11-1902-17489-2
STATE OF
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY
|
In the
Matter of Jason Scott Moksnes, individually, and d/b/a JP’s Home Finishing |
FINDINGS OF
FACT, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION |
The above-entitled matter came on for
a prehearing conference before Administrative Law Judge Barbara L. Neilson on
October 18, 2006, at 3:30 p.m. at the Office of Administrative Hearings in
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
The
issues presented in this case are whether the Respondent, Jason Scott Moksnes,
individually and d/b/a JP’s Home Finishing, advertised his availability for
finishing work, represented to homeowners Jay and Kirsten Kocon in March of
2006 that he was a licensed residential building contractor, provided the
Kocons with a nonexistent license number, cashed the Kocons’ down payment check,
never did any work for the Kocons, and never sent the Kocons a refund, and has
thereby engaged in unlicensed residential building contractor or remodeler
activities, performed in breach of contract, engaged in a fraudulent,
deceptive, or dishonest practice, and displayed incompetence,
untrustworthiness, or financial irresponsibility in violation of Minn. Stat. §§
326.84, subds. 1 and 1b, and 326.91, subds. 1(2), (4), (5), and (6), and 4 (2004). If so, the further issue is whether the
Respondent should be subject to discipline and/or a civil penalty pursuant to
Minn. Stat. §§ 45.027, subd. 7, and 326.91, subd. 1 (2004).
Based upon all of the proceedings
herein, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Notice of
and Order for Hearing, Order for Prehearing Conference, and Statement of
Charges (“Notice of Hearing”) initiating this contested case proceeding was
served on the Respondent Jason Scott Moksnes, individually, and d/b/a JP’s Home
Finishing, via first class mail on September 6, 2006, at the following
address: Jason Scott Moksnes, JP’s Home
Finishing, 1122 Arthur Street, Wausau, WI
54403.[1]
2.
The Notice of Hearing contained the following language:
Respondent’s
failure to appear at the hearing or prehearing conference may result in a
finding that the Respondent is in default, that the Department’s allegations
contained in the Statement of Charges may be accepted as true, and that its
proposed disciplinary action may be upheld.[2]
3. The Notice of
Hearing set a prehearing conference for October 18, 2006, at 3:30 p.m.[3]
4.
The Respondent did not file a notice of appearance in this
matter, and no one appeared at the prehearing conference on October 18, 2006,
on behalf of the Respondent. The
Respondent did not make any request prior to the October 18, 2006, prehearing
conference for a continuance or any other relief.
5.
Because the Respondent failed to appear at the prehearing
conference in this matter, he is in default.
6.
Pursuant to Minn. Rules part 1400.6000 (2005), the
allegations contained in the Notice of Hearing and Statement of Charges are
hereby taken as true and incorporated into these Findings of Fact.
Based upon the foregoing Findings of
Fact, the Administrative Law Judge makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS
1.
The Administrative Law Judge and the Commissioner of the
Department of Labor and Industry have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to
Minn. Stat. §§ 14.50, 45.027, and 326.91 (2004).
2.
The Notice of Hearing issued by the Department was proper
and the Department has fulfilled all relevant substantive and procedural
requirements of law and rule.
3.
The Respondent, having made no appearance at the prehearing
conference, and not requesting any continuance or relief, is in default. Pursuant to Minn. Rules part 1400.6000 (2005),
the allegations contained in the Notice of Hearing and Statement of Charges are
hereby taken as true.
4.
By advertising his availability for finishing work,
representing to homeowners Jay and Kirsten Kocon that he was a licensed
residential building contractor, providing the Kocons with a nonexistent
license number, cashing the Kocons’ down payment check, failing to do any work
for the Kocons, and failing to send the Kocons a refund, the Respondent has
engaged in unlicensed residential building contractor or remodeler activities,
performed in breach of contract, engaged in a fraudulent, deceptive, or
dishonest practice, and displayed incompetence, untrustworthiness, or financial
irresponsibility in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 326.84, subds. 1 and 1b, and
326.91, subds. 1(2), (4), (5), and (6), and 4 (2004).
5.
The Respondent is subject to discipline and/or a civil
penalty pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 45.027, subd. 7, and 326.91, subd. 1
(2004). The imposition of sanctions is in the public interest.
Based
upon the foregoing Conclusions, the Administrative Law Judge makes the
following:
IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the Commissioner of
Labor and Industry impose discipline and/or an appropriate civil penalty
against the Respondent, Jason Scott Moksnes, individually, and d/b/a JP’s Home
Finishing.
Dated: November 16, 2006 s/Barbara L.
Neilson
|
|
|
BARBARA
L. NEILSON |
|
Administrative
Law Judge |
Reported: Default.
This Report is a recommendation, not
a final decision. The Commissioner of
Labor and Industry will make the final decision after a review of the
record. The Commissioner may adopt,
reject or modify the Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Recommendations. Under Minn. Stat. § 14.61, the final decision
of the Commissioner shall not be made until this Report has been made available
to the parties to the proceeding for at least ten days. An opportunity must be afforded to each party
adversely affected by this Report to file exceptions and present argument to
the Commissioner. Parties should contact
the Office of the Commissioner of Labor and Industry,
If the Commissioner fails to issue a final decision within 90 days of the close of the record, this report will constitute the final agency decision under Minn. Stat. § 14.62, subd. 2a. The record closes upon the filing of exceptions to the report and the presentation of argument to the Commissioner, or upon the expiration of the deadline for doing so. The Commissioner must notify the parties and the Administrative Law Judge of the date on which the record closes.