ALJDEC - Licensing

2022A-05394-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2023-03-13

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Fred Gonzalez,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

ALLTECH Solutions, Inc.

License No. ROC 296000,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2022A-05394-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: February 24, 2023

APPEARANCES: Complainant Fred Gonzalez appeared on his own behalf, with his daughter, Nicole Gonzalez. Keith Kessler and Marat Victor Sorokko appeared on behalf of Respondent ALLTECH Solutions, Inc. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator Christopher Allison appeared as a witness.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella

FINDINGS OF FACT

ALLTECH Solutions, Inc. (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. 296000 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). Marat Victor Sorokko is Respondent’s qualifying party.

On or about May 18, 2022, Fred Gonzalez (“Complainant”) contracted with Respondent to remove the existing HVAC system and install a new HVAC system as follows:

Disconnect, remove and haul away old furnace and cooler. Convert from swamp to central heating and air conditioning by furnishing and completing full professional installation of new 3 ton 16 SEER 2 stage heat pump package unit on the rooftop. Set adjustable curb for rooftop foundation. Connect to existing cooler supply jack. Set new drop for return. Run flex duct through attic and install new return air filter grill and assembly for ceiling application. Run new 220 VAC 60 amp circuit to rooftop equipment location. Plumb PVC for condensation to gutter or off roof. Run new control wire to connect to new digital programmable WIFI thermostat. Run and confirm all operations. This cost includes all parts, labor and our workmanship guarantee. Warranty includes Lifetime compressor, with 10 year parts, labor and unit replacement. We also provide 2 years of PM service at no charge.

Disconnect, remove and haul away old spiral and steel duct. Abandon drop ceiling supply run. Drop in new supply and return plenums. Relocate all air registers from wall to ceiling mount. Cut in new ceiling penetrations in each conditioned zone. Install ceiling mount cans for new multi directional OBD diffusers. Install various collars to connect new flexible ducting system from new supply and return air cabinets. Hang and strap all ductwork to ensure no restrictions, kinks or tears. Tape and seal all seams and measure static pressure for optimum performance. Test and balance airflow, make damper adjustments where needed. Run and confirm all operations of newly installed HVAC system.

The contract price was $15,212.00. Complainant paid Respondent in full.

On or about July 5, 2022, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work with respect to Respondent’s work on the project.

The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator Christopher Allison. After an August 5, 2022 Jobsite Inspection, at which both parties were present, Investigator Allison issued a Written Directive to Respondent, dated August 9, 2022, 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 August 26, 2022.

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

Compliance Item: 2 - Incorrect work done

Investigator’s Observation: There is inadequate airflow through most of the vents. The ducting has air leaks at connections. "Y" connectors used when not needed. There is a hole in return air not sealed properly. Failed building inspection.

Respondent shall correct in an appropriate manner and pass building inspection

Compliance Item: 3 - Over cut vent holes

Investigator’s Observation: Vent holes in ceiling were cut to big.

Damage to ceiling.

Respondent shall correct in an appropriate manner.

Compliance Item: 5 - exposed wire on unit

Investigator’s Observation: Thermostat wire exposed to elements.

Failed building department inspection.

Respondent shall correct in an appropriate manner and pass inspection.

Compliance Item: 7 - Warranty and owner’s manual not provided.

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent shall provide the Complainant will all documentation the came with the unit.

ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION

The following complaint items require no action by the Respondent:

Compliance Item: 1 - Incorrect unit installed

Investigator’s Observation: The unit installed is not what was listed on the estimate provided. However, the unit installed is the equivalent to or better than the unit listed on the estimate.

No corrections needed

Compliance Item: 4 - Thermostat never connected

Investigator’s Observation: Thermostat was connected.

Corrected prior to inspection.

Compliance Item: 6 - drip line was improperly installed

Investigator’s Observation: Corrected prior to inspection.

All errors in original.

After the issuance of the Written Directive and the expiration of the time period in which to perform corrective work, Investigator Allison contacted Complainant and was informed that Respondent had not performed all of the required corrective work.

Investigator Allison conducted a Compliance Inspection on September 8, 2022. Investigator Allison’s Compliance Jobsite Notes state the following in regard to his Compliance Findings:

Compliance Item: 2 – The Ducting was reworked and the “Y’ were removed. The ducting had minimal air leakage. The hole in the return air was sealed properly. There is still poor air flow through the vents. The Respondent has stated that they ordered a bigger unit and will install it when it get delivered. Respondent has not provided any documentation on the order or delivery.

The installation has not passed inspection by the building department yet.

This item is not in compliance with the written directive.

Compliance Item: 3 – This item has not been corrected. This item is not in compliance with the written directive.

Compliance Item: 5 – This item was corrected and in compliance with the written directive.

Compliance Item: 7 – This item is corrected and in compliance with the written directive.

There are was also additional drywall damage that was done to the ceiling in one of the bedrooms and the hall closet where the old HVAC system was installed that was no repaired.

All errors in original.

Thereafter, Investigator Allison forwarded the matter to the Registrar’s Legal Department. The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(b), A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

Investigator Allison testified consistently with his findings contained in the Written Directive and Compliance Jobsite Notes. Investigator Allison also referenced various photographs taken at the Jobsite Inspection. Investigator Allison testified that there is additional drywall damage.

Complainant testified that he agreed with Investigator Allison’s findings and testimony.

Keith Kessler, Respondent’s sales manager, testified that there were delays on the project caused by “industry issues” and delays in obtaining the necessary equipment. Mr. Kessler testified that Respondent did not receive the necessary parts/supplies until after the deadline in the Written Directive. Mr. Kessler further testified that Complainant requested that Respondent perform work that was not included in the Written Directive

Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on March 9, 2023. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. 296000 was first issued on February 20, 2015, and is active. Such prior License record also reflects that there are three open complaints, one resolved/settled complaint, and no discipline against Respondent’s license.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.

Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.”

In this case, Investigator Allison found that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards. Investigator Allison determined the existence of workmanship issues concerning the work that was performed by Respondent, including the failure to pass building inspections. 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(a), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(b).

The evidence, including Respondent’s admission, established that Respondent did not complete the required corrective work following the Written Directive being issued. The Administrative Law Judge concludes based on the evidence of record that valid justification did not exist for Respondent’s failure to comply with the Written Directive. 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. 2960004 for a period of five (5) 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 (30) 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)(7), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.

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 forty (40) days from the date of that certification.

Done this day, March 13, 2023.

/s/ Sondra J. Vanella

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Martín Quezada, Director

Registrar of Contractors

[email redacted]

ALLTECH Solutions, Inc.

[email redacted]

Fred Gonzalez

[email redacted]

Chris Allison

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff