ALJDEC

99F-T0406-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-04-13

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|MICHAEL McGEE, |(|Case No.: T99-0406 | | |(| | |Complainant, |(|Docket No.: 99F-T0406-ROC | | |(| | |vs. |(| | | |(| | |License No. 090706, Class C-05 of|(|Recommended | |Bernadette Ann Perry and Kenneth |(|Decision and Order | |Bruce Perry, d.b.a. TUCSON |(| | |SEAMLESS GUTTERS (PTR), |(| | | |(| | |Respondent. |(| | | |(| |

HEARING: April 5th, 1999; 9:00 a.m. Appearances: The Respondent appeared through its Qualifying Party, Mr. Kenneth Bruce Perry. The Complainant failed to appear or be represented. Administrative Law Judge: Grant Winston

This matter was brought on for administrative hearing on Monday, April 5th, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. The Respondent appeared through its Qualifying Party, Mr. Kenneth Bruce Perry. The Complainant failed to appear or be represented. Based on the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommended Order are made.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. This matter was scheduled for hearing on Monday, April 5th, 1999, at 9:00 a.m. in the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), Tucson, Arizona. When the scheduled time arrived, the Respondent appeared through its Qualifying Party, Mr. Kenneth Bruce Perry. The Complainant failed to appear or be represented.

2. The Complainant had left a message on the OAH answering machine, indicating that he would not appear at the hearing, due to the requirement of his presence in Phoenix that morning for a court trial.

3. The Respondent submitted a letter to the file, representing it to be from the Complainant, and its content to be the Complainant’s statement that all previously outstanding issues regarding the work in question performed by the Respondent were now “resolved.”

Conclusions of Law

1. This hearing was held under authority of and pursuant to A.R.S. §32- 1156, and A.R.S. §41-1092.07.

2. The Complainant, by his aforementioned default in appearance or waiver of the right to hearing, failed to sustain the required burden of proving the charges set forth in the Complaint by a preponderance of evidence. Consequently, the record does not support any conclusion that the Respondent violated A.R.S. §32-1154.A.7., 23., or 3., namely Rule 4-9-108, as set forth in the Citation and Complaint.

Recommended Order

Wherefore, it is hereby recommended that the entire Citation and Complaint in case number T99-0406, together with the Complaint on which it is based, be dismissed. . . . . . . . . . . . . Dated this 13th day of April, 1999.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ Grant Winston Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of April, 1999, to:

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

Transmitted by:

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