ALJDEC

00F-H0235-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2001-03-14

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: February 27, 2001; at 11:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainants appeared through Wilda Oranje. The Respondent appeared through its authorized representative, Gilbert Franco. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas _____________________________________________________________________

Evidence and testimony were presented and, based upon the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order are made: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. Respondent is the holder of a Class B License issued by the Registrar of Contractors. 2. This is a residential matter where the Respondent constructed a new addition to the Complainants’ residence. 3. The Complainants were dissatisfied with the Respondent’s workmanship and filed a formal complaint, against the Respondent, with the Registrar of Contractors. 4. Pursuant to the filing of the formal complaint, an assigned Agency Inspector conducted an on-site inspection and issued a written corrective work order directing the Respondent to perform designated corrective work on the Complainant’s residence. 5. The Respondent filed a written statement with the Registrar of Contractors stating that all of the items set forth in the written corrective work order had been properly corrected. The Complainants sharply disputed the Respondent’s statement and the matter was set for formal hearing. 6. Credible evidence, presented at hearing, established that the following items fail to comply with applicable workmanship and industry standards and require proper corrective action by the Respondent: g) There are still walls in the new addition which are out of plumb more than 1/4 of an inch. The Respondent shall cause all such walls to be properly repaired or replaced. h) The firebricks in the fireplace display unacceptable cracking. The Respondent shall cause the fireplace unit to be properly repaired or replaced. i) The grading around the addition still fails to comply with code requirements and workmanship standards. The Respondent shall correct the grading and obtain approval of the grading from the local building authority. 10. The following items were added to the Complaint at hearing pursuant to the Respondent’s agreement to do so: k) The bottom portion of a truss has been cut. This does not comply with applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall retain a structural engineer and shall, at the structural engineer’s written and stamped direction, cause the altered truss to be properly repaired or replaced. The Respondent shall obtain proper inspection and approval of all corrective action on the truss from the local building authority. l) The current access to the attic is inadequate and fails to comply with code requirements. The Respondent shall properly correct the attic access to comply with applicable code requirements, including the installation of a light and service platform as required by applicable building code. The Respondent shall obtain proper inspection and approval of the all corrective action in the attic of the addition from the local building authority. m) The HVAC duct work in the attic is torn and damaged. The Respondent shall cause all torn and damaged duct work to be properly corrected by a licensed HVAC contractor. n) The kitchen vent fails to comply with applicable workmanship standards. The Respondent shall properly correct the kitchen vent. The Respondent shall obtain a proper inspection and approval of the corrected kitchen vent from the local building authority. 15. At the hearing the Respondent agreed to return to the job-site and clean the grout around the vent unit in the kitchen. The Respondent shall comply with its agreement and properly clean the tile grout around the kitchen vent unit. 16. The Respondent’s actions, in failing to provide adequate attic access and failing to provide an attic light and work platform and in allowing an engineered truss to be cut or altered, are found to constitute a wrongful act. The Respondent is admonished that the alteration of an engineered truss is a potential health and safety matter and that is should be properly corrected as soon as possible. 17. Notice is taken of the Respondent’s prior License record with the Registrar of Contractors. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The credible evidence of record established violations by the Respondent of the provisions of A.R.S. (32-1154 (A) (7) (Wrongful Act), (23) and (3); namely, Rule R4-9-108. RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Class B License shall be suspended until the Registrar of Contractors receives proof that the Respondent has properly performed corrective action to the items set forth above in Finding of Fact Nos. 6(a) through (c), 7(a) through (d), inclusive, and Finding of Fact No. 8. It is further recommended that if the Respondent properly accomplishes the above described corrective action, on or before the effective date of this Order, then the above provided License suspension shall not take place and Citation No. H00-0235 shall be closed. Done this day, March 16, 2001.

________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of March, 2001, to:

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

By _______________________________

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

Office of Administrative Hearings 100 N. Stone Ave., Suite 704 Tucson, Arizona 85701 (520) 628-5488