ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2022A-02659-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2022-10-18

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Nicole Stambaugh

COMPLAINANT,

Thomas Hugh Norris

DBA: T Norris Roofing

License No. ROC 143667,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2022A-02659-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: September 28, 2022

APPEARANCES: Complainant Nicole Stambaugh (Ms. Stambaugh) appeared on behalf of herself. Respondent Thomas Hugh Norris DBA: T Norris Roofing

(Mr. Norris) appeared on behalf of himself.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. On August 12, 2022, the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar),

issued a Notice of Hearing setting the above-captioned matter for hearing on September 28, 2022, by the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) in Phoenix, Arizona.

2. The Notice of Hearing shows that the hearing was set to consider the

charges made in the Citation and Complaint. Through the Citation, the Registrar alleges that Mr. Norris may have violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(3) (specifically, Ariz. Admin. Code section R4-9-108(A); Ariz. Rev. Stat. sections 32- 1154(A)(2)(A) and (B),(12),(16), and (22); Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1158.

3. The Citation shows that if the Administrative Law Judge finds that the alleged charges are valid, the Registrar may suspend or revoke Mr. Norris’s license.

4. A hearing was held on September 28, 2022.

5. At hearing, Ms. Stambaugh testified on behalf of herself. Registrar Investigator Jason Simpson testified regarding his investigation of the complaint.

Mr. Norris testified on behalf of himself and presented the testimony of Alec Young and his son, Thomas Norris.

6. Mr. Norris holds roofing license number 143667 issued by the Registrar.

See the Registrar’s Administrative Record, pg. 44, and Investigator Simpson’s testimony on the Hearing Audio Record at 15:00 - 15:42 minutes.

7. On or about November 29, 2021, Ms. Stambaugh and Mr. Norris entered into a residential remodeling contract wherein Mr. Norris would repair Ms. Stambaugh’s roof, replace shingles, add a new front porch, and rebuild the rear porch. See the Registrar’s Administrative Record, pg. 44 and Investigator Simpson’s testimony on the Hearing Audio Record at 15:00 - 14:15 minutes. The job-site location was located in Mesa, AZ.

8. Mr. Norris did not provide Ms. Stambaugh with a written contract that advised Ms. Stambaugh of her right to file a complaint with the Registrar against

Mr. Norris for an alleged violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A) within the time allowed by Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1155(A).

9. On or about November 29, 2021, Mr. Norris started work.

10. On or about January 7, 2022, Mr. Norris stopped work.

11. On or about April 6, 2022, Ms. Stambaugh filed a complaint with the Registrar alleging poor workmanship on the part of Mr. Norris. See Investigator Simpson’s testimony on the Hearing Audio Record at 13:39 - 14:15 minutes.

12. On or about May 19, 2022, Investigator Simpson conducted a job-site inspection. Investigator Simpson confirmed with the City of Mesa that the rear porch was not approved by the City of Mesa and that Mr. Norris did not obtain the required building permits. See Investigator Simpson’s testimony on the Hearing Audio Record at 15:30 - 16:30 minutes.

13. On or about June 9, 2022, the Registrar issued a Directive to Mr. Norris. The Directive provided, in relevant part, 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 July 1, 2022.

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 reasons1, 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:

Complaint Item 1: “wood used for patio is warped and has gaps that shows roof material above.”

Investigator’s Observation: This allegation is verified as the responsibility of the respondent. Reference Pictures: Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 2: “wood is broken and delaminating;” Investigator’s Observation: This allegation is verified as the responsibility of the respondent. Reference Pictures: Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 3: “There are large gaps between sheets of plywood”

Complaint Item 4: “support beam on front patio is not enforced properly;”

Complaint Item 6: “trim was not finished along house on underside of back patio”

ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION

The following complaint items require no action by the Respondent:

Complaint Item 5: “proper screws were not used for assembling structure;”

Investigator’s Observation: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). Reference Pictures: Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 7: “electrical wires were damaged and have been left exposed in attic when patio was deconstructed” Investigator’s Observation: This allegation is NOT verified. Reference Pictures:

Governing Rule: N/A

14. Mr. Norris did not receive the Directive because he was out of town at the time that it was issued. See Mr. Norris’s testimony on the Hearing Audio Record at 32:00 to 32:51 minutes.

15. Mr. Norris did not comply with the Directive by the due date.

16. Mr. Norris filed a timely answer to the Citation.

17. The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an evidentiary hearing.

18. A hearing was held on September 28, 2022.

19. At hearing, Ms. Stambaugh explained that Mr. Norris performed poor work in the construction of her home. Mr. Norris explained that he was unaware that he could not construct the front and rear porches under his roofing license. Mr. Norris explained that he performed good work and that the boards warped due to the weather. Alec Young explained that he has always known Mr. Norris to be an upstanding contractor. Thomas Norris explained that Mr. Norris tried to comply with all notices. Thomas Norris explained that he and Mr. Norris had been in contact with Ms. Stambaugh by text. Thomas Norris explained that Ms. Stambaugh did not notify him or Mr. Norris of the Directive.

20. Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record as reflected on the Registrar’s public website on October 18, 2022. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s license number 143667 was first issued on May 24, 1995 and is current. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s license number 107426 was first issued on March 19, 1999, and is current. Such prior License record also reflects that Respondent’s license has never been disciplined. Respondent’s lack of disciplinary history is considered a mitigating factor in the imposition of discipline and penalties.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. sections 32-1101 et seq.

Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violation by a preponderance of the evidence. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 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 preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent did not

obtain approval and required permits from the City of Mesa for the remodeling project, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(2)(A) and (B).

The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent did not perform

the work in a professional and workmanlike manner in violation of A.A.C. R4-9-108, and thereby of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3).

5. The undisputed evidence established that Respondent’s contract did not include a statement that the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the Registrar for alleged violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A), which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(12) and Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1158.

6. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent contracted

beyond the scope of his roofing license when he added the front porch and rebuilt the rear porch, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154 (A)(16).

7. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent failed to comply with the Registrar’s Directive without valid justification, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 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 License No. 143667 issued to Thomas Hugh Norris

DBA: T Norris Roofing, for one day. It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $250.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 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 Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1101(A)(7), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.

Done this day, October 18, 2022.

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 is forty days after the date of that certification.

/s/ Velva Moses-Thompson

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Jeffrey Fleetham, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Nicole Stambaugh

3752 E Dewberry Ave

Mesa, AZ 85206

[email redacted]

Thomas Hugh Norris

DBA: T Norris Roofing

11555 S. Power Rd Ste. 114

Mesa, AZ 85206

By Miranda Alvarez

Legal Secretary