2023A-01263-CHC-ROC Notice of Hearing and Packet MAILED

2023A-01263-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2023-09-08

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Matthew Pryer , Case No. 2023-01263 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2023A-01263-CHC-ROC v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON Oak Craft Inc CONTESTED CASE License No. ROC 274336,

RESPONDENT.

This Notice of Hearing is issued under A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D). HEARING INFORMATION The hearing is set for: October 23, 2023 1:00 PM Brian Del Vecchio 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 August 11, 2023.

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)(3) - R4-9-108(a) Charge: 2 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22)

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/content/prehearing-disclosure- statement.

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 September 7, 2023.

By: /s/ Erika Hoskin Erika Hoskin Legal Secretary Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail September 7, 2023 to: Respondent(s) Oak Craft Inc 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345 Edward A. Salanga, Esq. N Central Ave One Renaissance Square Phoenix, AZ 85004 Complainant(s) Matthew Pryer 45321 N. 18th St., New River, AZ 85087-6520

Philip G. Mueller Esq. 1423 S Higley Rd Ste 110 Mesa, AZ 85206 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. 2023-01263 /

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

Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Complainant: Matthew Pryer Brisk Air Inc. 3310 West Bell Road 127 Phoenix, AZ 85053

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 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Respondent: Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345

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 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

February 6, 2023

Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint Number 2023-01263

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

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

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for March 16, 2023 at 11:30 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. 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 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

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, David Fagerburg David Fagerburg, Investigator #210 (602) 771-6735 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812

CC: Respondent Complainant Complainant Attorney

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 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

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. 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 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

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 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 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

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 Katie Hobbs, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Complainant Attorney: Philip Mueller 1423 S Higley Rd Suite 110 Mesa, AZ 85206

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 March 16, 2023 2023-01263 JSI Photos

45321 N 18th St New River, AZ 85087

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P 10 P 11 P 12 P 13 P 14 P 15 P 16 P 17 P 18 P 19 P 20 P 21 P 22 P 23 P 24 P 25 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

Jobsite Inspection Notes

Case No.: 2023-01263 Investigator: David Fagerburg #210 Inspection Date: March 16, 2023 Inspection Time: 11:30 AM

Complainant: Matt & Nicole Pryer, Respondent: Oak Craft Inc. Homeowners Kimberly Dillie Sales Representative, Not Present: Elite Kitchen Cabinetry LLC Ryan Gorospe, QP & Owner, Marco Posillico Representing Elite Kitchen Cabinetry Not Present:

Jobsite General Notes: Both parties were present at this jobsite investigation JSI photos taken with my Pixel 6 Pro Cell Phone JSI audio recorded with my Olympus Digital Voice Recorder model DM-620. Photos #1 and #2 are of the complainant’s residence and address.

Compliant Item 1: Dark (Espresso) cabinet finish throughout home does not match.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation in the kitchen, laundry room and master bathroom I observed cabinets installed with excessive variation in stain color throughout the cabinet components and at the some of the door frames the stain is missing. See P (3), P (7) thru P (12), P (14) and P (25). Per ROC Workmanship Standards, it should be noted that it is not unusual for the color of installed cabinets to be slightly different from the samples shown at the time of selection. Color can differ with wood grain variations and stain lots. Excessive variation is not acceptable. I am able to verify the dark espresso cabinet finish throughout the home does not match and the color variation is excessive. The respondent is to correct by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

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 RCC100 11/18

Compliant Item 2: White (Coconut) cabinet finish looks oxidized and splotchy.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation in the kitchen I observed white base and upper cabinets installed. The finished color of 2 of the drawer fronts on the base cabinets appear to have a dull finish and is not uniform with the surrounding drawers and doors. See P (16) and P (17). During this jobsite investigation the respondent acknowledged the 2 drawer fronts have a slightly different finish. The respondent is to correct the 2 drawer fronts that are not uniform at the kitchen base cabinets by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 3: Gaps in upper cabinets have been filled with different colors of silicone.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation in the kitchen and laundry room the complainant showed me where there are 3 different colors of caulking applied at the back seams of the cabinet boxes. See P (18) thru P (20) and P (24). The respondent acknowledged the caulking applied is of 3 different colors. The respondent is to correct the cabinets in the laundry room and kitchen with different color caulking by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 4: Shelving is splintered.: Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation I observed cabinets that have not been installed on the floor of the kitchen. The shelves inside the cabinets are splintered. See P (21) thru P (23). I also observed splintered interior panels in the laundry room, master bathroom and kitchen cabinets. See P (18) thru P (20). The respondent is to correct the cabinets with splintered shelves and interior panels by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 5: Cabinet doors and drawers do not line up correctly.; Cabinet doors and drawers need adjustments to open and close properly; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation I observed and am able to verify the cabinet doors and drawers in the kitchen, laundry room, hallway and master bathroom do not line up correctly and need adjustments to open and close properly. See P (5) thru P (9) and P (16). During this jobsite investigation the respondent acknowledged the cabinet doors and drawers do not line up correctly and need to be adjusted to open and close properly and has yet to make the final adjustments. Per ROC Workmanship Standards, Cabinet Malfunctions: Cabinet doors, drawers and other operating parts should function properly. Contractor should repair, adjust or replace operating parts as required once within the first year. Cabinet Doors Not At Same Height: Tops of cabinet doors must be in the same horizontal plane, within 1/8”. The contractor should adjust doors to meet the above standard once within the first year. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards. 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 RCC100 11/18

Compliant Item 6: doors hang open when closed drag when open.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation I observed and am able to verify some of the cabinet doors and drawers hang open when meant to be closed. See P (15) and P (17). During this jobsite investigation the complainant showed me where some of the cabinet doors drag the frame. During this jobsite investigation the respondent acknowledged the cabinet doors hang open when closed, drag when opening, need to be adjusted to open and close properly and has not yet made the final adjustments. Per ROC Workmanship Standards cabinet doors, drawers and other operating parts should function properly. Contractor should repair, adjust or replace operating parts as required once within the first year. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 7: Drawer fronts and doors are warped.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation I observed and am able to verify some of the cabinet doors in the laundry room hallway and kitchen are warped. I did not observe any warped drawer fronts. The respondent acknowledged some of the warped doors have been replaced and agreed to correct any remaining warped doors. Per ROC workmanship standards, a warp of 1/8” in 30” is acceptable. The respondent is to correct the warped doors throughout that exceed 1/8” in 30” by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 8: Missing cabinet door and drawer fronts.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation I observed and am able to verify there is a missing cabinet door in the laundry room and a missing false drawer front in the master bathroom. See P (9) and P (14). During this jobsite investigation the respondent stated that new doors will be replaced today after this jobsite investigation. The respondent is to complete the missing cabinet doors and drawer fronts by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 9: Side panels are not spaced out to match doors on center island.; Investigator’s Observation: Not Verified. At this jobsite investigation at the kitchen center island I observed fixed panels at the corners of the island and cabinet doors between the panels with spacing that is not uniform between the cabinet doors and the fixed panels. See P (5) thru P (8). The respondent explained that the space is different because the operational doors have hinges and the decorative panels are fixed. In reviewing the plans submitted by the complainant I am able to verify there is no specification regarding the spacing between the operational doors and the fixed panels. Governing Rule: No Action

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 RCC100 11/18

Compliant Item 10: Cabinet doors have nicks and dings in them. ; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation in the kitchen, laundry room and master bathroom the complainant showed me cabinets with nicks, dings and nail holes that are not filled. See P (3), P (4) and P (10) thru P (13). The respondent is to correct nicks, dings and nail holes throughout by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 11: Door seams are very noticeable.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. At this jobsite investigation the complainant showed me cabinet doors frames with butt joints at the corners that are visible and not uniform. See P (10) and P (11). The respondent is to correct the cabinet door frames with visible seams at the corner butt joints throughout by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 12: Pull handles have not been installed. Investigator’s Observation: Not Verified. After this jobsite investigation in reviewing the contract documents submitted by the complainant I am able to verify cabinet hardware is not quoted or to be installed. Governing Rule: No Action

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 RCC100 11/18

Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

Complainant: Matthew Pryer Brisk Air Inc. 3310 West Bell Road 127 Phoenix, AZ 85053

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: Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345

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

March 30, 2023

License No. ROC 274336

Re:Complaint No. 2023-01263

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 Thursday April 20, 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:

Compliant Item 1: Dark (Espresso) cabinet finish throughout home does not match.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I am able to verify the dark espresso cabinet finish throughout the home does not match and the color variation is excessive. The respondent is to correct by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

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 Martín Quezada, Director

Compliant Item 2: White (Coconut) cabinet finish looks oxidized and splotchy.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. The respondent is to correct the 2 drawer fronts that are not uniform at the kitchen base cabinets by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 3: Gaps in upper cabinets have been filled with different colors of silicone.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. The respondent is to correct the cabinets in the laundry room and kitchen with different color caulking by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 4: Shelving is splintered.: Investigator’s Observation: Verified. The respondent is to correct the cabinets with splintered shelves and interior panels by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 5: Cabinet doors and drawers do not line up correctly.; Cabinet doors and drawers need adjustments to open and close properly; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. Per ROC Workmanship Standards, Cabinet Malfunctions: Cabinet doors, drawers and other operating parts should function properly. Contractor should repair, adjust or replace operating parts as required once within the first year. Cabinet Doors Not At Same Height: Tops of cabinet doors must be in the same horizontal plane, within 1/8”. The contractor should adjust doors to meet the above standard once within the first year. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 6: doors hang open when closed drag when open.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. Per ROC Workmanship Standards cabinet doors, drawers and other operating parts should function properly. Contractor should repair, adjust or replace operating parts as required once within the first year. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 7: Drawer fronts and doors are warped.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. Per ROC workmanship standards, a warp of 1/8” in 30” is acceptable. The respondent is to correct the warped doors throughout that exceed 1/8” in 30” by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

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

Compliant Item 8: Missing cabinet door and drawer fronts.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. The respondent is to complete the missing cabinet doors and drawer fronts by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 10: Cabinet doors have nicks and dings in them. ; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. The respondent is to correct nicks, dings and nail holes throughout by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliant Item 11: Door seams are very noticeable.; Investigator’s Observation: Verified. The respondent is to correct the cabinet door frames with visible seams at the corner butt joints throughout by appropriate means. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3) namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

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

Compliant Item 9: Side panels are not spaced out to match doors on center island.; Investigator’s Observation: Not Verified. In reviewing the plans submitted by the complainant I am able to verify there is no specification regarding the spacing between the operational doors and the fixed panels. Governing Rule: No Action

Compliant Item 12: Pull handles have not been installed. Investigator’s Observation: Not Verified. In reviewing the contract documents submitted by the complainant I am able to verify cabinet hardware is not quoted or to be installed. Governing Rule: No Action

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 Martín Quezada, Director

David Fagerburg David Fagerburg, Investigator #210 (602) 771-6735 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812

CC: Respondent Complainant

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: Matthew Pryer Brisk Air Inc. 3310 West Bell Road 127 Phoenix, AZ 85053

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: Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345

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

April 4, 2023

License No. ROC 274336

Re:Complaint No. 2023-01263

ADDENDUM WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR

Dear Respondent:

DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS

After further review it has been determined to include all the white coconut kitchen cabinets be corrected to ensure uniformity throughout. All other items listed on the Written Directive issued March 30, 2023 remain standing.

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

Sincerely,

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 Martín Quezada, Director

David Fagerburg David Fagerburg, Investigator #210 (602) 771-6735 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812

CC: Respondent Complainant

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 Complainant: Matthew Pryer Brisk Air Inc. 3310 West Bell Road 127 Phoenix, AZ 85053

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov

C012 05/21 Respondent: Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov

C012 05/21 July 25, 2023

Compliance Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint No. 2023-01263

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

A Compliance Inspection has been scheduled for July 26, 2023 at 11:30 AM to determine the current status of the items listed on the issued Directive.

The Complainant is required to be present for this inspection. The Respondent is encouraged to be present but is not required to attend.

Complainant: SAFE ACCESS IS REQUIRED TO ANY AREA TO BE INSPECTED.

Sincerely,

David Fagerburg David Fagerburg, Investigator #210 602 7716735 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812

CC: Respondent Complainant

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov

C012 05/21 July 26, 2023 2023-01263 CJSI Photos

45321 N 18th St. New river, AZ 85087

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 P8 P9 P 10 P 11 P 12 P 13 P 14 P 15 P 16 P 17 P 18 P 19 P 20 P 21 P 22 P 23 P 24 P 25 P 26 P 27 P 28 P 29 P 30 P 31 P 32 P 33 July 26, 2023 2023-01263 Addi onal JSI Photos

45321 N 18th St. New River, AZ 85087

P1 P2 Complainant: Matthew Pryer Brisk Air Inc. 3310 West Bell Road 127 Phoenix, AZ 85053

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Respondent: Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Case No.: 2023-01263 Investigator: David Fagerburg Inspection Date: July 26, 2023 Inspection Time: 11:30 AM

Compliance Jobsite General Notes: Both parties were present at this compliance jobsite investigation CJSI photos taken with my Pixel 6 Pro Cell Phone CJSI audio recorded with my Olympus Digital Voice Recorder model DM-620 Photos #1 and #2 are of the complainant’s residence and address.

Investigator Note: 1: At this compliance jobsite investigation in an attempt to show me a non operable cabinet end panel that is not secured properly, the complainant pried the panel loose and a popping sound was heard. The respondent stated that the panels are attached with pin nails in case access is needed in the future. This was not a complaint item listed on the complaint form.

Compliance Findings:

Compliant Item 1: Dark (Espresso) cabinet finish throughout home does not match. Investigator’s Observation: The dark espresso cabinet finish is uniform. Per ROC Workmanship Standards, It should be noted that it is not unusual for the color of installed cabinets to be slightly different from the samples shown at the time of selection. Color can differ with wood grain variations and stain lots. Governing Rule: The respondent is in compliane with the directive.

Compliant Item 2: White (Coconut) cabinet finish looks oxidized and splotchy.; Investigator’s Observation: The white coconut cabinet finish in the kitchen is uniform. Governing Rule: The respondent is in compliane with the directive.

Compliant Item 3: Gaps in upper cabinets have been filled with different colors of silicone.; Investigator’s Observation: The complainant acknowledged that this complaint item has been corrected. Governing Rule: The respondent is in compliance with the directive.

Compliant Item 4: Shelving is splintered. Investigator’s Observation: I observed 2 uninstalled cabinets on the floor in the kitchen. 2 of the shelves inside the cabinets have splinters on the cut edges. Governing Rule: The respondent is not in compliance with the directive.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Compliant Item 5: Cabinet doors and drawers do not line up correctly.; Cabinet doors and drawers need adjustments to open and close properly; Investigator’s Observation: I did not observe any cabinet doors or drawers that do not line up correctly. Per ROC Workmanship Standards tops of cabinet doors must be in the same horizontal plane within 1/8”. During this compliance jobsite investigation the respondent stated that the cabinet drawers and doors were adjusted during the corrective work prior to the complainant loading some of the drawers with a large amount of dishes. The respondent stated that the complainant was warned not to load heavy objects into the drawers as this will alter the adjustments previously made and may cause the soft close drawer guides not to function properly. During this compliance jobsite investigation the respondent made final adjustments to the drawers in question. Per ROC Workmanship Standards the contractor should repair adjust or replace operating parts as required within the first year. I am able to verify all adjustments were made prior to or at this compliance jobsite investigation. Governing Rule: The respondent is in compliance with the directive.

Compliant Item 6: doors hang open when closed drag when open.; Investigator’s Observation: I did not observe any doors that hang open when closed or drag when open. Governing Rule: The respondent is in compliance with the directive.

Compliant Item 7: Drawer fronts and doors are warped. Investigator’s Observation: In the kitchen and hallway of the home I observed some of the kitchen cabinet drawer fronts with less than 1/8” warp and a cabinet door in the hallway that has a 1/8” warp. Per ROC Workmanship Standards a warp of 1/8” in 30” is acceptable. Governing Rule: The respondent is in compliance with the directive.

Compliant Item 8: Missing cabinet door and drawer fronts. Investigator’s Observation: I did not observe any missing cabinet door or drawer fronts. Governing Rule: The respondent is in compliance with the directive.

Compliant Item 10: Cabinet doors have nicks and dings in them. Investigator’s Observation: I observed minor nicks and dings in the master bathroom vanity and laundry room cabinets. Governing Rule: The respondent is not in compliance with the directive.

Compliant Item 11: Door seams are very noticeable. Investigator’s Observation: I observed minor cracks in some of the cabinet door frame seams. Governing Rule: The respondent is not in compliance with the directive.

Note:

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Please review the complaint items listed above. If any of the items have not been corrected at the time of the compliance inspection this complaint will be forwarded to the Registrar’s legal department and a citation may be issued.

If all items are corrected after receipt of this letter, please notify the Registrar’s legal department by sending a notice of compliance signed by the complainant to fax number (602) 364-0416 or by mail to: Arizona Registrar of Contractors, P.O. Box 18244, Phoenix, Arizona 85005-8244. Sincerely,

David Fagerburg David Fagerburg, Investigator #210 602 7716735 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812

CC: Respondent Complainant

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Complainant: Matthew Pryer Brisk Air Inc. 3310 West Bell Road 127 Phoenix, AZ 85053

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Respondent: Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Case No.: 2023-01263 Investigator: David Fagerburg Inspection Date: July 26, 2023 Inspection Time: 11:30 AM

Amended Compliance Findings:

Compliant Item 1: Dark (Espresso) cabinet finish throughout home does not match. Investigator’s Observation: The dark espresso cabinet finish is uniform. Per ROC Workmanship Standards, It should be noted that it is not unusual for the color of installed cabinets to be slightly different from the samples shown at the time of selection. Color can differ with wood grain variations and stain lots. After further review it has been determined that this is not acceptable. Governing Rule: The respondent is not in compliance with the directive.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

Note:

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

David Fagerburg David Fagerburg, Investigator #210 602 7716735 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812

CC: Respondent Complainant

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Matthew Pryer, Case No. 2023-01263 COMPLAINANT, v. Oak Craft Inc., CITATION License No. ROC 274336,

RESPONDENT.

The Registrar issues this Citation to Oak Craft Inc. (“Respondent”) under A.R.S. § 32- 1155(A). If Respondent fails to answer this Citation by August 26, 2023, then under A.R.S. § 32-1155(C), Respondent’s failure to answer may be deemed an admission of the act or acts charged in the underlying complaint, and the Registrar may then suspend or revoke Respondent’s license(s). THE WRITTEN COMPLAINT On February 1, 2023, Matthew Pryer (“Complainant”) filed a written complaint with the Registrar. A copy of that Complaint is attached to this Citation. A FORMAL STATEMENT OF THE CHARGES AGAINST RESPONDENT The Registrar investigated this matter and finds cause to charge Respondent with violation(s) of Title 32, Chapter 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. Respondent is charged with violating: Charge :1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(a) Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner. of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 Charge :2 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. A license shall not be revoked or suspended nor shall any other penalty be imposed for a violation of this paragraph until after a hearing has been held.

If the matter proceeds to a hearing and the administrative law judge determines that any of the charges listed above are supported by a preponderance of the evidence, then Respondent’s license(s) may be subject to suspension or revocation, and Respondent may be subject to other penalties provided by law, including civil penalties under A.R.S. §§ 32-1154(E) and (F). FILING A WRITTEN ANSWER Respondent must appear by filing with the Registrar a written answer to the citation and complaint showing cause, if any, why Respondent’s license(s) should not be suspended or revoked. A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). Respondent’s written answer should contain the heading “Written Answer to Citation and Complaint” and should include the case number, which is Case No. 2023-01263. How to File a Written Answer: Respondent’s written answer may be submitted in the following ways: In-Person: 1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007-2812 Mail: P.O. Box 18244, Phoenix, Arizona, 85005-8244 Email: [email redacted] of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 The Registrar’s normal office hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. If Respondent submits a written answer by mail, it is not filed with the Registrar until the Registrar actually receives it. Deadline for Filing a Written Answer: Respondent must file a written answer with the Registrar no later than August 26, 2023. This deadline is calculated under A.R.S. §§ 32-1155(A) and (B), which provides a deadline ten days after service of the Citation. Service of the Citation and Complaint is complete five days after the Registrar mails a copy of the Citation and Complaint to Respondent’s latest address of record in the Registrar’s office. Consequences for Failing to File a Written Answer: If Respondent fails to answer, Respondent’s failure may be deemed an admission of the act or acts charged in the written complaint. A.R.S. § 32-1155(C). The Registrar may then suspend or revoke Respondent’s license(s). THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING If Respondent files a timely written answer contesting any charges in the Complaint, then the Registrar will request the Office of Administrative Hearings set a date for an administrative hearing and will notify all the parties at least 30 days before that hearing. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D). INVESTIGATOR’S APPEARANCE AS A WITNESS The Registrar’s assigned investigator will appear as a witness at the hearing. If either party demands the attendance at the hearing of any other person, that party must obtain and serve a subpoena in compliance with the rules and processes established by the Office of Administrative Hearings. RESPONDENT’S RIGHT TO REQUEST AN INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE Under A.R.S. § 41-1092.06, if Respondent submits a request to the Registrar for an of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 informal settlement conference, the Registrar must hold a conference within 15 days after receiving the request. Respondent’s request for an informal settlement conference must be in writing and must be filed no later than 20 days before the administrative hearing. A.R.S. § 41- 1092.06(A). The Registrar will not close or settle any case without both parties’ appearance at the Settlement Conference. The parties participating in the settlement conference must have the authority to settle the case and must waive their right to object to the participation of the Registrar’s settlement conference representative in the final administrative decision. A.R.S. § 41-1092.06(B). Any statements, either written or oral, made by the parties at the conference, including a written document, created or expressed solely for the purpose of settlement negotiations, are inadmissible in the administrative hearing. A.R.S. § 41-1092.06(B). RESPONDENT’S PRIOR RECORD Under A.A.C. R4-9-117, in determining the appropriate discipline, the administrative law judge and the Registrar may consider not only facts in the current case, but also facts in prior cases and any documents regarding Respondent on file with the Registrar. Respondent’s prior disciplinary record and current license(s) status may be considered as a mitigating or aggravating factor in determining the appropriate discipline. EVIDENTIARY DISCLAIMER By issuing this Citation, the Registrar is directing Respondent to file a written answer to the Citation and Complaint, showing cause, if any, why Respondent’s license(s) should not be suspended or revoked. A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). This Citation does not constitute proof that any charge or allegation in Complainant’s written complaint is in fact true. This Citation does not constitute proof that Respondent violated any statutory provision or rule adopted by the Registrar. of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 Dated August 11, 2023. By: /s/ Tedi Quezada Tedi Quezada Legal Assistant Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors COPY of the foregoing mailed by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, August 11, 2023 to:

Respondent Certified Mail No: [number redacted]

Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345-7103 Copy mailed by USPS First Class mail this same date to:

Respondent Oak Craft Inc. 7733 W Olive Ave Peoria, AZ 85345

Complainant Matthew Pryer 45321 N. 18th St., NEW RIVER, AZ 85087-6520

Complainant’s Attorney Philip G. Mueller Esq. Davis Miles McGuire Gardner 1423 S Higley Rd Ste. 110 Mesa, AZ 85206 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 Attorney at email address of record with Registrar of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 3/20/23, 8:29 AM 20230317_083500.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsqzrptWMnmZHLmHnzKBgBBqGq?projector=1… 1/1 8/2/23, 1:54 PM 20230801_173117.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKZGZCGJZcnHBwBqHScXrrCfqcRmzngcHRlLdKpVHGDzgwJxLkrClggVlXCvdwmPsSl?projector=1&m… 1/1 3/20/23, 8:30 AM 20230317_083215.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsqzrptWMnmZHLmHnzKBgBBqGq?projector=1… 1/1 8/2/23, 1:55 PM 20230801_172921.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKZGZCGJZcnHBwBqHScXrrCfqcRmzngcHRlLdKpVHGDzgwJxLkrClggVlXCvdwmPsSl?projector=1&m… 1/1 3/20/23, 8:30 AM 20230317_083207.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsqzrptWMnmZHLmHnzKBgBBqGq?projector=1… 1/1 8/2/23, 1:55 PM 20230801_172614.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKZGZCGJZcnHBwBqHScXrrCfqcRmzngcHRlLdKpVHGDzgwJxLkrClggVlXCvdwmPsSl?projector=1&m… 1/1 4/3/23, 12:19 PM 20230111_110150 (1).jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsrnQHLwhplNlsfcHLgHZLBqGq?projector=1&m… 1/1 4/3/23, 12:21 PM 20230111_110150.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsrnQHLwhplNlsfcHLgHZLBqGq?projector=1&m… 1/1 4/3/23, 12:22 PM 20230111_110117.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsrnQHLwhplNlsfcHLgHZLBqGq?projector=1&m… 1/1 4/3/23, 12:22 PM 20230111_110413.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsrnQHLwhplNlsfcHLgHZLBqGq?projector=1&m… 1/1 4/3/23, 12:18 PM Screenshot_20230401_100640_Outlook.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/WhctKKXpVfSFxDkrFtqmhhfWbVbWDzWPPqgLhDlPqGHCVXsrnVxclFktrNRShHvFvQvrVXQ?projector=1&m… 1/1 Received 08/25/2023 ROC Legal

Quarles & Brady LLP One Renaissance Square Two North Central Avenue Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85004-2322 TELEPHONE 602-229-5200 Attorneys for Respondent Edward A. Salanga (#20654) [email redacted] Cale S. Johnson (#035557) [email redacted]

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA Matthew Pryer, Case No. 2023-01263 COMPLAINANT, WRITTEN ANSWER TO CITATION v. AND COMPLAINT

Oak Craft Inc., License No. ROC 274336, RESPONDENT.

Respondent Oak Craft Inc., (“Oak Craft”), through undersigned counsel, submits its Written Answer to Citation and Complaint (“Written Answer”) and hereby shows cause why the charges therein should not result in any discipline against Oak Craft. BACKGROUND Oak Craft manufactures and designs custom cabinetry. Oak Craft often sells its cabinets to contractors, such as Elite Kitchen Concepts (“Elite”), who then do the installation work. On or about June 1, 2021, Elite and Matthew Pryer (“Pryer”) entered into a Contractor Agreement (the “Contract”) for Elite to provide materials and labor for custom cabinetry at Pryer’s property at 45321 N. 18th Street, New River, AZ 85067 (the “Project”). From the Project’s outset, Oak Craft has made every effort to ensure that Mr. Pryer was happy with his cabinets. For example, after Oak Craft delivered the cabinets, a technician went to the Project to respray cabinet doors. When the technician was Received 08/25/2023 ROC Legal

unsuccessful in respraying the doors to Mr. Pryer’s satisfaction, Oak Craft made the decision to replace all the coconut painted doors in the kitchen cabinets. After replacing the coconut doors, a technician returned to the Project to touch up and adjust the cabinets as needed. Despite repeatedly taking actions to address any and all of Mr. Pryer’s concerns, Mr. Pryer filed a complaint with the ROC on or about February 1, 2023, alleging numerous issues with the cabinets. On or about March 16, 2023 Oak Craft met with ROC Investigator David Fagerburg at the Project. On March 30, 2023, Mr. Fagerburg issued a “Written Directive From The Registrar” (the “Directive”) requiring Oak Craft to remedy the following alleged violations: 1. Dark (Espresso) cabinet finish throughout home does not match; 2. White (Coconut) cabinet finish looks oxidized and splotchy; 3. Gaps in upper cabinets have been filled with 3 different colors of silicone; 4. Shelving is splintered; 5. Cabinet doors and drawers do not line up correctly; cabinet doors and drawers need adjustments to open and close property; 6. Doors hang open when closed, drag when open; 7. Drawer fronts and doors are warped; 8. Missing cabinet door and drawer fronts; 9. Cabinet doors have nicks and dings in them; and 10. Door seams are very noticeable. 1 The Directive gave Oak Craft until April 20, 2023 to address each item. 2 Notwithstanding this deadline Pryer refused to allow anyone from Oak Craft to access the Project until April 18, 2023, a mere two days before Oak Craft could comply with the Directive. However, even after Mr. Pryer allowed the two technicians to access the Project

Oak Craft disputes each and every alleged violation in the Directive. As the ROC acknowledges in its Citation, the Citation (including the Directive) “does not constitute proof that any charge or allegation in Complainant’s written complaint is in fact true…[or] constitute proof that Respondent violated any statutory provision or rule adopted by the Registrar.” Received 08/25/2023 ROC Legal

on April 18, he did not allow them to commence any work. On April 19, both Oak Craft and Elite visited the Project to assess the job. Oak Craft brought a color spectrometer to measure all doors for compliance, and all but two were within specification, and those two were promptly replaced. After finally being permitted to access the Project, Oak Craft made the decision to replace all the Sundown cabinet doors as well to try to appease Mr. Pryer. However, due to difficulty in obtaining certain materials, Oak Craft requested, and was granted, an extension by Mr. Fagerburg to comply with the Directive until June 9, 2023. As Oak Craft diligently worked to address each and every item in the Directive, Oak Craft determined because of material shortage, it would need additional time and Mr. Fagerburg once again authorized an extension to comply. After Oak Craft timely complied with the Directive, Mr. Fagerburg returned to inspect. In Mr. Fagerburg’s original compliance findings, he determined that all items complied with the Directive except for the following: item four (splintered shelving); item nine (doors have nicks and dings), and item ten (noticeable door seams). Notably, with respect to item one, Mr. Fagerburg observed that “Per ROC Workmanship Standards, it should be noted that it is not unusual for the color of installed cabinets to be slightly different from the samples shown at the time of selection. Color can differ with wood grain variations and stain lots.” However, without explanation, the ROC determined item one was no longer in compliance. Oak Craft provided explanations for each item that adequately addresses any alleged defects, and that will exonerate Oak Craft at a hearing, if necessary. With respect to item one, and as discussed above, Oak Craft, replaced each and every cabinet door to comply with item one in the Directive. Moreover, and as Mr. Fagerburg, originally recognized, ROC workmanship standards permit and recognize that there will generally be some variation with grain and stain lots. Moreover, Oak Craft’s Wood & Finish Characteristics materials explicitly disclose that there can be “subtle variations from piece Received 08/25/2023 ROC Legal

to piece in the application, absorption of stain, and the glaze detailing.” 3 Simply put, any variations in the wood finish complied with ROC workmanship standards. Regarding item four, the alleged splintering is on the shelving of two cabinets which Mr. Pryer instructed Oak Craft/Elite not to install because he was not going to use them in the design anymore. There is no alleged shelving splintering complained of on any of the shelving in the installed cabinets. Turning to item nine, the alleged “nicks and dings” in the cabinets are not due to any actions attributable to Oak Craft. Indeed, there was no damage present on the cabinets after Elite completed the install. Rather, such damage only appeared after the cabinets were installed. Such damage can only be attributable to Mr. Pryer. Oak Craft can provide photographic evidence at a hearing, if necessary, that will exonerate Oak Craft. Lastly, regarding item eleven, it is industry standard for hairline cracks to be present in the seams at joints, and Mr. Pryer knew this from the outset. Indeed, the Contract between Elite and Mr. Pryer, explicitly discloses that “doors will have seams and point fractures at some joints.” Notwithstanding its work complying this standard, Oak Craft appropriately addressed any and all door seams. To the extent that any hairline seam cracks remain, these are industry standard and do not constitute any defective workmanship. THE CITATION Charge 1: Alleged Violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), R4-9-108(a) Charge 1 alleges that Oak Craft violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) by violating Rule 4-9-108(a). Oak Craft denies Charge 1. Through this Written Answer, Oak Craft has shown cause for why its license should not be suspended or revoked. As demonstrated above, Oak Craft’s work was performed in a “professional and workmanlike manner.” Oak Craft will demonstrate the workmanlike manner with which it performed at a hearing, through documentary evidence and testimony, if necessary. Charge 2: Alleged Violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22)

Oak Craft provided these materials to Elite to provide to Mr. Pryer, whether Mr. Pryer received and/or reviewed them is unknown to Oak Craft. Received 08/25/2023 ROC Legal

Charge 2 alleges that Oak Craft violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) by failing to take appropriate corrective action to comply with a written directive from the registrar without valid justification within a reasonable time period. Oak Craft denies Charge 2. As shown above, Oak Craft, upon receiving the Directive, promptly attempted to take corrective action pursuant to the Directive. However, Mr. Pryer did not allow Oak Craft to access the Project until a day before the original compliance period expired. Moreover, certain materials needed to comply with the Directive were difficult to find, requiring Oak Craft to seek additional time. Moreover, Mr. Fagerburg approved the extensions. This constitutes a valid justification. It simply cannot be said that Oak Craft did not take timely action to comply with the Directive. Nor did Oak Craft contribute to any delay in completing the compliance work. REQUEST FOR RELIEF Oak Craft denies all allegations in the Citation not directly admitted to herein, and reserves the rights to pursue any and all remedies available to it under Arizona law, and requests no disciplinary action be taken against Oak Craft.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED August 25, 2023

QUARLES & BRADY LLP One Renaissance Square Two North Central Avenue Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85004-2322

By: Edward A. Salanga Cale S. Johnson Attorneys for Respondent

COPY of the foregoing sent Via email to : [email redacted] Received 08/25/2023 ROC Legal

and via mail to: Arizona Registrar of Contractors P.O. Box 18244 Phoenix, AZ 85005-8244, Complainant’s Attorney Philip G. Mueller Davis Miles McGuire Gardner 1423 S. Higley Rd., Suite 110 Mesa, AZ 85206 Received 8/28/23, 8:03 AM State of Arizona Mail - Matthew Pryer v. Oak Craft Inc. - Case No. 2023-0126308/25/2023 ROC Legal

Answers - AZROC <[email redacted]>

Matthew Pryer v. Oak Craft Inc. - Case No. 2023-01263 message

Worth, Pam A. <[email redacted]> Fri, Aug 25, 2023 at 11:21 AM To: "[email redacted]" <[email redacted]> Cc: "Salanga, Edward" <[email redacted]>, "Johnson, Cale S." <[email redacted]>, "Howard, Jonathan G." <[email redacted]>, DocketAZ <[email redacted]>

Good afternoon.

Attached is Respondent Oak Craft Inc.'s Written Answer to Citation and Complaint in the above matter.

Thank you,

Pam Worth

Pam WorthACP / Legal Assistant Quarles & Brady LLP [email redacted] One Renaissance Square, Two North Central Avenue, Suite 600 / Phoenix, AZ 85004-2322 Office: 602-229-5740 / quarles.com

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission and any attachments are confidential and may be privileged. They should be read or retained only by the intended recipient. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the transmission from your system. This communication is not intended to constitute an electronic signature unless expressly stated otherwise.

Written Answer to Citation and Complaint(84370309.1).pdf 172K

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRRPs76rvG6is06fsZxfhkDPP92sKvHRL176-f-03m8uOAzS/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&permthid=t… 1/1 Mediation Notice

Mediation Services Mediation services are available to the parties. What is Mediation? Mediation is a method of resolving disputes where the parties can end conflict without the expense and time associated with the full administrative process. Who Participates in During mediation, a mediator will attempt to help the Mediation? parties find an optimal solution to the conflict. Both parties must agree to participate in mediation, and both parties must bring a representative to mediation that has full authority to settle the entire matter. Mediation Is Not Neither the Registrar nor the Office of Administrative Mandatory Hearings will penalize a party for not agreeing to mediation. Where do the Parties The parties will meet at the Office of Administrative Meet for Mediation? Hearings to participate in mediation.

The Office of Administrative Hearings is located at 1400 West Washington, Suite 101, Phoenix, Arizona 85007. When does Mediation can occur after the Registrar issues a citation, but Mediation Occur? before the administrative hearing. Why Should Parties Mediation can be an alternative to the full administrative Consider Mediation? process. Mediation is beneficial because it is (1) time- efficient, (2) cost-effective, (3) confidential, and (4) capable of providing flexible solutions to complex problems. How to Request If the parties wish to mediate this case, they must file a Joint Mediation Request for Mediation with the Office of Administrative Hearings. A Joint Request for Mediation is included with this Mediation Notice. REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA _________________________ Case No. _______________ COMPLAINANT,

v. JOINT REQUEST FOR MEDIATION _________________________ RESPONDENT.

REQUEST

The parties jointly request that this matter be referred to mediation in the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). ☐ This matter is set for hearing on __________________(date). ☐ This matter is not currently set for hearing. MEDIATION AGREEMENT By requesting this mediation and signing below, the parties understand, represent, and agree: 1. The parties are prepared to commence mediation and will be ready for mediation on _____________________(date); 2. The parties will participate in the mediation process in good faith; 3. This request for mediation is not intended to hinder or delay administrative proceedings; 4. No party will contend that the mediation limits the power of OAH and its administrative law judges to conduct an administrative hearing and issue decisions under A.R.S. §§ 41-1092 – 1092.12; 5. The parties will be courteous and respectful throughout the mediation process to all participants; 6. The mediation is completely voluntary and the principal purpose is to allow the parties a full and fair opportunity to discuss settlement; of 3 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – PHOENIX, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 7. The mediator may conduct joint and separate meetings with the parties and may suggest resolutions to the parties’ dispute, but the mediator has no authority to impose a settlement upon the parties; 8. The mediation process is confidential. Communications made, material created for or used during, and acts occurring during mediation are confidential and may not be discovered or admitted into evidence in any proceeding except as provided by A.R.S. § 12-2238; 9. The mediator is not subject to service of process or a subpoena to produce evidence or to testify regarding any evidence or occurrence relating to the mediation except as provided in A.R.S. § 12-2238(C); 10. Neither the mediator, nor the Registrar of Contractors, nor the Office of Administrative Hearings is subject to civil liability for any act or omission in connection with any mediation service or activity except for acts involving

intentional misconduct or reckless disregard of a substantial risk of injury to the rights of others; 11. Throughout the mediation process, each party must have a representative present who will have full settlement authority to settle all claims at issue in the administrative

proceeding. 12. The mediation process will terminate when: a. The parties reach settlement; b. The mediator determines that further efforts at mediation are no longer likely

to achieve a settlement; or c. One of the parties withdraws from mediation. _____________________________________ _______________________ Complainant (or representative) Date

_____________________________________ _______________________ Respondent (or representative) Date

of 3 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – PHOENIX, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 PREHEARING DISCLOSURE STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS ***DO NOT SUBMIT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WITH THE PREHEARING DISCLOSURE FORM***

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES A copy of the Arizona Administrative Code’s Rules for the Registrar of Contractors can be located on the Registrar’s Website.

PREHEARING DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(A), before a hearing, the parties must prepare a disclosure statement. The disclosure statement must contain: • A list of all the witnesses the party will call to testify, including the witnesses’ contact information and a brief description of the subject matter of the witnesses’ expected testimony; and • A list of all the exhibits that the party will use at the hearing.

FILE PREHEARING DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS • The Prehearing Disclosure Statements and Exhibits may be submitted to the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings using any of the following: • Electronically: https://portal.azoah.com/submission/ • In-Person or by Mail: 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level, Phoenix, Arizona 85007

EXCHANGING DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(B) (effective November 5, 2017), a party to the hearing must serve on every other party and file with the Office of Administrative Hearings a copy of: • The disclosure statement; and, • Any exhibit that the party will use at the hearing. Service: The disclosure statement and exhibits must be served on all parties in accordance with Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-108 Filing Documents. Under A.A.C. R2-19-108, service is completed by: • Personal delivery; • 1st class, certified or express mail; or • Facsimile. Timing: The disclosure statement and the exhibits must be served and filed not less than seven calendar days before the date of the hearing. Under A.A.C. R2-19-108, a document is served on a party: • On the date it is personally served; • Five days after it is mailed by express or 1st class mail; • On the date of the return receipt if it is mailed by certified mail; or • On the date indicated on the facsimile transmission.

CONSEQUENCES FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE Under A.A.C. R4-9-108(C), if a witness or an exhibit is not timely disclosed as required the rules, and good cause for the failure to disclose is not shown, then the administrative law judge may: • Order that certain witnesses or exhibits not be used at the hearing; • Order that a particular fact is or is not established for the record; or, • Order that a charge, a defense, a claim, or some portion thereof, be dismissed.

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 10/08/2019 Instructions Form PREHEARING DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FORM RC-L-800A

PART 1: WITNESS LIST DOCKET NO. Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(A), before a hearing, a party must prepare a disclosure statement containing a list of all the witnesses the party will call to testify, including the witnesses’ contact information and a brief description of the subject matter of the witnesses’ expected testimony. If you need additional space to list all witnesses, complete and attach additional Witness Lists. Example 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

John Doe (123) 456-7890 [email redacted] 4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

John Doe will testify regarding the poor workmanship and poor installation of the Garage Door. Mr. Doe will also testify regarding the invoices and change orders for the project.

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 1/15/2019 Page 1 of 3 PART 2: EXHIBIT LIST DOCKET NO. Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(A), before a hearing, a party must prepare a disclosure statement containing a list of all the exhibits that the party will use at the hearing. Note: All exhibits listed below must be provided to all parties to the hearing. See A.A.C. R4-9-118(B). If you need additional space to list all witnesses, complete and attach additional Exhibit Lists. Example Contract for new garage door. Invoice #10001 – Cost for garage door replacement.

Exhibit Exhibit Name

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 1/15/2019 Page 2 of 3 PART 3: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT & SIGNATURE I certify that the above information is true and correct and that I will serve a copy of this disclosure statement and any exhibits listed in Part 2 to all parties to the hearing in accordance with A.A.C. R4-9-118. I acknowledge and understand that if I fail to properly disclose a witness or exhibit, the administrative law judge may: • Order that certain witnesses or exhibits not be used at the hearing; • Order that a particular fact is or is not established for the record; or, • Order that a charge, a defense, a claim, or some portion thereof, be dismissed.

I am the (check one):  Complainant  Respondent Docket No.

Print Name Signature Date

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 1/15/2019 Page 3 of 3