DECISION ORDER
ORDERED that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.
The Administrative Code of the County of Westchester is applicable in this case, since by performing home improvement work on the respondents' home in Westchester County, the plaintiff was clearly "conduct[ing]" or "engag[ing]" in a home improvement business there (Administrative Code of County of Westchester § 863.313). Even assuming that the respondent James J. Marcella may have been employed himself as a contractor or a builder, that fact would not render the code inapplicable to this situation. Inasmuch as the complaint does not allege that the plaintiff was licensed under the Administrative Code of the County of Westchester, the Supreme Court properly granted the respondents' motion to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against them ( see, CPLR 3015[e]: CPLR 3211 [a][7]; see also, Cappadona v. Salman, 228 A.D.2d 632).