0 K-04 57 PL C8 pe D5) be A RE fs 709 STATE OF FLORIDA é DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULA a) CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD DIVISION I DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, Petitioner, Case No. 2007-007313 v. PAUL HANSEN, Respondent. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ("Petitioner"), files this Administrative Complaint before the Construction Industry Licensing Board, against PAUL HANSEN, ("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, Florida Statutes. 2. Respondent is, and has been at all times material hereto, a Certified Residential Contractor in the State of Florida, having been issued license number CRC 56902. 3. Respondent's last known addresses of record are 1424-2 SE 17" Avenue, Cape Coral, FL 33990; P. O. Box 151735, Cape Coral, FL 33915-1735; and, 1436 SE 16" Place, Cape Coral, FL 33909. 4. At all times material hereto, Respondent was the primary qualifying agent for Hansen Homes of South Florida, Inc. ("HHSEF"), which has a certificate of authority, QB 13128. 1 5. Section 489. '5(1)(a), Florida Statutes, provides tha 1 primary qualifying agents for a business organization are jointly and equally responsible for supervision of all operations of the business organization; for all field work at all sites; and for financial matters, both for the organization in general and for each specific job. 6. On or about September 27, 2005, HHSF entered into a contract with Aaron Wolff ("Wolff") to build a home on the property located at 126 SW 22™ Street, Cape Coral, Florida. 7. The total contract price was $232,441.00, of which $23,244.10 was paid to HHSF on or about November 18, 2005. 8. Respondent did not apply for a permit to complete any work on Wolff S property. 9. Neither Respondent nor HHSF performed any work from the date payment was made on November 18, 2005 to May 4, 2007. 10, Financing and funding for the construction loan remained in place for a period that covered in excess of ninety (90) days between November 18, 2005 and May 4, 2007. 11. There is at least one ninety (90) day period between November 18, 2005 and May 4, 2007, in which Respondent did no work and did not have Just cause for failing to complete any work during each said ninety (90) day period. 12. At the time of abandonment, the percentage of completion of work by Respondent and/or HHSF is less than the amount of monies received by Respondent and/or HHSF. COUNT I 13. Petitioner realleges and incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 12 as though fully set forth herein. 14. Based on the egoing, Respondent violated section. «1 29(1)(g)2, Florida Statutes, by committing mismanagement or misconduct in the practice of contracting that causes financial harm to a customer. Financial mismanagement or misconduct occurs when the contractor has abandoned a customer's job and the percentage of completion is less that than the percentage of the total contract price paid to the contractor as of the time of abandonment, unless the contractor is entitled to retain such funds under the terms of the contract or refunds the excess funds within 30 days after the job is abandoned. COUNT II 15. Petitioner realleges and incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 12 as though fully set forth herein. 16. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated section 489.129(1)(j), Florida Statutes, by abandoning the construction project in which the contractor is engaged or under contract as a contractor. A project may be presumed abandoned after 90 days if the contractor terminates the project without just cause or without proper notification to the owner, including the reason for termination, or fails to perform work without just cause for 90 consecutive days. COUNT III 17. Petitioner realleges and incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs’ 1 through 12 as though fully set forth herein. 18. Based upon the foregoing, the Respondent violated Section 489.129(1)(o), Florida Statutes, by proceeding on this job without obtaining the necessary permits. COUNT IV 19. Petitioner realleges and incorporates the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 18 as though fully set forth herein, 20. Based on the foregoing, Respondent violated section 489. 129(1)Gn), Florida Statutes, by committing incompetence or mismanagement in the practice of contracting WHEREFORE, Pet _ ner respectfully requests the Construc 1 Industry Licensing Board enter an Order imposing one or more of the following penalties: place on probation, reprimand the licensee, revoke, suspend, deny the issuance or renewal of the certificate or registration, require financial restitution to a consumer, impose an administrative fine not to exceed $5,000 per violation, require continuing education, assess costs associated with investigation and prosecution, impose any or all penalties delineated within section 455.227(2), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the Board is authorized to impose pursuant to Chapters 489, 455, Florida Statutes, and/or the rules promulgated thereunder. 4 , . Signed this _/O™ day of fly , 2007. COUNSEL FOR DEPARTMENT: Matthew D. Morton Assistant General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation Office of the General Counsel 1940 N. Monroe Street, Ste. 42 Tallahassee, FL 32399-2202 PC Found: July 3, 2607 Div. I: Clark & Burke By! Matthew D. Morton Assistant General Counsel MEMORANDUM OF FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE TO: DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATIONS 2 layin); ICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL-LEGAL C ig FROM: CHAIRPERSON, PROBABLE CAUSE PANEL, DIVISIONI BOARD: CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD . RE: Paul Hansen CASE NO. 2007-07313 LICENSE NO.: CRC 56902 JUL 9 3 2007 DATE OF PROBABLE CAUSE PANEL MEETING: THIS MATTER WAS BROUGHT BEFORE THE PROBABLE CAUSE PANEL MEMBERSHIP COMPOSED OF: Clark ¢ Burke ON THE DATE SET FORTH ABOVE. THE PANEL, HAVING RECEIVED THE INVESTIGATIVE REPORT, HAVING CAREFULLY REVIEWED THAT REPORT, HAVING REVIEWED THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE DEPARTMENT AND HAVING HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO INQUIRE OF COUNSEL AND BEING OTHERWISE DULY ADVISED IN THE PREMISES THEREOF, FINDS THAT: PROBABLE CAUSE WAS NOT FOUND IN THIS CASE. Lo PROBABLE CAUSE WAS FOUND ON THE FOLLOWING STATUTORY AND RULE GROUNDS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, SECTIONS: 489.129(1)(2)2, F.S., 489.129(1)(j). F.S..489.129(1)(0), F.S., and 489.129(1)(m), F.S. PROBABLE CAUSE WAS FOUND TO AMEND THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT AS FOLLOWS: ALTHOUGH PROBABLE CAUSE WAS PREVIOUSLY FOUND, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT SHOULD BE DISMISSED [AIRPERSON, PROBABLE CAUSE PANEL

Docket for Case No: 08-000927PL