ALJDEC

01F-C001248-BFS · Department of Building and Fire Safety · 2001-05-21

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: May 16, 2001 APPEARANCES: Steve and Brenda Brown, Complainants, in their own behalf No one appeared on behalf of the Respondent ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Allen Reed _____________________________________________________________________ Findings of Fact This matter came on for hearing at the time, date and place set forth in the Notice of Hearing. The Respondent failed to appear and no good cause is known for the non appearance. According to information received from Dennis Butzen of the Department of Building and Fire Safety-Office of Manufactured Housing (Department), the Respondent is going out of business and will not be renewing his license. The Respondent’s answer to the Citation and Complaint asserts lack of access. In view of the fact that the Respondent did not appear and present a defense at the hearing, this is not given any evidentiary value and is not considered for the purpose of the findings and conclusion in this case. 1. The Complainants purchased their triple wide manufactured home from the Respondent in December, 1999. The price was $87,318.00. 2. The home was set up in Eager, Arizona and the Complainants moved into the home in January, 2000. 3. The Complainants noticed a ¾ inch gap in the marriage line between the A and B sections of the home. The problem was discussed with the person who had done the set up and the carpet installer, who nonetheless installed the carpet despite the gap and the Complainant’s concerns. 4. The carpet showed problems at the seams. This and other areas which required attention, were noted by the Complainants who attempted to have them addressed by the Respondent. The other problem areas of the home will be specifically identified and addressed as part of the items set forth in the Verified Complaint, later in this Recommended Decision 5. The Respondent gave assurances to the Complainants, including assurances about replacing the carpet. This did not happen because the Respondent apparently filed a complaint against the person who installed the carpet, with the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar), which required repair rather than replacement of the carpet. 6. The attempted repair to the carpet was done in July of 2000, but the Respondent did not address other issues which had been raised by the Complainants. 7. The carpet repair was unsuccessful and in approximately October, 2000, the Complainants filed their complaint with the Department. 8. On October 25, 2000, Department inspector Dennis Butzen (Butzen) performed an inspection at the Complainant’s home. 9. Based on the inspection, Butzen issued a Verified Complaint and Sign Off Form (Verified Complaint), which required the Respondent to correct loose seams, tack strips, re-stretch and properly secure the carpet throughout the home. The Verified Complaint noted that there had been two prior repairs on the carpet seams. Other items which were to be corrected by the Respondent included the replacement of cut, nicked and marked baseboards throughout the house, replacement of the ridgecap, repair, sealing, texturing and painting of drywall cracks, wall joints, window sills and nail pops, corner rosettes need to be installed at top corners of various doors after drywall repairs. 10. On January 30, 2001, Butzen performed another inspection and issued another Verified Complaint which required the Respondent to level the home and tighten the shims. During his inspection, Butzen had found three of six piers with loose shims in the master bedroom-living room area. The floor of the home was vibrating when persons walked across it. 11. The corrective work was not done by the Respondent and the Department issued a Citation and Complaint on March 16, 2001. The Respondent filed an Answer to the Citation and Complaint and the Notice of Hearing was issued on April 4, 2001. 12. The Respondent failed to appear at the hearing and the testimony and documentary evidence presented by the Complainants was not contested. 13. Butzen testified that the carpet backing was delaminating in various areas and in his opinion the carpet needed to be replaced. Additional evidence was presented by the Complainants. There are numerous holes in the carpet seams, prior repairs have been unsuccessful and documentation from two carpet dealers concurred with Butzen’s determination that all the carpeting needed to be replaced. Conclusions of Law The Citation and Complaint alleges violations of A.R.S. §41-2186(1), failure to comply with the applicable law; (12), failure to respond to a verified complaint after notice; (19), failure to provide all agreed upon goods and services; and (20), failure to install in a workmanlike manner. 1. Any violation of the statutory provisions of A.R.S. §41-2186 (12), (19) and (20), constitute a violation of A.R.S. §41-2186(1). To this extent any violation of A.R.S. §41-2186(1) would be duplicative. 2. All the charged violations are established by a preponderance of the evidence. The Respondent was notified by two verified complaints of the work which was required at the Complainant’s home. The Respondent failed to do the work and there is no justifiable excuse of record for this failure. The Complainant’s were entitled to receive what they paid for. The items cited by the verified complaints included defective materials and poor workmanship. 3. Since the Respondent has not done the required corrective work and is not renewing the license, there is no purpose in recommending a suspension until corrective work is done.

Recommended Order In view of the foregoing it is recommended commencing on the effective date of the Order entered in this matter that the Respondent’s Class D-08 License No. 7085, be revoked.

Done this day, May 21, 2001

______________________________________ Allen Reed Administrative Law Judge

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

Department of Building and Fire Safety N. Eric Borg ATTN: Shawna Blank East Virginia, Suite 100 Phoenix, AZ 85004

By ___________________________

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

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