2023A-13082-CHC-ROC Notice of Hearing and Packet MAILED

2023A-13082-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-03-19

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Rachelle Faas , Case No. 2023-13082 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2023A-13082-CHC-ROC v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON CONTESTED CASE Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron License No. ROC 332924,

RESPONDENT.

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

HEARING INFORMATION The hearing is set for:

May 6, 2024 9:00 AM Adam Stone Google Meet. A link will be provided directly from The Office of Administrative Hearings. Go to www.azoah.com to request to appear in-person.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The statutes and rules governing the hearing can be found at: Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 41-1092 to -1092.12, and Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-101 to -122. PARTICULAR ARIZONA STATUTES AND RULES INVOLVED The statutes and rules the Respondent is alleged to have violated are cited in the complaint and citation, which were served on the Respondent on February 22, 2024.

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

Charge: 1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(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/forms/RC-L-800A%20- %20Prehearing%20Disclosure%20Statement%2020191007v4.pdf

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RESOLUTION SHORT OF ADJUDICATION In any case which is resolved or settled by the parties, or which is withdrawn by the Complainant without objection from Respondent after the Notice of Hearing is issued, the parties must notify the Office of Administrative Hearings of the resolution or settlement. Any such cases will be listed on the Registrar’s website and its records under the category: “Closed Complaints – Resolved/Settled/Withdrawn.” Dated March 19, 2024.

By: /s/ Erika Hoskin Erika Hoskin Legal Secretary Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors

Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail March 19, 2024 to: Respondent(s) Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron 21152 W Green St Buckeye, AZ 85396

Complainant(s) Rachelle Faas 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale, AZ 85251

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. 2023-13082 /

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

Complainant: Rachelle Faas 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale, AZ 85251

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Respondent: Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron 21152 W Green St Buckeye, AZ 85396

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 November 24, 2023

Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint Number 2023-13082

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

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

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for December 11, 2023 at 11:00 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.

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 If either party needs to reschedule the jobsite inspection, please notify the assigned investigator at least three business days prior to the inspection date to schedule a new date and time.

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

Sincerely, Mark Nipp Mark Nipp, Investigator 602 7716740 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

CC: Complainant Respondent

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 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 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.

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Work performed after the directive ends: After the Directive period ends, a property owner may choose to allow the contractor to continue its work. The Registrar encourages parties to work cooperatively, but cannot require a homeowner to continue to allow a contractor access to the property after the Directive period ends in order for the administrative process to continue. Denying access after the Directive ends is not grounds to close or dismiss a complaint.

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 Jobsite Inspection Notes

Case No.: 2023-13082 Investigator: Mark Nipp Inspection Date: 12/11/2023 Inspection Time: 11:00 AM

Complainant: Rachelle Faas Respondent: Jesus Edgar Padilla Not Present: (DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron) Not Present:

Jobsite General Notes: This complaint is related to BCP 2023-12510.

Compliance Item #1: Exterior metal gates (rear wall and RV panels) are unfinished, dented, scratched, not powder coated or painted. Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Respondent agreed the gate frame and panels were dented/scratched and agreed that he would replace any damaged components. I saw the gates were not painted/powder coated and appeared to have an uneven primer coat only. I saw that all the panels/frame components were dented and scratched. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 2-5 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

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

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

Compliance Item #2: Interior door hinges were used so the integrity is poor. Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Respondent agreed that the hinges were “Home Depot interior hinges.” The Respondent stated he has used these hinges for years on exterior gates and they have never failed. The Respondent agreed to replace the hinges if the Complainant wanted him to. I saw the hinges were interior door hinges (appeared to be brass). I researched the Home Depot interior hinges and noted that the manufacturer recommends they be used in interior applications. Interior and Exterior hinges have similar load ratings; however, they differ in their ability to withstand corrosion from exposure to the elements. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 3, 5 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Compliance Item #3: Rear awning is structurally unsafe and unsecure. Bolts/brackets used instead of welds. Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed that the brackets had been bolted and not welded as agreed. The Respondent stated that he had been waiting on a decision from the Complainant regarding the height of the pergola and had bolted the brackets temporarily until he received the final decision. The Complainant disagreed with the Respondent’s statement regarding the height and stated they had told him how high to build the pergola. I saw there were multiple brackets that had been bolted to the pergola. The brackets were rough cut sections of flat steel. Although it is not improper to bolt brackets, both parties agreed they were to be custom cut and welded.

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

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

The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 6-11 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Compliance Item #4: Metal is the wrong gauge and won’t support the foam or tongue and groove. Investigator’s Observation: Not Verified - Insufficient Evidence Both parties disagree regarding the plan/design of the pergola. The pergola design/engineering was included on the project building permit. However, both parties agree the plan was changed. The Respondent states he was never given a drawing/plans/engineering and built the pergola as described by the Complainant and their General Contractor. The General contractor (Present at Jobsite Inspection) indicated he was not certain if the Respondent had the plans or not. The Complainant explained that the pergola roof was supposed to support a foam roof and tongue/groove material on the lower side. Both parties agree there was no written change order or update made to the plans/engineering. I saw the pergola had common thin gauge corrugated metal roofing (Home Depot/Lowes). This material would not support a foam roof or tongue/groove material. However, there was Insufficient Evidence to determine what the Respondent knew/did not know at the time construction started. The Complainant could not say definitively that the Respondent had the drawings/plans prior to starting the project. Even if he had, the design changed and there is no documentation of when/what that change involved. It would not be appropriate for the Registrar to compel a contractor to correct work with no evidence of what the agreed upon work was. No further action is required.

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

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

Reference Picture(s) 12-16 Governing Rule: N/A

Compliance Item #5: Roof is bent, loose, and missing panels. Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed that the roofing material (corrugated metal) was bent/damaged in multiple locations. The Respondent stated he would replace the damaged panels. I saw there were multiple damaged pieces of the corrugated metal roofing. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 12-16 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Compliance Item #6: The bolts going into the footers are exposed and look unfinished. Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed the pavers had already been installed when the Respondent installed the post and that another contractor poured the footer. The Respondent stated that he might have forgotten to tighten one bolt and that he thought it would hold just fine. I inspected the attached patio cover and noted that the post was mounted to the footer with four (4) bolts through the post plate. However, I saw that one bolt had threads exposed beneath the post plate and the corresponding nut could be easily turned by hand. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 17-18

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: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Compliance Item #7: The supports are not mounted and can be removed with no effort as they are just sitting on the wall. Investigator’s Observation: Verified I saw that the rear pergola supports were not attached in any way and could be easily removed. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 19-20 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R4-9-108(B); in part, A contractor shall perform all work in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards…a contractor shall use such skills, prudence, and diligence in performing and completing tasks…

Compliance Item #8: Awning attached to rear of home is poorly attached Structure supports were only placed on one side, welds are not completed, and roofing won’t support the foam and tongue and groove. Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Respondent stated he used 3/8” x 4” Lag Bolts to attach the rear patio cover to the house. I saw that the rear patio cover was attached to the house in four (4) locations using brackets on one side of each structural member. Two (2) brackets had two (2) bolts while the other two (2) brackets only had one (1) bolt each.

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

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

I saw that the vertical posts were only welded on two (2) sides and some were tacked only on the remaining sides. The full structural strength is not attained unless the joints (post to rafter) are welded on all four sides. The Complainant should provide the Respondent with all associated plans, specs, and engineering in order to allow the Respondent to correct this appropriately. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 18, 21-29 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Compliance Item #9: Bolts are exposed at footers and not fastened. Investigator’s Observation: DUPLICATE of Complaint Item #6 See Compliance Item #6

Compliance Item #10: All metal was not powder coated, rusting, and looks unfinished. Causing rust to stain new travertine that was just installed. Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Complainant explained they believed the rust was the result of drip edge material that the Respondent had placed on the pavers (under rear pergola). They showed me the drip edge material. I saw there was a linear rust stain on the pavers beneath the pergola. I inspected the drip edge material and noted it was painted galvanized material and had no visible rust on it. This type of material is not prone to corrosion and is likely not the cause of the rust stain. I inspected the linear rust stain in relation to the pergola, which had rusted material on it. However, it did not seem likely that the rust stain could have been cause by water run-off from the pergola.

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

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

I inspected the steel components and noted that many had not been painted or powder coated and were rusting. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 12944-5:2019 – Paints and varnishes – Corrosion protection of steel structures by protective paint systems-part 5 states in its foreword, “Unprotected steel in the atmosphere, in water and in soil is subjected to corrosion that may lead to damage. Therefore, to avoid corrosion damage, steel structures are normally protected to withstand the corrosion stresses during the required service life required of the structure.” There was Insufficient Evidence to determine what caused the rust stain on the pavers or who was responsible. There is no written contract; however, the Complainant provided email communications between the parties that clearly indicate the Respondent was responsible for painting/powder coating the steel components. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 30-31 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R4-9-108(B); in part, A contractor shall perform all work in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards…a contractor shall use such skills, prudence, and diligence in performing and completing tasks…

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

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

Investigator’s Observation: Not Verified – Although the conditions described are present, there is a financial dispute regarding this issue. The Registrar has no authority to intervene or resolve a financial dispute between parties. Both parties agreed that the Respondent was supposed to build and install a gate in this location. The Respondent stated that he had not been paid and so he removed the gate and put up a fence panel as a temporary measure to secure the yard since it had a swimming pool. The Complainant disagreed with the Respondent’s statement. I saw that a fence panel was installed and not a gate. The parties should work to resolve their financial dispute either cooperatively or through the appropriate civil venue. Reference Picture(s) 32 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

Complaint #2023-13082 P 1 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 2 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 3 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 4 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 5 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 6 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 7 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 8 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 9 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 10 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 11 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 12 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 13 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 14 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 15 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 16 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 17 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Bolt threads are exposed. This nut can be turned by Complaint #2023-13082 P 18 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Attached to House in Four (4) Locations Complaint #2023-13082 P 19 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 20 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 21 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Two (2) Bolts Complaint #2023-13082 P 22 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Two (2) Bolts Complaint #2023-13082 P 23 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Welded on Two (2) Sides Only Complaint #2023-13082 P 24 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Welded on Two (2) Sides Only Complaint #2023-13082 P 25 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Welded on Two (2) Sides Only Complaint #2023-13082 P 26 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

Welded on Two (2) Sides Only Complaint #2023-13082 P 27 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 28 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

One (1) Bolt Complaint #2023-13082 P 29 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS

One (1) Bolt Complaint #2023-13082 P 30 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 31 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 32 JSI Date 12/11/2023 at 11:00 AM JSI PHOTOS Complainant: Rachelle Faas 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale, AZ 85251

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: Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron 21152 W Green St Buckeye, AZ 85396

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 December 26, 2023

License No. ROC 332924

Re:Complaint No. 2023-13082

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 January 17, 2024.

RESTRICTIONS  You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license.  If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons1, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.

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

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 I saw the gates were not painted/powder coated and appeared to have an uneven primer coat only. I saw that all the panels/frame components were dented and scratched. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 2-5 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed that the brackets had been bolted and not welded as agreed. The Respondent stated that he had been waiting on a decision from the Complainant regarding the height of the pergola and had bolted the brackets temporarily until he received the final decision. The Complainant disagreed with the Respondent’s statement regarding the height and stated they had told him how high to build the pergola. I saw there were multiple brackets that had been bolted to the pergola. The brackets were rough cut sections of flat steel. Although it is not improper to bolt brackets, both parties agreed they were to be custom cut and welded. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 6-11 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Compliance Item #5: Roof is bent, loose, and missing panels. Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed that the roofing material (corrugated metal) was bent/damaged in multiple locations. The Respondent stated he would replace the damaged panels. I saw there were multiple damaged pieces of the corrugated metal roofing. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 12-16 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Compliance Item #6: The bolts going into the footers are exposed and look unfinished. Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed the pavers had already been installed when the Respondent installed the post and that another contractor poured the footer. The Respondent stated that he might have forgotten to tighten one bolt and that he thought it would hold just fine. I inspected the attached patio cover and noted that the post was mounted to the footer with four (4) bolts through the post plate. However, I saw that one bolt had threads exposed beneath the post plate and the corresponding nut could be easily turned by hand. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 17-18 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Compliance Item #7: The supports are not mounted and can be removed with no effort as they are just sitting on the wall. Investigator’s Observation: Verified I saw that the rear pergola supports were not attached in any way and could be easily removed. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 19-20 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R4-9-108(B); in part, A contractor shall perform all work in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards…a contractor shall use such skills, prudence, and diligence in performing and completing tasks… Compliance Item #8: Awning attached to rear of home is poorly attached Structure supports were only placed on one side, welds are not completed, and roofing won’t support the foam and tongue and groove. Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Respondent stated he used 3/8” x 4” Lag Bolts to attach the rear patio cover to the house. I saw that the rear patio cover was attached to the house in four (4) locations using brackets on one side of each structural member. Two (2) brackets had two (2) bolts while the other two (2) brackets only had one (1) bolt each. I saw that the vertical posts were only welded on two (2) sides and some were tacked only on the remaining sides. The full structural strength is not attained unless the joints (post to rafter) are welded on all four sides. The Complainant should provide the Respondent with all associated plans, specs, and engineering in order to allow the Respondent to correct this appropriately. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 18, 21-29 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Compliance Item #10: All metal was not powder coated, rusting, and looks unfinished. Causing rust to stain new travertine that was just installed. Investigator’s Observation: Verified

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 The Complainant explained they believed the rust was the result of drip edge material that the Respondent had placed on the pavers (under rear pergola). They showed me the drip edge material. I saw there was a linear rust stain on the pavers beneath the pergola. I inspected the drip edge material and noted it was painted galvanized material and had no visible rust on it. This type of material is not prone to corrosion and is likely not the cause of the rust stain. I inspected the linear rust stain in relation to the pergola, which had rusted material on it. However, it did not seem likely that the rust stain could have been cause by water run-off from the pergola. I inspected the steel components and noted that many had not been painted or powder coated and were rusting. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 12944-5:2019 – Paints and varnishes – Corrosion protection of steel structures by protective paint systems-part 5 states in its foreword, “Unprotected steel in the atmosphere, in water and in soil is subjected to corrosion that may lead to damage. Therefore, to avoid corrosion damage, steel structures are normally protected to withstand the corrosion stresses during the required service life required of the structure.” There was Insufficient Evidence to determine what caused the rust stain on the pavers or who was responsible. There is no written contract; however, the Complainant provided email communications between the parties that clearly indicate the Respondent was responsible for painting/powder coating the steel components. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 30-31 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

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

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

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 documentation of when/what that change involved. It would not be appropriate for the Registrar to compel a contractor to correct work with no evidence of what the agreed upon work was. No further action is required. Reference Picture(s) 12-16 Governing Rule: N/A Compliance Item #9: Bolts are exposed at footers and not fastened. Investigator’s Observation: DUPLICATE of Complaint Item #6 See Compliance Item #6

Compliance Item #11: Side yard gate was never installed but left on property. Contractor put up a temporary white gate that doesn’t open. The last time the contractor came to the property he took his tools and our metal gate that was supposed to be in place of the white gate there now. We asked him to return the gate and contractor refused. Investigator’s Observation: Not Verified – Although the conditions described are present, there is a financial dispute regarding this issue. The Registrar has no authority to intervene or resolve a financial dispute between parties. Both parties agreed that the Respondent was supposed to build and install a gate in this location. The Respondent stated that he had not been paid and so he removed the gate and put up a fence panel as a temporary measure to secure the yard since it had a swimming pool. The Complainant disagreed with the Respondent’s statement. I saw that a fence panel was installed and not a gate. The parties should work to resolve their financial dispute either cooperatively or through the appropriate civil venue. Reference Picture(s) 32 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 C009 04/21 Please direct all questions regarding this Directive to the undersigned Investigator.

Sincerely,

Mark Nipp Mark Nipp, Investigator 602 7716740 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

CC: Complainant Respondent

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: Rachelle Faas 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale, AZ 85251

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: Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron 21152 W Green St Buckeye, AZ 85396

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

C012 05/21 January 23, 2024

Compliance Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint No. 2023-13082

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

A Compliance Inspection has been scheduled for February 20, 2024 at 10:30 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,

Mark Nipp Mark Nipp, Investigator 602 7716740 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

CC: Complainant Respondent

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

C012 05/21 Complainant: Rachelle Faas 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale, AZ 85251

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Respondent: Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron 21152 W Green St Buckeye, AZ 85396

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Case No.: 2023-13082 Investigator: Mark Nipp Inspection Date: 2/20/2024 Inspection Time: 10:30 AM

Compliance Jobsite General Notes:

Compliance Findings:

Compliance Item #1: Exterior metal gates (rear wall and RV panels) are unfinished, dented, scratched, not powder coated or painted. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Verified – Respondent Did Not Comply I saw that the gate frames/panels had been painted; however, the paint was splotchy and uneven, with different sheens and uneven coverage. I saw that there were rust stains running vertically on the inside panels of the RV gate. I saw that the gate frames still had dents and scratches on them. The Respondent’s corrective work does not meet the acceptable minimum workmanship standards. CJSI Reference Picture(s) 1-6, 25-27

Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 12/11/2023 @ 11:00 AM Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Respondent agreed the gate frame and panels were dented/scratched and agreed that he would replace any damaged components. I saw the gates were not painted/powder coated and appeared to have an uneven primer coat only. I saw that all the panels/frame components were dented and scratched. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Reference Picture(s) 2-5 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Compliance Item #2: Interior door hinges were used so the integrity is poor. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Resolved Both parties reached an agreement to resolve this compliance item while at the CJSI. CJSI Reference Picture(s) 6-7

Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Respondent agreed that the hinges were “Home Depot interior hinges.” The Respondent stated he has used these hinges for years on exterior gates and they have never failed. The Respondent agreed to replace the hinges if the Complainant wanted him to. I saw the hinges were interior door hinges (appeared to be brass). I researched the Home Depot interior hinges and noted that the manufacturer recommends they be used in interior applications. Interior and Exterior hinges have similar load ratings; however, they differ in their ability to withstand corrosion from exposure to the elements. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 3, 5 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Compliance Item #3: Rear awning is structurally unsafe and unsecure. Bolts/brackets used instead of welds. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Corrected by the Respondent The Complainant stated the Respondent corrected this item and they are satisfied with the result. CJSI Reference Picture(s) 8

Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed that the brackets had been bolted and not welded as agreed. The Respondent stated that he had been waiting on a decision from the Complainant regarding the height of the pergola and had bolted the brackets temporarily until he received the final decision. The Complainant disagreed with the Respondent’s statement regarding the height and stated they had told him how high to build the pergola. I saw there were multiple brackets that had been bolted to the pergola. The brackets were rough cut sections of flat steel. Although it is not improper to bolt brackets, both parties agreed they were to be custom cut and welded. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 6-11 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Compliance Item #5: Roof is bent, loose, and missing panels. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Corrected by the Respondent

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 The Complainant stated the Respondent corrected this item and they are satisfied with the result. CJSI Reference Picture(s) 8-9

Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed that the roofing material (corrugated metal) was bent/damaged in multiple locations. The Respondent stated he would replace the damaged panels. I saw there were multiple damaged pieces of the corrugated metal roofing. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 12-16 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Compliance Item #6: The bolts going into the footers are exposed and look unfinished. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Corrected by the Respondent I saw the nut on the bolt appeared to be tight. The Respondent’s corrective work appears to meet the acceptable minimum workmanship standards. CJSI Reference Picture(s) 10

Investigator’s Observation: Verified Both parties agreed the pavers had already been installed when the Respondent installed the post and that another contractor poured the footer. The Respondent stated that he might have forgotten to tighten one bolt and that he thought it would hold just fine.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 I inspected the attached patio cover and noted that the post was mounted to the footer with four (4) bolts through the post plate. However, I saw that one bolt had threads exposed beneath the post plate and the corresponding nut could be easily turned by hand. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 17-18 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Compliance Item #7: The supports are not mounted and can be removed with no effort as they are just sitting on the wall. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Corrected by the Respondent The Complainant stated the Respondent corrected this item and they are satisfied with the result. CJSI Reference Picture(s) 11-13

Investigator’s Observation: Verified I saw that the rear pergola supports were not attached in any way and could be easily removed. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 19-20 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R4-9-108(B); in part, A contractor shall 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 perform all work in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards…a contractor shall use such skills, prudence, and diligence in performing and completing tasks… Compliance Item #8: Awning attached to rear of home is poorly attached Structure supports were only placed on one side, welds are not completed, and roofing won’t support the foam and tongue and groove. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Corrected by the Respondent The Complainant stated the Respondent corrected this item and they are satisfied with the result. CJSI Reference Picture(s) 14-17

Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Respondent stated he used 3/8” x 4” Lag Bolts to attach the rear patio cover to the house. I saw that the rear patio cover was attached to the house in four (4) locations using brackets on one side of each structural member. Two (2) brackets had two (2) bolts while the other two (2) brackets only had one (1) bolt each. I saw that the vertical posts were only welded on two (2) sides and some were tacked only on the remaining sides. The full structural strength is not attained unless the joints (post to rafter) are welded on all four sides. The Complainant should provide the Respondent with all associated plans, specs, and engineering in order to allow the Respondent to correct this appropriately. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 18, 21-29

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Compliance Item #10: All metal was not powder coated, rusting, and looks unfinished. Causing rust to stain new travertine that was just installed. Compliance Jobsite Inspection Conducted on 02/20/2024 @ 10:30 Investigator’s Observation: Verified – Respondent Did Not Comply I saw that the frames and panels had been painted. However, The Complainant noted that there was significant overspray to include the stucco, travertine pavers, and interlocking concrete pavers. The Complainant also stated there was significant construction debris left by the Respondent. I saw there were black paint drops and overspray throughout the travertine under the steel structures the Respondent built/painted. I also noted there was significant overspray on the synthetic stucco at each location the Respondent attached metal to the house and perimeter walls. I saw there were a large number of washers and screws laying under all structures the Respondent constructed. I asked the Respondent about the overspray and construction debris and he replied that the washers and screws were from they removed the old metal roofing, although they had thrown the used washers and screws away. The Respondent claimed that the Complainant must have taken the washers/screws out of the trash and spread them around the property. The Respondent further stated that he believed the Complainant may have painted their own house to make it look like overspray. The Respondent’s work was sloppy and demonstrated a disregard for the quality of his work. The overspray damage is extensive and may have ruined the travertine pavers. The house is finished in a synthetic stucco which is not normally painted because the color is imbedded within the stucco material.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 After the CJSI, the Respondent emailed me, indicating he was mailing printed copies of text messages between him and the Complainant. That evidence will be reviewed if/when it is received.

CJSI Reference Picture(s) 18-33

Investigator’s Observation: Verified The Complainant explained they believed the rust was the result of drip edge material that the Respondent had placed on the pavers (under rear pergola). They showed me the drip edge material. I saw there was a linear rust stain on the pavers beneath the pergola. I inspected the drip edge material and noted it was painted galvanized material and had no visible rust on it. This type of material is not prone to corrosion and is likely not the cause of the rust stain. I inspected the linear rust stain in relation to the pergola, which had rusted material on it. However, it did not seem likely that the rust stain could have been cause by water run-off from the pergola. I inspected the steel components and noted that many had not been painted or powder coated and were rusting. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 12944-5:2019 – Paints and varnishes – Corrosion protection of steel structures by protective paint systems-part 5 states in its foreword, “Unprotected steel in the atmosphere, in water and in soil is subjected to corrosion that may lead to damage. Therefore, to avoid corrosion damage, steel structures are normally protected to withstand the corrosion stresses during the required service life required of the structure.” There was Insufficient Evidence to determine what caused the rust stain on the pavers or who was responsible.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 There is no written contract; however, the Complainant provided email communications between the parties that clearly indicate the Respondent was responsible for painting/powder coating the steel components. The respondent should correct by appropriate means, pursuant to the contract, applicable building codes, and within the scope of their license. Reference Picture(s) 30-31 Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3); Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R4-9-108(B); in part, A contractor shall perform all work in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards…a contractor shall use such skills, prudence, and diligence in performing and completing tasks…

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,

Mark Nipp Mark Nipp, Investigator 602 7716740 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 CC: Complainant Respondent

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C013 12/23 Complaint #2023-13082 P 1 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 2 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 3 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 4 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 5 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 6 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 7 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 8 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 9 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 10 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 11 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 12 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 13 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 14 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 15 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 16 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 17 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 18 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 19 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 20 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 21 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 22 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 23 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 24 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 25 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 26 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 27 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 28 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 29 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 30 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 31 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 32 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS Complaint #2023-13082 P 33 CJSI Date 2/20/2024 at 10:30 AM CJSI PHOTOS REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Rachelle Faas Case No. 2023-13082 COMPLAINANT, v. Jesus Edgar Padilla CITATION DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron License No. ROC 332924,

RESPONDENT.

The Registrar issues this Citation to Jesus Edgar Padilla (“Respondent”) under A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). If Respondent fails to answer this Citation by March 8, 2024, 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 November 15, 2023, Rachelle Faas (“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. 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: 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. 2023-13082. How to File a Written Answer: Respondent’s written answer may be submitted in the following ways:

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 In-Person: 1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007-2812 Mail: P.O. Box 18244, Phoenix, Arizona, 85005-8244 Email: [email redacted]

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 March 8, 2024.

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.

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 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 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

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 Registrar. Dated February 22, 2024. By: /s/ Madelyn Hayes Madelyn Hayes Legal Assistant II Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors COPY of the foregoing mailed by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, February 22, 2024 to:

Respondent Certified Mail No: [number redacted]

Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron 21152 W Green St Buckeye, AZ 85396

Copy mailed by USPS First Class mail this same date to: Jesus Edgar Padilla DBA: PadMar Wrought Iron 21152 W Green St Buckeye, AZ 85396 Complainant Rachelle Faas 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale, AZ 85251 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. 2023-13082 / MTH

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 Licensed Complaint Form Departmental Use Only For Current or Suspended Licensees

Person Filing Complaint Full Name (First Middle Last) Business Name (if a licensed contractor or supplier) ROC License Number(s) (if any)

Rachelle Faas Mailing Address (Enter jobsite in Contract/Project section) City State Zip

2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale Arizona 85251 Phone Number Email

[number redacted] [email redacted] I consent to receive communications electronically in connection with this case Name of Attorney (if any)

Street Address of Attorney City State Zip

Phone Number of Attorney Email of Attorney

Contractor Information Name (as shown on contract/invoice) ROC License Number(s)

Jesus Edgar Padilla ROC 332924 Street Address City State Zip

Phone Number Email

[number redacted] [email redacted] Name of Person(s) Representing License

Edgar Padilla Contract/Project Information Contract Date Contract Amount Amount Paid

August 31, 2023 $12,000.00 $6,000.00 Date Work Started Date Work Stopped Date Work Was Completed

September 5, 2023 September 29, 2023 Close of Escrow (New Home) Move-In Date (New-Home)

Jobsite Street Address City State Zip

2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale AZ 85251 Name of Construction Site Owner Construction Site Name (if applicable)

Phone Number of Construction Site Owner Email of Construction Site Owner

This complaint is for Abandonment;Poor Work I have contacted the contractor by Phone/Text;Email Have you filed a complaint in court? No Has any work been corrected? No

RCC099 12/05/18 Page 1 of 2 Licensed Complaint Form Departmental Use Only For Current or Suspended Licensees

The contract was Both All change orders were Both This project was Residential This project involved Remodel

A building permit was obtained by N/A List and briefly describe each complaint item (Please do not write "see attached" or use additional pages unless necessary to further describe issues or list more complaint items) (limited to 100 characters per line)

Exterior metal Gates (Rear Wall and RV panels) are unfinished, dented, scratched, not powder coated or painted. Interior door hinges were used so the integrity is poor. ; Rear pool awning is structurally unsafe and unsecure. Bolts and brackets were used instead of welds. Metal is wrong gauge and won't support the foam or tongue & groove. Roof is bent, loose, and missing panels. The bolts going into the footers are exposed and look unfinished. The supports are not mounted and can be removed with no effort as they are just sitting on the wall. ; Awning attached to rear of home is poorly attached. Structure supports were only placed on one side, welds are not completed, and roofing won't support the foam and tongue and groove. Bolts are exposed at footers and not fastened. All metal was not powder coated, rusting, and looks unfinished. Causing rust to stain new travertine that was just installed. ; Side Yard Gate was never installed but left on property. Contractor put up a temporary white gate that doesn't open. The last time the contractor came to the property he took his tools and our metal gate that was supposed to be in place of the white gate there now. We asked to return the gate and contractor refused.

Signature I declare under penalty of perjury that the information and documents contained on this Complaint Form, included with this complaint, or hereafter submitted in support of this complaint are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I will assist in the investigation or in the prosecution of the contractor or other parties, and will, if necessary, attend hearings and testify to facts. Printed Name Signature Date

Rachelle Faas \complainant1\ \complainantd1\

RCC099 12/05/18 Page 2 of 2 Rachelle Faas <[email redacted]>

Fwd: 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale 85252 message

[email redacted] <[email redacted]> Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 9:03 AM To: "J. Edgar Padilla" <[email redacted]>, Chelle Faas <[email redacted]>

Edgar - CC'd Chelle my wife on this email and she will handle this from here on out.

The email you provided in your text I sent you this morning will match the email Chelle sent this to yesterday at 9:05am. I found this on your Instagram and forward her message from yesterday - SEE BELOW.

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Rachelle Faas <[email redacted]> Date: Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 9:05 AM Subject: 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale 85252 To: [email redacted] <[email redacted]>

Good morning,

Reaching out to coordinate the completion of the gates/pergola.

When we initially had you over to quote the job we discussed the following.

RV gate side yard gate at front of home by garage smaller side yard gate at end dog run (You recommended not doing an additional "gate within the gate" but rather one at each end to keep the dogs in the side yard of the house) Rear gate to alley Ramada Pergola Cash's room pergola S. Side small pergola over the slider that is baking in the sun.

It seems that maybe some of the details were not ironed out and now we have a few things we need to discuss in order to get this all completed and us with a finished product. It was not explained that the metal would not be finished/painted. We wouldn't have known this was an additional charge unless you specified this. So what is the best way to proceed? The middle section of the RV gate does not match the other two sections so I'm not sure what's the best way to rectify that as well. Please advise

Thank you Rachelle

IMG_4641.jpg 2188K Rachelle Faas <[email redacted]>

Re: 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale 85252 message

J. Edgar Padilla <[email redacted]> Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 1:38 PM To: [email redacted] Cc: Chelle Faas <[email redacted]>

Yes, I agree. That's what we had agreed!

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023, 8:21 AM [email redacted] <[email redacted]> wrote: PLEASE REPLY BACK - YES - NO

12k for following items: RV Gate (Needs to have matching panels and be finished painting) Front Gate by garage (Needs to be installed and painted) Dog Run Gate at end of the turf (Needs to be provided, installed, and painted) Cash's Pergola (Needs to be painted and solution for the bolts) Pool Pergola (Needs to completed, painted and solution for the bolts) You can paint the bolts black and we will find some solution just need this done.

If you want to finish your job, we need it done this week.

Pool is being held up and our landscaping will be done today.

On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 2:06 PM J. Edgar Padilla <[email redacted]> wrote: Paint is no big!! And bolts you need to tell me what to do! That's the proper way of doing who tells you otherwise is incorrect you will have water from the pool.. so listen to whoever and just tell me what do. I can remove posts while you correct at your best decision.!

On Sat, Sep 16, 2023, 11:02 AM [email redacted] <[email redacted]> wrote: This email is detailed to make sure we are on the same page before coming back to our property.

RESPOND TO THIS EMAIL THAT YOU AGREE OR DO NOT AGREE BELOW AND WILL MOVE FORWARD ACCORDINGLY. IF YOU AGREE AND WANT TO COMPLETE THE JOB WE NEED THE JOB COMPLETED RIGHT AWAY. AT THIS POINT THIS PERGOLA IS HOLDING UP OUR PROJECT.

REPLY ALL THAT YOU AGREE AS FOLLOWS OR YOU DO NOT. IF YOU DO NOT THEN WE WILL MOVE FORWARD WITH ANOTHER VENDOR TO GET COMPLETED. Finish building, painting, and find a solution for the bolts that look presentable on pergolas for the 12k that was originally agreed upon. If you still have questions, reference the email which explains everything. Items to include: RV Gate (Needs to have matching panels and be finished painting) Front Gate by garage (Needs to be painted) Dog Run Gate at end of the turf (Needs to be provided, installed, and painted) Cash's Pergola (Needs to be painted and solution for the bolts) Pool Pergola (Needs to completed, painted and solution for the bolts)

If you have any issues or do not want to agree to any of this just let us know and we will find another course of action to get this completed.

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 6:30 PM J. Edgar Padilla <[email redacted]> wrote: This email is long and confusing.. I will be glad to meet and discuss.. I'm just confused because it repeats so many times.. I can stop by Monday afternoon because I will be in Cave Creek really early I'm sure we can agree.. I'm actually resting tomorrow and Sunday because I'm at the exhaustion point.. so if Monday afternoon is okay we can square things up.. I'm in the best of intentions to always make my customers happy.. Have a great weekend

Edgar Padilla

I really need to get the other pergola done before there is water in pool.. the grinding and shavings can ruin the pebble tech!!!

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023, 10:44 AM [email redacted] <[email redacted]> wrote: Edgar - Please take a minute to read this in its entirety which should clear this all up.

We had a contract with Ray for 12k (front fence, gates, pergolas) and $5500 (spiral staircase). Regardless if it was underbid or if the metal guy didn't show up we still had a contract that he was responsible for which is in our contract. Happy to log into our BUILT ACCOUNTING BANK PORTAL and show you.

By agreeing to have you take over and match the items at that price we allowed Ray our contractor out of his contract and obligation. Common sense will tell you that there is no way we would have agreed to let him off the hook unless we were going to get equal or better from another vendor. Now we are in a situation where you are stating that we verbally agreed to 3 gates and 2 pergolas which would exclude the following:

dog run gate pergola over the side sliders (South Side) front fence around the courtyard. - I was not clear with you and forgot to tell you about this and admitted that and told you I would get a separate bid from you and just eat the pricing for this. This was my fault and let you know I didn't expect this to be included as I failed to mention it. I also asked you to bid separately for the firepit guard rail (which was NOT included) and what you would recommend for the hole in the parapet wall where the spiral staircase was going to go. You told me that you just wanted to focus on the gates for now and could talk about all this later which I agreed to and was fine with. You then later responded that you would do the hand rail at the firepit for $1800 unpainted.

If you put yourself in our shoes there is no world where you would agree to less than what you were obligated to receive from Ray's guy as Ray would have had to make up the difference as he was contracted to do so and was his proposal. We would never agree to have an unfinished project that we had to come out of pocket to paint or powdercoat either. Makes absolutely no sense at all. Why would we put ourselves into a situation that we would have to come out of pocket more for an unfinished project?

Also why would we pay a lot of money to the landscapers to build a dog run and not have a gate to enforce the dog run? These are all items I specifically walked you around to look at and don't feel you were listening if you're coming back with 2 pergolas and 3 gates. I texted you the list of the items that we had in the previous agreement with the dimensions. You stated that you didn't look at that and we had some verbal that is what you're going off of.

You have to take a look at this logically from our standpoint to realize that the argument you were trying to make the other day makes absolutely no sense for the reasons listed above.

We are not trying to get something for free or take advantage of anyone. We are simply trying to get our project done. I couldn't have been any more transparent showing you the exact price and what that consisted of. I'm eating 1000's of dollars on that front fence around the courtyard because I screwed up and didn't mention that. I did send you the other items with dimensions you can clearly revisit your texts.

If you want to complete the job then we will need you to confirm by replying all that you will finish building, painting, and find a solution for the bolts that looks presentable on pergolas for the 12k that was originally agreed upon. Items to include:

RV Gate (Needs to have matching panels and be finished painting) Front Gate by garage (Needs to be painted) Dog Run Gate at end of the turf (Needs to be provided, installed, and painted) Cash's Pergola (Needs to be painted) We will spray the foam to soundproof and cover gap between wall and provide the tongue/groove with stain Pool Pergola (Needs to be painted) We will spray the foam to soundproof and provide the tongue/groove with stain

- We will find another solution for the pergola on the South Side of the home for the sliders and windows - We will also find another solution for the firepit railing, metal for the spiral staircase opening, and front fence

If you have any issues or do not want to agree to any of this just let us know and we will find another course of action to get this completed.

Hopefully this all makes sense and we can get this to completion and enjoy a beer at the pool after.

Best Regards, Eddie and Chelle

On Fri, Sep 15, 2023 at 9:03 AM [email redacted] <[email redacted]> wrote: Edgar - CC'd Chelle my wife on this email and she will handle this from here on out.

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Rachelle Faas <[email redacted]> Date: Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 9:05 AM Subject: 2928 N 83rd St Scottsdale 85252 To: [email redacted] <[email redacted]> Good morning,

Reaching out to coordinate the completion of the gates/pergola.

When we initially had you over to quote the job we discussed the following.

Thank you Rachelle The contract was not provided to us by Edgar. He insisted several times on having telephone and in person conversations as to which we began emailing and texting to get everything in writing regarding the scope of work. I have included the emails for review. The emails include the work to be done on the metal pergolas/awnings and gates. Edgar received $5000 and then an additional $1000 as shown in the attached chase document. Edgar negotiated the contract with myself, Rachelle Faas and my partner Edward Clayton both verbally, in email and text and in front of our GC Raymond Roshto. 50% deposit was paid to Edgar (total of 6K) and the remaining would be paid upon completion which has not occurred at this time. Original contract that was agreed upon with GC was given to Edgar to quote and he agreed to the same scope of work. The emails describe this in detail. n Written Answer to Citation and Complaint Case No. 2023-L3082 In Person: P,O. Box 18244 Phoenix, Arizona, 85007-2812

On August 31st I entered a contract with Eddie Clayton to do two pergolas and three gates for a total of $12,000. He explained that everything was going to be primered a flat black. He acknowledged via text message and after installing the gates via text message he told me how great they were, I built the pergola to his specifications and heights everything that he needed to make it work for his specific needs. He told me that his prior contractor had abandoned him and that he only had $12,000 to work with. I agreed that I would make it work, He knew that there was very little budget for what we were doing. After installing the gates and the pergola he asked me when I was going to start doing the front fence and I asked him what he was talking about that I didn't understand. He replied that the other guy was going to include it in the price, I told him no, we never discussed that and I didn't even know what he wanted, how would I know that that's included and he became upset and stopped talking to me and ghosted me. He wouldn't answer my phone calls and everything that I'm saying you can corroborate via the text messages they're all there. Finally he called the the ROC which I thought was good news so I can get this done and he started inventing stuff that wasn't included but in order to get this done and get this nightmare behind me I did even extra work that wasn't included and at the meeting with the ROC. I offered to give them back their money and the inspector said that was a good offer. Ray told me no because he had tenants moving in on January 5th and had to get this done, I explained that I was going to be on vacation I had a vacation program many months before but he insisted that I do the work so I came back from vacation I worked and I did everything that I was supposed to do even they even hired an engineer to check my pergola on December 15th and the only thing that he can find was adding an additional 4x4 beam that should never have been in my expense but I did it just to make him happy, to make this go away. At some point Ray Usher who is his contractor while I was working on all these remediations, called me and said "hey I'm not going to lie for anybody" and I said "what are you talking about Ray" he said "Eddie wants me to say that you attacked him with me sawzall. I'm not going to lie I will not lie for anybody." I said why would he do that and he replied its because he doesn't like you because he's a racist and you didn't give him what he wanted. That's why but I'm not going to lie for him"

At this point Eddie Clayton wrote an email saying that he was going to sue me for a x amount of money for lost rental income but the fact is he doesn't have a certificate probably to this date. He didn't have it at the end of the letter and he didn't have it at the date when I checked which was at the second inspection so that's another lie. He couldn't have tenants on January 5th and he couldn't be missing income cuz he doesn't even have a certificate of occupancy also which is petty but we took the roof down and redid the roof when we were correcting it and we cleaned everything we kept blowing to make sure no debris went into the pool because I know that he would make a fuss so lt was spotless clean, The day of the inspection a month after, we were there and there was a bunch of little washers that could have not physically fallen under the pergola so it's just little deceptions that have occurred and to sum it up he has used the ROC not only to not pay me but to try and get something that he didn't contract for. He left the yard full of dog feces, we worked under humiliating conditions and it was an awful situation to work with, I literally would take the oldest shoes to throw them away because there was no way you can avoid stepping on dog poop. This has just been very humiliating and you know I'm being extorted with the help of The ROC to give this guy what he did not hire me for, 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