2023A-13169-CHC-ROC Notice of Hearing and Packet MAILED

2023A-13169-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-04-02

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Rahel Gebru , Case No. 2023-13169 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2023A-13169-CHC-ROC v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON CONTESTED CASE E Brothers Development LLC License No. ROC 333120,

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 1:00 PM Velva Moses-Thompson Google Meet. A link will be provided directly from The Office of Administrative Hearings. Go to www.azoah.com to request to appear in-person.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The statutes and rules governing the hearing can be found at: Arizona Revised Statutes §§ 41-1092 to -1092.12, and Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-101 to -122. PARTICULAR ARIZONA STATUTES AND RULES INVOLVED The statutes and rules the Respondent is alleged to have violated are cited in the complaint and citation, which were served on the Respondent on March 11, 2024.

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

Charge: 1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a)

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

Charge: 3 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12) - A.R.S. § 32-1158

Charge: 4 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 27, 2024.

By: /s/ Erika Hoskin Erika Hoskin Legal Secretary Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail March 27, 2024 to: Respondent(s) E Brothers Development LLC 18455 S Copper Point Dr Green Valley, AZ 85614

Complainant(s) Rahel Gebru 5512 E 8th St. Tucson, AZ 85711

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. 2023-13169 /

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: Rahel Gebru 5512 E 8TH STREET TUCSON, AZ 85711

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: E Brothers Development LLC 18455 S Copper Point Dr Green Valley, AZ 85614

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 December 1, 2023

Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint Number 2023-13169

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

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

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for January 26, 2024 at 09:00 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, John Smith, Investigator #194 (520) 483-0027 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St,Suite 105 Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2812

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

602.542.1525 · 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. 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 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.

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 Complainant: Rahel Gebru 5512 E 8TH STREET TUCSON, AZ 85711

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: E Brothers Development LLC 18455 S Copper Point Dr Green Valley, AZ 85614

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

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 05/21 January 16, 2024

Jobsite Inspection Notice Re: Complaint Number 2023-13169

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

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

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for January 26, 2024 at 09:00 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, John Smith, Investigator #194 (520) 483-0027 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St,Suite 105 Phoenix, Arizona 85007-2812

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

602.542.1525 · 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. 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 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.

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 Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Complainant: Rahel Gebru Respondent: E Brothers Development LLC

Present for the complainant: Rahel Gebru Present for the respondent: The respondent was not present. Overview of project: Building a three bedroom, one bathroom, addition.

General Notes: The respondent previously submitted a request for a Building Confidence Program inspection. BCP# 2023- 12678 The contractor’s wording on that BCP Request form: • “She keeps going to city asking about permit Causing a lot of confusion She has since hired a 3rd party inspector who has come up with a lot of what he says are wrong Every thing on his list are tasks we have not been able to perform.”

In response to that BCP request, I spoke with the contractor on 11/3/23, at 2:29PM. Notes of that phone conversation: • I advised him there is nothing listed in the BCP request form that would be considered a workmanship concern. BCP's are specifically to evaluate potential workmanship issues. The BCP does not address allegations of abandonment, or permit delays. He said the property owner has hired a home inspector that keeps pointing out things that are wrong. Those things are just things that aren't done yet. I advised him the ROC would not be able to offer an opinion on work in progress. He said the home inspector stated the panel is not in the correct location. However, the panel is actually installed in the location specified on the approved plans. I advised him that determination would then be approved or disapproved by the local building official, not a home inspector. He said there are delays due to city and fire not communicating properly about the sprinkler system. I advised the ROC cannot help straighten things out between city and fire. I advised him I can call and explain this to the property owner. Currently there is nothing listed that would be a workmanship concern.

11/7/23, I spoke with the property owner. • During that conversation, I advised her of the submitted BCP request and explained there is nothing included that would be considered a workmanship issue/concern. The property owner stated there are numerous workmanship issues and she will be filing a formal complaint.

Later 11/7/23, I closed the BCP

RCC100

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes 11/24/23, the property owner filed a formal complaint, Complaint# 2023-13169

12/1/23, the respondent was notified of the formal complaint by phone, mail, and email. The respondent was also notified of a jobsite inspection scheduled to take place on 1/26/24 at 9:00AM.

1/16/24, a reminder notice was sent to the respondent by mail and email, again advising him of the jobsite inspection scheduled for 1/26/24 at 9:00AM.

1/26/24 at 9:00AM, the jobsite inspection was conducted at 9:00AM as scheduled. The respondent was not present.

Previously, on 11/3/23, the respondent had stated that any alleged issues are just areas of work in progress that have not been completed. At that time there was no supporting documentation. Based on supporting documentation submitted with the formal complaint: • The respondent has billed for, and been paid for the first three contractual progress payments: o 1st draw of $70000 is due at start of project. o 2 draw of$ 70000 is due at completion of framing. o 3rd draw of $26000 is due at completion of intermediate. o Final draw of $20000 is due at completion of final inspection. • The respondent billing for, and being paid for, the first three draws is evidence the respondent considers those portions of the project complete, not work in progress. • All workmanship allegations included in this complaint are specific to portions of the project considered to be complete, not work in progress.

As stated in the submitted complaint, 7/13/23 was the last day the respondent performed any work on this project.

Complaint Item 1: “FOUNDATION/SLAB Poor/Defective - Concrete at shower area has been poured flush with floor slab. This is a handicap shower - should be depressed at this location to allow for shaping shower floor for drainage and having tile flush with floor. "No curb" is specified in plans on site.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The concrete in the shower are is not recessed from the floor elevation, and does not have an adequate slope towards the drain. The concrete in the shower area is not per plan. The plans on site specify: “No curb @ edge of concrete floor.” Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a): Departure from or disregard of: (a) Plans or specifications... Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 2: “- Nailers missing for installation of ceiling drywall in many areas.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are several areas of framing not ready for drywall, specifically, there are several areas of “backers” missing. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 3: “-Sill plate is loose and misaligned at wall coming in from back yard (on left).” RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Investigator’s Observations: Verified. In at least one location, the framing sill plates are not properly aligned. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 4: “-Sill plates are cracked and loose at both sides of hall closet.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are locations of split sill plats. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 5: “- Blocks are missing at ceiling line in many places.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Framing blocks at the ceiling line are missing in several locations. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 6: “-Studs are twisting or bowed in some areas.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are several studs excessively twisted. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 7: “-Large gaps noted at top of exterior walls where blocking and siding do not come together.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are significant gaps along the tops of the sheathing, around the full perimeter of the structure. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 8: “-Framing grade lumber used for fascia - typically a higher grade lumber is spec'd for this use.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Stud/framing grade material used of finished fascia material. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 9: “ROUGH-IN ELECTRICAL - At main panel (on outside wall) white wire for power to A/C should be taped or colored to properly identify it as a "hot" conductor.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. One of the “hot” wires from the main panel to the roof mounted HVAC unit has white insulation. International Residential Code (IRC) E3407.3 Insulation on the ungrounded conductors shall be a continuous color other than white, gray and green. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 10: “-Construction outlet at bottom of panel is hanging by its wires.” RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The receptacle and electrical box below the main panel is loose and hanging by the wires. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 11: “-Ground and neutral wires are not properly separated in subpanel in bedroom.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Grounding and grounded conductors are not isolated from each other in the sub-panel. Also stated as: Ground and neutral conductors are not isolated from each other in the sub-panel. International Residential Code (IRC) E3607.3.1 …Any installed grounded conductor shall not be connected to the equipment grounding conductor or to the grounding electrode(s). Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 12: “-One 40 amp breaker and wiring installed for new tankless water heater. Unit (and plans) indicate that 2 breakers and wires are required.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is currently only one 40 amp circuit to the water heater location. The plans on site specify two 40 amp circuits to this location. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a): Departure from or disregard of: (a) Plans or specifications... Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 13: “-Loose (old) wire in corner of addition is "hot" - advise removal or installing in secure junction box by electrician.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is a “live” wire hanging from the top of the original house wall, in the northwest corner of the addition. This wire is from the attic space of the original house structure, and hanging inside the new addition. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 14: “-Some wires are unsecured in attic.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are several locations of improper and inadequate support and securing of electrical wires. • Areas of flat cable stapled on edge o Table E3802.1 of the International Residential Code (IRC) states that flat cables shall not be stapled on the edge. • Areas of EMT clamps used as cable straps • Areas of plastic zip ties used a cable supports and straps • Areas of “P” clamps not attached Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 15: “ROUGH-IN PLUMBING - Leaking noted at water supply to fire protection system for addition.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified. There was no evidence of leaking observed during this inspection. RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 16: “-Open sewer pipe - flush with new pavers at back patio.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are two sewer pipes coming up through the pavers in the back yard. One is higher than the pavers, with a temporary cap, and creating a trip hazard. The other is flush with the pavers and not capped. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 17: “-Reducer bushings stacked at fire sprinkler supply piping. These fittings are typically not permitted in fire protection systems and stacking reducers is also not allowed.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). This will need to be evaluated and determined by the local code official. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 18: “HVAC, DUCTING and SUPPORT Poor/Defective (1) Recommend coating PVC for condensate drain piping with reflective roof coating to prevent damage from sun.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is exposed and unpainted PVC pipe used for the condensation drain. PVC pipe is not rated for UV exposure. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 19: “(2) End of condensate drain piping extends past edge of roof. If no gutters are to be installed - this piping should be piped down near ground.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The condensate pipe terminates off the edge of the roof, with no elbow, no catch basin, and no gutter, and directly over a seating area. International Residential Code (IRC) M1411.3 Condensate shall not discharge into a street, alley or other areas where it would cause a nuisance. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 20: “(3) No ground wire has been installed between the disconnect and the unit's internal wiring. Recommend installing ground wire.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is no equipment ground connecting the HVAC unit to the electrical disconnect box. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 21: “(4) Joint in supply duct has not been sealed - advise sealing properly to prevent air loss.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is at least one unsealed and uninsulated “Y” duct connector in the attic space. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Complaint Item 22: “(5) Two flex ducts are contacting sharp corners of truss nails. Recommend re-locate or separate ducts to prevent damage and leaks. Inspect ducts for damage at these locations and repair if needed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are at least three locations where flexible duct work is resting directly on top of, and being punctured by, metal gusset plates of the trusses. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 23: “ROOFING (1) Active leaking observed at roof above door to back yard. Advise repair by roofer.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified. No leaks were observed during this inspection. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 24: “(2) New roof has buckling, lifting at seams and coating thin and uneven in places. Recommend re-sealing seams where separated and additional coating be applied after all other roof work is completed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Areas of visibly thin coating, missing coating, and separating seams. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 25: “(3) Cricket required at A/C unit. Standing water at this location during inspection. Advise building cricket and roofing properly.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The base of the HVAC platform is approximately 45 inches wide on the uphill side. There is no cricket installed on the uphill side. International Residential Code (IRC) R903.2.2 A cricket or saddle shall be installed on the ridge side of any chimney or penetration more than 30 inches (762 mm) wide as measured perpendicular to the slope. Cricket or saddle coverings shall be sheet metal or of the same material as the roof covering. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 26: “(4) A cricket is required at the junction of the old roof and the new wall to properly divert drainage around. The cricket installed is too small and ends at a skylight where water was ponding during the inspection. This will be a leak point. Recommend building a larger cricket. Removal of skylight will be required (a solatube could be installed thru the cricket afterwards) and vents will have to be extended.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. A skylight is installed in the valley at the north side of the addition. This is creating ponding in excess of 1/2 inch depth. As stated in the Arizona workmanship Standards: Vents of other penetrations should not be located within inches of valley centerline. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes Complaint Item 27: “(5) Old roof has damage to coating and debris in areas near new construction. Recommend proper cleaning and re-coating when work is completed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Roofing material around the addition is damaged and has debris embedded in the coating. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 28: “(6) Vent cover missing at existing house exhaust fan - advise replacing to prevent water entry.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. One metal roof vent cap missing the cap. One electrical conduit protruding through the roof with no cap. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 29: “(7) Drip edge flashing missing at NW corner of addition roof. Recommend installing properly.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Missing roof edge metal at northwest corner of addition. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 30: “SHEATHING & LATH Poor/Defective (1) Addition has already been stuccoed and painted. Typically - the pre-drywall inspection includes and evaluation of moisture barrier, foam and wire installation.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. As visible from inside the addition: sheathing has • Unsupported edges • Inadequate backing • Inadequate edge nailing Additionally, there is no evidence of lath inspection prior to stucco application. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 31: “(2) Walls at rear and NE corner of addition have not been properly finished. Roof material has been wrapped up walls partway and reflective roof coating has been applied to roof paper and bare OSB. There should be Z flashing with built-up roof to bottom and stucco w/ moisture barrier and lath above it. Recommend re- finishing walls properly by builder.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 32: “WINDOWS AND DOORS Poor/Defective RCC100 11/14

Arizona Registrar of Contractors Jobsite Inspection Notes (1) Threshold is warped and unsecured at door to back yard - rain water coming through. Recommend repair, secure and seal threshold.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The door threshold is missing parts and is not sealed to the concrete. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 33: “(2) Flashing at east window is melted or damaged near exterior wall. Recommend any needed repairs to ensure that future leaking does not occur.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Flashing / water-proofing material around at least one window is deteriorated. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 34: “MISCELLANEOUS Poor/Defective (1) Fire foam missing at holes in top plates in all locations. Verify sealing of all gaps prior to installation of sheetrock.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. No fire-stop material has been installed in openings in top plates of walls. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 35: “(2) Light coming thru gaps at bottom of walls around perimeter in a few places. Recommend caulking where needed to seal.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified. This was not observed during this inspection. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 36: “I will be attaching the full inspection from HouseMaster Home inspection.” Investigator’s Observations: This statement by the complainant does not implicate a workmanship issue, or a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). Governing Rule: N/A

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

Elements of a Contract Investigator’s Observations: The respondent’s contract is missing the following information: • The date the parties entered into the agreement. • The mailing address of the property owner. • An estimated date of completion • Information about the customer’s right to file a complaint with the registrar • Contact information for the registrar Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12), Namely A.R.S. § 32-1158(A) Minimum Elements of a Contract. Any contract in an amount of more than one thousand dollars entered into between a contractor and the homeowner of a property to be improved shall contain in writing at least the following information: RCC100 11/14

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

RCC100 11/14

Jobsite Inspection Photos 1 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Jobsite Inspection Photos 2 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The concrete in the shower are is not recessed from the floor elevation, and does not have an adequate slope towards the drain. The concrete in the shower area is not per plan. The plans on site specify: “No curb @ edge of concrete floor.”

Jobsite Inspection Photos 3 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The concrete in the shower are is not recessed from the floor elevation, and does not have an adequate slope towards the drain. The concrete in the shower area is not per plan. The plans on site specify: “No curb @ edge of concrete floor.”

Jobsite Inspection Photos 4 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The concrete in the shower are is not recessed from the floor elevation, and does not have an adequate slope towards the drain. The concrete in the shower area is not per plan. The plans on site specify: “No curb @ edge of concrete floor.”

Jobsite Inspection Photos 5 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several areas of framing not ready for drywall, specifically, there are several areas of “backers” missing.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 6 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several areas of framing not ready for drywall, specifically, there are several areas of “backers” missing.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 7 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several areas of framing not ready for drywall, specifically, there are several areas of “backers” missing.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 8 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

In at least one location, the framing sill plates are not properly aligned.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 9 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are locations of split sill plats.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 10 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Framing blocks at the ceiling line are missing in several locations.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 11 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Framing blocks at the ceiling line are missing in several locations.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 12 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Framing blocks at the ceiling line are missing in several locations.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 13 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Framing blocks at the ceiling line are missing in several locations.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 14 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Framing blocks at the ceiling line are missing in several locations.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 15 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several studs excessively twisted.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 16 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several studs excessively twisted.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 17 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several studs excessively twisted.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 18 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several studs excessively twisted.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 19 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are significant gaps along the tops of the sheathing, around the full perimeter of the structure.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 20 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are significant gaps along the tops of the sheathing, around the full perimeter of the structure.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 21 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Stud/framing grade material used of finished fascia material.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 22 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Stud/framing grade material used of finished fascia material.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 23 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Stud/framing grade material used of finished fascia material.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 24 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

One of the “hot” wires from the main panel to the roof mounted HVAC unit has white insulation.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 25 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

One of the “hot” wires from the main panel to the roof mounted HVAC unit has white insulation.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 26 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The receptacle and electrical box below the main panel is loose and hanging by the wires.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 27 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Grounding and grounded conductors are not isolated from each other in the sub-panel. Also stated as: Ground and neutral conductors are not isolated from each other in the sub-panel.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 28 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is currently only one 40 amp circuit to the water heater location. The plans on site specify two 40 amp circuits to this location.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 29 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is currently only one 40 amp circuit to the water heater location. The plans on site specify two 40 amp circuits to this location.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 30 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is currently only one 40 amp circuit to the water heater location. The plans on site specify two 40 amp circuits to this location.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 31 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is a “live” wire hanging from the top of the original house wall, in the northwest corner of the addition. This wire is from the attic space of the original house structure, and hanging inside the new addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 32 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several locations of improper and inadequate support and securing of electrical wires. • Areas of flat cable stapled on edge o Table E3802.1 of the International Residential Code (IRC) states that flat cables shall not be stapled on the edge. • Areas of EMT clamps used as cable straps • Areas of plastic zip ties used a cable supports and straps • Areas of “P” clamps not attached

Jobsite Inspection Photos 33 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several locations of improper and inadequate support and securing of electrical wires. • Areas of flat cable stapled on edge o Table E3802.1 of the International Residential Code (IRC) states that flat cables shall not be stapled on the edge. • Areas of EMT clamps used as cable straps • Areas of plastic zip ties used a cable supports and straps • Areas of “P” clamps not attached

Jobsite Inspection Photos 34 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several locations of improper and inadequate support and securing of electrical wires. • Areas of flat cable stapled on edge o Table E3802.1 of the International Residential Code (IRC) states that flat cables shall not be stapled on the edge. • Areas of EMT clamps used as cable straps • Areas of plastic zip ties used a cable supports and straps • Areas of “P” clamps not attached

Jobsite Inspection Photos 35 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several locations of improper and inadequate support and securing of electrical wires. • Areas of flat cable stapled on edge o Table E3802.1 of the International Residential Code (IRC) states that flat cables shall not be stapled on the edge. • Areas of EMT clamps used as cable straps • Areas of plastic zip ties used a cable supports and straps • Areas of “P” clamps not attached

Jobsite Inspection Photos 36 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are several locations of improper and inadequate support and securing of electrical wires. • Areas of “P” clamps not attached

Complaint Item 15: “ROUGH-IN PLUMBING - Leaking noted at water supply to fire protection system for addition.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified. There was no evidence of leaking observed during this inspection.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 37 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are two sewer pipes coming up through the pavers in the back yard. One is higher than the pavers, with a temporary cap, and creating a trip hazard. The other is flush with the pavers and not capped.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 38 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Complaint Item 17: “-Reducer bushings stacked at fire sprinkler supply piping. These fittings are typically not permitted in fire protection systems and stacking reducers is also not allowed.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). This will need to be evaluated and determined by the local code official.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 39 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is exposed and unpainted PVC pipe used for the condensation drain. PVC pipe is not rated for UV exposure.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 40 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The condensate pipe terminates off the edge of the roof, with no elbow, no catch basin, and no gutter, and directly over a seating area.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 41 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The condensate pipe terminates off the edge of the roof, with no elbow, no catch basin, and no gutter, and directly over a seating area.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 42 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is no equipment ground connecting the HVAC unit to the electrical disconnect box.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 43 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is at least one unsealed and uninsulated “Y” duct connector in the attic space.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 44 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are at least three locations where flexible duct work is resting directly on top of, and being punctured by, metal gusset plates of the trusses.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 45 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There are at least three locations where flexible duct work is resting directly on top of, and being punctured by, metal gusset plates of the trusses.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 46 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The base of the HVAC platform is approximately 45 inches wide on the uphill side. There is no cricket installed on the uphill side.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 47 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The base of the HVAC platform is approximately 45 inches wide on the uphill side. There is no cricket installed on the uphill side.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 48 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

A skylight is installed in the valley at the north side of the addition. This is creating ponding in excess of 1/2 inch depth.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 49 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

A skylight is installed in the valley at the north side of the addition. This is creating ponding in excess of 1/2 inch depth.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 50 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Roofing material around the addition is damaged and has debris embedded in the coating.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 51 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Areas of visibly thin coating, missing coating, and separating seams.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 52 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

One metal roof vent cap missing the cap.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 53 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

One electrical conduit protruding through the roof with no cap.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 54 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Missing roof edge metal at northwest corner of addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 55 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Missing roof edge metal at northwest corner of addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 56 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

Missing roof edge metal at northwest corner of addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 57 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

As visible from inside the addition: sheathing has • Unsupported edges • Inadequate backing • Inadequate edge nailing Additionally, there is no evidence of lath inspection prior to stucco application.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 58 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

As visible from inside the addition: sheathing has • Unsupported edges • Inadequate backing • Inadequate edge nailing Additionally, there is no evidence of lath inspection prior to stucco application.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 59 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 60 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 61 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 62 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 63 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 64 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 65 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

The door threshold is missing parts and is not sealed to the concrete.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 66 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

No fire-stop material has been installed in openings in top plates of walls.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 67 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

No fire-stop material has been installed in openings in top plates of walls.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 68 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

No fire-stop material has been installed in openings in top plates of walls.

Jobsite Inspection Photos 69 Complaint No.: 2023-13169 Investigator: John Smith #194 Inspection Date: 1/26/2024 Inspection Time: 9:00AM Jobsite address: 7012 E. Rosewood St., Tucson, AZ 85710

No fire-stop material has been installed in openings in top plates of walls.

Complainant: Rahel Gebru 5512 E 8TH STREET TUCSON, AZ 85711

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: E Brothers Development LLC 18455 S Copper Point Dr Green Valley, AZ 85614

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 January 30, 2024

License No. ROC 333120

Re: Complaint No. 2023-13169

WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR

Dear Respondent:

After investigation, the Registrar determined that you failed to meet the requirements of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A), and now issues this Directive requiring you to take appropriate corrective action. Failure to comply with this Directive constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) and may result in the issuance of a citation, discipline of your license, and a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E) of up to $500.00. You must notify the Registrar’s assigned Investigator of your compliance with this Directive prior to 5:00 p.m. on February 27, 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: • Complete all work per contract • Satisfy all requirements of local jurisdictions • Remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:

Complaint Item 1: “FOUNDATION/SLAB Poor/Defective - Concrete at shower area has been poured flush with floor slab. This is a handicap shower - should be depressed at this location to allow for shaping shower floor for drainage and having tile flush with floor. "No curb" is specified in plans on site.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The concrete in the shower are is not recessed from the floor elevation, and does not have an adequate slope towards the drain. The concrete in the shower area is not per plan.

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 The plans on site specify: “No curb @ edge of concrete floor.” Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a): Departure from or disregard of: (a) Plans or specifications... Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 2: “- Nailers missing for installation of ceiling drywall in many areas.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are several areas of framing not ready for drywall, specifically, there are several areas of “backers” missing. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 3: “-Sill plate is loose and misaligned at wall coming in from back yard (on left).” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. In at least one location, the framing sill plates are not properly aligned. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 4: “-Sill plates are cracked and loose at both sides of hall closet.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are locations of split sill plats. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 5: “- Blocks are missing at ceiling line in many places.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Framing blocks at the ceiling line are missing in several locations. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 6: “-Studs are twisting or bowed in some areas.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are several studs excessively twisted. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 7: “-Large gaps noted at top of exterior walls where blocking and siding do not come together.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are significant gaps along the tops of the sheathing, around the full perimeter of the structure. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Complaint Item 8: “-Framing grade lumber used for fascia - typically a higher grade lumber is spec'd for this use.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Stud/framing grade material used of finished fascia material. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 9: “ROUGH-IN ELECTRICAL - At main panel (on outside wall) white wire for power to A/C should be taped or colored to properly identify it as a "hot" conductor.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. One of the “hot” wires from the main panel to the roof mounted HVAC unit has white insulation. International Residential Code (IRC) E3407.3 Insulation on the ungrounded conductors shall be a continuous color other than white, gray and green. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 10: “-Construction outlet at bottom of panel is hanging by its wires.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The receptacle and electrical box below the main panel is loose and hanging by the wires. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 11: “-Ground and neutral wires are not properly separated in subpanel in bedroom.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Grounding and grounded conductors are not isolated from each other in the sub-panel. Also stated as: Ground and neutral conductors are not isolated from each other in the sub-panel. International Residential Code (IRC) E3607.3.1 …Any installed grounded conductor shall not be connected to the equipment grounding conductor or to the grounding electrode(s). Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 12: “-One 40 amp breaker and wiring installed for new tankless water heater. Unit (and plans) indicate that 2 breakers and wires are required.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is currently only one 40 amp circuit to the water heater location. The plans on site specify two 40 amp circuits to this location. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a): Departure from or disregard of: (a) Plans or specifications... Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 13: “-Loose (old) wire in corner of addition is "hot" - advise removal or installing in secure junction box by electrician.” Investigator’s Observations: 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 There is a “live” wire hanging from the top of the original house wall, in the northwest corner of the addition. This wire is from the attic space of the original house structure, and hanging inside the new addition. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 14: “-Some wires are unsecured in attic.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are several locations of improper and inadequate support and securing of electrical wires. • Areas of flat cable stapled on edge o Table E3802.1 of the International Residential Code (IRC) states that flat cables shall not be stapled on the edge. • Areas of EMT clamps used as cable straps • Areas of plastic zip ties used a cable supports and straps • Areas of “P” clamps not attached Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 16: “-Open sewer pipe - flush with new pavers at back patio.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are two sewer pipes coming up through the pavers in the back yard. One is higher than the pavers, with a temporary cap, and creating a trip hazard. The other is flush with the pavers and not capped. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 18: “HVAC, DUCTING and SUPPORT Poor/Defective (1) Recommend coating PVC for condensate drain piping with reflective roof coating to prevent damage from sun.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is exposed and unpainted PVC pipe used for the condensation drain. PVC pipe is not rated for UV exposure. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 19: “(2) End of condensate drain piping extends past edge of roof. If no gutters are to be installed - this piping should be piped down near ground.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The condensate pipe terminates off the edge of the roof, with no elbow, no catch basin, and no gutter, and directly over a seating area. International Residential Code (IRC) M1411.3 Condensate shall not discharge into a street, alley or other areas where it would cause a nuisance. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Complaint Item 20: “(3) No ground wire has been installed between the disconnect and the unit's internal wiring. Recommend installing ground wire.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is no equipment ground connecting the HVAC unit to the electrical disconnect box. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 21: “(4) Joint in supply duct has not been sealed - advise sealing properly to prevent air loss.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is at least one unsealed and uninsulated “Y” duct connector in the attic space. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 22: “(5) Two flex ducts are contacting sharp corners of truss nails. Recommend re-locate or separate ducts to prevent damage and leaks. Inspect ducts for damage at these locations and repair if needed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There are at least three locations where flexible duct work is resting directly on top of, and being punctured by, metal gusset plates of the trusses. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 24: “(2) New roof has buckling, lifting at seams and coating thin and uneven in places. Recommend re-sealing seams where separated and additional coating be applied after all other roof work is completed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Areas of visibly thin coating, missing coating, and separating seams. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 25: “(3) Cricket required at A/C unit. Standing water at this location during inspection. Advise building cricket and roofing properly.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The base of the HVAC platform is approximately 45 inches wide on the uphill side. There is no cricket installed on the uphill side. International Residential Code (IRC) R903.2.2 A cricket or saddle shall be installed on the ridge side of any chimney or penetration more than 30 inches (762 mm) wide as measured perpendicular to the slope. Cricket or saddle coverings shall be sheet metal or of the same material as the roof covering. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Complaint Item 26: “(4) A cricket is required at the junction of the old roof and the new wall to properly divert drainage around. The cricket installed is too small and ends at a skylight where water was ponding during the inspection. This will be a leak point. Recommend building a larger cricket. Removal of skylight will be required (a solatube could be installed thru the cricket afterwards) and vents will have to be extended.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. A skylight is installed in the valley at the north side of the addition. This is creating ponding in excess of 1/2 inch depth. As stated in the Arizona workmanship Standards: Vents of other penetrations should not be located within 18 inches of valley centerline. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 27: “(5) Old roof has damage to coating and debris in areas near new construction. Recommend proper cleaning and re-coating when work is completed.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Roofing material around the addition is damaged and has debris embedded in the coating. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 28: “(6) Vent cover missing at existing house exhaust fan - advise replacing to prevent water entry.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. One metal roof vent cap missing the cap. One electrical conduit protruding through the roof with no cap. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 29: “(7) Drip edge flashing missing at NW corner of addition roof. Recommend installing properly.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Missing roof edge metal at northwest corner of addition. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 30: “SHEATHING & LATH Poor/Defective (1) Addition has already been stuccoed and painted. Typically - the pre-drywall inspection includes and evaluation of moisture barrier, foam and wire installation.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. As visible from inside the addition: sheathing has • Unsupported edges • Inadequate backing • Inadequate edge nailing Additionally, there is no evidence of lath inspection prior to stucco application.

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) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 31: “(2) Walls at rear and NE corner of addition have not been properly finished. Roof material has been wrapped up walls partway and reflective roof coating has been applied to roof paper and bare OSB. There should be Z flashing with built-up roof to bottom and stucco w/ moisture barrier and lath above it. Recommend re- finishing walls properly by builder.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. There is no stucco wall coverings on the north side of the addition. Roofing material has been poorly applied to the wall and coated with reflective coating. Some areas of the walls have exposed wall sheathing that is just coated with reflective roof coating. There is inadequate flashing between the roof and the stucco at the sides of the addition. There is no kick-out flashing at the sides of the addition. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 32: “WINDOWS AND DOORS Poor/Defective (1) Threshold is warped and unsecured at door to back yard - rain water coming through. Recommend repair, secure and seal threshold.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. The door threshold is missing parts and is not sealed to the concrete. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 33: “(2) Flashing at east window is melted or damaged near exterior wall. Recommend any needed repairs to ensure that future leaking does not occur.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. Flashing / water-proofing material around at least one window is deteriorated. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Complaint Item 34: “MISCELLANEOUS Poor/Defective (1) Fire foam missing at holes in top plates in all locations. Verify sealing of all gaps prior to installation of sheetrock.” Investigator’s Observations: Verified. No fire-stop material has been installed in openings in top plates of walls. Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154 (A)(3) - R4-9-108(a): Violation of any rule adopted by the registrar; Namely R 4-9-108(a) A contractor shall perform work in a professional and workmanlike manner.

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

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 Elements of a Contract Investigator’s Observations: The respondent’s contract is missing the following information: • The date the parties entered into the agreement. • The mailing address of the property owner. • An estimated date of completion • Information about the customer’s right to file a complaint with the registrar • Contact information for the registrar Governing Rule: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12), Namely A.R.S. § 32-1158(A) Minimum Elements of a Contract. Any contract in an amount of more than one thousand dollars entered into between a contractor and the homeowner of a property to be improved shall contain in writing at least the following information: 1: The name of the contractor and the contractor's business address and license number. 2: The name and mailing address of the owner and the jobsite address or legal description. 3: The date the parties entered into the contract. 4: The estimated date of completion of all work to be performed under the contract. 5: A description of the work to be performed under the contract. 6: The total dollar amount to be paid to the contractor by the owner for all work to be performed under the contract, including all applicable taxes. 7: The dollar amount of any advance deposit paid or scheduled to be paid to the contractor by the owner. 8: The dollar amount of any progress payment and the stage of construction at which the contractor will be entitled to collect progress payments during the course of construction under the contract. 9a: That the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the registrar for an alleged violation of section 32-1154, subsection A. 9b: The contract shall contain the registrar's telephone number and website address and shall state that complaints must be made within the applicable time period as set forth in section 32-1155, subsection A. 9c: The information in this paragraph must be prominently displayed in the contract in at least ten point bold type... 9d: ...and the contract shall be signed by the property owner and the contractor or the contractor's designated representative. REQUIRED CORRECTIVE ACTION: The respondent is to submit a copy of a current contract form that complies with A.R.S. § 32-1158

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

Complaint Item 15: “ROUGH-IN PLUMBING - Leaking noted at water supply to fire protection system for addition.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified. There was no evidence of leaking observed during this inspection. 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 Complaint Item 17: “-Reducer bushings stacked at fire sprinkler supply piping. These fittings are typically not permitted in fire protection systems and stacking reducers is also not allowed.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified as a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). This will need to be evaluated and determined by the local code official. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 23: “ROOFING (1) Active leaking observed at roof above door to back yard. Advise repair by roofer.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified. No leaks were observed during this inspection. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 35: “(2) Light coming thru gaps at bottom of walls around perimeter in a few places. Recommend caulking where needed to seal.” Investigator’s Observations: This allegation is NOT verified. This was not observed during this inspection. Governing Rule: N/A

Complaint Item 36: “I will be attaching the full inspection from HouseMaster Home inspection.” Investigator’s Observations: This statement by the complainant does not implicate a workmanship issue, or a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A). Governing Rule: N/A

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

Sincerely,

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

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 04/21 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Rahel Gebru, Case No. 2023-13169 COMPLAINANT, v. E Brothers Development LLC, CITATION License No. ROC 333120, RESPONDENT.

The Registrar issues this Citation to E Brothers Development LLC, (“Respondent”) under A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). If Respondent fails to answer this Citation by March 26, 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 24, 2023, Rahel Gebru, (“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)(2)(a)

Departure from or disregard of: (a) Plans or specifications in any material

respect that is prejudicial to another without consent of the owner or the owner's

of 6

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 duly authorized representative and without the consent of the person entitled to have the particular construction project or operation completed in accordance with such plans and specifications and code. Charge :2 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.

Charge :3 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12) - A.R.S. § 32-1158 Failure in any material respect to comply with this chapter; Namely A.R.S. § 32- 1158. Charge :4 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) Failure to take appropriate corrective action to comply with this chapter or with rules adopted pursuant to this chapter without valid justification within a reasonable period of time after receiving a written directive from the Registrar. The written directive shall set forth the time within which the contractor is to complete the remedial action. The time permitted for compliance shall not be less than fifteen days from the date of issuance of the directive. A license shall not be revoked or suspended nor shall any other penalty be imposed for a violation of this paragraph until after a hearing has been held.

If the matter proceeds to a hearing and the administrative law judge determines that any of the charges listed above are supported by a preponderance of the evidence, then Respondent’s license(s) may be subject to suspension or revocation, and Respondent may be subject to other penalties provided by law, including civil penalties under A.R.S. §§ 32-1154(E) and (F).

of 6

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 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. 2023-13169. How to File a Written Answer: Respondent’s written answer may be submitted in the following ways: In-Person: 1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007-2812 Mail: P.O. Box 18244, Phoenix, Arizona, 85005-8244 Email: [email redacted] 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 26, 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

of 6

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 administrative hearing and will notify all the parties at least 30 days before that hearing. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D). INVESTIGATOR’S APPEARANCE AS A WITNESS The Registrar’s assigned investigator will appear as a witness at the hearing. If either party demands the attendance at the hearing of any other person, that party must obtain and serve a subpoena in compliance with the rules and processes established by the Office of Administrative Hearings. RESPONDENT’S RIGHT TO REQUEST AN INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE Under A.R.S. § 41-1092.06, if Respondent submits a request to the Registrar for an 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

of 6

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 prior disciplinary record and current license(s) status may be considered as a mitigating or aggravating factor in determining the appropriate discipline. EVIDENTIARY DISCLAIMER By issuing this Citation, the Registrar is directing Respondent to file a written answer to the Citation and Complaint, showing cause, if any, why Respondent’s license(s) should not be suspended or revoked. A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). This Citation does not constitute proof that any charge or allegation in Complainant’s written complaint is in fact true. This Citation does not constitute proof that Respondent violated any statutory provision or rule adopted by the Registrar. Dated March 11, 2024. By: /s/ Gail Mathews Gail Mathews Legal Assistant II Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors

COPY of the foregoing mailed by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, March 11, 2024 to: Respondent Certified Mail No: [number redacted] E Brothers Development LLC 18455 S Copper Point Dr Green Valley, AZ 85614

Copy mailed by USPS First Class mail this same date to: E Brothers Development LLC 18455 S Copper Point Dr Green Valley, AZ 85614

Complainant Rahel Gebru 5512 E 8TH STREET TUCSON, AZ 85711 of 6

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 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. 2023-13169

of 6

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)

Rahel Gebru Mailing Address (Enter jobsite in Contract/Project section) City State Zip

5512 E 8TH STREET TUCSON Arizona 85711 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)

E Brothers Development LLC ROC 333120 Street Address City State Zip

18455 S Copper Point Dr Green Valley AZ 85614 Phone Number Email

520-730-9024 [email redacted] Name of Person(s) Representing License

David Espinosa Contract/Project Information Contract Date Contract Amount Amount Paid

May 7, 2023 $176,000.00 $156,000.00 Date Work Started Date Work Stopped Date Work Was Completed

May 7, 2023 July 13, 2023 Close of Escrow (New Home) Move-In Date (New-Home)

Jobsite Street Address City State Zip

7012 E Rosewood St Tucson AZ 85710 Name of Construction Site Owner Construction Site Name (if applicable)

Phone Number of Construction Site Owner Email of Construction Site Owner

[email redacted] This complaint is for 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 3 Licensed Complaint Form Departmental Use Only For Current or Suspended Licensees

The contract was Written All change orders were Both This project was Commercial This project involved Other Three bedroom and one bathroom addidtion A building permit was obtained by Property Owner T22CM05244 Tucson 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)

FOUNDATION/SLAB Poor/Defective - Concrete at shower area has been poured flush with floor slab. This is a handicap shower - should be depressed at this location to allow for shaping shower floor for drainage and having tile flush with floor. "No curb" is specified in plans on site. - Nailers missing for installation of ceiling drywall in many areas. -Sill plate is loose and misaligned at wall coming in from back yard (on left). -Sill plates are cracked and loose at both sides of hall closet. - Blocks are missing at ceiling line in many places. -Studs are twisting or bowed in some areas. -Large gaps noted at top of exterior walls where blocking and siding do not come together. -Framing grade lumber used for fascia - typically a higher grade lumber is spec'd for this use. ROUGH-IN ELECTRICAL - At main panel (on outside wall) white wire for power to A/C should be taped or colored to properly identify it as a "hot" conductor. -Construction outlet at bottom of panel is hanging by its wires. -Ground and neutral wires are not properly separated in subpanel in bedroom. -One 40 amp breaker and wiring installed for new tankless water heater. Unit (and plans) indicate that 2 breakers and wires are required. -Loose (old) wire in corner of addition is "hot" - advise removal or installing in secure junction box by electrician. -Some wires are unsecured in attic. ROUGH-IN PLUMBING - Leaking noted at water supply to fire protection system for addition. -Open sewer pipe - flush with new pavers at back patio. -Reducer bushings stacked at fire sprinkler supply piping. These fittings are typically not permitted in fire protection systems and stacking reducers is also not allowed. HVAC, DUCTING and SUPPORT Poor/Defective (1) Recommend coating PVC for condensate drain piping with reflective roof coating to prevent damage from sun. (2) End of condensate drain piping extends past edge of roof. If no gutters are to be installed - this piping should be piped down near ground. (3) No ground wire has been installed between the disconnect and the unit's internal wiring. Recommend installing ground wire. (4) Joint in supply duct has not been sealed - advise sealing properly to prevent air loss. (5) Two flex ducts are contacting sharp corners of truss nails. Recommend re-locate or separate ducts to prevent damage and leaks. Inspect ducts for damage at these locations and repair if needed. ROOFING (1) Active leaking observed at roof above door to back yard. Advise repair by roofer. (2) New roof has buckling, lifting at seams and coating thin and uneven in places. Recommend re-sealing seams where separated and additional coating be applied after all other roof work is completed. (3) Cricket required at A/C unit. Standing water at this location during inspection. Advise building cricket and roofing properly. (4) A cricket is required at the junction of the old roof and the new wall to properly divert drainage around. The cricket installed is too small and ends at a skylight where water was ponding during the inspection. This will be a leak point. Recommend building a larger cricket. Removal of skylight will be required (a solatube could be installed thru the cricket afterwards) and vents will have to be extended. (5) Old roof has damage to coating and debris in areas near new construction. Recommend proper cleaning and re-coating when work is completed. (6) Vent cover missing at existing house exhaust fan - advise replacing to prevent water entry. (7) Drip edge flashing missing at NW corner of addition roof. Recommend installing properly. SHEATHING & LATH Poor/Defective (1) Addition has already been stuccoed and painted. Typically - the pre-drywall inspection includes and evaluation of moisture barrier, foam and wire installation.

RCC099 12/05/18 Page 2 of 3 Licensed Complaint Form Departmental Use Only For Current or Suspended Licensees

(2) Walls at rear and NE corner of addition have not been properly finished. Roof material has been wrapped up walls part- way and reflective roof coating has been applied to roof paper and bare OSB. There should be Z flashing with built-up roof to bottom and stucco w/ moisture barrier and lath above it. Recommend re- finishing walls properly by builder. WINDOWS AND DOORS Poor/Defective (1) Threshold is warped and unsecured at door to back yard - rain water coming through. Recommend repair, secure and seal threshold. (2) Flashing at east window is melted or damaged near exterior wall. Recommend any needed repairs to ensure that future leaking does not occur. MISCELLANEOUS Poor/Defective (1) Fire foam missing at holes in top plates in all locations. Verify sealing of all gaps prior to installation of sheetrock. (2) Light coming thru gaps at bottom of walls around perimeter in a few places. Recommend caulking where needed to seal. I will be attaching the full inspection from HouseMaster Home inspection.

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

Rahel Gebru \complainant1\ \complainantd1\

RCC099 12/05/18 Page 3 of 3 Report ID: 231024-17017-JP / Gebru

Prepared for Exclusive Use by: Rahel Gebru

Address of Property: 7012 E Rosewood Cir Tucson AZ 85710

Date of Service: 10/24/2023

Company Providing Service: Jack Parker 59717

CMET Enterprises, LLC dba HouseMaster Home Inspections 6751 E. Camino Principal Tucson, AZ 85715

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 1 of 21 Report ID: 231024-17017-JP / Gebru SUMMARY OF INSPECTOR COMMENTS This Summary of Inspector Comments is only one section of the Inspection Report and is provided for guidance purposes only. This Summary isNOT A HOME INSPECTION REPORT and does not include information on all conditions or concerns associated with this home or property.The Inspection Report includes more detailed information on element ratings/conditions and associated information andmust be read and considered in its entirety prior to making any conclusive purchase decisions or taking any other action. Any questionable issues should be discussed with the Inspector and/or Inspection Company. Note: While listings in this Summary of Inspector Comments may serve as a guide to help prioritize remedial needs, the final decision regarding any action to be taken must be made by the client following consultation with the appropriate specialists or contractors. 1. PHASE 2 : PRE-DRYWALL INSPECTION 1.0 DESCRIPTION A list of noteworthy conditions and concerns are provided below. The purpose of this inspection is to identify construction conditions related to the visible and accessible elements at the time of inspection. These conditions should be remedied and otherwise appropriately addressed prior to the next phase of construction and title transfer. Design and code compliance issues are the responsibility of the builder and local code officials.

1.1 FOUNDATION/SLAB Poor/Defective Concrete at shower area has been poured flush with floor slab. This is a handicap shower - should be depressed at this location to allow for shaping shower floor for drainage and having tile flush with floor. "No curb" is specified in plans on site. Recommend cutting floor at shower and re-installing properly.

1.1 (Picture 1) 1.1 (Picture 2)

1.2 FRAMING Poor/Defective 1.2 (1) Nailers missing for installation of ceiling drywall in many areas. Recommend adding framing for nailers in all needed locations.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 2 of 21 1.2 (2) Sill plate is loose and misaligned at wall coming in from back yard (on left). Recommend re-set and secure sill plate properly.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 3 of 21 1.2 (3) Sill plates are cracked and loose at both sides of hall closet - advise repair and secure properly.

1.2 (4) Blocks are missing at ceiling line in many places. Advise adding blocks in all needed areas.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 4 of 21 1.2 (5) Studs are twisting or bowed in some areas. Recommend evaluation of studs by framer and repair or replace where needed.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 5 of 21 1.2 (6) Large gaps noted at top of exterior walls where blocking and siding do not come together. Many gaps are large enough for water or pest entry. Recommend repairs or sealing as needed.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 6 of 21 1.2 (7) Framing grade lumber used for fascia - typically a higher grade lumber is spec'd for this use. Check approved plans and change if plan specifies.

1.3 ROUGH-IN ELECTRICAL Poor/Defective 1.3 (1) At main panel (on outside wall) white wire for power to A/C should be taped or colored to properly identify it as a "hot" conductor. Wire is too short and cuts behind buss. Recommend re-route or splice to lengthen wire.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 7 of 21 1.3 (2) Construction outlet at bottom of panel is hanging by its wires. Advise repair to properly secure or removal by electrician.

1.3 (3) Ground and neutral wires are not properly separated in subpanel in bedroom. Recommend re-wiring to properly separate by a licensed electrician.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 8 of 21 1.3 (4) One 40 amp breaker and wiring installed for new tankless water heater. Unit (and plans) indicate that 2 breakers and wires are required. Recommend adding second 2-pole, 40 amp breaker in panel and install proper wire between panel and water heater location.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 9 of 21 1.3 (5) Loose (old) wire in corner of addition is "hot" - advise removal or installing in secure junction box by electrician.

1.3 (6) Some wires are unsecured in attic - advise adding staples where needed.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 10 of 21 1.4 ROUGH-IN PLUMBING Poor/Defective 1.4 (1) Leaking noted at water supply to fire protection system for addition. Recommend repair of leak by a licensed plumber.

1.4 (2) Open sewer pipe - flush with new pavers at back patio. Recommend cutting in proper "walk-on" cover for both clean-outs in this location.

1.4 (3) Reducer bushings stacked at fire sprinkler supply piping. These fittings are typically not permitted in fire protection systems and stacking reducers is also not allowed. Advise re-piping properly by a licensed plumber.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 11 of 21 1.5 HVAC, DUCTING and SUPPORT Poor/Defective 1.5 (1) Recommend coating PVC for condensate drain piping with reflective roof coating to prevent damage from sun.

1.5 (2) End of condensate drain piping extends past edge of roof. If no gutters are to be installed - this piping should be piped down near ground.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 12 of 21 1.5 (3) No ground wire has been installed between the disconnect and the unit's internal wiring. Recommend installing ground wire.

1.5 (4) Joint in supply duct has not been sealed - advise sealing properly to prevent air loss.

1.5 (5) Two flex ducts are contacting sharp corners of truss nails. Recommend re-locate or separate ducts to prevent damage and leaks. Inspect ducts for damage at these locations and repair if needed.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 13 of 21 1.6 ROOFING Poor/Defective 1.6 (1) Active leaking observed at roof above door to back yard. Advise repair by roofer.

1.6 (2) New roof has buckling, lifting at seams and coating thin and uneven in places. Recommend re-sealing seams where separated and additional coating be applied after all other roof work is completed.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 14 of 21 1.6 (3) Cricket required at A/C unit. Standing water at this location during inspection. Advise building cricket and roofing properly.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 15 of 21 1.6 (4) A cricket is required at the junction of the old roof and the new wall to properly divert drainage around. The cricket installed is too small and ends at a skylight where water was ponding during the inspection. This will be a leak point. Recommend building a larger cricket. Removal of skylight will be required (a solatube could be installed thru the cricket afterwards) and vents will have to be extended.

1.6 (5) Old roof has damage to coating and debris in areas near new construction. Recommend proper cleaning and re-coating when work is completed.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 16 of 21 1.6 (6) Vent cover missing at existing house exhaust fan - advise replacing to prevent water entry.

1.6 (7) Drip edge flashing missing at NW corner of addition roof. Recommend installing properly.

1.7 SHEATHING & LATH Poor/Defective 1.7 (1) Addition has already been stuccoed and painted. Typically - the pre-drywall inspection includes and evaluation of moisture barrier, foam and wire installation. Has the city already given approval for stucco installation? Check with city to verify.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 17 of 21 1.7 (2) Walls at rear and NE corner of addition have not been properly finished. Roof material has been wrapped up walls part-way and reflective roof coating has been applied to roof paper and bare OSB. There should be Z flashing with built-up roof to bottom and stucco w/ moisture barrier and lath above it. Recommend re- finishing walls properly by builder.

1.8 WINDOWS AND DOORS Poor/Defective 1.8 (1) Threshold is warped and unsecured at door to back yard - rain water coming through. Recommend repair, secure and seal threshold.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 18 of 21 1.8 (2) Flashing at east window is melted or damaged near exterior wall. Recommend any needed repairs to ensure that future leaking does not occur.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 19 of 21 1.9 MISCELLANEOUS Poor/Defective 1.9 (1) Fire foam missing at holes in top plates in all locations. Verify sealing of all gaps prior to installation of sheetrock.

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 20 of 21 1.9 (2) Light coming thru gaps at bottom of walls around perimeter in a few places. Recommend caulking where needed to seal.

Prepared Using HomeGauge http://www.HomeGauge.com : Licensed To Jack Parker

© Copyright 2001-2017 HouseMaster Each HouseMaster Franchise is an Independently Owned and Operated Business. Page 21 of 21 Rachel Gebru November 18, 2023 7012 E Rose Wood Tucson, Arizona 85710

Current Invoice:

1st Draw: $70,000 Partial Payment of $19,950 Received 5/8/2023 Partial Payment of $50,079 Received 5/10/2023 for Total Of $70,029

E Brothers Development was on site 5/2/23.Partial Demo of rear wall to gain access from alley. Removed large planter and concrete to haul. Leveled backyard where addition is to be built. Excavated footers and leveled addition location. Formed building and added rebar after compaction. Ran underground plumbing for new toilet and shower with 2 way clean out. Pre slab inspection with the City of Tucson inspection before poor.

2nd Draw : Payment of $60,000 Received 5/25/2023 Truss and lumber package delivered. Frame layout according to plans, hung trusses within 4 days. Rough frame inspection. First coat of roof Electrical panel and electrical boxes and ran electrical to both panel and boxes.

3rd Draw : Payment of $26,000 6//23/23 Set windows and hung both exterior doors. Set HVAC ran HVAC duct, plumbing top-out. Lath and Stucco, first coat of paint.

Thank You,

David Espinosa E Brothers Development LLC. 520-730-9024

(520) 730-9024 [email redacted] Thank You,

David Espinosa E Brothers Development LLC. 520-730-9024 3/20/24, 10:40 AM State of Arizona Mail - Re: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development

Answers - AZROC <[email redacted]>

Re: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development message

David Espinosa <[email redacted]> Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 10:18 AM To: David Espinosa <[email redacted]>, [email redacted]

John,

The permit was finally permit was finally approved for us to get into Rahel's at 7012 E Rosewood. We have been in there and are almost complete with the list of violations you had. I understand that we have until the 26th of March to complete but we still have a few outstanding issues. We are getting the crickett built in a the new HVAC unit to accommodate proper drainage this week, we wont be able to be get the roofers in until sometime next week . I have included a few pics to show our progress. Please call me so that I know where we are at with the ROC

Thank You,

David Espinosa E Brothers Development LLC. 520-730-9024

20240319_121804.jpg

20240319_121747.jpg

20240319_121747.jpg

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRQ3VCaPFAQ1cNUk8HKnkYPfW1QRiFNKDMCCrurFYfOLHIM7/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&per… 1/6 3/20/24, 10:40 AM State of Arizona Mail - Re: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRQ3VCaPFAQ1cNUk8HKnkYPfW1QRiFNKDMCCrurFYfOLHIM7/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&per… 2/6 3/20/24, 10:40 AM State of Arizona Mail - Re: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRQ3VCaPFAQ1cNUk8HKnkYPfW1QRiFNKDMCCrurFYfOLHIM7/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&per… 3/6 3/20/24, 10:40 AM State of Arizona Mail - Re: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development

David Espinosa E Brothers Development LLC. [email redacted] 520-730-9024

On Mon, Feb 26, 2024 at 6:20 AM David Espinosa <[email redacted]> wrote: John, Smith,

John,

When we last spoke you told me that I had 4 weeks to finish the Rahel Gebru project at 7012 E. Rosewood Tucson. I have not had the opportunity to even get started because the new revisions that were submitted by Rahlels people have not been approved. Once they get approved I can get in and prepare for an inspection by the City of Tucson. Once approved I can then get started on finishing this project.

Thank You,

David Espinosa E Brothers Development LLC. [email redacted] 520-730-9024

On Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 3:20 PM David Espinosa <[email redacted]> wrote:

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: John Smith <[email redacted]> Date: Tue, Nov 7, 2023 at 2:02 PM Subject: Fwd: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development To: David P Espinosa <[email redacted]>

Mr. Espinosa,

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRQ3VCaPFAQ1cNUk8HKnkYPfW1QRiFNKDMCCrurFYfOLHIM7/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&per… 4/6 3/20/24, 10:40 AM State of Arizona Mail - Re: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development I am forwarding you information received from the property owner. Thank you,

John Smith Investigator #194 Arizona Registrar of Contractors 1700 W. Washington St., Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007 Phone: 520-483-0027

The ROC is now on social media! Make sure to follow us on:

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

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Rahel Gebru <[email redacted]> Date: Mon, Nov 6, 2023 at 4:02 PM Subject: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development To: [email redacted] <[email redacted]>

Hello John,

I hope this message finds you well. I am Rahel Gebru, the individual who hired E brothers Development to build the construction of a three-bedroom and one-bath addition, which started on May 7, 2023. Unfortunately, as of July, construction work came to an end. When I inquired about the reason for this delay, the contractor, David Espinosa, informed me that the Fire Department and the City of Tucson were preventing them from continuing their work.

In response to this, I decided to investigate the situation myself. I also sought the expertise of a professional house inspector, who conducted a thorough inspection of the house. The inspection reported a significant number of problems and defects within the construction. When I presented this report to David Espinosa, he contacted the ROC

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRQ3VCaPFAQ1cNUk8HKnkYPfW1QRiFNKDMCCrurFYfOLHIM7/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&per… 5/6 3/20/24, 10:40 AM State of Arizona Mail - Re: Regarding 7012 E Rosewood Tucson, AZ 85710 Addition/ebrothers development (Registrar of Contractors). I allowed him the opportunity to address these issues. However, it has now been over a week, and there has been no communication from him regarding a plan or a course of action to resolve the problems.

I have reached a point of physical, emotional, and financial exhaustion due to this situation. The trust I had placed in the contractor, David, has been severely betrayed. I have attached the inspection report for your reference, and I kindly request that you investigate his work. You are welcome to visit at any time during the week. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to reach out to me.

Sincerely,

Rahel Gebru 520-393-9359

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRQ3VCaPFAQ1cNUk8HKnkYPfW1QRiFNKDMCCrurFYfOLHIM7/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&per… 6/6 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