ALJDEC

01F-2650-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2002-01-29

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: January 9, 2002. APPEARANCES: Complainant was represented by Steven Kimble, Esq. William B. McDonald appeared on behalf of Respondent. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Gregory L. Hanchett _____________________________________________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT 1. This matter was set for hearing on January 9, 2002. Immediately before the hearing, the parties entered into and successfully completed settlement negotiations between themselves. As a result, Respondent agreed to hire a properly licensed contractor to repair and/or complete the deficiencies listed in the corrective work orders dated June 18, 2001 and August 20, 2001. The agreement of the parties, reached after Herculean efforts on the part of the litigants, is fully set forth in the audio record of the proceeding that was made in this case. 2. The settlement agreement calls for the Respondent to hire a properly licensed contractor to correct the following items set forth in both the June 18, 2001 and August 20, 2001 corrective work orders: The June 18, 2002 order: (A) The Laundry Room: Corrective Work order Items 1, 2, and 3. (B) The Back Office Space: Corrective Work Order Items 1A, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7. (C) The Theater: Items I, 2, 3B, 4, 5, 7. (D) General - All areas: Items 1A, 2, 3, and 4. (E) The Living Room: Items 1, 2 (sand and paint), 3, and 4. (F) The Hall Way: Items 1, 2 and 3. (G) The Master Bedroom: Items 1, 2, and 3. (H) The Small Closet: Item 1. (I) The Second Bedroom: Item 3 and that portion of Item 6 relating to the repainting of the front office. (J) The Master Hall Way: Items 1, 2, and 3. (K) The Dining Room: Items 1, 2, and 3. (L) The Rear Patio: Items 1, 2, 3, and 5. (M) The Shed: Items 2, 3, and 4. (N) The Exterior of the Residence: Item 1. (O) The Yard Area: Respondent agreed to reimburse Complainant the amount of monies actually expended by Complainant in fixing the damaged irrigation system plus an additional $600.00. (O) The Courtyard: Items 4, 5, 6C, and 8. (P) The Carport: Items 1 and 2. The August 20, 2001 Work Order: Items 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 (stucco on the rear wall to be applied to the two sections of wall that are exposed), 11 (with the exception of the furniture), 12, 13 (as it applies to the northern section of the affected wall and the areas immediately around the part of the wall), and 15. 2. The terms of the foregoing settlement appeared to be reasonable under all the circumstances and the agreement was determined to be the product of knowing and voluntary action on the part of each party. 3. The parties agreed that all rights and defenses were to be merged into the settlement agreement and if any petition for rehearing of this matter was to be filed and granted, or if any new complaint was filed, the sole issues for determination shall be whether the parties have performed their respective obligations under the terms of the aforesaid settlement agreement. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The policy of the law favors settlements of disputes and adverse parties should be free to adjust their differences by entry into agreements or stipulations of settlement which should be recognized and given effect by all tribunals. 2. The settlement reached and submitted during the hearing of this matter, having been found to be reasonable and voluntarily made, warrants the termination of the instant hearing. RECOMMENDED ORDER In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the settlement of the parties be adopted and the citation together with the complaint be closed. Done this day, January 29, 2002

______________________________________ Gregory L. Hanchett Administrative Law Judge Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of ____________, 2002 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