arenas a oS " , WV : J ae % ey | . & von ny, 8 a sions ee Rein ae 4 ; ; Whee hy "STATE OF FLORIDA kyo, “a DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION 94 Qo Sy CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD OA, DIVISION I o DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, Petitioner, | DOAH Case No. OO- 2651] vs. DBPR Case No. 99-02432 WILLIAM A. POSEY, Respondent. ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION (“Petitioner”) files this Administrative Complaint against Respondent WILLIAM A. POSEY Respondent") before the Construction Industry Licensing Board ("Board"), and alleges: 1, Petitioner is the State agency charged with regulating the practice of contracting pursuant to Section 20.165 and Chapters 455 and 489, Fla. Stat. . 2. At all material times, Respondent was a Certified Building Contractor in the State of 7 Florida, under license num er CB C013334, and was the licensed qualifier for Buildings Unlimited. Therefore, Respondent was responsible for al of such business organization's contiacting and financial activities. 3. Respondent, however, has failed or refused to obtain a qualified business licensure number from the Board for Buildings Unlimited. Hey alt we. a » \ Ce U 4, Respondent! s last known address is 1015 Hollow Point, Longwood (Seminole County), Florida 32791. 5. Onor about April 14, 1997, Respondent entered into a written contractual agreement with Joseph Alter to construct a two thousand, one hundred (2,100) square-foot horse barn, and related landscaping and furnishings. Such work was to include roofing, plumbing and electrical _ contracting services. 6. The price under said contractual agreement was forty-five thousand, fourteen dollars ($45,014.00). 7. Respondent failed, however, in his contract with Mr. Alter, to include his contracting licensure number and the disclosures concerning consumers’ rights under the Construction Industries Recovery Fund, pursuant to Section 489.1425, Fla. Stat. 8. Onor about April 22, 1997, the Orange County Building Department issued permit number B97-005785, by and through Respondent’s licensure, for the subject project. Later, the same Building Department issued permit number B99-006540 (after the previous permit had expired) at Respondent’s request, so that construction which various unlicensed sub-contractors had performed could be corrected, code violations resolved, and so that a final inspection could be obtained. 29 “Mr. Bruce Draper, a salesman for and an independent contractor to Buildings Unlimited, actualy estimated the work necessary for Mr. Alter's project, negotiated a contract price with him and assisted Mr, “Alter i in “obtaining construction financing, Mr. Draper also procured and su ervised the sub- contractors for the subject project, including individuals and entities whic provided unlicensed roofing, oun and electrical contracting services. 10. Respondent knew that Mr. Draper was an unlicensed person and was performing and 2 DBPR Case No, 99-02432 i > 5 z supervising construction for Mr. Alter's project. Respondent also knew, or should have known, that additional unlicensed persons or entities were performing unlicensed roofing, plumbing and electrical ‘contracting services at such Project. 11. Asa result of Respondent s failure to obtain licensed sub-contractors and to properly supervise the construction, the work on Mr. Alter's project was sub-standard, untimely and did not meet the local building code requirements. 12. Respondent failed or refused to remedy the existing problems on the subject project, including, but not limited to a leaking hot water heater, missing and inoperable electrical outlets and fixtures, improperly installed, graded and unfinished concrete, improper interior and exterior drainage systems, unfinished and unpainted doors and shutters and related items. Accordingly, Respondent never obtained a successful final inspection for the project. 13. Mr Alter, therefore, was forced to retain additional licensed contractors to make necessary repairs at the project, and at an additional cost of more than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00). 14. On or about October 27, 1997, Mr. Alter instituted a civil suit in the Orange County County Court, Case No. $O97-6584, against Respondent, Mr. Draper and Buildings Unlimited, arising from the j instant it nucleus of facts. 15, On or about June 19, 1998, Mr Alter obtained an Amended Final Judgment against : Respondent in n this County Court litigation for money damages in the ¢ original principal amount of five thousand, one hundred and fory-four dollars (85, 144, 00). Such Amended Final Judgment relates t to o Respondent s practice of contracting, it has n not been appealed, and Respondent has failed or refused to satisfy same within a reasonable time. 3 DBPR Case No. 99-02432 age wo U Count I 16. Petitioner realleges Paragraphs 1-15, and further alleges: 17. Based upon ‘the ‘foregoing, Respondent violated Section 489.129(1 \(e), Fla. Stat., by performing any act which assists a person or entity in engaging in the prohibited uncertified and unregistered practice of contracting, if the certificate holder or registrant knows or has reasonable grounds to know that the person(s) or entity(ies) was/were uncertified and unregistered. | Count If 18. Petitioner realleges Paragraphs 1-15, and further alleges: 19. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 489.129(1)(n), Fla. Stat., by committing incompetency or misconduct in the practice of contracting, including the failure to properly supervise all work occurring on Mr. Alter's project. - Count IH 20, Petitioner realleges 3 Paragraph ‘-15 , and further alleges: 21. Based upon ‘the foregoing, Respondent violated 489. 129(1)(h)3., Fla. Stat., by committing mismanagement or misconduct in the practice of contracting that causes financial harm to a customer. Financial mismanagement or misconduct occurs when: 3. The contractor’s job has been completed, and it is shown that the customer has hag to pay more for the contracted job than the original c contract price, IS adjusted for subsequent change orders, unless such i increase in Cost was eyond th the control of the contractor, was the result of circumstances caused d by the customer, or was ; otherwise nermitted byt the terms sof the contract between the c contractor tand the customer. Count IV 4 DBPR Case No. 99-02432 we _ order of the t ‘) | ) Yo. . Vv 22. Petitioner realleges Paragraph 1-15, and further «alleges 23. Based upon the foregoing Respondent violated Section 489.129(1)(p), Fla Stat., by - proceeding on any job without obtaining applicable local building department inspections. Count V 24. Petitioner realleges Paragraph 1-15, and further alleges: 25. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 489.129(1)(n), Fla. Stat., by committing incompetency or misconduct in the practice of contracting. Count VI 26. Petitioner realleges Paragraph 1-15, and further alleges: 27. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent violated Sections 489.129(1)(j) and . 489.124(2)(a), Fla. Stat., and Rule 61G4-15.007, F.A.C., by failing to affix the number of his or her registration or certification on each contract used by that contractor or business organization in the practice of contracting. Count VIT 28, Petitioner realleges Paragraph 1-15, and further alleges: 29. Based upon t the o roreeon, Respondent violated Section 489. 129000), Fla. Stat., by failing in any material respect to ‘comply with the provisions s ofthis part or r violating a mule or lawful ard, including, as here, Section 489.1425, Fla. Stat. f Count vit 30. Petitioner realleges Paragraph 1- 15, and further alleges: 31. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 489, 12800, Fla. Stat., by failing to satisfy within a reasonable time, thet terms ofa a civil judgment obtained against the licensee, or the business organization qualified by the licensee, relating to the practice of the 5 DBPR Case No. 99-02432 | ea pe cad CU licensee’s profession. Count IX 32. Petitioner reallepes Paragraphs 1- 15, and further or alleges: 33. Section 489.1 19(2), Fla. Stat., provides that if an applicant proposes to engage in contracting as a business organization, such as Buildings Unlimited here, the organization must apply for a certificate of authority through a qualifying agent. _ 34. Rule 61G4-15.0021(1)(b), F.A.C., provides that a certificate issued to a business organization shall bear the name of the business organization, the address of the business organization, and the licensure number of the business organization. 35. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent violated Section 489. 129(1)q), Fla. Stat., by failing in any material respect to comply with the provisions of this part ¢ or violating a rule or lawful order of the board, incuting as here, Section 489. 1190), Fla. ‘Stat. and Rule 61G4- 15. 002(1)(6), F. A. C. by failing c or r refusing to obtain a qualified business organization licensure number for Buildings Unlimited. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Construction Industry Licensing - Board enter an Order imposing one or more of the following penalties on Respondent: place on probation, reprimand the licensee, revoke, suspend, deny the issuance or renewal of the certificate f -_ Of régistration, require financial restitution to a consumer, impose an administrative fine not to exceed “five thousand dollars ($5000.00) per violation, require continuing education, assess costs associated with the investigation and prosecution, impose any or all penalties delineated within Section ass. 5.291(2), Fla. Stat., and/or any other relief that the Board is authorized to impose pursuant 1 to Chapters 455 and 489, Fla. Stat., and the rules promulgated thereunder. 6 DBPR Case No. 99-02432 oe mpeg oe eae —_ ee ne er eran Signed this day of__ Avpost , 1999, By. COAL 4 D'or G.W. HARRELL CHIEF ATTORNEY F | . aan : . tate gee . j lation COUNSEL FOR DEPARTMENT: Department of Business and Professional Regu Robert W. Burijon, Ir. yn DEPUTY CLER Senior Attorney My Aichelt- Dept. of Business & Professional Regulation ’ 400 W. Robinson St. N501 © CLERK -\o- aq Orlando, FL 32801 DATE B-\e7 tt oe RWB/rtm ~ 6/1/99 case #99-02432 eR. aaa | Mok rice Y Siemens 7 DBPR Case No. 99-02432 REE RENE RE I Eprom tng roe “eRe me ge

Docket for Case No: 00-002679PL