ALJDEC

00F-C990026-BFS · Department of Building and Fire Safety · 1999-10-22

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|MICHAEL and DAWN N. HIGUERA, |§| | | |§|CASE NO.: 99-0/026 | | |§| | |Complainants, |§|DOCKET NO.: 00F-C990026-BFS | | |§| | |-v- |§| | | |§|RECOMMENDED | |CLAYTON HOMES, LOT #281, |§|DECISION AND ORDER | |License No. 6849, Class D-12, |§| | | |§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: October 14, 1999, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainants appeared through Dawn Higuera. The Respondent appeared through its authorized representative, Guy Mauerhan. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for hearing on October 14, 1999. The Complainants appeared through Dawn Higuera and the Respondent appeared through its authorized representative, Guy Mauerhan. Evidence and testimony were presented and, based upon the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order on are made:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent is the holder of a Class D-12 License issued by the Department of Building and Fire Safety.

2. The Complainants purchased a new manufactured residence from the Respondent.

3. The Complainants were dissatisfied with portions of their new residence and filed a complaint, against the Respondent, with the Department of Building and Fire Safety.

4. Pursuant to the filing of the formal complaint, an assigned agency inspector conducted an on-site inspection and verified portions of the complaint.

5. The Respondent completed the majority of the items on the verified complaint and there was only one item presented at the hearing.

6. Following a recess during the scheduled hearing, the parties entered into a settlement agreement, the essential terms of which were stated for the record.

7. Pursuant to the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement, the Respondent agreed to properly correct the remaining item by replacing the paneling in the Complainants’ bathroom and the Complainants agreed to withdraw their complaint and to the closing of the instant citation.

8. The parties agreed that all rights and defenses were to be merged into their settlement agreement and that if any Petition for Rehearing of this matter was to be filed, and granted, or if any new complaint was filed, the sole issue for determination shall be whether the parties have performed their respective obligations under the terms of the parties’ settlement agreement.

9. The Agreement was shown to be the product of knowing and voluntary action on the part of each party.

. . .

. . . CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. Adverse parties should be free to adjust their differences by entry into settlement agreements which should be recognized and given effect by all tribunals.

2. The parties’ settlement agreement warrants the termination of the instant hearing.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that Case No. 99-0/026, together with the complaint upon which it is based, be closed.

Dated: October 28, 1999.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. DOUGLAS Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of October, 1999, to:

N. Eric Borg, Director Department of Building & Fire Safety ATTN: Michelle Castaneda E. Virginia, Suite 100 Phoenix, AZ 85004

Transmitted by: -----------------------