CSLB - Accusation...Mar 16, 2020 · ALEX KOTYAKOV, RMO/PRES/CEO 4811 Chippendale Drive #301...

1 (GOLDEN COAST CONSTRUCTION & RESTORATION; ALEX KOTYAKOV, RMO/PRES/CEO)

ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

XAVIER BECERRA Attorney General of California KENT D. HARRIS Supervising Deputy Attorney General STEPHANIE ALAMO-LATIF Deputy Attorney General State Bar No. 283580 1300 I Street, Suite 125 P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Telephone: (916) 210-6112 Facsimile: (916) 327-8643

Attorneys for Complainant

BEFORE THE

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS CONTRACTORS STATE LICENSE BOARD DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

In the Matter of the Accusation Against: GOLDEN COAST CONSTRUCTION & RESTORATION ALEX KOTYAKOV, RMO/PRES/CEO 4811 Chippendale Drive #301 Sacramento, CA 95841 Contractor's License No. 838443 B, C61/D41 ALEX KOTYAKOV, DBA GOLDEN COAST CONSTRUCTION & RESTORATION 4811 Chippendale Drive #307 Sacramento, CA 95841 Contractor's License No. 992371 B

Respondent.

Case No. N2019-203

ACCUSATION

PARTIES

1. Wood Robinson (Complainant) brings this Accusation solely in his official capacity

as the Enforcement Supervisor I of the Contractors State License Board (Board), Department of

Consumer Affairs.

///


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Golden Coast Construction, Contractors License No. 838443

2. On or about May 18, 2004, the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) issued

Contractor's License Number 838443, Classifications B and C-61/D41, to Golden Coast

Construction (Respondent GC), with Christopher Benjamin Ait as Responsible Managing Officer

in classification B; Nadi Kotyakov, officer; and, Alex Kotyakov, officer. The Contractor's

License was in full force and effect at all times relevant to the charges brought herein and will

expire on May 31, 2020, unless renewed.

3. Effective May 9, 2006, Christopher Benjamin Ait associated as Responsible

Managing Officer for Respondent GC’s Classification 61. Effective July 5, 2007, Christopher

Benjamin Ait disassociated from Classifications B and C61. Effective July 13, 2007, Mikhail Y.

Pshichenko associated as Responsible Managing Officer in Classifications B and C61/D41.

Effective February 20, 2014, Alex Kotyakov replaced Mikhail Y. Pshichenko as Responsible

Managing Officer in Classification B. Effective April 19, 2017, Mikhail Y. Pshichenko

disassociated as Responsible Managing Officers in Classification C61/D41 and Alex Kotyakov

associated as Responsible Managing Officer in those classifications.

4. On March 20, 2009, Nadi Kotyakov was removed as an officer.

5. Effective September 25, 2012, the name was changed from Golden Coast

Construction to Golden Coast Construction & Restoration.

Alex Kotyakov, dba Golden Coast Construction & Restoration, Contractors License

No. 992371

6. On or about April 24, 2014, the Registrar issued Contractor's License Number

992371, Classification B to Alex Kotyakov (Respondent Kotyakov), doing business as Golden

Coast Construction & Restoration. The Contractor's License was in full force and effect at all

times relevant to the charges brought herein and will expire on April 30, 2020, unless renewed.

JURISDICTION

7. This Accusation is brought before the Registrar for the Board under the authority of

the following laws. All section references are to the Business and Professions Code (Code)

unless otherwise indicated.


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

8. Code section 118, subdivision (b), states:

The suspension, expiration, or forfeiture by operation of law of a license issued by a board in the department, or its suspension, forfeiture, or cancellation by order of the board or by order of a court of law, or its surrender without the written consent of the board, shall not, during any period in which it may be renewed, restored, reissued, or reinstated, deprive the board of its authority to institute or continue a disciplinary proceeding against the licensee upon any ground provided by law or to enter an order suspending or revoking the license or otherwise taking disciplinary action against the licensee on any such ground.

9. Code section 7076.5, subdivision (h), states:

The inactive status of a license shall not bar any disciplinary action by the board against a licensee for any of the causes stated in this chapter.

10. Code section 7090 provides, in pertinent part, that the Registrar may suspend or

revoke any license or registration if the licensee or registrant is guilty of or commits any one or

more of the acts or omissions constituting cause for disciplinary action.

11. Code section 7106.5 states:

The expiration, cancellation, forfeiture, revocation, or suspension of a license by operation of law or by order or decision of the registrar or a court of law, or the voluntary surrender of a license by a licensee, shall not deprive the registrar of jurisdiction to proceed with any investigation of or action or disciplinary proceeding against the license, or to render a decision suspending or revoking the license.

12. Code section 7121 states:

A person who has been denied a license for a reason other than failure to document sufficient satisfactory experience for a supplemental classification for an existing license, or who has had his or her license revoked, or whose license is under suspension, or who has failed to renew his or her license while it was under suspension, or who has been a partner, officer, director, manager, or associate of any partnership, corporation, limited liability company, firm, or association whose application for a license has been denied for a reason other than failure to document sufficient satisfactory experience for a supplemental classification for an existing license, or whose license has been revoked, or whose license is under suspension, or who has failed to renew a license while it was under suspension, and while acting as a partner, officer, director, manager, or associate had knowledge of or participated in any of the prohibited acts for which the license was denied, suspended, or revoked, shall be prohibited from serving as an officer, director, associate, partner, manager, qualifying individual, or member of the personnel of record of a licensee, and the employment, election, or association of this type of person by a licensee in any capacity other than as a nonsupervising bona fide employee shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action.

/// ///


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28


A person who was the qualifying individual on a revoked license, or of a license under suspension, or of a license that was not renewed while it was under suspension, shall be prohibited from serving as an officer, director, associate, partner, manager, or qualifying individual of a licensee, whether or not the individual had knowledge of or participated in the prohibited acts or omissions for which the license was revoked, or suspended, and the employment, election, or association of that person by a licensee shall constitute grounds for disciplinary action.

STATUTORY PROVISIONS

14. Code section 7068 states, in pertinent part:

(a) The board shall require an applicant to show the degree of knowledge and experience in the classification applied for, and the general knowledge of the building, safety, health, and lien laws of the state and of the administrative principles of the contracting business that the board deems necessary for the safety and protection of the public.

(b) An applicant shall qualify in regard to his or her experience and knowledge in one of the following ways:

(1) If an individual, he or she shall qualify by personal appearance or by the appearance of his or her responsible managing employee who is qualified for the same license classification as the classification being applied for.

(2) If a partnership or a limited partnership, it shall qualify by the appearance of a general partner or by the appearance of a responsible managing employee who is qualified for the same license classification as the classification being applied for.

(3) If a corporation, or any other combination or organization, it shall qualify by the appearance of a responsible managing officer or responsible managing employee who is qualified for the same license classification as the classification being applied for.

(4) If a limited liability company, it shall qualify by the appearance of a responsible managing officer, a responsible managing manager, responsible managing member, or a responsible managing employee who is qualified for the same license classification as the classification being applied for.

. . .

15. Code section 7068.1, subdivision (a), states, in pertinent part:

The person qualifying on behalf of an individual or firm under paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of subdivision (b) of Section 7068 shall be responsible for exercising that direct supervision and control of his or her employer’s or principal’s construction operations to secure compliance with this chapter and the rules and regulations of the board.

/// ///


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28


For the purposes of this chapter, the term “licensee” shall include an individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, joint venture, or any combination or organization licensed under this chapter, and shall also include any named responsible managing officer, responsible managing manager, responsible managing member, or personnel of that licentiate whose appearance has qualified the licentiate under the provisions of Section 7068.


(a) A willful departure in any material respect from accepted trade standards for good and workmanlike construction constitutes a cause for disciplinary action, unless the departure was in accordance with plans and specifications prepared by or under the direct supervision of an architect.

(b) A willful departure from or disregard of plans or specifications in any material respect, which is prejudicial to another, without the consent of the owner or his or her duly authorized representative and without the consent of the person entitled to have the particular construction project or operation completed in accordance with such plans or specifications, constitutes a cause for disciplinary action..


Failure in a material respect on the part of a licensee to complete any construction project or operation for the price stated in the contract for such construction project or operation or in any modification of such contract constitutes a cause for disciplinary action. 19. Code Section 7122.5 states:

The performance by an individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, firm, or association of an act or omission constituting a cause for disciplinary action, likewise constitutes a cause for disciplinary action against a licensee who at the time that the act or omission occurred was the qualifying individual of that individual, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, firm, or association, whether or not he or she had knowledge of or participated in the prohibited act or omission.

20. Code Section 7159 states, in pertinent part:

(a)

(1) This section identifies the projects for which a home improvement contract is required, outlines the contract requirements, and lists the items that shall be included in the contract, or may be provided as an attachment.

. . . (d) A home improvement contract and any changes to the contract shall be in

writing and signed by the parties to the contract prior to the commencement of work covered by the contract or an applicable change order and, except as provided in


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

paragraph (8) of subdivision (a) of Section 7159.5, shall include or comply with all of the following:

. . . (5) The heading: “Contract Price,” followed by the amount of the contract in

dollars and cents. . . .

21. Code section 7159.5 provides, in pertinent part:

This section applies to all home improvement contracts, as defined in Section 7151.2, between an owner or tenant and a contractor, whether a general contractor or a specialty contractor, that is licensed or subject to be licensed pursuant to this chapter with regard to the transaction.

(a) Failure by the licensee or a person subject to be licensed under this chapter,

or by his or her agent or salesperson, to comply with the following provisions is cause for discipline:

(1) The contract shall be in writing and shall include the agreed contract

amount in dollars and cents. The contract amount shall include the entire cost o the contract, including profit, labor, and materials, but excluding finance charges.

. . . . (3) If a downpayment will be charged, the downpayment may not exceed one

thousand dollars ($1,000) or 10 percent of the contract amount, whichever is less. . . . . (5) Except for a downpayment, the contractor may neither request nor accept

payment that exceeds the value of the work performed or material delivered. . . .

COST RECOVERY AND OTHER AUTHORITY

22. Code section 125.3 states, in pertinent part:

(a) Except as otherwise provided by law, in any order issued in resolution of a disciplinary proceeding before any board within the department or before the Osteopathic Medical Board, upon request of the entity bringing the proceeding, the administrative law judge may direct a licentiate found to have committed a violation or violations of the licensing act to pay a sum not to exceed the reasonable costs of the investigation and enforcement of the case.

(b) In the case of a disciplined licentiate that is a corporation or a partnership, the order may be made against the licensed corporate entity or licensed partnership. . . .


Any board, bureau, or program within the Department of Consumer Affairs that takes disciplinary action against a licensee or licensees based on a complaint or report that has also been the subject of a civil action and that has been settled for monetary damages providing for full and final satisfaction of the parties may not require its licensee or licensees to pay any additional sums to the benefit of any plaintiff in the civil action.


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28


The decision may:

(a) Provide for the immediate complete suspension by the licensee of all operations as a contractor during the period fixed by the decision.

(b) Permit the licensee to complete any or all contracts shown by competent evidence taken at the hearing to be then uncompleted.

(c) Impose upon the licensee compliance with such specific conditions as may be just in connection with his operations as a contractor disclosed at the hearing and may further provide that until such conditions are complied with no application for restoration of the suspended or revoked licensee shall be accepted by the registrar.


Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 7121 and 7122, when any licensee has been suspended by a decision of the registrar pursuant to an accusation or pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 7071.17, Section 7085.6 or 7090.1, any additional license issued under this chapter [the Contractors’ State License Law] in the name of the licensee or for which the licensee furnished qualifying experience and appearance under the provisions of Section 7068, may be suspended by the registrar without further notice.


Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 7121 and 7122, when any license has been revoked under the provisions of this chapter [the Contractors’ State License Law], any additional license issued under this chapter in the name of the licensee or for which the licensee furnished qualifying experience and appearance under the provisions of Section 7068, may be revoked by the registrar without further notice.


After suspension of a license upon any of the grounds set forth in this chapter [the Contractors’ State License Law], the registrar may reinstate the license upon proof of compliance by the contractor with all provisions of the decision as to reinstatement or, in the absence of a decision or any provisions of reinstatement, in the sound discretion of the registrar.

After revocation of a license upon any of the grounds set forth in this chapter, the license shall not be reinstated or reissued and a license shall not be issued to any member of the personnel of the revoked licensee found to have had knowledge of or participated in the acts or omissions constituting grounds for revocation, within a minimum period of one year and a maximum period of five years after the final decision of revocation and then only on proper showing that all loss caused by the act or omission for which the license was revoked has been fully satisfied and that all conditions imposed by the decision of revocation have been complied with.

The board shall promulgate regulations covering the criteria to be considered when extending the minimum one-year period. The criteria shall give due consideration to the appropriateness of the extension of time with respect to the following factors:


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

(a) The gravity of the violation.

(b) The history of previous violations.

(c) Criminal convictions.

When any loss has been reduced to a monetary obligation or debt, however, the

satisfaction of the monetary obligation or debt as a prerequisite for the issuance, reissuance, or reinstatement of a license shall not be required to the extent the monetary obligation or debt was discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding. However, any nonmonetary condition not discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding shall be complied with prior to the issuance, the reissuance, or reinstatement of the license.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

I.P. PROJECT

28. On or about June 7, 2016, I.P.’s residence, located on Black Butte Circle in Stockton,

California, was damaged in a fire.

29. On or about June 8, 2016, I.P. entered into a written home improvement contract with

Respondent GC to restore residential fire damage at her residence (the I.P. Project). The contract

did not state an amount or describe the work to be performed. The approximate start date of the

contract was July 2016; The approximate completion date of the contract was January 2017.

30. On or about December 7, 2016, CSAA Insurance Group issued an estimate for

$107,960.33, replacement cost value, for work needed to repair or replace fire damage to I.P.’s

residence (the CSAA Estimate). The CSAA Estimate included, but was not limited to: blow-in

cellulose insulation to a 10” depth in main level; install load trusses; seal attic framing; clean

driveway, front walkways, front porch, etc., with pressure/chemical spray; post abatement

clearance; install carpet and carpet pad; detach and reset window drapery hardware; remove and

replace light fixtures and ceiling fan with light; clean smoke damage; remove and replace

cabinetry; repair wood fencing and gate; remove and replace brick veneer; seal and paint garage

doors, exposed rafters, exterior fascia, soffits, gutter downspouts; and, roofing.

31. On or about January 24, 2017, I.P. entered into another contract with Respondent GC,

to perform work on the I.P. Project in accordance with CSAA’s Estimate for $107,960.33. The

approximate start date of the contract was January 2017; The approximate completion date of the

contract was June 2017.


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

32. Respondent GC commenced work in or around February 2017.

33. On or about May 24, 2017, I.P. and Respondent GC entered into a verbal change

order in the amount of $1,634.00 for a cabinet upgrade, increasing the contract price to

$109,594.33 total.

34. On or about February 18, 2017, Wells Fargo Bank, NA, naming I.P. as Remitter,

issued a check for $33,388.10 to Respondent GC. On or about April 13, 2017, I.P. Freedom

Mortgage, on behalf of CSAA for I.P., issued a check to Respondent GC, in the amount of

$23,978.33. On or about May 5, 2017, I.P. provided Respondent GC with a cashier’s check for

$9,409.77. Respondent GC received a total of $66,776.20 for the I.P. Project.

35. The schedule of progress payments required I.P. to pay a $1,000.00 down payment;

$10,796.03 upon procurement of plans (10%); $21,592.07 upon completion of demolition (20%);

and $35,626.91 upon completion of “rough trades”, framing, plumbing, electrical, mechanical

(33%); for a total of $69,015.01 at 63% completion. Progress payments for the remaining work

were: $35,626.91 upon substantial completion of painting (33%); and, $3,318.41 for the final

inspection and completion (4%).

36. On or about July 20, 2017, Respondent GC requested $20,781.11, claiming that the

project was 96% complete. I.P. terminated Respondent GC on or about August 1, 2017.

37. On or about August 7, 2017, I.P. entered into a contract with correcting contractor

Herson Rodriguez Barrios (Barrios), Responsible Managing Officer for Dream Quality Builders

Inc. to complete the work. Correcting contractor Barrios installed insulation, sealed the attic

framing with shellac, replaced the carpet and carpet pads, installed light fixtures and fans,

repaired the damaged fence and gate, and performed finish carpentry, substantially completing

the project, for which I.P. paid Barrios approximately $31,430.

38. Barrios determined that Respondent GC departed from accepted trade standards, in

that Respondent GC failed to:

a. Install the cabinetry in a manner free of scratches and with all cabinet hardware.

b. Install the cabinetry with appropriate flat cabinet screws without penetration.


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

c. Install electrical wiring for the garage door opener in a manner that appropriately

concealed exposed electrical wires in an electrical box.

d. Install electrical wiring in a manner that avoided intersection with rafters and nail

plate.

e. Install the exhaust fan securely and free of kinks.

f. Install electrical wiring for the exhaust fan box in a manner that appropriately

concealed exposed electrical wires in the fan box.

g. Energize the air conditioning system and seal the ducting.

39. On or about October 31, 2017, Respondent GC recorded a Mechanics Lien claim on

I.P.’s property, totaling approximately $34,270.08. On or about January 31, 2018, Respondent

GC filed a lawsuit against I.P. seeking damages and to foreclose on the mechanic’s lien.

40. On or about May 20, 2019, the Board received a complaint from I.P. against

Respondent GC.

FIRST CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Departure from Trade Standards)

41. Respondent GC is subject to discipline pursuant to Code section 7109,

subdivision (a), in that regarding the I.P. project, Respondent GC willfully departed from

accepted trade standards for good and workmanlike construction in certain material respects, as

set forth above in paragraph 38 and its subparts.

SECOND CAUSE OF DISCIPLINE

(Contract Violations)

42. Respondent GC is subject to discipline under Code sections 7159, subdivision (a)(1),

7159, subdivision (d)(5), and 7159.5, subdivision (a)(1), in that on the I.P. Project, Respondent

GC failed to include a cost amount in its contract dated June 8, 2016.

THIRD CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Request for Payment in Excess of Value of Work Performed)

43. Respondent GC is subject to discipline pursuant to Code section 7159.5,

subdivision (a)(5), in that on the I.P. Project, Respondent GC requested from I.P. payment that


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

exceeded the value of work performed and material delivered. Specifically, on or about July 20,

2017, Respondent GC requested payment from I.P. for completing 96% of the project when, in

fact, the project was not 96% complete.

FOURTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Failure to Complete the Contract for the Stated Contract Price)

44. Respondent GC is subject to discipline pursuant to Code section 7113, in that on the

I.P. Project, Respondent GC failed in a material respect to complete the project for the price

stated in the contract, which will require I.P. to spend substantial sums over the total price of the

contract to complete the project that Respondent GC contracted for.

E.G. PROJECT

45. On or about August 18, 2018, E.G.’s residence, located on Scoles Court in

Sacramento, California, was damaged in a fire.

46. On or about August 21, 2018, American Technologies, Inc. issued an estimate for

$241,390.98, replacement cost value, for the repair or replacement of damaged items or structures

pursuant to its inspection of E.G.’s residence (the ATI Estimate). The ATI Estimate included, but

was not limited to: demolition; remove and replace the furnace and ductwork system; obtain

permits; remove and replace, seal and paint wood siding; clean, prime and paint; remove and

replace wall paper and drywall; remove and replace laminate and oak flooring and carpet; remove

and replace vanities, countertops and custom cabinetry in bathrooms and kitchen; remove and

replace insulation; remove and replace electrical outlets, switches, light fixtures, breaker panel,

etc.; remove and replace decking and gutter downspouts; remove and replace framing to include

trusses, 1” x 6” sheathing, and bracing; and remove and replace roofing.

47. On or about August 27, 2018, E.G. entered into a written home improvement contract

with Respondent GC in the amount of $241,390.98 to perform work in accordance with the ATI

Estimate (the E.G. Project). The contract provided for a $1,000.00 down payment.

48. On or about October 23, 2018, Respondent GC was paid $40,000.00 for the E.G.

Project. Respondent GC started work on the project in or around December 2018.

49. On or about March 19, 2019, E.G. terminated Respondent GC. Respondent GC


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ceased work on the project.

50. In or around February 2019, E.G. met with Aaron Whitlow, Responsible Managing

Officer for PRS Construction & Restoration Inc. (Whitlow) at E.G.’s residence. On or about

March 23, 2019, E.G. entered into a contract with Whitlow to correct and complete the project,

and E.G. paid Whitlow $245,483.30 for doing so. Whitlow determined that Respondent GC

departed from accepted trade standards, in that Respondent GC failed to:

a. Frame the deck level and in a structurally sound manner.

b. Install framing and header in a structurally sound manner.

c. Properly nail the roof sheathing to framing members.

d. Properly install electrical wiring.

51. On or about March 28, 2019, Respondent GC recorded a Mechanic’s lien on E.G.’s

property, totaling approximately $89,908.84. The lien incorporates an invoice dated March 18,

2019, that includes a $9,376.00 charge for scope-writing services, a service that was performed

by ATI in the ATI Estimate, which was the basis for Respondent GC’s contract. Respondent

GC’s contract with E.G. did not include a separate charge for creating an estimate or reiterating

ATI’s estimate, and there is no change order evidencing E.G.’s agreement for such a change.

Respondent GC filed a lawsuit against E.G. seeking damages and to foreclose on the mechanic’s

lien.

52. Respondent GC’s list of items performed in support of its Mechanic’s Lien, also

includes as “items done”, “demolition” in the amount of $18,697.83, as well as charges for

detaching and cleaning cabinetry, sinks, countertops, hardware, bookshelves, etc. In fact,

Respondent GC disposed of those items and did not clean them, contrary to ATI’s Estimate.

There is no change order evidencing E.G.’s agreement to demolish rather than clean those items.

Respondent GC deviated from and failed to follow plans and specifications without E.G.’s

consent, by:

a. Removing and discarding the flue pipe.

b. Discarding items that were to be cleaned, including, but not limited to, sinks, sink

fixtures, vanities, cabinetry, and a bookshelf.


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

53. On or about March 18, 2019, the Board received a complaint from E.G. against

Respondent GC.

FIFTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Departure from Trade Standards)


subdivision (a), in that regarding the E.G. project, Respondent GC willfully departed from

accepted trade standards for good and workmanlike construction in certain material respects, as

set forth above in paragraph 50 and its subparts.

SIXTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Disregard of Plans or Specifications)


subdivision (b), in that on the E.G. Project, Respondent GC willfully departed from or

disregarded the plans and specifications, with prejudice to another, without the consent of the

owners or the duly authorized representative, and without the consent of the persons entitled to

have the project completed in accordance with such plans or specifications, as set forth above in

paragraphs 51 and 52.

SEVENTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Down Payment/Payment in Excess of Value of Work Performed)

56. Respondent GC is subject to discipline pursuant to Code section 7159.5, subdivisions

(a)(3) and (a)(5) in that on the E.P. project, Respondent GC did the following:

a. Respondent GC demanded and received down payment in excess of $1,000 or 10% of

the contract amount, whichever is less; and/or,

b. Respondent GC received payment in excess of the value of work performed.

EIGHTH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Failure to Complete the Contract for the Stated Contract Price)

57. Respondent GC is subject to discipline pursuant to Code section 7113, in that on the

E.G. Project, Respondent GC failed in a material respect to complete the project for the price


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

stated in the contract, which will require E.G. to spend substantial sums over the total price of the

contract to complete the project that Respondent GC contracted for.

NINETH CAUSE FOR DISCIPLINE

(Cause for Discipline for Qualifier – Respondent Kotyakov)

58. Pursuant to Code section 7122.5, the causes for discipline established as to

Respondent GC constitute cause for discipline against Respondent Kotyakov, doing business as

Golden Coast Construction & Restoration, under license number 992371, regardless of whether

Alex Kotyakov had knowledge of or participated in the acts or omissions, which constitute cause

for discipline against Respondent GC.

DISCIPLINE CONSIDERATIONS

59. To determine the degree of discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent GC,

Complainant alleges as follows:

60. On or about October 17, 2018, in a prior action, the Board issued Citation Number

2 -2018-1542 for violations of Code sections 7028.1 (engaging in asbestos-related work without

certification), 7110 (failure to obtain permit), and 7159 (contract violations) and ordered

Respondent GC to pay a $2,000 civil penalty. Respondent GC appealed the citation, which was

affirmed effective October 18, 2019. Respondent GC complied with that Citation and the

Citation is now final.

61. On or about November 16, 2018, in a prior action, the Board issued Citation Number

2-2018-1752 that included, inter alia, violations of Code sections 7109, subdivision (a) (trade

standards), 7159 (contract violations), and 7159.5, subdivision (a)(5) (receipt of payment in

excess of value of work performed). Respondent GC was ordered to pay a civil penalty in the

amount of $2,000. Respondent GC appealed the citation, which was affirmed effective

November 18, 2019. Respondent GC was ordered to pay a $1,500 civil penalty. Respondent GC,

and Respondent Kotyakov by association, complied with that Citation and the Citation is now

final.

///

///


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CAUSE FOR OTHER ACTION

(Restrictions on Corporate Qualifier – Respondent Kotyakov)

62. Pursuant to Code section 7121.5, if license number 838443, issued to Respondent GC

is revoked or suspended, Respondent Kotyakov shall be prohibited from serving as an officer,

director, associate, partner, manager, or qualifying individual of a licensee during the time the

discipline is imposed, whether or not he had knowledge of or participated in the acts or omissions

constituting grounds for discipline as alleged in the causes for discipline, above, and any licensee

which employs, elects, or associates Respondent Alex Kotyakov other than as a bona fide

nonsupervising employee shall be subject to disciplinary action.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, Complainant requests that a hearing be held on the matters herein alleged,

and that following the hearing, the Registrar of Contractors issue a decision:

1. Ordering the revocation or suspension of Contractor’s License Number 838443,

issued to Golden Coast Construction & Restoration, pursuant to Code section 7090;

2. Ordering the revocation or suspension of Contractor’s License Number 992371,

issued to Alex Kotyakov, doing business as Golden Coast Construction & Restoration, pursuant

to Code section 7090;

3. Ordering restitution of all damages according to proof suffered by I.P., as a condition

of probation in the event probation is ordered for Respondent Golden Coast Construction &

Restoration, pursuant to Government Code section 11519, subdivision (d);

4. Ordering restitution of all damages suffered by I.P. as a result of Golden Coast

Construction & Restoration conduct as a contractor, as a condition of restoration of license

number 838443, Classifications B and C-61/D41, issued to Golden Coast Construction &

Restoration, Alex Kotyakov, Responsible Managing Officer;

5. Ordering restitution of all damages according to proof suffered by R.G., as a

condition of probation in the event probation is ordered for Respondent Golden Coast

Construction & Restoration, pursuant to Government Code section 11519, subdivision (d);


ACCUSATION

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

6. Ordering restitution of all damages suffered by E.G. as a result of Golden Coast

Construction & Restoration conduct as a contractor, as a condition of restoration of license

number 838443, Classifications B and C-61/D41, issued to Golden Coast Construction &

Restoration, Alex Kotyakov, Responsible Managing Officer;

7. Ordering Respondent Golden Coast Construction & Restoration and Respondent Alex

Kotyakov, jointly and severally, to pay the Registrar costs for the investigation and enforcement

of the case according to proof at the hearing, pursuant to Code section 125.3;

8. Ordering Respondent Golden Coast Construction & Restoration and Alex Kotyakov

to provide the Registrar with a listing of all contracting projects in progress and the anticipated

completion date of each, pursuant to Code section 7095;

9. Ordering that Respondent Alex Kotyakov is prohibited from serving as an officer,

director, associate, partner, manager or qualifying individual of a licensee, pursuant to Code

section 7121.5; and,

10. Taking such other and further action deemed proper.

DATED: _________________

WOOD ROBINSON Enforcement Supervisor I Contractors State License Board Department of Consumer Affairs State of California Complainant

SA2020100323 14409518.docx

CSLB - Accusation...Mar 16, 2020 · ALEX KOTYAKOV, RMO/PRES/CEO 4811 Chippendale Drive #301...

Documents

Transcript of CSLB - Accusation...Mar 16, 2020 · ALEX KOTYAKOV, RMO/PRES/CEO 4811 Chippendale Drive #301...