrected but instead testified that he had allowed an unlicensed individual to become his “partner” and that the unlicensed individual actually ran the Respondent’s construction business with the Respondent’s role being reduced to that of an unpaid subcontractor. 8. The Respondent testified that both the Complainant and the Respondent were taken advantage of by the Respondent’s unscrupulous “partner” who was now in jail and that in view of the fact that the jailed “partner” had cheated the Respondent out of over $80,000.00 that no further action should be taken against the Respondent. 9. The evidence of record establishes that the Respondent’s Class B- License is an individual license and that the Respondent was not supposed to have a “partner” nor was the Respondent supposed to allow an unlicensed individual to take over the Respondent’s construction license and perform construction work regardless of how dominating or persuasive the unlicensed individual was. 10. The Respondent’s actions, in allowing an unlicensed individual to become his “partner” and in allowing the unlicensed individual to take over the Respondent’s construction license to perform construction work and to unscrupulously take advantage of the Complainant and the public at large, are found to constitute a wrongful act. 11. Notice is taken of the Respondent’s prior License record with the Registrar of Contractors. . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The credible evidence of record established violations by the Respondent of the provisions of A.R.S. (32-1154 (A) (7) (Wrongful Act), (23) and (3); namely, Rule R4-9-108. RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Class B be revoked. Done this day, December 21, 2000.

________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of December, 2000, to:

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

By _______________________________

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

Office of Administrative Hearings 100 N. Stone Ave., Suite 704 Tucson, Arizona 85701 (520) 628-5488