ALJDEC
01F-F0122-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2001-07-17
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
|Paul Tibbetts, | | No. 01F-F0122-ROC | | | | | |Complainant, | | | | | | | |-v- | |RECOMMENDED DECISION | | | |OF ADMINISTRATIVE | |License No. 138739, Class K-02 of | |LAW JUDGE | |Donald James Felix dba J D L | | | |Excavating and Trenching (Indiv), | | | | | | | |Respondent. | | | | | | |
HEARING: July 9, 2001 APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared in his own behalf The Respondent appeared in his own behalf ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Allen Reed _____________________________________________________________________
Findings of Fact 1. In early October 2000, the Complainant entered into a contract with a person identified as Richard Matt (Matt), an unlicensed contractor. 2. Matt was to remove a concrete pad at the Complainant's home and then replace it with a more level concrete pad upon which the Complainant would keep his 23 and a half-foot cabin cruiser. The contract price was $2,600.00 3. Matt subcontracted with the Respondent to have him do the work for approximately $500.00. 4. Matt and the Respondent were under the impression that the thickness of the pad, which was to be removed, was the standard four inches. The Complainant was out of town when the Respondent went to the Complainant's home in order to remove the pad. 5. While attempting to remove the pad, the Respondent found it was six inches thick and reinforced with rebar. The Respondent contacted Matt to inform him of the problem. Matt told the Respondent to get the concrete out the best he could. 6. The Respondent used a backhoe to remove the pad. An oil-sending unit on the backhoe cracked, causing oil to leak on the Complainant's driveway. Additionally, The Respondent caused some damage to the driveway concrete. 7. The Complainant paid Matt after the new pad was poured but before the damage to the driveway was corrected. Matt told the Complainant he would repair the damage but failed to do so. 8. The Respondent submitted a bill for $1,050.00 to Matt but was paid only $500.00. 9. The Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) issued Matt a Cease and Desist Order for contracting without a license. 10. On December 21, 2000, the Complainant filed a complaint against the Respondent with the Registrar. 11. On December 28, 2000, Inspector Mark Schweiger (Schweiger) of the Registrar's Office performed a job site inspection with the parties present. 12. On December 28, 2000, Schweiger issued a Corrective Work Order (CWO). It stated that under the jobsite agreement, the Respondent would remove and correct the damaged concrete and clean the oil stains. 13. Schweiger performed a prehearing inspection and determined that the Respondent satisfactorily corrected the concrete in the driveway but the attempts to remove the oil stains have only been partially successful. There was a significant delay in correcting the driveway because the parties had difficulty coordinating their schedules in order to be on site at the same time. Conclusions of Law The Citation and Complaint alleges violations of A.R.S. §32-1154 (A)(3)/AAC R4-9-108, unsatisfactory workmanship; (A)(7), a wrongful or fraudulent act with substantial injury; and (A)(23), failure to take corrective action. 1. The violation of A.R.S. §32-1154(A)(3)/AAC R4-9-108 is proven with respect to the initial damage done to the Complainant's driveway. Although the problems with pulling up the old pad and the oil leak were unexpected, the damage to the driveway constitutes a failure to do the work in a workmanlike manner. 2. The Complainant has corrected the concrete in the driveway and made good faith attempts to clean up the oil stains. Although the Respondent was unable to completely correct the oil stain problem, no further corrective work should be required because there is no evidence that the condition can be significantly improved. 3. There is no independent violation of A.R.S. §32-1154 (A)(7). Recommended Order In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that commencing the effective date of the Order entered in this matter that the Respondent’s Class K-02 license be placed on probation for a period of 30 days. Done this day, July 19, 2001.
______________________________________ Allen Reed Administrative Law Judge
Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of July, 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 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826