FINACT2017A-4713-CHC-ROC.pdf

2017A-4713-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2018-03-20

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Barbara Louise Dodds, Case No. 2017-4713 COMPLAINANT,

v.

Desert Soul Landesign LLC, License No. 300590, Docket No. 2017A-4713-CHC-ROC RESPONDENT. FINAL ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION AND ORDER

Under A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B), the Registrar may review and accept, modify, or reject an

administrative law judge’s written decision. If the Registrar modifies or rejects that decision, then the

Registrar must provide written justification setting forth the reasons for the modification or rejection. In

this case, a hearing was held, and the administrative law judge issued a written decision. See

Administrative Law Judge Decision, attached. The Registrar reviewed that decision and modifies it. BACKGROUND The Registrar issued a citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of Rule 4-9-108, and thereby of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22). ALJ Dec. 2:15-24. The administrative law judge determined that the evidence established that the Respondent violated Rule 4-9-108, and thereby A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3). ALJ Dec. 5:18-27. The administrative law judge determined that Complainant failed to present sufficient evidence to establish cause to discipline Respondent’s license under A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) because, although Respondent failed to correct the work as required by the Directive, Respondent “made a diligent and good faith effort to correct the remaining items of the Directive in a timely manner.” ALJ Dec. 5:20-24 and 6:19-22. The administrative law judge recommended that Respondent’s license be suspended for two

1 of 4 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 days unless the Registrar receives proof that Respondent had made all the corrections as ordered in the

Directive. ALJ Dec. 6:24-28.

MODIFICATION & JUSTIFICATION

The Registrar modifies the Administrative Law Judge Decision to find that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22). Respondent was cited for A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22): Failure to take appropriate corrective action to comply with this chapter or with rules adopted pursuant to this chapter without valid justification within a reasonable period of time after receiving a written directive from the registrar. The written directive shall set forth the time within which the contractor is to complete the remedial action. The time permitted for compliance shall not be less than fifteen days from the date of issuance of the directive. The administrative law judge found that several directive items have not been corrected. ALJ Dec. 5:18-27. Though the administrative law judge noted Respondent’s good faith effort to comply with the directive, he did not conclude such effort was a valid justification for Respondent’s failure to comply. ALJ Dec. 5:20-24. As such, the record shows a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) for which discipline is appropriate. The administrative law judge found that Respondent’s license should be disciplined for a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), but recommended that Respondent be afforded another opportunity to correct the deficiencies before any disciplinary action is imposed. ALJ Dec. 6:13-18. The administrative law judge recommended that Respondent’s license be suspended for two days, if the Respondent failed to perform corrective work within 14 days of the Order’s effective date. ALJ Dec. 6:24-28. Title 32, Chapter 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes does not entitle Respondent to an additional opportunity to correct poor workmanship after a citation has been issued. Indeed, it is a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) to fail to take corrective action to comply with a written directive within the time permitted. Even if Respondent were permitted to perform corrective work now, it would not cure the underlying violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22). Respondent’s appropriate remedy was to correct the workmanship issues prior to the expiration of the written directive. The Registrar hereby modifies the Administrative Law Judge Decision so that on the effective date of this order Respondent’s license

number 300590 is suspended for two days. CONCLUSION The Registrar modifies the Administrative Law Judge Decision by: • Replacing page 6, lines 19-22, of the Decision with “Complainant has established that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) by failing to correct all items as ordered in the Directive within the time specified in the Directive.” • Replacing the Recommended Order on page 6-7, with “IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT on the effective date of the Final Order in this matter, Respondent’s License

No. 300590 be suspended for two days.”

FINAL NOTE

The Registrar replaces all instances of “Harley” with “Hawley” within the Administrative Law

Judge Decision.

The Registrar hereby accepts the remainder of the Administrative Law Judge Decision, which

becomes effective on April 28, 2018.

Dated this 19th day of March 2018.

Registrar of Contractors

/s/ Nicole Sornsin ----------------------------------------------------------- Nicole Sornsin Assistant Director, Legal and Recovery Fund Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail this 19th day of March 2018 to:

Respondent Desert Soul Landesign LLC 2200 E Williams Field Rd Ste 200 Gilbert, AZ 85295-0764 Complainant Barbara Louise Dodds 3490 S Barberry Pl Chandler, AZ 85248-4365

3 of 4 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 Complainant’s Attorney Emilie Bell BELL LAW PLC 17470 N Pacesetter Way Scottsdale, AZ 85255-5445 Copy sent electronically this same date to: Respondent at email address on record with the Registrar Complainant at email address on record with the Registrar Complainant’s counsel at email address on record with the Registrar Copy sent electronically this same date to: Office of Administrative Hearings Roger A. Geddes, Administrative Law Judge

Case No. 2017-4713/mm