ALJDEC

00F-2107-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2000-08-30

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: August 23, 2000. APPEARANCES: Linda McDermitt; Complainant; Clayton Cobb, Complainant’s son; Dan Starkey, Complainant’s witness; and Bob Davies, Registrar of Contractors Inspector. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Dorinda M. Lang. _____________________________________________________________________ Complainant, Linda McDermitt, has established that Respondent, More Than Electric, Inc., has violated the statutes applicable to licensed contractors by doing substandard and dangerous work on her home and failing to make any attempt to correct it. Therefore, I recommend that Respondent’s license be revoked. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Complainant, Linda McDermitt, hired More Than Electric, Inc., through its president, Florin S. Rivish (Steve Rivish), to do the electrical work on the construction of her home. While Mr. Rivish was at the home doing electrical work, he told Ms. McDermitt that when it came time to do the drywall and paint, he had a crew that did that and would like to bid on the work. She hired him for these jobs as well. Because his van had printing on it stating that he was licensed and listing two license numbers, Ms. McDermitt thought Rivish had a license. Mr. Rivish and a crew did the work and Mr. Rivish was paid in full. When the work was completed and Ms. McDermitt was not satisfied, she wrote a letter to the Registrar of Contractors, which did an investigation resulting in Mr. Rivish applying for and receiving a license. The Complaint in this case was initiated by a referral from the investigations unit of the Registrar of Contractors rather than by a Complaint form filed by Ms. McDermitt. 2. On March 20, 2000, Bob Davies, a Registrar of Contractors Inspector, conducted a job site inspection. There were 30 items listed by Ms. McDermitt in her original letter to the Registrar of Contractors and these were considered the Complaint items. Mr. Rivish was not present for the inspection. Ms. McDermitt and an employee of hers, Dan Starkey, were there. Mr. Davies found that most of the 30 Complaint items showed substandard workmanship and issued a Corrective Work Order on March 24, 2000 ordering Mr. Rivish to correct them. 3. At a pre-hearing inspection conducted on August 22, 2000, with only Ms. McDermitt present, he found that nothing had been corrected by Mr. Rivish. (Mr. Davies had been unable to reach Mr. Rivish directly to tell him about the pre-hearing inspection, but he left a message informing him of the date and time of it.) Mr. Davies testified that the corrections, had Mr. Rivish attempted them, would have been substantial for the electrical work and drywall, less substantial for the paint. 4. Ms. McDermitt and her witnesses testified and provided photographs showing poor workmanship. Ms. McDermitt even had an electrical fire one night because the wires in a fan had been wound too tightly. She testified that Mr. Rivish promised to come fix the work but never did any corrections at all. Furthermore, his drywallers borrowed her generator and then stole it. Ms. McDermitt paid Mr. Rivish about $36,000 and has spent $4,000 to date just to correct a small portion of his work. She stated that the reason she is pursuing the hearing is that she does not want to see anyone else suffer this kind of damage.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. This matter is within the jurisdiction of the Registrar of Contractors pursuant to A.R.S. §§32-1104(A)(4), 32-1154(B) and 32-1156. 2. The Citation and Complaint issued by the Registrar of Contractors in this matter alleged potential violations of A.R.S. §32-1154(A)(3), (7), (20), and (23) and A.A.C. R4-9-108. 3. The Arizona Revised Statutes at §32-1154(A)(3) provides grounds for suspension or revocation of a contractor’s license for “[v]iolation of any rule adopted by the registrar”. The only applicable rule in the Arizona Administrative Code in this case refers to workmanship standards. A.A.C. R4-9-108. 4. The Arizona Revised Statutes at §32-1154(A)(7) provides for suspension or revocation of a contractor’s license for the “doing of a wrongful or fraudulent act by the licensee as a contractor resulting in another person being substantially injured”. 5. The Arizona Revised Statutes at §32-1154(A)(20) provides for suspension or revocation of a contractor’s license in cases of the discovery of facts that, if known at the time of the issuance of the contractor’s license, would have been grounds for the denial of the license. 6. The Arizona Revised Statutes at §32-1154(A)(23) provides grounds for suspension or revocation of a contractor’s license for failure to take appropriate corrective action on a Corrective Work Order without valid justification and within a reasonable period of time. 7. In this case, Complainant has established that Mr. Rivish performed substandard work on her home, causing her substantial injury, and that he failed to correct his work, or even to attempt it, without valid justification. Mr. Rivish took $36,000 for his work and has left Ms. McDermitt with expensive repairs without making the slightest attempt to correct them. Further, some of his work even put her in danger. Because of the amount of potential harm he poses to the community, I recommend that his license be revoked. RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that Respondent’s Class K- license shall be revoked on the effective date of the Order entered in this matter.

Done this day, August 30, 2000. OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

______________________________________ Dorinda M. Lang Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2000, to:

Registrar of Contractors Michael P. Goldwater Attn: Joyce Armijo 800 West Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

By ___________________________

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826