2022A-11605-CHC-ROC Notice of Hearing and Packet MAILED

2022A-11605-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-02-22

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Carrie Cecil , Case No. 2022-11605 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2022A-11605-CHC-ROC v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON CONTESTED CASE P & B Mechanical Inc DBA: Advantage Air Mechanical, License Nos. ROC 214570, 263465, 263466, 267548

RESPONDENT.

This Notice of Hearing is issued under A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D).

HEARING INFORMATION The hearing is set for:

April 5, 2024 1:00 PM Adam Stone Google Meet. A link will be provided directly from The Office of Administrative Hearings. Go to www.azoah.com to request to appear in-person.

If you have requested to appear in-person at the hearing, the hearing will

be held at 1740 W Adams Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007.

You must attend this hearing. This is an adversarial hearing before an administrative law judge, and is conducted in a similar manner as judicial proceedings. Thus, you must be prepared to present evidence, including witness testimony and documents, in support of your case.

STATEMENT OF LEGAL AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION The State of Arizona has determined that the licensing and regulation of construction contractors is a proper state function, and has vested authority in the Registrar of Contractors

to administer Title 32, Chapter 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. A.R.S. §§ 32-1101 et seq.

All hearings for alleged violations of Title 32, Chapter 10 are conducted under Title 41,

Chapter 6, Article 10. A.R.S. § 32-1156.

The statutes and rules governing the hearing can be found at: Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 41-1092 to -1092.12, and Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-101 to -122. PARTICULAR ARIZONA STATUTES AND RULES INVOLVED The statutes and rules the Respondent is alleged to have violated are cited in the complaint and citation, which were served on the Respondent on January 25, 2024.

SHORT AND PLAIN STATEMENT OF THE MATTERS ASSERTED The complaint and citation allege that the Respondent committed the following act(s):

Charge: 1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(b)

Charge: 2 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(a)

Charge: 3 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(b)

THE PARTIES TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING Because Respondent is a licensee and is charged with an act(s) or omission(s) that is

cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Respondent is a party to this case and will

be a party to the hearing.

Because Complainant alleged Respondent committed an act(s) or omission(s) that is cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Complainant is a party to this case and will be a party to the hearing. Respondent and Complainant, as the parties to the hearing, will present evidence and argument to the administrative law judge. The Registrar’s assigned investigator will appear as a witness at the hearing.

RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED The parties to the administrative hearing may choose to be represented by an attorney. A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(B). If one of the parties is a company, the company may be represented

by an officer or employee if that person satisfies the conditions set forth in A.R.S. § 32-

1156(B).

CHANGE OF ADDRESS Each party must inform the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings of

any change of address within five (5) days of the change. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04.

HEARING PROCEDURES AND RULES The administrative hearing will be conducted in accordance with A.R.S. §§ 41-1092

to -1092.12, and A.A.C. R2-19-101 to -122. The parties should review the statutes, rules, and processes governing the administrative hearing. Copies of the statutes, rules, and articles

regarding the administrative hearing process can be found at https://www.azoah.com/.

REGISTRAR’S APPEARANCE BY VIDEO CONFERENCE OR TELEPHONE

The Registrar’s investigators, employees, and attorneys will appear at the hearing via

video conference or telephone unless requested by a party to appear in-person. Requests for

the Registrar’s investigators, employees, or attorneys to appear in-person must be filed with the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the hearing date.

HEARING PACKET In the interests of administrative efficiency, the Registrar compiles and discloses certain documents to the parties and the Office of Administrative Hearings. These documents are attached to this Notice of Hearing as the “Hearing Packet.” If any party wishes to submit additional evidence, they must do so during the hearing after completing a disclosure statement. See “Disclosure Statement” section below.

SUBPOENAS FOR TESTIMONY FROM A WITNESS OR DOCUMENTS The parties to the hearing must be prepared to present evidence in support of their case. If a party wants to obtain testimony from a witness or documents not in the party’s possession, the party must prepare and file a written subpoena for the Administrative Law Judge to review and sign, if approved. A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(C). Forms for requesting a subpoena can be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’ website at www.azoah.com. The party seeking a subpoena must serve notice on all the parties to the hearing, and on the Registrar. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT At least seven calendar days before the hearing, each party must prepare and serve a

disclosure statement on all other parties, and file it with the Office of Administrative Hearings.

A.A.C. R4-9-118; A.A.C. R2-19-108. The disclosure statement must include any exhibit the

party will use at the hearing. A party’s failure to timely disclose any witness or exhibit, without good cause, may result in the administrative law judge excluding those witnesses or exhibits from being used at the hearing. A.A.C. R4-9-118(C). A sample disclosure form is available on the Registrar’s website at https://roc.az.gov/forms/RC-L-800A%20- %20Prehearing%20Disclosure%20Statement%2020191007v4.pdf

CHANGING THE HEARING DATE The date of the hearing may only be advanced or delayed on the agreement of the

parties or on a showing of good cause. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(C). The date of the hearing may

be changed by filing a written agreement of the parties to change the date of the hearing. The

written agreement must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the

assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmitted to the Registrar and all other parties. The

assigned Administrative Law Judge may be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’ web portal at www.azoah.com If a party would like to move the date of the hearing without agreement of all parties, the party must file a written motion with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmit a copy to the Registrar and all other parties.

The motion must state in detail good cause for why the date of the hearing should be advanced or delayed, and the position of all other parties regarding the advancement or delay. A party may also file a motion asserting a right to an expedited hearing upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances or the possibility of irreparable harm. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(E).

RESOLUTION SHORT OF ADJUDICATION In any case which is resolved or settled by the parties, or which is withdrawn by the Complainant without objection from Respondent after the Notice of Hearing is issued, the parties must notify the Office of Administrative Hearings of the resolution or settlement. Any such cases will be listed on the Registrar’s website and its records under the category: “Closed Complaints – Resolved/Settled/Withdrawn.” Dated February 22, 2024.

By: /s/ Erika Hoskin Erika Hoskin Legal Secretary Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail February 22, 2024 to: Respondent(s) P & B Mechanical Inc DBA: Advantage Air Mechanical 3132 E 45th St Tucson, AZ 85713 Daniel J.F. Peabody, Esq. Two North Central Avenue, Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85004-5200

Complainant(s) Carrie Cecil 3201 N San Sebastian Tucsonn, AZ 85715 Michael J. Rusing, Esq. 6363 N Swan Rd Ste 151 Tucson, AZ 85718 Copy sent electronically this same date to:

Respondent at email address on record with the Registrar Respondent’s Attorney at email address of record with Registrar Complainant at email address on record with the Registrar Complainant’s Attorney at email address of record with Registrar

Case No. 2022-11605 /

Katie Hobbs, Governor Martin Quezada, Director

Hearing Packet FAQ What is the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet is a packet of certain documents collected or issued by the Registrar over the course of its investigation.

Who gets the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet is assembled and distributed to all parties and to the Office of Administrative Hearings (“OAH”) prior to an administrative hearing.

What types of cases does the Registrar prepare a Hearing Packet for?

The Registrar prepares a Hearing Packet for Complainant-Handled Cases and No-Pay Cases. Note: If the Docket Number on the Notice of Hearing contains a “CHC” or “NPC”, your case is a Complainant-Handled Case or a No-Pay Case.

What is in the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet contains essential case-specific documents and at a minimum will include the following documents:

● Original complaint;

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Katie Hobbs, Governor Martin Quezada, Director

● Citation; and ● Answer.

The Hearing Packet will also contain the following documents (if applicable):

● Jobsite inspection notices, notes, and photos; ● Written directives; and ● Compliance inspection notices, notes, and photos.

What if there are documents missing from the Hearing Packet?

If there is any evidence you submitted to the Registrar that are not included in the Hearing Packet it is your responsibility to introduce that evidence at the administrative hearing. Note: The administrative law judge assigned to your case does not have access to the entire Registrar record.

If there is additional evidence you submitted to the Registrar during the investigation that you also want to introduce as evidence during your hearing, it is your responsibility to:

● Properly disclose that evidence to the other party; and ● Introduce the evidence during your hearing.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Katie Hobbs, Governor Martin Quezada, Director

How do I disclose evidence I intend to use at a Hearing?

You must properly disclose any and all documents and witnesses you intend to use at your hearing according to the Registrar’s Prehearing Disclosure Rules. See Arizona Administrative Code Section R4-9-118.

A sample prehearing disclosure form and instructions are provided to the parties by the Registrar.

How do I obtain documents I previously submitted to the Registrar?

If you previously submitted documents to the Registrar and need a copy of these documents, please contact the Registrar’s Legal Department or submit a public records request at https://roc.force.com/AZRoc/s/roc-public-request.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Complainant: Carrie Cecil 3201 N. San Sebastian Tucsonn, AZ 85715

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Respondent: P & B Mechanical Inc DBA: Advantage Air Mechanical 3132 E 45th St Tucson, AZ 85713

December 27, 2022

Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint Number 2022-11605

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

A formal complaint has been filed with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors.

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for January 12, 2023 at 10:30 AM. The Complainant is required to be present. The Respondent’s attendance is requested and encouraged. The Registrar encourages both parties to make a good faith effort to resolve this complaint prior to the jobsite inspection.

COMPLAINANT: 1. Under A.R.S. § 32-1155(D)(1), the Respondent must be allowed, upon request, the opportunity to inspect the work complained of within fifteen (15) days of receiving this notice. If Respondent is not provided an opportunity to inspect the work within the fifteen (15) day time period, the Registrar may be prohibited from taking further action on this complaint. 2. The Registrar may also be precluded from taking further action on this complaint, if the work that is the subject of the complaint is subject to neglect, modification, or abnormal use. A.R.S. § 32-1155(D)(2) 3. You must provide safe access to any area to be inspected. If access to a roof or other elevated area is required, you must provide a means to safely access the area (ladder or manlift as appropriate). Additionally, please secure any animals.

RESPONDENT: 1. Enclosed is a copy of the complaint. Under A.R.S. § 32-1155(D) you must be allowed, upon request, the opportunity to inspect the work complained of within fifteen days of the date of receipt of this notice. 2. To assist the assigned investigator in evaluating the merits of the complaint, please submit a response to the enclosed complaint to the assigned investigator prior to the scheduled inspection. 3. If you do not attend the jobsite inspection, your absence may negatively impact the investigation, and your interests. 4. If a building permit(s) was required for this project, please have the building permit information available at the jobsite inspection. If either party needs to reschedule the jobsite inspection, please notify the assigned investigator at least three business days prior to the inspection date to schedule a new date and time.

If the parties resolve the complaint prior to the inspection, please notify the assigned investigator in writing and by phone as soon as possible.

Sincerely, John Smith John Smith, Investigator #194 (520) 483-0027 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St,Suite 105 Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2812

A Guide to Jobsite Inspections

Purpose of the Jobsite Inspection When the Registrar receives a complaint against a contractor’s license alleging poor workmanship, the Registrar generally schedules a Jobsite Inspection. The Jobsite Inspection serves two purposes: 1. To give the contractor an opportunity to inspect the complaint items; and 2. To give the Registrar an opportunity to determine if the contractor’s work violates Arizona law.

Jobsite Inspection Rights and Responsibilities Access to inspect: The property owner has complete control over who they allow on the property. However, if the Registrar’s investigator or the contractor cannot inspect the work, the Registrar will not move forward with a citation.

Cooperation: Arizona law enables injured parties to seek relief for damages through several paths. When dealing with a licensed contractor, the Registrar of Contractors’ administrative complaint process may serve as one of those possible paths. However, in order to use that path, the Registrar relies on the cooperation of all parties to a complaint.

Minimum workmanship: The Registrar investigates workmanship complaints for compliance with minimum workmanship and professional industry standards. The Registrar does not issue citations for work that meets these standards.

Scope: The scope of the Jobsite Inspection is limited to items listed in the complaint filed with the Registrar’s office. It is the complainant’s responsibility to point out the complaint item(s) and the Investigators role to review the item(s). If the complainant identifies additional workmanship items not listed in the original complaint, they must file an addendum to the complaint. The Registrar’s Investigator may identify additional administrative violations by the contractor (e.g. work performed out of scope of the license and failure to provide a contract that meets requirements set by Arizona law) at the time of the inspection.

The Role of the Investigator At the Jobsite Inspection, the Registrar’s investigator will: ● Only investigate the items listed on the complaint form filed with the Registrar. ● Will gather evidence to make an informed decision about the complaint items.

What to expect after a Jobsite Inspection After doing a Jobsite Inspection, the Registrar’s Investigator will leave the jobsite and review the evidence provided during the inspection. Generally, the investigator does not make any determination at the time of the jobsite inspection regarding whether the allegations listed in the complaint are supported. ● If the allegations are confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator may issue a Written Directive telling the contractor to correct the poor or incomplete work. ● If the allegations are not confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator will close the complaint.

Questions? If you have already filed a complaint and it was assigned to an investigator, you are encouraged to contact that investigator directly with the information listed in your jobsite inspection letter. If you have not filed a complaint yet or have not been assigned an investigator, you can reach the Registrar’s compliance department at (877) 692-9762.

A Guide to Written Directives Purpose of the Jobsite Inspection When the Registrar receives a complaint against a contractor’s license, the Registrar generally schedules a Jobsite Inspection. The Jobsite Inspection serves two purposes: 1. To give the contractor an opportunity to inspect the complaint items; and 2. To give the Registrar an opportunity to determine if the contractor’s work violates Arizona law.

What to expect after a Jobsite Inspection After doing a Jobsite Inspection, the Registrar’s Investigator will determine whether the allegations listed in the complaint are supported. ● If the allegations are confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator may issue a Written Directive telling the contractor to correct the poor or incomplete work. ● If the allegations are not confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator will close the complaint.

Written Directives Access: In order to use the administrative process offered by the Registrar, a property owner must provide reasonable access to allow the contractor to fix their work as directed by the Registrar in a Written Directive. Complainants may not put any additional, unnecessary restrictions on the Respondent above and beyond the initial contract requirements agreed upon at the beginning of the project. Respondents are required to make repairs on items identified on any Written Directive, not otherwise restricted by local code or HOA limitations. Complainants must make access available to the Respondent to make the required repairs and failure to provide reasonable access may result in the Registrar dismissing the complaint.

Contractor obligations: The Written Directive will set a deadline for compliance. This is the period of time determined by the Investigator as necessary to complete the items listed in the Directive. ● The deadline for compliance assumes the contractor will promptly begin working on the items listed in the Directive. ● Do not wait. Both parties should communicate quickly to schedule the work.

Extensions: If good cause exists to extend this deadline, either party may submit a written request to the Investigator. The Registrar will review requests for extension and determine if the Directive should be extended.

Manner and method of performance: The Registrar does not provide specific instructions for how to correct poor work. A licensed contractor is expected to have the skill and professionalism to complete the work. Moreover, the complainant may not dictate the manner of repair. If the contractor fails to appropriately correct the work according to the contract, the Registrar will issue a citation.

Compliance Inspection: After the Written Directive expires, the Registrar’s Investigator will contact the complainant to determine if the contractor performed any corrective work. ● If the contractor did corrective work, the Investigator may schedule a Compliance Inspection to determine if the poor work is corrected. ● If the contractor did not perform any corrective work, the Registrar’s Investigator will not do a Compliance Inspection and will determine whether to issue a citation based on the administrative record.

Work performed after the directive ends: After the Directive period ends, a property owner may choose to allow the contractor to continue its work. The Registrar encourages parties to work cooperatively, but cannot require a homeowner to continue to allow a contractor access to the property after the Directive period ends in order for the administrative process to continue. Denying access after the Directive ends is not grounds to close or dismiss a complaint. 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Complainant: Carrie Cecil Respondent: P & B Mechanical Inc DBA Advantage Air mechanical

Present for the complainant: Carrie Cecil Present for the respondent: Ivan Salcido, Chris Davis Also present: Architect Daniel McPeak Overview of project: As stated by the complainant, the project is a “…remodel with two additions and 900 SQF guesthouse/office”. General Notes: Photos taken with agency issued Canon PowerShot ELPH180 and/or agency issued Google cell phone. Audio recorded with agency issued Olympus recorder and/or agency issued Google cell phone.

Complaint Item 1A: “• Tankless water heater was not installed properly/to code or plans…” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The water heater is installed in the location specified on the plumbing page of the approved plans. The local building official has passed all inspections indicating all work was determined to be code complaint. Reference Pictures: 1 Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 1B: “• Tankless water heater …leaked in the mechanical room an inside the wall causing black MOLD to grow in the wall and it has made its wall onto the floor of the interior laundry room and on the baseboard.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The tankkless water heater and all related plumbing were installed by the respondent. The respondent acknowledged being notified of the leak, and also repairing the fitting that was leaking. The respondent explained this to be a water pipe fitting near the water heater, not specifically from the water heater. Additionally, the respondent accepted responsibility for all damage and all mold growth caused by the leak. Drywall has been removed in the mechanical room/closet. There is moisture damage inside the wall, and on the drywall and base trim inside the room on the opposite side of the wall. Reference Pictures: 1-7 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: “• Duct work on main house was not properly installed, had to be fixed. o Still does not have proper flow and we are freezing.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Temperature readings were not able to be taken accurately during this inspection. The complainant acknowledged using electric space heaters in specific rooms of the house. The respondent did acknowledge the systems have not yet been balanced. 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. RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes

Complaint Item 3: “• Duct work in main house was not done to plan and will need to be removed, and roof, and new interior wood beams replaced as AAM cut penetrations in the center of the room where the lighting fixtures were to be placed. o The entire room is off center.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. HVAC supply ducts in two rooms of the addition, at the south side of the house, are not in the locations identified in the approved plans. The plans specify the air supply ducts to be near the exterior walls, above the windows. Currently the air supply ducts are in the center of each room. The plans further specify electrical fixtures to be located in the center of the rooms. In addition to the HVAC ducts being in the incorrect locations, the electrical fixtures are also in the incorrect locations. Reference Pictures: 8-11 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a): Departure from or disregard of: (a) Plans or specifications... 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 5: “• HVAC in guest house mechanical room is installed improperly and leaking air.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are air leaks from the guest house air handler. Additionally, one of the condensate drain fitting is not glued. Reference Pictures: 14 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.

RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Complaint Item 6: “• Electrical outlet damaged and capped, outside bedroom, when putting in a gas line for fireplace causing the Cecils to be without any outlet where their exterior irrigation is placed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The respondent confirmed there was an outlet in this location prior to installing gas lines in this location. The receptacle has been removed and the electrical box is currently capped. There is no signed change order authorizing the elimination of the receptacle. Reference Pictures: 15 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 7: “• Exterior pipe showing in the front of the guest house which should have been a hose bib in side wall. Not to plan.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). This is a standard water entrance design. The water line to the guest house comes up out the ground near the guest house wall, and includes a shut off valve. At the top of the pipe, there is a hose bib, and a “T” directing the water pipe into the structure. Reference Pictures: 16-17 Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 8: “• Exterior pipe showing on the side of the mudroom which should have been a hose bib. Not to plan.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). This is a standard design. The water line from the house to the guest house exits the house near the garage. The pipe comes out of the house to a “T” and a hose bib. The “T” directs the water line to below grade, to continue out to the guest house. There is also a shut off valve in the line above grade. Reference Pictures: 18-19 Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 9: “• AAM jackhammered a finished floor in guest house to which the response was “oh well,” and it was not fixed properly.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The area of the floor has been repaired by the complainant. Reference Pictures: 20 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1155(D): The registrar may 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…The contractor’s work has been subject to neglect, modification, or abnormal use.

Complaint Item 10: “• Damage/ large gouge to new front doors by AAM employee when bringing in ductwork to home through front door.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The main entry door is scratched/gouged. These doors were installed by the respondent, and used by the respondent to access the home for work. Reference Pictures: 21 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 11: “• Primary bathroom in main house bathtub was installed improperly, causing sewer smells in house.

RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes o AAM had to jackhammer finished bathroom floor. During the repair they cracked new bathtub and had to tear out a finished wall.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The complainant confirmed the only remaining issue with the tub is the crack. What was identified as a crack visually appears to be caulking, grout, or possibly drywall residue on the tub surface. Reference Pictures: 22 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 12: “• Multiple drainage issues with new primary shower (three times).” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). This complainant acknowledged there are no current draining issues with the shower. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 13: “• Multiple leaks from hardware improperly installed (three-four times).” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant acknowledged there are no current hardware issues. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 14: “• Steam shower hardware that was installed fell off.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The inner potion of the steam jet is currently missing. The respondent stated someone else removed the part and damaged an “O” ring. Due to the damaged “O” ring, the part will not stay securely installed. The respondent did not accept responsibility for the damage. The respondent did state they will repair for reasons of customer satisfaction. Reference Pictures: 23 Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 15: “• Two gas leaks in the primary house from AAM not testing the 90s prior to dry wall. o New finished wall had to be removed. We have found thee and fixed, but worried if there are more.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant stated she is unaware of any current gas leaks. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 16: “• Two gas leaks in the guest house. o We have found thee and fixed, but worried if there are more.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant stated she is unaware of any current gas leaks. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 17: “• Hose bib broken off in the exterior wall of new addition/stucco – main house. o AAM had to cut a hole in new stucco/paint. Cecils had to fix the hole with adobe design over it.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant confirmed she had this corrected. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1155(D): The registrar may not issue a citation for failure to perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner or in accordance with any applicable building codes and

RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes professional industry standards if…The contractor’s work has been subject to neglect, modification, or abnormal use.

Complaint Item 18: “• New gas heater in guest house did not work. o Replaced but is still not running properly. Cecils had to buy portable heaters.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant stated this is fine now. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 19: “• Shower in guest house was installed improperly and finished wall had to be torn out to fix.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant stated “This is all fixed now.” Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 20: “• Four-inch sewer for the camper was not properly back filled, plus there is no cover on it (was fixed by an outside subcontractor).” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant stated “We can let that go.” Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 21: “• Currently there is drip, drip, drip water sound onto metal in the primary bathroom behind the wall that cannot be located.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The noise was not heard during this inspection. All parties on site stated the noise is coming from the heating element of the steam unit. Thermal expansion and contraction from the steam shower unit is not considered to be a workmanship issue. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 22: “• During build, ductwork was not sealed for rain and finished dry wall and flooring was damaged.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant stated she had the entire roof and all duct work coated with a reflective roof coating material. Reference Pictures: 24 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1155(D): The registrar may 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…The contractor’s work has been subject to neglect, modification, or abnormal use.

ADDITIONAL VIOLATIONS In addition to the allegations in the complaint, the following violations were verified:

Warning Letter: Elements of a Contract. Investigator’s Observations: As stated by the complainant, and confirmed by the respondent, there is no written contract for this project. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12), Namely A.R.S. § 32-1158(A) Minimum Elements of a Contract. RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Any contract in an amount of more than one thousand dollars entered into between a contractor and the homeowner of a property to be improved shall contain in writing at least the following information: 1: The name of the contractor and the contractor's business address and license number. 2: The name and mailing address of the owner and the jobsite address or legal description. 3: The date the parties entered into the contract. 4: The estimated date of completion of all work to be performed under the contract. 5: A description of the work to be performed under the contract. 6: The total dollar amount to be paid to the contractor by the owner for all work to be performed under the contract, including all applicable taxes. 7: The dollar amount of any advance deposit paid or scheduled to be paid to the contractor by the owner. 8: The dollar amount of any progress payment and the stage of construction at which the contractor will be entitled to collect progress payments during the course of construction under the contract. 9a: That the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the registrar for an alleged violation of section 32-1154, subsection A. 9b: The contract shall contain the registrar's telephone number and website address and shall state that complaints must be made within the applicable time period as set forth in section 32-1155, subsection A. 9c: The information in this paragraph must be prominently displayed in the contract in at least ten point bold type... 9d: ...and the contract shall be signed by the property owner and the contractor or the contractor's designated representative. REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION: The respondent is to submit a copy of a current contract form that complies with A.R.S. § 32-1158

Warning Letter: Wrong name. Investigator’s Observations: Several invoices are in the name of Kevin Bedient, a named officer and share holder of the company; however, those invoices do not include the respondent’s registered company name. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(14): Acting in the capacity of a contractor under any license issued under this chapter in a name other than as set forth on the license. REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION: The respondent is to submit documented compliance.

Warning Letter: Display of License. Investigator’s Observations: Several invoices do not include the respondent’s ROC number. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12) Namely A.R.S. § 32-1124(B) Display of License REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION: The respondent is to submit documented compliance with A.R.S. § 32-1124

Warning Letter: Working beyond scope of License. Investigator’s Observations: The respondent was acting in the capacity of a general contractor on this project. The respondent has four Arizona contractor licenses: • ROC267548 – C-16 Fire Protection Systems • ROC263466 – CR-77 Plumbing Including Solar • ROC263465 – CR-45 Sheet Metal • ROC214570 – CR-39 Air Conditioning and Refrigeration None of these licenses allows the respondent to act in the capacity of a general contractor, or to perform specific areas of work specifically identified on several invoices, including but not limited to: • Demo • Pool Deck

RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes • Concrete • Cabinets • Yard lighting • Adobe Veneer • Front door install Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(16): Knowingly contracting beyond the scope of the license or licenses of the licensee.

RCC100 11/14

Jobsite Inspection Photos 1 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Tankless water heater inside a mechanical room/closet

Jobsite Inspection Photos 2 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Tankless water heater inside a mechanical room/closet. Water heater and all related plumbing installed by the respondent.

The respondent acknowledged being notified of the leak, and also repairing the fitting that was leaking. The respondent explained this to be a water pipe fitting near the water heater, not specifically from the water heater. Additionally, the respondent accepted responsibility for all damage and all mold growth caused by the leak.

Drywall has been removed in the mechanical room/closet.

There is moisture damage inside the wall, and on the drywall and base trim inside the room on the opposite side of the wall.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 3 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Tankless water heater inside a mechanical room/closet. Water heater and all related plumbing installed by the respondent.

Drywall has been removed in the mechanical room/closet.

There is moisture damage inside the wall, and on the drywall and base trim inside the room on the opposite side of the wall.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 4 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Tankless water heater inside a mechanical room/closet. Water heater and all related plumbing installed by the respondent.

Drywall has been removed in the mechanical room/closet.

There is moisture damage inside the wall, and on the drywall and base trim inside the room on the opposite side of the wall.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 5 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

The respondent accepted responsibility for all damage and all mold growth caused by the leak.

Drywall has been removed in the mechanical room/closet.

There is moisture damage inside the wall, and on the drywall and base trim inside the room on the opposite side of the wall.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 6 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

The respondent accepted responsibility for all damage and all mold growth caused by the leak.

Drywall has been removed in the mechanical room/closet.

There is moisture damage inside the wall, and on the drywall and base trim inside the room on the opposite side of the wall.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 7 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

The respondent accepted responsibility for all damage and all mold growth caused by the leak.

Drywall has been removed in the mechanical room/closet.

There is moisture damage inside the wall, and on the drywall and base trim inside the room on the opposite side of the wall.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 8 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

On site conditions: • HVAC ducts centered in the rooms. • Electrical fixtures not centered in the rooms. Per the approved plans: • HVAC ducts were to be near the exterior walls, above the windows. • Electrical fixtures were to be centered in the rooms.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 9 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Jobsite Inspection Photos 10 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Jobsite Inspection Photos 11 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Jobsite Inspection Photos 12 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

The kitchen sink drain has been disconnected form original drain pipe below the sink. A new drain pipe is now installed through the exterior wall and exposed on the exterior of the house. The original dink drain piping is not capped below the kitchen sink. The new sink drain piping is not vented.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 13 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Jobsite Inspection Photos 14 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

There are air leaks from the guest house air handler. Additionally, one of the condensate drain fitting is not glued.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 15 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

The respondent confirmed there was an outlet in this location prior to installing gas lines in this location. The receptacle has been removed and the electrical box is currently capped. There is no signed change order authorizing the elimination of the receptacle.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 16 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

This is a standard water entrance design. The water line to the guest house comes up out the ground near the guest house wall, and includes a shut off valve. At the top of the pipe, there is a hose bib, and a “T” directing the water pipe into the structure.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 17 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Jobsite Inspection Photos 18 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

This is a standard design. The water line from the house to the guest house exits the house near the garage. The pipe comes out of the house to a “T” and a hose bib. The “T” directs the water line to below grade, to continue out to the guest house. There is also a shut off valve in the line above grade.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 19 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Jobsite Inspection Photos 20 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

The area of the floor has been repaired by the complainant.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 21 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Main entry door scratched/gouged.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 22 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Caulking, grout, or possibly drywall residue on the tub surface.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 23 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

Caulking, grout, or possibly drywall residue on the tub surface.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 24 Case No.: 2022-11605 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/12/2023 Inspection Time: 10:30AM Address: 3021 N. San Sebastian Pl., Tucson, AZ 85715

The complainant stated she had the entire roof and all duct work coated with a reflective roof coating material.

Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Complainant: Carrie Cecil 3201 N. San Sebastian Tucson, AZ 85715

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Respondent: P & B Mechanical Inc DBA: Advantage Air Mechanical 3132 E 45th St Tucson, AZ 85713

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

January 17, 2023

License No. ROC 214570

Re: Complaint No. 2022-11605

WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR

Dear Respondent:

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 February 14, 2023.

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 1, 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:

This means the license is suspended for lack of qualifying party, lack of bond, nonrenewal, Recovery Fund payout, or for any reason listed in A.R.S. § 32-1124(F).

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

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: “• Duct work in main house was not done to plan and will need to be removed, and roof, and new interior wood beams replaced as AAM cut penetrations in the center of the room where the lighting fixtures were to be placed. o The entire room is off center.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. HVAC supply ducts in two rooms of the addition, at the south side of the house, are not in the locations identified in the approved plans. The plans specify the air supply ducts to be near the exterior walls, above the windows. Currently the air supply ducts are in the center of each room. The plans further specify electrical fixtures to be located in the center of the rooms. In addition to the HVAC ducts being in the incorrect locations, the electrical fixtures are also in the incorrect locations. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a): Departure from or disregard of: (a) Plans or specifications... 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.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Additionally, there is no change order authorizing the new drain pipe to be exposed on the exterior of the house. 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 5: “• HVAC in guest house mechanical room is installed improperly and leaking air.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are air leaks from the guest house air handler. Additionally, one of the condensate drain fitting is not glued. 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 6: “• Electrical outlet damaged and capped, outside bedroom, when putting in a gas line for fireplace causing the Cecils to be without any outlet where their exterior irrigation is placed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The respondent confirmed there was an outlet in this location prior to installing gas lines in this location. The receptacle has been removed and the electrical box is currently capped. There is no signed change order authorizing the elimination of the receptacle. 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 10: “• Damage/ large gouge to new front doors by AAM employee when bringing in ductwork to home through front door.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The main entry door is scratched/gouged. These doors were installed by the respondent, and used by the respondent to access the home for work. 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 11: “• Primary bathroom in main house bathtub was installed improperly, causing sewer smells in house. o AAM had to jackhammer finished bathroom floor. During the repair they cracked new bathtub and had to tear out a finished wall.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The complainant confirmed the only remaining issue with the tub is the crack. What was identified as a crack visually appears to be caulking, grout, or possibly drywall residue on the tub surface. 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.

ADDITIONAL VIOLATIONS In addition to the allegations in the complaint, the following violations were verified:

Warning Letter: Elements of a Contract. Investigator’s Observations: As stated by the complainant, and confirmed by the respondent, there is no written contract for this project.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12), Namely A.R.S. § 32-1158(A) Minimum Elements of a Contract. Any contract in an amount of more than one thousand dollars entered into between a contractor and the homeowner of a property to be improved shall contain in writing at least the following information: 1: The name of the contractor and the contractor's business address and license number. 2: The name and mailing address of the owner and the jobsite address or legal description. 3: The date the parties entered into the contract. 4: The estimated date of completion of all work to be performed under the contract. 5: A description of the work to be performed under the contract. 6: The total dollar amount to be paid to the contractor by the owner for all work to be performed under the contract, including all applicable taxes. 7: The dollar amount of any advance deposit paid or scheduled to be paid to the contractor by the owner. 8: The dollar amount of any progress payment and the stage of construction at which the contractor will be entitled to collect progress payments during the course of construction under the contract. 9a: That the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the registrar for an alleged violation of section 32-1154, subsection A. 9b: The contract shall contain the registrar's telephone number and website address and shall state that complaints must be made within the applicable time period as set forth in section 32-1155, subsection A. 9c: The information in this paragraph must be prominently displayed in the contract in at least ten point bold type... 9d: ...and the contract shall be signed by the property owner and the contractor or the contractor's designated representative. REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION: The respondent is to submit a copy of a current contract form that complies with A.R.S. § 32-1158

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

• ROC214570 – CR-39 Air Conditioning and Refrigeration None of these licenses allows the respondent to act in the capacity of a general contractor, or to perform specific areas of work specifically identified on several invoices, including but not limited to: • Demo • Pool Deck • Concrete • Cabinets • Yard lighting • Adobe Veneer • Front door install Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(16): Knowingly contracting beyond the scope of the license or licenses of the licensee.

ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION The following complaint items require no action by the Respondent:

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1155(D): The registrar may 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…The contractor’s work has been subject to neglect, modification, or abnormal use.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Complaint Item 22: “• During build, ductwork was not sealed for rain and finished dry wall and flooring was damaged.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). The complainant stated she had the entire roof and all duct work coated with a reflective roof coating material. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1155(D): The registrar may 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…The contractor’s work has been subject to neglect, modification, or abnormal use.

Please direct all questions regarding this Directive to the undersigned Investigator.

Sincerely,

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

John Smith John Smith, Investigator #194 (520) 483-0027 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St,Suite 105 Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2812

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

Complainant: Carrie Cecil 3201 N. San Sebastian Tucson, AZ 85715

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

Respondent: P & B Mechanical Inc DBA: Advantage Air Mechanical 3132 E 45th St Tucson, AZ 85713

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

February 14, 2023

License No. ROC 214570

Re: Complaint No. 2022-11605

AMENDED WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR