ne eS ~ a S . er v STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATEON CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD DIVISION I DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, oh llHY SLBA 02: Petitioner, Case No. 97-14016 vs. O0[ls? WALCOTT GEORGE ALLEN, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ("Petitioner"), files this Administrative Complaint before the Construction Industry Licensing Board (“CILB”), against WALCOTT GEORGE ALLEN, ("Respondent"), and says: 1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of contracting pursuant to Section 20. 165, Florida Statutes, and Chapters: 455 and 489, ‘Plorida statutes. 2. Respondent is, and at all times material hereto has been, a Certified General Contractor, in the State of Florida, having | “license number ce co47402. a a Respondent ': s last ‘known, address. is 17405 5. W. - ost Court, Miami, Florida "33157- “4001. 4. At all times material hereto, Respondent was the licensed qualifier for Lancewood Construction, Inc. (hereinafter ack a AM i al Sonanaial referred to as "Lancewood") . 5. At all times material hereto, Lancewood failed to obtain a certificate of authority as required by Section 489.119(2), Florida Statutes. 6. At some time or times, including some time or times prior to November 23, 1996, Rawlings Bisesar (“Bisesar”) was a Lancewood employee, " supervisor, salesperson, or agent. At all times material hereto, Bisesar was not licensed to practice contracting in the State of Florida, and the Respondent knew or had reasonable grounds to know this. 7. On or about November 23, 1996, Bisesar contracted with | Sheila Davis (“Davis”) to construct an addition to Davis’s residence at 12525 N.W. 17°* Place, Miami, Dade County, Florida, for $57,500.00. 8. Bisesar induced Davis to sign the contract and make payments pursuant thereto by representing in a business card and otherwise that he was licensed and insured and that he was “and the ‘business card ‘contained the ‘Respondent's ‘license “number. ee 9. On or about January 15,°1997, building permit number 97036333 for the contracted work was obtained from the Dade affiliated with the Respondent and Lancewood. Both the contract county Departivent of Planning, ‘Bevelopinent, ‘and “Regulation. “by ‘and - through the Respondent’s licensure. ‘10. Pursuant to the contract, Davis made payments to Bisesar as follows: $20,000.00 on November 26, 1996; $15,000.00 2 ce peri pee era eee Ts t on February 6,_ , 1997. 11. During the period from about November 25, 1996 through about April 28, 1997, Bisesar performed or attempted to perform, but did not complete, the work called for by the contract. ' Thereafter Bisesar failed, without just cause and notice to Davis, to perform further work. 12. At the time that Bisesar discontinued performance or attempted performance of the work, a substantial amount of the work remained to be done, including roof truss, roof, interior wall framing, electrical and plumbing work, even though, pursuant to Article 4 of the contract, ‘the second draw of $15,000.00 should have completed the roof truss and interior wall framing work, and the third draw should have completed the electrical and plumbing work. Thereafter, Davis completed the roof work on or about May 11, 1997, and she paid for that work with four payments directly to Bisesar’ s roofing subcontractor in the total amount of $4,200.00. 13. After. Davis Filed a complaint with the Petitioner, on November 12, 1997, _the Respondent agreed to assume. personal responsibility for completion of the contracted work ‘by ‘December 15, 1997; however, the Respondent failed, without just cause “and notice to Pavis, to complete the work. 14. The contract ‘contained a - provision “calling for any disputes under ‘the contract: to be ‘resolved by binding arbitration. Pursuant to that provision, an arbitrator of the 3 wh 7) american Arbitration Association, Construction Industry Arbitration Tribunal, conducted an arbitration proceeding. The named parties to that proceeding were Davis, the Respondent, and Bisesar. On February 26, 1998, an arbitration award was entered in favor of Davis and against the Respondent and Bisesar. The award imposed joint and several responsibility upon the Respondent and Bisesar for making payment to Davis within fifteen (15) days in the principal amount of $31,250.00 plus arbitration costs of $1,250.00. The Respondent and Bisesar failed to make any payments. . 15. On May 29, 1998, Davis filed suit against the Respondent and Bisesar in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida, Case No. 98- 12265 CA 01, to have the arbitration award confirmed. On May 14, 1999, by means of that lawsuit Davis obtained a civil judgment relating to the practice of contracting against the Respondent and Bisesar. The judgment ordered that Davis recover from the Respondent and Bisesar the principal amount of $31,250.00, “arbitration c sts of $1,250.00, court costs of $225.00, and 16. _The judgment 3 has not been ‘satisfied or "appealed, and no : mutually gre d payment plen has been entered into to “satisfy the judgment. 17. CILB Rule 61G4-17.001(23), Florida Administrative Code, reads as follows: perecge = epee seer oc i 489. 129(1) (a) J, F.s., * ‘reasonable time” means ninety (90) days following the entry of a civil judgment that is not appealed. The Board will consider a mutually agreed upon payment plan as satisfaction of such a judgment so long as the payments are current. 18. The Respondent has failed within a reasonable time to satisfy the judgment. COUNT I 13. Petitioner realleges and incorporates the allegations set forth in Paragraphs 1 through 18 as though fully stated herein. 20. Based upon the foregoing, the Respondent is guilty of having violated Section 489. 129(1) (e), Florida Statutes (1995), by performing any act which assists a ‘person or entity in engaging in the prohibited uncertified and unregistered practice of contracting, if the certificateholder or registrant knows or has reasonable grounds to know that the person or entity was uncertified and unregistered. _ COUNT II 2h. “Petitioner realleges and nd incorporates the allegations set forth in | Paragraphs 1 1 through. 18 as though fully stated herein. 22. Based upon the foregoing, the Respondent is guilty of having violated” ‘Section 489, 129(1) (3), Florida Statutes (1995), by failing in any material respect to comply with the provisions of this part or violating a rule or lawful order of the board; by 5 OE TERT eRe yn PRR we we came peers