Vacate: Settlement Recommendation

2010A-308477370-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2011-08-12

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: August 12, 2011, at 8:00 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainants appeared through Berlie David Cantrell. The Respondent appeared through its authorized representative, Juan Lamb. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

The following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order are made: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. During the scheduled hearing, the parties manifested movement in the direction of a resolution of the matter at issue. Therefore, the parties were afforded the opportunity to craft a settlement agreement, the essential terms of which were stated for the record. 2. Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent agreed to fully comply with the terms of the Corrective Work Order issued in this matter with the agreed upon corrective work to be started on September 5, 2011 and to be completed on or before October 5, 2011. 3. The Respondent also agreed to give the Complainants a financial offset for the costs of the glass table top, glass shelves and glass cabinet fronts against the $9,988.69 that the Complainants owe to complete the construction project. 4. The Respondent agreed to withdraw the Respondent’s claim for additional costs above the contractual price set forth in the parties’ written agreement. 5. The Complainants agreed to allow the Respondent reasonable access to their residence to complete the corrective action set forth in the Corrective Work Order and to withdraw the complaint at issue and agreed to the closing of the instant citation. 6. The parties agreed that in the event of any dispute regarding the acceptability of the Respondent’s workmanship on the items set forth in the Corrective Work Order that the parties would be bound be the determination of the assigned Agency Inspector as to whether any such item had been corrected to within applicable industry and workmanship standards. 7. The parties acknowledged that they understood the terms of their Settlement Agreement and that they had entered into the Settlement Agreement voluntarily and in good faith. 8. This tribunal finds that the terms of the Settlement Agreement are reasonable under the circumstances and that the Settlement Agreement was the product of knowing and voluntary action on the part of each party thereto. 9. In light of having entered into the Settlement Agreement, the Complainants and the Respondent agreed to vacate the hearing in this matter. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A general policy of law favors the settlement of disputes and adverse parties should be free to adjust their differences by entry into agreements and stipulations of settlement which should be recognized and given effect by the tribunal having jurisdiction over the issues and statutory enforcement authority. 2. Termination of the instant hearing is mandated by the parties having entered into the Settlement Agreement, as well as having agreed to vacate the hearing. A.A.C.R2-19-111(1) and (4). ORDER Pursuant to A.A.C. R2-19-111(1) and (4), it is ordered vacating the hearing in this matter and remanding this matter to the Director of the Arizona Registrar of Contractors for further disposition.

Done this day, August 12, 2011.

_________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Copy transmitted by mail this _____ Day of _________, 2011 to:

William A. Mundell, Director Registrar of Contractors c/o Legal Department 3838 N. Central Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85012

By _______________________________

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

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