ALJDEC - Licensing

2024A-05935-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2024-12-20

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Irene Duarte

COMPLAINANT,

Eco Life 21 Century LLC

DBA: Vital Roofing

License No. ROC 334792,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2024A-05935-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: December 19, 2024

APPEARANCES: Irene Duarte appeared on behalf of herself. Eugene Urias appeared on behalf of Eco Life 21 Century LLC DBA: Vital Roofing.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson

________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Eco Life 21 Century LLC DBA: Vital Roofing Respondent holds Specialty Dual CR-42 Roofing License No. 334792 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar or ROC). Eugene Urias is Respondent’s qualifying party.

2. On or about September 2, 2022, Respondent agreed to repair Complainant’s roof and add roof coating to the roof, for the amount of $3,700.

3. Respondent provided an invoice to Complainant informing her that he would provide a “10 year white coating” and a two-year watertight seal warranty. The invoice included the following language:

A pice of Plywood will be replaced around AC area to repair leak before coating application . Will be layng down new roled material or fabric of coating on exposed areas that have no roll roofing. Once Roof is ready and prepped will finally apply a 10 year white coating .

If any additional work needs to be done this well be outside of the scope of the total amount charge of $3,700.

Customer will have a two-year watertight seal warranty. Roof may not be altered in anyway or damage by some other person or warranty will be voided . Warranty will be affected a day of completion.

Customer and the contractor has agreed on $1,850 up front and The remaining balance due at a max point of 30 days. Customer well have a delay payment fee of $150 added to the bill if customer cannot pay as soon as job is completed with that fee customer will have a 30 day time frame to complete final payment.

Up front was paid electronic deposit $1,850 on 09/02/2022

All errors in original.

4. On or about September 7, 2022, Respondent began work.

5. On or about October 28, 2022, Respondent stopped work.

6. On May 21, 2024, the Registrar received a complaint from Complainant alleging poor work on the part of Respondent.

7. On June 7, 2024, an investigator from the Registrar, Ruben Perez, Sr. (Investigator Perez Sr.), conducted a job-site inspection.

8. On March 25, 2024, Investigator Perez Sr. issued a Directive against Respondent’s license. The March 25, 2024 Directive provided, in relevant part, as follows:

.....................................

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 Friday, June 28, 2024.

RESTRICTIONS

• You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside

the scope of your license.

• If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons1, or is inactive,

expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in

any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the

suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been

reactivated.

DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS

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

Complaint Item 1: Both apartments have water damage. Apartment A has mold.

Apartment B has to be repaired as water comes in through light fixtures. The area around the A/C is exposed, wood is exposed.

Investigator’s Observation: Roof (1 building for both apartments) under air

conditioning unit was observed with plywood exposed to the elements. Kitchen wall in Apartment A (front) was observed with dark stains near stove. Water damages were observed in master bedroom ceiling, West bedroom ceiling, living room ceiling and wall, kitchen wall and bathroom ceiling and walls. Respondent to identify and correct water intrusion and interior water damages by appropriate means.

Governing Rule: Workmanship Rule: ARS 32-1154(A) (3) specifically to Rule 4-9-108

.....................................

9. On June 20, 2024, Investigator Perez Sr. issued an Amended Directive that provided, in relevant part, as follows:

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 Friday, June 28, 2024.

RESTRICTIONS

• You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside

the scope of your license.

• If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons1, or is inactive,

expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in

any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the

suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been

reactivated.

DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS

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

Complaint Item 1: Both apartments have water damage. Apartment A has mold.

Apartment B has to be repaired as water comes in through light fixtures. The area around the A/C is exposed, wood is exposed.

Investigator’s Observation: Roof (1 building for both apartments) under air

conditioning unit was observed with plywood exposed to the elements. Kitchen wall in Apartment A (front) was observed with dark stains near stove. Water damages in Apartment B were observed in master bedroom ceiling, West bedroom ceiling, living room ceiling and wall, kitchen wall and bathroom ceiling and walls. Respondent to identify and correct water intrusion and interior water damages by appropriate means.

Governing Rule: Workmanship Rule: ARS 32-1154(A) (3) specifically to Rule 4-9-108

..............................

10. On July 22, 2024, Investigator Perez Sr. conducted a compliance job-site inspection. At the job-site inspection, Investigator Perez Sr. discovered that Respondent failed to comply with Complaint Item 1. Investigator Perez Sr.’s compliance job-site inspection notes provided, in relevant part, as follows, “This item was not complied with as per written directive as water damage in apartment B living room wall and bathroom wall were not repaired. Ceiling repairs were made in apartment B however, do not blend in with ceiling.”

11. On August 2, 2024, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent’s license, alleging that Respondent may have violated A.A.C. Rule 4-9-108(A) and Ariz. Rev. Stat. sections 32-1154(A) (3) and (22).

12. Respondent filed a timely answer to the Citation.

13. The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an

evidentiary hearing.

14. On October 17, 2024, Investigator Perez Sr. conducted a pre-hearing inspection and discovered that no additional repairs were made to Complainant’s roof.

15. A hearing was conducted on December 19, 2024.

16. At hearing, Investigator Perez Sr. testified regarding his investigation of the complaint. Complainant testified on her own behalf. Edgar Urias testified on behalf of Respondent.

Testimony of Investigator Perez Sr.

17. Investigator Perez Sr. stated that he issued an Amended Directive to all parties after Complainant notified him of pre-existing water damage. Investigator Perez Sr. stated that he verified pre-existing water damage.

Testimony of Complainant

18. Respondent provided Complainant with a guarantee regarding the roof repair and the roof coating. Mr. Urias gave Complainant a roof warranty and told her that she would not have problems with the roof for ten years.

19. I find Complainant’s testimony to be credible.

Testimony of Edgar Urias

20. Mr. Urias offered Complainant a full roof repair for approximately $15,000. Complainant told Mr. Urias that her husband was in the hospital and they could not afford to pay for a full roof repair. Mr. Urias stated that Complainant had a manufacturer’s warranty, but he alleged that he provided no warranty to Complainant.

Later in the hearing, Mr. Urias said that he would warranty the roof repairs, but not the entire roof.

21. Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s disciplinary history as shown on the Registrar’s public website on December 20, 2024. Respondent’s license record shows that its licensed was issued on September 16, 2021, and that there is only one open complaint against Respondent’s license. Respondent’s license record also shows that one complaint has resulted in discipline against Respondent’s license.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See A.R.S. section 32-1101 et seq.

The burden of proof at an administrative hearing falls to the party

asserting a claim, right, or entitlement and the standard of proof on all issues in these matters is by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.A.C. R2-19-119.

3. The Administrative Law Judge may consider ROC’s administrative record. See Ariz. Admin. Code section R4-9-118.

4. A preponderance of the evidence is “such proof as convinces the trier of

fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence section 5 (1960).

5. The preponderance of the evidence shows that the issues found by Investigator Perez Sr. regarding the repair and coating of Complainant’s roof constituted poor workmanship, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(A).

6. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent failed to

correct Complaint Item 1 of the Registrar’s Directive, as shown in Finding of Fact 10, without valid justification in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(22).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend ROC License: No. 334792 held by Eco Life 21 Century LLC DBA: Vital Roofing, for three days.

It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(E).

It is further recommended that no future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1101(A) (7), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.

In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be forty (40) days from the date of that certification.

Done this day, December 20, 2024.

/s/ Velva Moses-Thompson

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Irene Duarte

[email redacted]

Eco Life 21 Century LLC

DBA: Vital Roofing

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff