Oceguera

Oceguera v. Cohen

Good Law
172 Cal. App. 4th 783·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 411·91 Cal. Rptr. 3d 443
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 24, 2009B205608California4,460 words

Opinion

Opinion

Turner, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Business and Professions Code section 7031, subdivision (b) permits a consumer to sue an unlicensed contractor for a refund of moneys paid under a construction contract. Such a refund claim is subject to the defense the unlicensed contractor was in “substantial compliance” with the licensing requirement. The four elements of the substantial compliance defense of an unlicensed contractor to a consumer’s refund claim are specified in section 7031, subdivision (e). In this case, we conclude substantial evidence supports the trial court’s express and implied findings that defendants, L. A.’s Best Home Improvement, a general partnership (the partnership), Dave Cohen, and Yossi Grimberg, were unlicensed contractors who did not act in substantial compliance with the licensing requirement. We affirm the $32,500 judgment in favor of plaintiff, Theresa Oceguera, for the money she paid to defendants for construction work performed on her home.

II. BACKGROUND

This is the second appeal between the parties related to plaintiff’s March 1, 2004 complaint against defendants for work performed on her home. In the first appeal, in an unpublished opinion, we affirmed a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.