2024A-02309-CHC-ROC Notice of Hearing & Packet MAILED

2024A-02309-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-06-07

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Irv Arenberg , Case No. 2024-02309

COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2024A-02309-CHC-ROC

v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON CONTESTED CASE Durango Masonry and Tile LLC License No. ROC 337830,

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

HEARING INFORMATION The hearing is set for:

July 24, 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 May 16, 2024. SHORT AND PLAIN STATEMENT OF THE MATTERS ASSERTED

The complaint and citation allege that the Respondent committed the following act(s): Charge: 1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(a) Charge: 2 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22)

THE PARTIES TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING Because Respondent is a licensee and is charged with an act(s) or omission(s) that is cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Respondent is a party to this case and will be a party to the hearing. Because Complainant alleged Respondent committed an act(s) or omission(s) that is cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Complainant is a party to this case and will

be a party to the hearing.

Respondent and Complainant, as the parties to the hearing, will present evidence and

argument to the administrative law judge.

The Registrar’s assigned investigator will appear as a witness at the hearing. RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED The parties to the administrative hearing may choose to be represented by an attorney.

A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(B). If one of the parties is a company, the company may be represented

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

1156(B).

CHANGE OF ADDRESS Each party must inform the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings of any change of address within five (5) days of the change. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04.

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

to -1092.12, and A.A.C. R2-19-101 to -122. The parties should review the statutes, rules, and processes governing the administrative hearing. Copies of the statutes, rules, and articles regarding the administrative hearing process can be found at https://www.azoah.com/.

REGISTRAR’S APPEARANCE BY VIDEO CONFERENCE OR TELEPHONE

The Registrar’s investigators, employees, and attorneys will appear at the hearing via video conference or telephone unless requested by a party to appear in-person. Requests for the Registrar’s investigators, employees, or attorneys to appear in-person must be filed with the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the hearing date.

HEARING PACKET

In the interests of administrative efficiency, the Registrar compiles and discloses

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

SUBPOENAS FOR TESTIMONY FROM A WITNESS OR DOCUMENTS

The parties to the hearing must be prepared to present evidence in support of their

case. If a party wants to obtain testimony from a witness or documents not in the party’s

possession, the party must prepare and file a written subpoena for the Administrative Law Judge to review and sign, if approved. A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(C). Forms for requesting a

subpoena can be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’ website at www.azoah.com. The party seeking a subpoena must serve notice on all the parties to the hearing, and on the Registrar. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

At least seven calendar days before the hearing, each party must prepare and serve a disclosure statement on all other parties, and file it with the Office of Administrative Hearings. A.A.C. R4-9-118; A.A.C. R2-19-108. The disclosure statement must include any exhibit the party will use at the hearing. A party’s failure to timely disclose any witness or exhibit, without good cause, may result in the administrative law judge excluding those witnesses or exhibits from being used at the hearing. A.A.C. R4-9-118(C). A sample disclosure form is available on the Registrar’s website at https://roc.az.gov/forms/RC-L-800A%20- %20Prehearing%20Disclosure%20Statement%2020191007v4.pdf

CHANGING THE HEARING DATE

The date of the hearing may only be advanced or delayed on the agreement of the

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

be changed by filing a written agreement of the parties to change the date of the hearing. The written agreement must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmitted to the Registrar and all other parties. The assigned Administrative Law Judge may be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’ web portal at www.azoah.com

If a party would like to move the date of the hearing without agreement of all parties, the party must file a written motion with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmit a copy to the Registrar and all other parties. The motion must state in detail good cause for why the date of the hearing should be advanced or delayed, and the position of all other parties regarding the advancement or delay. A party may also file a motion asserting a right to an expedited hearing upon a showing of

extraordinary circumstances or the possibility of irreparable harm. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(E).

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

Complaints – Resolved/Settled/Withdrawn.”

Dated June 7, 2024.

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

Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail June 7, 2024 to:

Respondent(s) Durango Masonry and Tile LLC 806 E Stephens Dr. Tempe, AZ 85283

Complainant(s) Irv Arenberg 15357 E Verbena Dr. Fountain Hills, AZ 85268

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. 2024-02309 /

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: Irv Arenberg 15357 East Verbena Drive Fountain Hills, AZ 85268

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 Respondent: Durango Masonry and Tile LLC 806 E Stephens Dr Tempe, AZ 85283

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 February 26, 2024

Re: Complaint No. 2024-02309

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

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

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for Wednesday, March 20, 2024 at 10:45 AM. The Complainant is required to be present. The Respondent’s attendance is requested and encouraged. The Registrar encourages both parties to make a good faith effort to resolve this complaint prior to the jobsite inspection.

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

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

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 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, Robert Di Alto Robert Di Alto Investigator 602 7716758 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 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 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 After doing a Jobsite Inspection, the Registrar’s Investigator will leave the jobsite and review the evidence provided during the inspection. Generally, the investigator does not make any determination at the time of the jobsite inspection regarding whether the allegations listed in the complaint are supported. ● If the allegations are confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator may issue a Written Directive telling the contractor to correct the poor or incomplete work. ● If the allegations are not confirmed, the Registrar’s Investigator will close the complaint.

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

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 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 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 professionalism to complete the work. Moreover, the complainant may not dictate the manner of repair. If the contractor fails to appropriately correct the work according to the contract, the Registrar will issue a citation.

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

Work performed after the directive ends: After the Directive period ends, a property owner may choose to allow the contractor to continue its work. The Registrar encourages parties to work cooperatively, but cannot require a homeowner to continue to allow a contractor access to the property after the Directive period ends in order for the administrative process to continue. Denying access after the Directive ends is not grounds to close or dismiss a complaint.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C008 12/23 Jobsite Inspection Notes

Case No.: 2024-02309 Investigator: Robert Di Alto Inspection Date: Wednesday, March 20, 2024 Inspection Time: 10:45 AM

Complainant: Irv Arenberg Respondent: Durango Masonry Not Present: and Tile LLC Not Present:

Jobsite General Notes:

JSI photos taken with my Google Pixel Phone camera. JSI audio recorded with my Olympus Digital Voice Recorder model DM-720. JSI photos and audio have been placed into the ROC complaint file.

Compliance Item: 1 - Roof repair and removal of original balustrades done improperly, and now roof repair is leaking again, Investigator’s Observation: Unverified. Complainant stated that this complaint item has been corrected prior to this jobsite inspection. No further action required by the Respondent. Governing Rule: N/A

Compliance Item: 2 - New balustrades not installed correctly and to the architects drawings specs, they damaged and had to buy more new ones Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed that the installation does not appear to be in accordance with the Manufacturer’s instructions and specifications, and is in violation of IRC R312.1.3 Opening Limitations.

Required guards shall not have openings from the walking surface to the required guard height that allow a sphere of 4” in diameter to pass through.

The complaint item does not meet minimum workmanship standards. The Respondent shat correct by the appropriate means. Governing Rule: Workmanship Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3), namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C011 12/23

Compliance Item: 3 - Installed in an incorrect location by 2 feet, and to correct problem, needs to be corrected at big cost in time-material Investigator’s Observation: Verified. The Complainant stated that he provided the Respondent with layout and the Respondent did not follow plans and specifications. The Respondent stated that he didn’t install in the same location as the previous handrail and balusters because it would not be installed over an existing beam then. Governing Rule: Workmanship Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3), namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliance Item: 4 - French door was sold to me stating it was custom door was installed improperly and door was not custom. was stock Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed light from the exterior at several locations around the door. There are visible gaps at the interior door trim and the exterior perimeter is not finished properly. Exterior lath is visible at the head jamb and there is a large gap between the stucco and the door. The complaint item is not installed to professional industry standards. The Respondent shall correct by the appropriate means. Governing Rule: Workmanship Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3), namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

Compliance Item: 5 - Walk on deck was repaired improperly and is now leaking and did not finish completely Investigator’s Observation: Verified. I observed several areas where the anti-slip sand is not visible and appears to be missing from the finished surface. The overall deck finish is inconsistent and varies. The Respondent shall correct by the appropriate means. Governing Rule: Workmanship Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3), namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C011 12/23

Complaint #2024-02309 P 1 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 2 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 3 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 4 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 5 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 6 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 7 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 8 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 9 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 10 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 11 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 12 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 13 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 14 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 15 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 16 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 17 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 18 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 19 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 20 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 21 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 22 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 23 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 24 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 25 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 26 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 27 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 28 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 29 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 30 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 31 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 32 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 33 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 34 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 35 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 36 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 37 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 38 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 39 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complaint #2024-02309 P 40 JSI date 03/20/2024 at 10:45 AM JSI PHOTOS Complainant: irv arenberg 15357 east verbenadrive fountain hills, AZ 85268

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 Respondent: Durango Masonry and Tile LLC 806 E Stephens Dr Tempe, AZ 85283

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 March 25, 2024

License No. ROC 337830

Re:Complaint No. 2024-02309

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 04/19/2024.

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 reasons 1, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.

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

Required guards shall not have openings from the walking surface to the required guard height that allow a sphere of 4” in diameter to pass through.

The complaint item does not meet minimum workmanship standards. The Respondent shat correct by the appropriate means. This means the license is suspended for lack of qualifying party, lack of bond, nonrenewal, Recovery Fund payout, or for any reason listed in A.R.S. § 32-1124(F).

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 Governing Rule: Workmanship Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3), namely R4-9-108, Poor work not performed in accordance with professional industry standards.

ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 Please direct all questions regarding this Directive to the undersigned Investigator.

Sincerely, Robert Di Alto Robert Di Alto Investigator 602 7716758 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C009 12/23 4/2/24, 12:33 PM State of Arizona Mail - Please amend ROC Complaint No. 2024-02309 (against Gregg Link/Durango Masonry

Robert Di Alto <[email redacted]>

Please amend ROC Complaint No. 2024-02309 (against Gregg Link/Durango Masonry message

irv arenberg <[email redacted]> Mon, Apr 1, 2024 at 3:16 PM To: Robert Di Alto <[email redacted]>

Hi Robert,

Please amend ROC Complaint No. 2024-02309 (against Gregg Link/Durango Masonry) and add the additional damages necessary to repair the damaged roof /ceiling water damage and remove and reinstall the new lightweight deck railing/balustrades. This was not originally discussed with you last week as we only focused on the original complaint component regarding the incomplete and incorrect railing system installation with Gregg Link in attendance.

NEW ROOF AND CEILING DAMAGE, (presumed as a result of improper installation of replacement deck railing/balustrades}

The brand new roofing that was installed with all new treated plywood and roofing material was done ~ 2 years ago, just prior to installing the new deck railing/balustrades by Gregg Link/Durango. It is now clearly evident that the new roof has also sustained definite damages requiring repairs, as evidenced by the new leaking from the roof through the ceiling. This obvious water damage is all new since the new deck railing installation by Gregg Link/Durango Masonry.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=129aee39bd&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:[number redacted]&simpl=msg-f:[number redacted]… 1/5 4/2/24, 12:33 PM State of Arizona Mail - Please amend ROC Complaint No. 2024-02309 (against Gregg Link/Durango Masonry

The reason for the old balustrades and the railing to be removed, was to repair the roof they were sitting upon.

Apparently when Gregg's team was installing the replacement railing system with the required metal rod inserts into the roof, they made a definite defect into and through the new roof that is now leaking water, damaging both the new roof and damaging the ceiling under the roof (see photos). The exact nature of this defect can not be readily determined now, except it has now occurred only after new roofing and the installation

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=129aee39bd&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:[number redacted]&simpl=msg-f:[number redacted]… 2/5 4/2/24, 12:33 PM State of Arizona Mail - Please amend ROC Complaint No. 2024-02309 (against Gregg Link/Durango Masonry

of the replacement railing by Gregg and his team. Note: Gregg's team was rarely supervised and often just left to their own devices.

The extent of the new roof damage can only be confirmed when the old /replacement railing is removed in order to repair the roof, and then to correctly reinstall the replacement railing.

Please add the roof/ceiling damage to this complaint and reinspect as necessary.

Also, please add these additional deck railing information photos to my ROC matter you are already assessing...

#1. You can see the original placement of the Balustrade (Concrete) railing before the roof repair, and that distance to the edge of the roof of ~less than one foot, as when we bought the house.

#2. Now the incorrect replacement of the original railing by Gregg Link/Durango is notably at a much greater distance to the edge of the roof than originally, and not where "the to scale Architect drawing" given to Gregg at the beginning of the project would place the new deck railing. We are losing over 100-200 square feet of usable deck surface. There was no need for any permit as we were only replacing the original deck railing with a much lighter material.

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=129aee39bd&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:[number redacted]&simpl=msg-f:[number redacted]… 3/5 4/2/24, 12:33 PM State of Arizona Mail - Please amend ROC Complaint No. 2024-02309 (against Gregg Link/Durango Masonry

n #3. This view shows how significant the loss of usable deck area is. It makes a significant difference in what useful arrangement of furniture can be practically utilized and a comfortable fit on the new existing deck compared to the original Deck.

#4. The deck walking area was supposed to be resurfaced completely as it is a high traffic social deck area, not only a roof, with a non-skid waterproof roofing material. It https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=129aee39bd&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:[number redacted]&simpl=msg-f:[number redacted]… 4/5 4/2/24, 12:33 PM State of Arizona Mail - Please amend ROC Complaint No. 2024-02309 (against Gregg Link/Durango Masonry

was not applied thoroughly or evenly.

Thank you for updating and amending my complaint. I am available for any additional questions or photo documentation.

Irv Arenberg

I. Kaufman Arenberg MD Author and Director, The Killing Vincent Project (KVP) The Greatest Art Heist In History-Twenty-six van Gogh's Stolen in One Afternoon 1890" 15357 East Verbena Drive Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 516 729 9402 cell [email redacted] www.killingvincent.com

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=129aee39bd&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:[number redacted]&simpl=msg-f:[number redacted]… 5/5 Complainant: irv arenberg 15357 east verbenadrive fountain hills, AZ 85268

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C007 12/23 Respondent: Durango Masonry and Tile LLC 806 E Stephens Dr Tempe, AZ 85283

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C007 12/23 April 2, 2024

Re: Complaint No. 2024-02309

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

After the initial filing of the complaint 2024-02309, the Complainant filed the attached amended complaint containing additional complaint items.

A jobsite inspection is scheduled for Monday, April 22, 2024 at 11:30 AM. The Complainant is required to be present. The Respondent’s attendance is requested and encouraged. The Registrar encourages both parties to make a good faith effort to resolve this complaint prior to the jobsite inspection.

COMPLAINANT: 1. Under A.R.S. § 32-1155(D)(1), the Respondent must be allowed, upon request, the opportunity to inspect the amended complaint items 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 the amended complaint items. 2. The Registrar may also be precluded from taking further action on the amended complaint items, if the work that is the subject of the amended 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. Additionally, please secure any animals.

RESPONDENT: 1. Enclosed is a copy of the amended complaint. Under A.R.S. § 32-1155(D) you must be allowed, upon request, the opportunity 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 amended complaint, please submit a response to the enclosed complaint to the assigned investigator prior to the scheduled inspection. 3. If you do not attend the jobsite inspection, your absence may negatively impact the investigation, and your interests. 4. If a building permit(s) was required for this project, please have the building permit information available at the jobsite inspection.

If either party needs to reschedule the jobsite inspection, please notify the assigned investigator at least three business days prior to the inspection date to schedule a new date and time. 1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C007 12/23 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, Robert Di Alto Robert Di Alto Investigator 602 7716758 [email redacted] 1700 W Washington St, Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov C007 12/23 AMENDED 04/02/2024 Licensed Complaint Form Departmental Use Only For Current or Suspended Licensees 2024-02309

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

irv arenberg Mailing Address (Enter jobsite in Contract/Project section) City State Zip

15357 east verbenadrive fountain hills Arizona 85268 Phone Number Email

(516) 729-9402 [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)

Durango Masonry and Tile LLC ROC 337830 Street Address City State Zip

806 E Stephens Dr Tempe AZ 85283 Phone Number Email

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

Gregory Link Contract/Project Information Contract Date Contract Amount Amount Paid

August 22, 2022 $20,000.00 $20,000.00 Date Work Started Date Work Stopped Date Work Was Completed

August 22, 2022 December 9, 2022 Close of Escrow (New Home) Move-In Date (New-Home)

Jobsite Street Address City State Zip

15357 East Verbena Drive Fountain Hills AZ 85268 Name of Construction Site Owner Construction Site Name (if applicable)

Phone Number of Construction Site Owner Email of Construction Site Owner

[number redacted] [email redacted] This complaint is for Abandonment;Poor Work;Other I have contacted the contractor by Have you filed a complaint in court? No Has any work been corrected? Yes

RCC099 12/05/18 Page 1 of 2 Licensed Complaint Form Departmental Use Only For Current or Suspended Licensees 2024-02309

lux home remodeling The contract was Both All change orders were Oral This project was Residential This project involved Remodel

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

Hired Gregory link to install my balusters replacements, after in adequate roof repair. Baluster rods were inaccurately placed in wrong area. He provided no onsite supervision to his workers who spoke no english. He priced us out a new custom french door. He ended up giving us a stock window depot vinyl door. Allegations Listed on Complaint:

*Roof repair and removal of original balustrades done improperly, and now roof repair is leaking again, *

New balustrades not installed correctly and to the architects drawings specs, they damaged and had to buy more new ones

Installed in an incorrect location by 2 feet, and to correct problem, needs to be corrected at big cost in time-material

French door was sold to me stating it was customdoor was installed improperly and door was not custom. was stock

*Walk on deck was repaired improperly and is now leaking and did not finish completely * 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

irv arenberg \complainant1\ \complainantd1\

RCC099 12/05/18 Page 2 of 2 Complainant: irv arenberg 15357 east verbenadrive fountain hills, AZ 85268