Vacate

2017A-2933-CPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2017-09-08

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

An evidentiary hearing on the merits had been scheduled on this date at 8:30 a.m. before the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency. William Andrew Garmes (“Complainant”) and his wife, Lisa Garmes, appeared via video conference from the Registrar of Contractors’ (“the Registrar’s”) Flagstaff office. Gilpin and Son’s Contracting Inc. (“Respondent”) appeared telephonically through William Paul Gilpin, Jr., its qualifying party/officer. Complainant acknowledged that, before he filed the workmanship complaint with the Registrar, he had hired another contractor to correct Respondent’s workmanship and that, after the new contractor started repairs and exposed Respondent’s work, he allegedly discovered additional poor workmanship that Complainant previously did not know about. Because the new contractor had altered Respondent’s work before Complainant filed the complaint, the Registrar’s investigator did not perform a jobsite inspection and could not testify about whether or not Respondent had complied with the Registrar’s workmanship standards, thereby potentially furnishing cause under A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3),[1] specifically A.A.C. R4-9-108,[2] which had been charged in the Registrar’s Citation, to suspend or revoke Respondent’s contractor’s license. Respondent’s representative cited A.R.S. § 32-1155 in his opening statement. A discussion occurred on the record about whether, under the circumstances, this administrative forum was the appropriate one to resolve the parties’ dispute. A.R.S. § 32-1155(C) provides in relevant part as follows: The registrar shall not issue a citation for failure to perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner or in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards if either:

1. The contractor is not provided an opportunity to inspect the work within fifteen days after receiving a written notice from the registrar.

2. The contractor's work has been subject to neglect, modification or abnormal use.

Because Complainant acknowledged that Respondent’s work had been modified by the second contractor before Complainant filed the Complaint with the Registrar, Complainant agreed to withdraw the complaint and that it would be more appropriate to seek relief on his claim against Respondent in a judicial forum. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED vacating the hearing on the merits that had been scheduled on this date at 8:30 p.m. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED remanding this matter under A.A.C. R2-19-111(4) to the Director of the Registrar for further action. Done this day, September 8, 2017. /s/ Diane Mihalsky Administrative Law Judge Copy mailed/e-mailed/faxed September 8, 2017 to: Jeffrey Fleetham, Director Registrar of Contractors c/o Legal Department 1700 W. Washington St., Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

William Gilpin Gilpin and Son's Contracting Inc. 9950 E Spur Ln Prescott Valley AZ 86315-7954 William Andrew Garmes 3148 Rainbow Ridge Dr Prescott AZ 86303-5767

By M.Aguirre ----------------------- [1] A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) includes among the grounds for suspension, revocati湯牯漠桴牥搠獩楣汰湩牡⁹捡楴湯愠慧湩瑳愠挠湯牴捡潴鉲⁳楬散獮ⱥ錠癛楝汯瑡潩⁮景愠祮爠汵⁥摡灯整⁤祢琠敨爠来獩牴牡鐮†ȍ䄠䄮䌮㑒㤭ㄭ㠰爠煥極敲⁳桴瑡錠慛汝⁬潷歲猠慨汬戠⁥数晲牯敭⁤湩愠瀠潲敦獳潩慮⁬湡⁤潷歲慭汮歩⁥慭湮牥ₔ湡⁤桴瑡錠慛汝⁬潷歲猠慨汬戠⁥数晲牯敭⁤湩愠捣牯慤据⁥楷桴愠祮愠灰楬慣汢⁥畢汩楤杮挠摯獥愠摮瀠潲敦獳潩慮 ⁬湩畤瑳祲猠慴摮牡獤鐮഍ഃЍ഍ഃon, or other disciplinary action against a contractor’s license, “[v]iolation of any rule adopted by the registrar.” [2] A.A.C. R4-9-108 requires that “[a]ll work shall be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner” and that “[a]ll work shall be performed in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards.”

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

()1237¤ª¼½ÔÛ5 Z © I J Y Z x y å æ Ü Ý ÁÂÊè$^dh}”®ÏøìåÚìÔÎÔÎÔøÔÎÅÎ¿·¿«¿«¿¥¿·¿·¿˜Ž¿ˆ¿ˆ¿ˆ?ˆ?ˆwˆhFd´CJ^J[3]aJ hFd´5?CJhFd´CJhÌ+XOJ[4]QJ[5]^J[6]hÌ+XhÌ+XOJ[7]QJ[8]^J[9]häyÚCJjhÌ+X0JCJU[pic] hÌ+XCJ^J[10]hÌ+X17

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