ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2021A-02810-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2021-11-22

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Suzanne Renee Lehman,

COMPLAINANT

Help Construction LLC,

License No. ROC 300114,

RESPONDENT

No. 2021A-02810-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: November 2, 2021

APPEARANCES: Complainant Suzanne Renee Lehman appeared on her own behalf. Art Maebe, Co-Owner and Qualifying Party, appeared on behalf of Respondent Help Construction LLC.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Tammy L. Eigenheer

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

Help Construction LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 300114 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).

On or about February 5, 2021, Suzanne Renee Lehman (Complainant) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, flooring installation and a bathroom remodel.

On or about June 21, 2021, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work with respect to the project.

The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Cliff Corlett. After a jobsite inspection, Investigator Corlett issued a written directive to Respondent that provided as follows:

After investigation, the Registrar determined that you failed to meet the requirements of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A), and now issues this Directive requiring you to take appropriate corrective action. Failure to comply with this Directive constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) and may result in the issuance of a citation, discipline of your license, and a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E) of up to $500.00. You must notify the Registrar’s assigned Investigator of your compliance with this Directive prior to 5:00 p.m. on or before Aug. 13, 2021.

RESTRICTIONS

You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license.

If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.

DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS

You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:

Compliance Item: 1 - Flooring in hallways, dining room, kitchen and laundry lifting and not spaced properly and/or flat. Flooring must to be removed then put back in correctly.

Investigator’s Observation: At the onsite inspection (7/9/21) the Respondent was in the process of attempting to correct/repair numerous issues with laminate flooring installation throughout the house.

The Workmanship Standards for Licensed Contractors (WSLC) states that concrete floors must be flat within 1/4-inch in a ten (10) foot area provided that the deviations are gradual. Deviations over short distances are unacceptable and contractor should correct by appropriate methods.

The Respondent should properly remove and replace any and all flooring so as to correct any underlying problems and properly reinstall all flooring so that the joints and seams are proper/correct. . . .

Compliance Item: 2 - Master room closet door relocated and the New doorway cut short and won't close.

Investigator’s Observation: Master bath/bedroom closet door had been worked on and appeared to close properly at the onsite inspection. However this door and others throughout project were in various stages of completion.

Respondent should properly complete all interior door installations, trim work, and properly correct any and all misaligned door casing corners. . . .

Compliance Item: 3 - Baseboards not properly aligned, cut to the correct length to match up with corner or attached to wall correctly, etc.

Investigator’s Observation: Trim carpentry throughout project is incomplete and or incorrect. Respondent should properly complete any and all missing and or misaligned trim carpentry work. . . .

Compliance Item: 4 - Painting not completed.

Investigator’s Observation: Agreed. Painting is incomplete.

Respondent should properly complete any and all painting work associated with this project matching surrounding areas as closely as possible. . . .

Compliance Item: 5 - 5) Guest bath - new shower tile not cut properly, open areas exposing the wall behind the tile and not sealed completely

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent should properly complete all tile installation and or grouting in guest bathroom tub/shower. . . .

Compliance Item: 6 - Installed new ceiling fans. All fans with lights have their own remote but when I use dining room remote and the bedroom lights come on too along with fan.

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent should properly program fan remotes to work with each ceiling fan/light. . . .

Compliance Item: 9 - Fireplace remodel incomplete

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent should properly complete fireplace work. Respondent had grouted the flooring to the fireplace. Flooring required to be free floating and not attached in any way at flooring perimeters.

Respondent should properly remove grout at fireplace and install correct trim that allows flooring to "float". . . .

Compliance Item: 10 - Ceiling lights not completed - recessed lighting

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent needs to properly complete the texture/paint work in kitchen ceiling light well. . . .

Compliance Item: 11 - Crack in wall(s) especially where master bedroom closet relocated.

Investigator’s Observation: Agreed. Respondent should properly complete any and all drywall repairs & painting work associated with this project matching surrounding areas as closely as possible.

Following the issuance of the written directive, Respondent attempted to complete some corrective work. After the deadline in the directive expired, Investigator Corlett was notified some corrective work had been performed.

On or about August 17, 2021, Investigator Corlett conducted a compliance jobsite inspection. At that time, Investigator Corlett noted that compliance item 6 had been corrected, but all remaining items had not been appropriately remedied by Respondent.

The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108; and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

Investigator Corlett testified as to his observations of the project at the jobsite inspection and the compliance jobsite inspection.

Complainant testified that she believed the subfloor was not properly leveled prior to the flooring being installed, which resulted in the majority of the issues with the flooring being uneven and popping up. Complainant also indicated that, while the ceiling fans appeared to have been corrected at the time of the compliance inspection, she has since noted that different fans are not operating properly with the remote controls.

Mr. Maebe acknowledged that there were workmanship issues at the time of the jobsite inspection that remained at the time of the compliance jobsite inspection. Mr. Maebe indicated that Respondent made several attempts to correct the flooring issue, and believed he “had it pretty good” at some point. Mr. Maebe argued that Complainant still owed money on the project.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See A.R.S. § 32-1101 et seq.

Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(1); see also Vazanno v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz. 369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952). “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960).

The evidence established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent did not complete the project in a workmanlike manner in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108.

The evidence established that Respondent did not complete the corrective work following the Directive being issued. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action following a written directive from the Registrar in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License No. 300114 for a period of three days.

It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E).

It is further recommended that if Respondent fails to pay the entire amount of the civil penalty on or before thirty days following the effective date of the Registrar’s final order, the Registrar revoke Respondent’s license, effective on such deadline date. No future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in A.R.S. § 32-1101(A)(5), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.

In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be 40 days from the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, November 22, 2021.

/s/ Tammy L. Eigenheer

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Jeffrey Fleetham, Director

Registrar of Contractors

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000