2023A-06021-CHC-ROC Notice of Hearing and Packet MAILED

2023A-06021-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2023-09-25

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Gary Solomon , Case No. 2023-06021 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2023A-06021-CHC-ROC v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC CONTESTED CASE License No. ROC 314281,

RESPONDENT.

This Notice of Hearing is issued under A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D). HEARING INFORMATION The hearing is set for: November 14, 2023 1:00 PM Velva Moses-Thompson 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 September 1, 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 25, 2023.

By: /s/ Erika Hoskin Erika Hoskin Legal Secretary Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail September 25, 2023 to: Respondent(s) Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Complainant(s) Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

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

Case No. 2023-06021 /

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 Martín Quezada, Director

Complainant: Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

Respondent: Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

June 2, 2023

Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint Number 2023-06021

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

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

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for June 12, 2023 at 12:00 PM. 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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, 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, Daniel Edwards Daniel Edwards, Investigator #218 602 7716788 [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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, 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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, 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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, 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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

Complainant: Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C010 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

Respondent: Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C010 04/21 Katie Hobbs, Governor Martín Quezada, Director

June 9, 2023

Re: Complaint Number 2023-06021

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

Due to a conflict in scheduling of one of the parties, the jobsite inspection scheduled for June 12, 2023 at 12:00 PM has been rescheduled for June 27, 2023 at 9:00 AM.

If either party is unable to attend, the Registrar requires 36-hours advance notice for cancellation or continuance.

Complainant: Safe access is required to any area to be inspected.

Should you have any questions regarding the above, please contact me.

Sincerely,

Daniel Edwards Daniel Edwards, Investigator #218 602 7716788 [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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C010 04/21 Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 6/27/2023 1 29451 N 74th St JSI PHOTOS

Drive arm

Linking arm

Doorking 6400 gate opener installed, north side of gate. Manufacturer has inspected the installation and determined, “The linking arm and drive arm were not installed correctly on the LH operator causing it to bottom out on shaft/pivot point.” Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 6/27/2023 2 29451 N 74th St JSI PHOTOS

No drainage installed for either gate opener Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 6/27/2023 3 29451 N 74th St JSI PHOTOS

Doorking 6400 at south end of the gate does not appear to have the same issue Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 6/27/2023 4 29451 N 74th St JSI PHOTOS

Product detail Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 6/27/2023 5 29451 N 74th St JSI PHOTOS

Gate hinges not aligned above pivot point per manufacturer

Pivot point

Northern gate opener, hinges not aligned with pivot point Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 6/27/2023 6 29451 N 74th St JSI PHOTOS

Gate hinges not aligned above pivot point per manufacturer

Pivot point

Southern gate opener, hinges need to be aligned with pivot point Jobsite Inspection Notes

Case No.: 2023-06021 Investigator: Daniel Edwards Inspection Date: June 27, 2023 Inspection Time: 9:00 AM

Complainant: Gary Solomon Respondent: Security Door, Gate, Not Present: and Fence LLC Not Present:

Jobsite General Notes:

Present for inspeciton was Gary Solomon (complainant) and Frank Vargas (member/QP). Photos taken with Canon ELPH digital camera and/or state-issued Google Pixel cell phone camera. Audio recorded with Olympus DM-620 digital voice recorder. Labelled photos included in case attachments labelled "20230627 JSI Photos 2023-06021."

Complaint Item: 1 - Improper installation of operational drive shaft Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated. Manufacturer has inspected the installation and verified that the linking and drive arms at the north box are not installed correctly, causing them to bottom out on shaft/pivot point. Respondent shall correct per manufacturer's installation requirements by appropriate means. Governing Rule: 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.

Complaint Item: 2 - Misalignment of hinges Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated. Manufacturer's installation requirements specify that the gate hinges must be aligned with foundation box pivot point, this was not done. Respondent shall correct per manufacturer's installation requirements by appropriate means.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov RCC100 08/19

Governing Rule: 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.

Complaint Item: 3 - Manufacturers required rainwater drain installation not installed Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated, no rainwater drainage has been installed. Respondent shall correct per manufacturer's installation requirements by appropriate means. Governing Rule: 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.

Complaint Item: 4 - Improper limit functions Investigator’s Observation: Allegation is a duplicate of issues addressed in compliance item no. 1. Governing Rule: N/A

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov RCC100 08/19

Complainant: Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Respondent: Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 June 29, 2023

License No. ROC 314281

Re:Complaint No. 2023-06021

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 July 17, 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:

Compliance Item: 1 - Improper installation of operational drive shaft Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated. Manufacturer has inspected the installation and verified that the linking and drive arms at the north box are not installed correctly, causing them to bottom out on shaft/pivot point. Respondent shall correct per manufacturer's installation requirements by appropriate means. Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar;

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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Compliance Item: 2 - Misalignment of hinges Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated. Manufacturer's installation requirements specify that the gate hinges must be aligned with foundation box pivot point, this was not done. Respondent shall correct per manufacturer's installation requirements by appropriate means. Governing Rule: 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.

Compliance Item: 3 - Manufacturers required rainwater drain installation not installed Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated, no rainwater drainage has been installed. Respondent shall correct per manufacturer's installation requirements by appropriate means. Governing Rule: 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.

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

Compliance Item: 4 - Improper limit functions Investigator’s Observation: Allegation is a duplicate of issues addressed in compliance item no. 1. Governing Rule: N/A

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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Daniel Edwards Daniel Edwards, Investigator #218 602 771 6788 [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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]>

AZ ROC - Case no. 2023-06021 - Complaint Status and Requirements of the Complaint Process messages

Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]> Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 3:48 PM To: [email redacted], Security Door Gate & Fence <[email redacted]>

Good afternoon all,

I have received multiple emails concerning complications that have arisen since issuing the directive for this case. Per all parties, I am of the understanding that it has been discovered that the steel posts mounted to the block columns on either side of the gate are loose and additional work may be required to allow the gate installation to operate as intended. I have also received requests to review this issue as a separate inspection. I am denying these requests at this time, for reasons detailed below.

Compliance item no. 2 of the directive specifies that the respondent is to ensure the installation meets the manufacturer's installation requirements (regarding alignment of the hinges). I have been informed that in order for this to happen, the gate needed to be removed, and in the process, it was discovered that the beams were loose. I am also of the understanding, based on the scope of work detailed in the estimates/invoices for this project, that the scope of work for this project included removal, repair and he-hanging of the pedestrian gates at the time this work was originally performed. At this time, the gates have been removed. The gates will need to be re-installed. Both during the course of completing the original work and now in the process of making the repairs ordered in the directive, respondent has accepted the steel posts as suitable for installation of the gates and any corrections needed to comply with the directive requirements will be respondent's responsibility to correct.

Furthermore, it is necessary for me to point out two requirements of the complaint process, specifically the method/manner of repairs and access requirements.

Neither the homeowner nor the ROC are unable to dictate the method or manner in which these repairs take place. The repairs are expected to meet the minimum standards enforceable by the ROC and the manufacturer's installation requirements - how these repairs are performed is up to the respondent to decide. Please see the attached courtesy copy of the jobsite inspection notice, originally issued to all parties on 6/2/2023. Please direct your attention to page 6 of the document, titled "A Guide to Written Directives." In the subsection titled "Manner and Method of Performance," the document states, "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."

Additionally, the homeowner must provide the contractor reasonable access to the jobsite in order to correct the directive items. The Registrar considers reasonable access to be akin to common business hours (Mon-Fri, 8:00AM - 5:00PM). The section of this guide titled "Access" states the following: "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." In short, the contractor is responsible to ensure all directive items are corrected within standards, and the homeowner is responsible to provide reasonable access to the home to ensure these repairs can be completed.

Attempts to restrict the method/manner of repairs OR denying respondent reasonable access to the jobsite may result in the Registrar dismissing this complaint.

The directive timeframe will be extended to allow additional time, given the fact that respondent was reportedly instructed to discontinue work on 7/5/2023. The directive will be reissued shortly and will reflect the new deadline for compliance.

Sincerely, Dan Edwards --

Dan Edwards Investigator #218 Arizona Registrar of Contractors 1700 W Washington Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007 602 771 6788 [email redacted]

Fill out AZ ROC’s survey to let us know how we’re doing and how we can better serve you!

20230602 Jobsite Inspection Notice 2023-06021.pdf 1077K

Security Door Gate & Fence <[email redacted]> Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 4:34 PM To: Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]>

Sir,

I have received your email and disagree with your finding. The gate and mounting posts are two separate "items". We never removed, repaired or performed any work on the posts and this was never the scope of work. Therefore, I dispute the mounting posts were ever part of the scope of work . When we originally performed work the mounting posts were secure . The cause of the mounting posts being loose is lack of maintenance and excessive wear and tear. The homeowner has never properly greased/lubricated the gate hinges which caused excessive wear and force on the gates, posts and operator which is not normal function. The result of this lack of maintenance and wear and tear is not "poor work" and beyond my responsibility. These mounting posts were installed by a third party several months or years before I became involved with this project or Mr. Solomon. The hinges appear as they have not been properly maintained by the homeowner. Bottom line, you are holding me responsible for someone else's lack of maintenance, installation and excessive wear and tear from hard use, lack of maintenance (hinges were never greased) and pressures of the elements, especially wind.

The manufacturer's installation requirements do not include excessive wear and tear and/or lack of maintenance of gates by the homeowner. Further, I never accepted the mounting post as adequate for the directive requirements as I had no way to know their condition until after the gate was removed. In your original directive you cited misalignment as a cause of the gate "bottoming out"; however that was not at all the cause of the "bottoming out". Lack of maintenance and wear and tear are the actual cause.

Page 1 (one) of directive paragraph 2 item 2 states "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)

The homeowners' failure to provide normal maintenance of the gate would have prevented the excessive wear and tear on the posts causing them to come loose from the mounting.

I agree that I should reinstall the gate but the mounting posts are separate items and beyond the scope of the original work.

Respectfully,

Frank Vargas Security Door, Gate & Fence (480) 548-0807 Website | Facebook | YouTube

[Quoted text hidden]

Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]> Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 4:55 PM To: Security Door Gate & Fence <[email redacted]>

Frank,

I do not disagree that installation of the gate posts was never part of your scope of work, however, that is not the issue. When you initially removed and reinstalled the gates, you deemed the posts as a suitable surface to reinstall the gates and as such, you are responsible to correct any issues necessary to ensure your work complies with the directive requirements and manufacturer's specifications. Please review the attached copy of the Registrar's Substantive Policy Statement 2017.01 regarding "Acceptance of the Surface" if you would like to research this policy further. This is all besides the point, as you have been ordered to correct your installation of the gate openers, which was not done correctly to begin with. If removing the gates is necessary to align the hinges, and the posts require repairs to ensure this is done, it is expected that this will be completed.

For clarification, the determination that the linking and drive arms were not installed correctly and were causing the bottoming out of the shaft/pivot point comes straight from the manufacturer, not me.

Regarding neglect, while you are correct that neglect may constitute dismissal when appropriate, I am not currently able to conclude that any of the gate issues are due to neglect when it has already been determined that this installation was never done correctly in the first place.

At this time, the directive still stands and remains in full force and effect.

Sincerely, Dan Edwards

[Quoted text hidden] SPS_2017.01_Collection_of_Representative_Cases_and_Authorities_Feb_2_2017.pdf 116K Complainant: Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 July 11, 2023

License No. ROC 314281

Re:Complaint No. 2023-06021

WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR (EXTENSION)

Dear Respondent:

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).

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

Compliance Item: 4 - Improper limit functions Investigator’s Observation: Allegation is a duplicate of issues addressed in compliance item no. 1. Governing Rule: N/A

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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 7/19/2023 P 1 29451 N 74th St ADDENDUM PHOTOS

Metal pillar gate is mounted to is loose Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 7/19/2023 P 2 29451 N 74th St ADDENDUM PHOTOS

Pillar separating from column Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 7/19/2023 P 3 29451 N 74th St ADDENDUM PHOTOS

Pillar separating from column Addendum Inspection Notes

Case No.: 2023-06021 Investigator: Daniel Edwards Inspection Date: July 19, 2023 Inspection Time: 10:00 AM

Complainant: Gary Solomon Respondent: Security Door, Gate, Not Present: and Fence LLC Not Present:

Jobsite General Notes:

Present at inspection was Gary Solomon (complainant) and Frank Vargas (respondent). Photos taken with Canon ELPH digital camera and/or state-issued Google Pixel cell phone camera. Audio recorded with Olympus DM-620 digital voice recorder. Labelled photos included in case attachments labelled "20230719 Addendum Inspection Photos 2023-06021."

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov RCC100 08/19

Governing Rule: 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.

Complaint Item: 4 - Improper limit functions Investigator’s Observation: Allegation is a duplicate of issues addressed in compliance item no. 1. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item: 5 - The contractor has informed me that the steel pillar attached to the stone has come loose Investigator’s Observation: Metal pillar next to the gate installed by respondent was observed to be loose. This is ultimately work which will need to be completed to ensure the gate and related equipment are installed as required. Respondent is responsible to ensure that this is addressed by appropriate means. Governing Rule: 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.

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov RCC100 08/19

Complainant: Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Respondent: Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 July 27, 2023

License No. ROC 314281

Re:Complaint No. 2023-06021

WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR WITH ADDENDUM ITEM(S)

Dear Respondent:

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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Governing Rule: 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.

Compliance Item: 5 - The contractor has informed me that the steel pillar attached to the stone has come loose Investigator’s Observation: Allegation submitted as an addendum after the filing of the initial complaint.

Metal pillar next to the gate installed by respondent was observed to be loose. This is ultimately work which will need to be completed to ensure the gate and related equipment are installed as required. Respondent is responsible to

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 ensure that this is addressed by appropriate means. Governing Rule: 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.

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

Compliance Item: 4 - Improper limit functions Investigator’s Observation: Allegation is a duplicate of issues addressed in compliance item no. 1. Governing Rule: N/A

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

Sincerely,

Daniel Edwards Daniel Edwards, Investigator #218 602 7716788 [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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Complainant: Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

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: Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov

C012 05/21 August 22, 2023

Compliance Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint No. 2023-06021

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

A Compliance Inspection has been scheduled for August 28, 2023 at 10:00 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,

Daniel Edwards Daniel Edwards, Investigator #218 602 7716788 [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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov

C012 05/21 Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 8/28/2023 1 29451 N 74th St CJSI PHOTOS

Northern gate. Respondent appears to have addressed many items, however, the gate is not operational as of date of CJSI Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 8/28/2023 2 29451 N 74th St CJSI PHOTOS

Southern gate. Respondent appears to have addressed many items, however, the gate is not operational as of date of CJSI Case no. 2023-06021

Dan Edwards, 8/28/2023 3 29451 N 74th St CJSI PHOTOS

Magnet beneath arm is intended to engage limit switches, not working

Limit switches

Gate operator at north side of the gate. Linking arm is touching shaft, outside of manufacturer’s specs. Respondent believes that this is due to faulty limit switches failing to engage when the gate opens to the intended range of motion. Complainant disagrees and believes the problem is still due to faulty installation of the operator. Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]>

2023-06021 Compliance Security Door Gate & Fence <[email redacted]> Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 2:47 PM To: [email redacted]

The purpose of this letter is to show that we have fully complied with the Written Directive from the Registrar and that the limit functions of the gate are an issue with an electrical component that is a completely different matter from the mechanical issues found on the Written Directive. The Written Directive specifically states, “ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION The following complaint items require no action by the Respondent: Compliance Item: 4 – Improper limit functions Investigator’s Observation: Allegation is a duplicate of issues addressed in compliance item no. 1. Governing Rule: N/A” The limit switches are an electrical component that tell the gate when to stop and when to start, regardless of the position of the drive arm. We installed the gate operator in December of 2021 and the gates worked properly until December of 2022, despite the mis-aligned drive arm. The mis-aligned drive arm did not and would not affect the limit switches not doing their job. We do not warranty the unit. The manufacturer, Doorking, provides the parts-only warranty on the product itself. We worked past our labor-only warranty. We have spent many hours with Doorking technical support to diagnose the problems with the gate operator parts dating back to January of 2023 at no charge to Gary Solomon. Doorking tech support determined there were problems with the control board and the limit switches. We switched out the control board twice with warranty parts from Doorking. Please also see attachment #1, which is a copy of an email from our distributor acknowledging the issues with the limit switches and letting us know that they were sending the replacement parts. Gary Solomon is making an unsubstantiated allegation that the linking arm interfered with or caused any type of issue with the limit switches. In the attached email from a Doorking representative to Gary, it specifically states under Item 3) that the mis-aligned linking arm caused it to bottom out, but it does not state that this caused any issue with the limit switch electrical component. Please see attachment #2. An appointment was set with the Doorking representative and us to meet in person at Gary Solomon’s gate on April 26, 2023 to troubleshoot and install the limit switches. Please see attachment #3. On April 18, 2023, Gary Solomon emailed me not to perform the needed repairs and that he had hired someone else to proceed with the repair. He specifically stated, “There is no need for you to pursue the task any further!” Please see attachment #4. Had Gary not cancelled this appointment, I would have been out there with the manufacturer, who would have pointed out the mechanical issues and all of the mechanical issues would have been repaired and the electrical limit switches would have been replaced. Gary Solomon has hired other companies in the meantime as well and it is unknown by us what the level of work performed by these other companies has been and whether they were properly licensed by the ROC. We complied in good faith with the Written Directive and completed all work specified in the Written Directive in a professional and workmanlike manner. After all mechanical repairs were completed, I attempted to set the limits on the gate. The gate proceeded several inches past the limit switches and an alarm sounded due to the gate opening past the limit switches, proving they were not functioning correctly, and I left it in that position as it was clear that the limit switches needed replacement. The limit switches are a separate electrical component that should still be under warranty by Doorking. Attachment #1 - Copy of email from our distributor acknowleging that we have been having issues with the limit switches and letting us know they were sending us warranty replacement parts. Attachment #2 – Copy of email from Doorking representative, Item 3) stating that the mis-aligned arm caused it to bottom out, but not mentioning anything about this causing an electrical problem with the limit switches. Attachment #3 – Copy of email to Gary Solomon on April 13, 2023 informing him that we had received the parts and were scheduled to complete the repair on April 26, 2023. Attachment #4 – Copy of email from Gary Solomon informing us that he had hired someone else to complete the repair and there is no need for us to pursue the task any further. [Quoted text hidden]

attachments

Before Written Directive Repair.jpeg 177K

AFTER Written Directive Repair.jpeg 160K

Drain on North Gate.jpeg 198K

Drain on South Gate.jpeg 223K Drain on South Gate Close up.jpeg 190K

Gates are Level.jpeg 135K

Gates are Plumb.jpeg 119K

Attachment 1 2023-06021.pdf 375K Attachment 2 2023-06021.pdf 1776K Attachment 3 2023-06021.pdf 1383K Attachment 4 2023-06021 (2).pdf 1064K 01201234ÿ2627ÿ89 ÿ4ÿ4ÿÿ ÿÿ9ÿÿ6ÿ

23456ÿ84394:ÿ;<3456=>?:@AB3CD?94349@EFF3GAF>H

2IEJ ÿKFF36C59 (ÿ# "" 23456ÿ84394:ÿL.M#" $#N 94ÿO ÿ2(4ÿ2%23ÿÿ06(/ÿ89 P6ÿ$"M$Q$- R 6#!ÿS$ÿ2%23%*%2( T ÿ"ÿ ÿ#ÿÿ ÿ#ÿ" "ÿ.ÿ9$ÿ#"ÿÿ! $ÿÿP "ÿÿ"ÿÿ ÿUÿ# ÿÿ. ÿUÿ "ÿ ÿ9$ÿ#ÿ" ÿÿ ÿ# .ÿÿ ÿ"- ÿ#!$ÿÿÿ ÿ#ÿ# ÿO!ÿ2*ÿÿ"ÿ ÿ#ÿ" "ÿÿ !ÿ.#ÿ ÿ# .$ÿÿVÿÿ ÿ"U ÿÿÿ"ÿ ÿ!ÿ"ÿVÿ ÿ ÿ$ÿÿ R "! .4 23456ÿ84394: W@AB3CD?ÿKFF3XÿY4D@ÿZÿ2@5A@ [c\]U^"_ÿ̀\ ]a^]^b ÿdÿ Uÿdÿf P U ÿ ÿ# "" ÿ #6ÿ23456ÿ84394:ÿL.M#" $#N 6ÿP 4ÿO!ÿ((4ÿ2%23ÿÿ((6%/gO9 Uh 6ÿR 6ÿ P6ÿ8 ÿiÿL!M" " #$#N 6ÿ9ÿjÿL#M" " #$#N P ÿ ÿ8 4ÿÿÿ ÿ !ÿ"ÿÿ!! k iÿP 4ÿO!ÿ((4ÿ2%234ÿ(%6+0ÿO9ÿ8 ÿiÿL!M" " #$#Nÿ6 ÿ#ÿ$ Vÿÿ ÿ-ÿÿ"" "ÿÿÿÿ ÿ ÿ!"$ c ÿÿÿÿ"ÿ ÿÿ#ÿ ""ÿÿÿ $ c ÿÿ"ÿÿ ÿl8 ÿ ÿ" ÿ -ÿÿ#$ mÿÿU ÿ"ÿÿ ""ÿUÿÿ"$ f ÿÿ-ÿÿÿ.ÿ ÿ."ÿU4ÿ" ÿ # 4ÿÿ ÿÿ.ÿ ÿÿÿ# ÿUÿ.ÿ ÿ" ÿU$ T! ÿ"ÿ.n"ÿ ÿ"" $ ÿ P ÿ kk ÿ ÿ ÿ opqrÿstup !"611#$$#1#11%1&'()*2%++)3,-'!," ',! #'.6(/*2)%3*%*%02%)73(00/#"67)+3%77//207)77+3*1 (1+ 01201234ÿ2627ÿ89 ÿ4ÿ4ÿÿ ÿÿ9ÿÿ6ÿ 234567ÿ9454:;3 < ÿ= .ÿ< #ÿÿ"#ÿ " 4ÿ<<4ÿ>?<@ 3*%2ÿ?$ÿABCD?EFÿ<G?$ÿB>C?ÿ7 8DA?F>H4ÿ<E>IAF<ÿ0+%7% =8DAF?@ÿ0//+300%*% ÿ <ÿ!ÿÿK4ÿ!ÿ "!ÿ #ÿ C ÿ ÿ ÿ,ÿ ?K!ÿ1ÿC ÿ ÿ9L

ÿ ÿ

!"611#$$#1#11%1&'()*2%++)3,-'!," ',! #'.6(/*2)%3*%*%02%)73(00/#"67)+3%77//207)77+3*1 21+ 01201234ÿ2627ÿ89 ÿ4ÿ4ÿÿ ÿÿ9ÿÿ6ÿ

[number redacted]:;<ÿ>??@ABBCCCD@EFGHIHFJKHIEDLFMB ÿ NHMOHFÿKÿQRSSTSUEÿVU?RÿWJ?EXÿYXI?RMÿK ZU[RÿUJXÿRSRL?EFJHLÿ\U?RÿUÿIMUE?ÿ\U?R >??@IABBJHMOHFDLFMB ÿ ÿ ÿ ÿ

]^_`ab^cde fghÿjklmnopqjmkÿrmkqpjkhsÿjkÿqgjtÿrmooukjrpqjmkÿlnmoÿqghÿthkshnÿjtÿrmkljshkqjpvwÿxqÿjtÿjkqhkshsÿtmvhvyÿlmnÿuthÿzyÿqghÿnhrj{jhkq pksÿmqghntÿpuqgmnj|hsÿqmÿnhrhj}hÿjqwÿxlÿymuÿpnhÿkmqÿqghÿnhrj{jhkq~ÿymuÿpnhÿghnhzyÿkmqjljhsÿqgpqÿpkyÿsjtrvmtunh~ÿrm{yjk~ sjtqnjzuqjmkÿmnÿqpjkÿprqjmkÿjkÿnhvpqjmkÿmlÿqghÿrmkqhkqtÿmlÿqgjtÿjklmnopqjmkÿjtÿtqnjrqvyÿ{nmgjzjqhsÿpksÿopyÿzhÿukvpluvw fgjtÿhopjvÿgptÿzhhkÿtrpkkhsÿlmnÿ}jnuthtÿpksÿopvpnh~ÿpksÿopyÿgp}hÿzhhkÿpuqmopqjrpvvyÿpnrgj}hsÿzyÿjohrptq~ÿpÿvhpshnÿjk hopjvÿthrunjqyÿpksÿryzhnÿnhtjvjhkrhwÿjohrptqÿjkqhnpqhtÿhopjvÿshlhkthtÿjqgÿznpksÿ{nmqhrqjmk~ÿthrunjqyÿppnhkhttÿqnpjkjk~ hzÿthrunjqy~ÿrmo{vjpkrhÿpksÿmqghnÿhtthkqjpvÿrp{pzjvjqjhtwÿjohrptqÿghv{tÿ{nmqhrqÿvpnhÿpksÿtopvvÿmnpkj|pqjmktÿlnmoÿopvjrjmut prqj}jqy~ÿguopkÿhnnmnÿpksÿqhrgkmvmyÿlpjvunhÿpksÿqmÿvhpsÿqghÿom}hohkqÿqmpnsÿzujvsjkÿpÿomnhÿnhtjvjhkqÿmnvswÿfmÿljksÿmuq omnh~ÿ}jtjqÿmunÿhztjqhw

!"611#$$#1#11%1&'()*2%++)3,-'!," ',! #'.6(/*2)%3*%*%02%)73(00/#"67)+3%77//207)77+3*1 31+ 01201234ÿ2627ÿ89 ÿ4ÿ4ÿÿ ÿÿ9ÿÿ6ÿ 2ÿ45546789:5;

<84=9>>?@A:= 22B

<84=9>>C@DA= 33B

<84=9>>E@A:= (/++B

<84=9>>F@A:= 2)2B

<84=9>>E@A:= (/++B

<84=9>>F@A:= 2)2B

<84=9>>?@A:= 22B

!"611#$$#1#11%1&'()*2%++)3,-'!," ',! #'.6(/*2)%3*%*%02%)73(00/#"67)+3%77//207)77+3*1 71+ 01201234ÿ2627ÿ89 ÿ4ÿ4ÿÿ ÿÿ9ÿÿ6ÿ

[number redacted]:;5 33<

!"611#$$#1#11%1&'()*2%++)3,-'!," ',! #'.6(/*2)%3*%*%02%)73(00/#"67)+3%77//207)77+3*1 +1+ Complainant: Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

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: Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

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.: 2023-06021 Investigator: Dan Edwards #218 Inspection Date: August 28, 2023 Inspection Time: 10:00 AM

Compliance Jobsite General Notes:

Present at inspection was Gary Solomon (complainant) and Frank Vargas (representative for respondent). Photos taken with Canon ELPH digital camera and/or state-issued Google Pixel cell phone camera. Audio recorded with Olympus DM-720 digital voice recorder. Labelled photos included in case attachments labelled "20230828 CJSI Photos 2023-06021."

Compliance Findings:

The following observations were made during the compliance inspection:

• Compliance item no. 1 – Respondent appears to have attempted to reinstall the DoorKing 6400 gate operator as ordered, however, as of the date of compliance inspection the gate is still not operational. The linking arm is making contact with the shaft and the gate is not operating within the intended range of motion for the gate configuration. While respondent believes this issue is due to faulty limit switches failing to detect the magnetic sensor beneath the linking arm, the issue has been reviewed by the product manufacturer. Per the manufacturer, the linking arm and shaft should not be touching and this indicates that the installation is still not installed correctly per the manufacturer’s requirements. It does not appear that respondent has complied with compliance item no. 1 of the directive. • Compliance item no. 2 – Issue appears resolved • Compliance item no. 3 – Issue appears resolved • Compliance item no. 5 – Issue appears resolved

Note:

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,

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 Daniel Edwards Daniel Edwards, Investigator #218 602 771 6788 [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 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 4/21 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Gary Solomon, Case No. 2023-06021 COMPLAINANT, v. Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC CITATION License No. ROC 314281, 325648, 325650,

RESPONDENT.

The Registrar issues this Citation to Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC

(“Respondent”) under A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). If Respondent fails to answer this Citation by

September 16, 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 May 25, 2023, Gary Solomon (“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. 2023-06021. 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 September 16, 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 September 1, 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, September 1, 2023 to:

Respondent Certified Mail No: [number redacted]

Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste. 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254-2045 Copy mailed by USPS First Class mail this same date to:

Respondent Security Door, Gate, and Fence LLC 6424 E Greenway Pkwy Ste. 100 Scottsdale, AZ 85254-2045

Complainant Gary Solomon 29451 N 74th Street Scottsdale, AZ 85266

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

Case No. 2023-06021

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 Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]>

Fwd: [From External Source] Present arm position message

Gary Solomon <[email redacted]> Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 2:00 PM To: Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]>

Dear Dan,

Dan Bembridge is DoorKings SW regional sales manager. He has illustrated the problem on the attached photo and manual illustrations. Call Dan if necessary! Please see his comments throughout the email.

His contact information is at the bottom of this email. The DoorKing people have been great in responding to my needs. I can arrange for a visit from others to verify if you so require. Please call me at your convenience to briefly discuss what I do next. I trust this is helpful and will suffice for you to pursue the matter further. I look forward to hearing from you at you earliest convenience. Home Phone: 480-659-0402

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Dan A. Bembridge" <[email redacted]> Subject: Re: Fwd: [From External Source] Present arm position Date: August 28, 2023 at 11:46:42 AM MST To: "Gary Solomon" <[email redacted]> Cc: "Christopher Gingerich" <[email redacted]>

Hello Gary,

I'm disappointed in how this gentleman has handled things with you and the ROC. The easiest way to see if this install was done properly, would be to review our manual: https://www.doorking.com/sites/default/files/downloads/6400-065-N-2-21_UL18.pdf

I would recommend reviewing Page 12, lower left diagram: Now please look at the pic provided, the arm is till bottoming out on the shaft:

The arm and the shaft should not be touching. This is not installed properly. The limits are not the issue, the arm position is the current issue.

In addition, DoorKing is a manufacturer of DoorKing product and is responsible for the warranty of our product, but we are not responsible for installation of the equipment, this would be the responsibility of the installing dealer. Here is our warranty information if needed: https://www.doorking.com/sites/default/files/2-year-limited- warranty-9-22.pdf

Please let me know if you or the ROC has any questions.

Regards,

Dan Bembridge | SW Regional Sales Manager C 480.436.4184 | AZ, CO, NE, NM, & UT 325 E Southern Ave, Suite113, Tempe, AZ 85282 www.doorking.com | [email redacted] www.linkedin.com/in/dan-bembridge-az/ Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]>

Complaint # 2023-06021 further problem resulting from inappropriate motor installation Gary Solomon <[email redacted]> Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 12:38 PM To: Daniel Edwards <[email redacted]>

Complaint Number. 2023-06021

Dear Mr. Edwards,

I first want to thank you for your visit to the job site. I appreciate the courtesy and time taken to evaluate the circumstances leading to the unfortunate proceeding.

I’m writing to inform you that we have a matter that, once again, requires your site visit. The contractor has informed me that the steel pillar attached to the stone has come loose. 1. He claims the loosening is a result of simple wear and tear. 2. There are three screws that need to be removed. 3. According to the contractor, following there needs to be three approximately 1/2 inch holes drilled into the steel pillar. Then the contractor will have to drill three holes in the stone pillar and reattach the steel. 5. For the above items 2-3-4 he wants to charge me $600.00

Then he can reattach the gate which he removed this morning.

I rejected his outrageous charge of $600.00. The loosening of the steel is the result of the motor putting undue pressure on the pillar as a result of the malfunctioning reverse motion.

The screws cannot be turned as he claimed to have tried. Obviously, the screws didn’t come loose from ordinary wear and tear. Simply put, the entire steel pillar had been pulled loose from the stone base because of the extraordinary reverse torque pressure applied thru the inappropriately installed arm. I will be informing him that no further work is to be attempted until we have again met to review and discuss the problem that caused the steel pillar to loosen.

I am sorry to trouble with this matter, however, I see no other means by which we can resolve the dispute. I have tried to reach you by phone and would appreciate a return call when convenient to discuss this latest problem.

With sincere thanks, regards, Gary Home phone: 480-659-0402 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 05/25/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received by Investigations 60/02/2023 2023-06021 Received 09/14/2023 ROC Legal

September 15, 2023

WRITTEN ANSWER TO CITATION AND COMPLAINT Case 2023-02061

Answer to Charge #1: Violation of A.A.C. R4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Security Door, Gate, and Fence has worked diligently to get the gate operator working for the Complainant. We have performed all work in good faith as well as in a professional and workmanlike manner. In addition to performing several hours of work at no charge well outside of our labor warranty, we also spent hours on the phone with the manufacturer’s tech support line. We have already replaced the control board in the operator twice.

We coordinated with the manufacturer’s local representative and scheduled to meet with the manufacturer’s representative AT the Complainant’s gate on April 26th, 2023, with the objective to have all parties there to get the gate operator working properly for the Complainant. However, PRIOR to the scheduled meeting, the Complainant emailed us to CANCEL that appointment and prevented all parties from working together towards a solution. The copies of the email informing the Complainant of the scheduled April 26th repair and the email from the Complainant to cancel that scheduled repair have previously been provided to the ROC.

Security Door, Gate, and Fence has attended all inspections with the ROC and has communicated and responded to all ROC directives. We even scheduled the repairs after the inspection prior to receiving the ROC directives. We have followed all instructions to complete all repairs as outlined by the ROC. We have communicated and responded to all calls and emails throughout the entire process with the Complainant and the ROC. There have been many emails and communications presented to the ROC throughout this process to show that we have continued to work with the Complainant as well as the manufacturer for months to try to resolve the issues with the gate operator for the Complainant.

We performed the ROC directives on a timely basis and the work was performed in a professional and workmanlike manner. The gate repairs were completed in compliance with the manufacturer’s directions. Security Door, Gate, and Fence believes the gate is not operational due to other factors not relating to the work performed by us. These facts demonstrate that Security Door, Gate, and Fence has performed all work in a professional and workmanlike manner and has fully complied with A.A.C R4-9-108(a) in good faith. Received 09/14/2023 ROC Legal

Answer to 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 after receiving a written directive from the Registrar.

Security Door, Gate, and Fence received a written directive from the Registrar to make repairs and we completed all Compliance item repairs in the time frame required.

In response to “Compliance Item #1 – Improper installation of operational drive shaft. Investigator’s Observation: Substantiated. The manufacturer has inspected the installation and verified that the linking and drive arms at the north box are not installed correctly, causing them to bottom out on shaft/pivot point. Respondent shall correct per manufacturer’s installation requirements by appropriate means,” we provided the following photos to the ROC Inspector to show that we completed the Compliance Item #1 repair of the Drive Arm and Linking Arm as directed:

This is the diagram provided by the manufacturer of what the Primary Operator Open Counter-Clockwise AFTER REPAIR COMPLETED. This photo installation SHOULD look like. was taken upon completion of the ROC Written Directive Repair. Arrangement of the Drive Arm and the Linking Arm in this photo MATCHES the diagram provided above by the manufacturer of what the installation should look like for a Primary Operator Open Counter- Clockwise. Received 09/14/2023 ROC Legal

BEFORE REPAIR. For reference, this is what the operator installation looked like BEFORE we completed the ROC Written Directive Repair.

These photos evidence the fact that Security Door, Gate, and Fence completed all repairs as shown in the manufacturer’s manual as well as in the Written Directive from the ROC in the required time frame. In addition to this repair for Compliance Item #1, we also completed the 3 other repairs and those repairs were found to have been completed satisfactorily and those issues were considered resolved by the ROC.

In conclusion, Security Door, Gate, and Fence responds to the Citation from the ROC by stating that we have, in fact, performed all work in a professional and workmanlike manner and that we did also take appropriate and corrective action to fully comply with the Written Directive within the required timeframe as evidenced above. We would have no reason to ignore one of the Compliance Items on the repair while completing the other Compliance Items – especially at the risk of having our professional license suspended.

Frank Vargas has been professionally licensed for well over 20 years in Colorado, Texas, and Arizona and has never had a substantiated complaint, nor a license suspended or revoked. He is the sole provider for his family that includes a special needs child with severe developmental disabilities. Therefore, Frank would never take an action nor ignore an ROC Directive to risk the welfare of his family. He has, in fact, taken all reasonable efforts to get this gate operator to work for the Complainant and has been prevented from servicing the gate by the Complainant. Frank and Security Door, Gate, and Fence now unduly face penalties and possible suspension of his professional license and livelihood. All repairs have been completed to the manufacturer’s printed instructions and to the ROC’s Written Directive. Frank was even directed to replace an old, leaning post that he didn’t install, and we complied with that order. Frank has stipulated from the very beginning to all parties involved that we believe the gate operator has a faulty limit switch, which is an electronic component that should be covered under the manufacturer’s warranty. The limit switch is failing to stop the gate from opening too far and causing the arm to touch the shaft. We have already detailed this information to the ROC. We installed the Drive Arm and the Linking Arm to match the diagram provided by the manufacturer, as well as all the other repairs the manufacturer directed the ROC to have us complete. Received 9/15/23, 8:11 AM 09/14/2023 State of Arizona Mail - Case# 2023-06021 Written Answer to Citation and Complaint ROC Legal

Answers - AZROC <[email redacted]>

Case# 2023-06021 Written Answer to Citation and Complaint message

Security Door Gate & Fence <[email redacted]> Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 8:11 PM To: [email redacted]

Hello,

Attached, please find the Written Answer to Citation and Complaint for case # 2023-06021. Please confirm that you have received this email. Thank you!

Respectfully,

Frank Vargas Security Door, Gate & Fence (480) 548-0807 Website | Facebook | YouTube

Case 2023-06021 Written Answer to Citation and Complaint.pdf 552K

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRQEZjL1Akcrzv_Kh77ez_rciGt0zZD6FxZ9C8kvErWKunXU/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&permthid… 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