Escambia Contractor Competency Board Denies License Amidst Legal and Regulatory Concerns

During the recent meeting of the Escambia Contractor Competency Board, attention centered on the application of a contractor whose legal entanglements and experience verification drew extensive scrutiny. The board ultimately decided to deny the application, pending an ongoing investigation.

23:29The applicant, whose identity remains linked to numerous lawsuits, was scrutinized for her involvement with a business embroiled in legal disputes, including a lawsuit in Nassau County, New York. Questions arose about her awareness and involvement in these matters, particularly since her husband changed the business name to his own in 2022 amidst allegations of unlicensed construction practices. Despite her claims of ignorance, the board expressed concerns about her qualifications under Florida’s licensing requirements, which mandate documented hands-on experience in contracting. The applicant’s experience verification forms, signed by the same contractor as her husband’s, lacked sufficient evidence of the required hands-on experience.

41:42The discussion was further complicated by an ongoing investigation by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation (DBPR) into unlicensed construction activities associated with the applicant’s husband. Some board members advocated for delaying a decision until the investigation’s conclusion, emphasizing the need for clarity before granting a license. Ultimately, the board voted to deny the application until the investigation was resolved.

57:14In another notable case, the board addressed a complaint against contractor Robert A. Ski check, operating as RS Services LLC and Honeybee Plumbing. The complaint, filed by homeowner Matthew Sprag, alleged that Ski check conducted work without the necessary permits and with an inactive license. Sprag detailed his experience, recounting an interaction in which he questioned the need for a permit, only to be told by the contractor’s wife that none was required. This prompted Sprag to confirm with the permitting office that a permit was indeed necessary.

01:11:41Sprag further described the contractor’s hostile demeanor when the issue of an expansion tank arose, leading him to file a formal complaint. The board, after considering the evidence and Sprag’s testimony, decided to advance the case to a disciplinary hearing. The board’s unanimous decision underscored the importance of adherence to permitting standards and the consequences of non-compliance.

01:13:30Additionally, the board conducted a disciplinary hearing for Mark P. Nunez, operating as Creekwood Builders LLC, concerning non-compliance with a prior order for restitution. Nunez had failed to pay $32,796.69 owed to a complainant, despite receiving proper notice of the hearing. The board deliberated on disciplinary actions, ultimately voting to revoke Nunez’s license for two years.

43:58The meeting also addressed the application of Mr. Clayton Curry, who sought approval for a sign erector non-electrical license. With over four years of experience, Curry presented his qualifications, leading the board to unanimously approve his application. Similarly, Mr. Benjamin Gambino Lighten successfully reinstated his expired pool contractor license, after clarifying misunderstandings about the renewal process. Mr. Christopher Taylor’s application for a doors, windows, and siding examination was also approved, following verification of his managerial experience.

01:24:08In contrast, a restitution hearing involving Wade L. Hunter III, operating as Lee Hunter Construction LLC, concluded with the board dismissing the claim due to insufficient evidence. The complainant, Julie Ricks, failed to provide the necessary documentation despite previous requests from the board, resulting in the dismissal of her restitution order.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly:

is discussed during:
in these locations: