Having held a General B CA Lic from '82 I can say I know the CSLB. Not that I ever had a problem with them, I haven't. One thing you can count on is that the CSLB runs more or less a 6 month back log at any given time. There are 2 reasons for this, FOA they are understaffed and under funded. Secondly, an agency like the CSLB gets a LOT of BS complaints and the weak ones tend to die on the vine. They can count on that so they aren't involved with every little petty issue such as this. The real problems they face regularly involve some pretty egregious cases brought on by non payment, mishandling funds, abandonment, fraud and/or insurance claims due to uninsured workers, etc. These can run from thousands to millions, but I'd believe mostly limited to 6 figures in residential work unless there was a death or something that grave.
To go to SCC is useless and I've been there as a plaintiff (I won). Anyone can appeal for any reason which automatically kicks it up to district court where attorneys are allowed to represent either or both sides. And you start over from the beginning because the judge doesn't care what was said in SCC.
AFAIK the monetary limit is not fixed at the SCC level anymore so lawyer fees, etc. can be added in.
Now for the case itself: whether you believe the CSLB is biased one way or the other, you will find that they are interested in one thing and one thing only, the law as set forth the the Business and Professional Codes of CA State law. If a law or code provision is violated the CSLB will cite a licensed contractor or unlicensed individual. They do not establish any value to the infraction and the matter is handled in Superior Court and involves, at the minimum, a misdemeanor. IOW, a criminal proceeding. There are no financial losses discussed other than the fact.
Lawsuits brought against either party of a contract are brought by the damaged party and any financial damages must be proved. So, if this lady could not use her sink but cannot show a financial loss due to loss of income resulting from an unusable sink, then she must show first her income pattern and how it was interrupted. Inconvenience is going to be very difficult to state in financial terms. A misunderstanding, even contractual, does not necessarily mean there was a loss leading to a claim for damages.
I cannot foresee any tortious, fraudulent activity or criminal intent here. What I see here is simply a matter of she said/he said miscommunication. Once the CSLB gets wind of this, they will say take it to court. This is not for us.
So now the thing comes down to what others are saying here, how much is your time worth? A quick end to the matter is the best course. Basically it's "What will it take to settle the problem?"
look171 needs to first offer to supply and install a faucet that will satisfy the client. This is important and every step must be documented to show willingness to correct the issue w/o any money involved other than the cost of the approved faucet. Approval must be in writing with pics. If the client refuses to accept the offer to install an approved faucet, this action by her must be witnessed and documented. This is always the first corrective action recognized by the CSLB and will hit a home run when it comes to negating any so called damages alleged by an attorney.
If I was in this situation I would not be hustled, threatened or blackmailed by an attorney representing the client. I would clearly ask what he intends to base his claim on and ask to see the claim. I would consider countersuing, but I'm not there and don't know the whole story. But that's the norm in the chess game that is about to be played.
All of this assumes no words constituting offense were spoken. Witnesses to any and all allegations are paramount to the strength of any claim. Stiil, I have had two conflicts that escalated even though only myself and the other party were present at the time of the occurrence. I would not have won the SCC case if it weren't for times, dates and receipts to validate my statements. The other was subjective in every way and I just paid a portion of the labor claim (unauthorized) to free myself of any further actions by either party. IOW, how much was my time was worth.