ALJDEC

00F-T0323-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2000-08-07

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: August 1, 2000, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainants appeared through E. Jene Langseth. The Respondent failed to appear. 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. The Respondent’s Class B License was suspended on June 15, 2000 for lack of bond and a second suspension was issued on August 1, 2000 for lack of QP (Qualifying Party). 2. This is a residential matter where the Respondent constructed a new custom residence for the Complainants. 3. The Complainants were dissatisfied with the Respondent’s workmanship and failure to correct its work despite repeated requests that it do so. The Complainants then 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. Credible testimony established that the Respondent failed to substantially comply with the terms and conditions of the corrective work order. 6. Credible testimony established that the Respondent failed to follow approved plans and specifications and knowingly deviated from approved plans and specifications. 7. Credible testimony established that the Respondent knowingly misrepresented the status of the well located on the adjoining neighbor’s property and that the Respondent failed to provide any kind of written right of access to the well for the Complainants and that as a consequence of the Respondent’s actions, the Complainants have been forced to have water trucked onto the property and may have to have a well dug to enable them to have water for their new residence. 8. The Complainants’ testimony established that the Complainants have had to endure a great deal of hardship because of the fact that they did not have written rights of access to the well on the neighbor’s property and because there was no other source of water on the property that they purchased from the Respondent. 9. The Respondent’s actions in knowingly deviating from approved plans and specifications, in knowingly misrepresenting the status of water on the property, and in failing to comply with the written corrective work order, are found to constitute a wrongful act. 10. 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 be revoked. Done this day, August 10, 2000.

________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of August, 2000, 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