ALJDEC

97F-P0201-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1997-12-15

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|RAY WOJCIK, |(| | | |(|Case No.: P97-0201 | |Complainant, |(| | | |(|Docket No.: 97F-P0201-ROC | |vs. |(| | | |(|Recommended | |License No. 118305, Class B of |(|Decision and Order | |CROWN GENERAL, INC., |(| | | |(| | |Respondent. |(| | | |(| |

HEARING: December 10th, 1997, at 10:00 a.m. Appearances: The Complainant appeared in his own behalf. The Respondent appeared through counsel, Mr. Duane P. Smith. Administrative Law Judge: Grant Winston

This matter was brought on for administrative hearing on Wednesday, December 10th, 1997. The Complainant appeared and represented himself. The Respondent was represented by Mr. Duane P. Smith, Attorney-at-Law. Testimony and other evidence was presented and, based on the record taken as a whole, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order are made:

FINDINGS OF FACTS

1. The Respondent herein is, and at all times material hereto was, a licensed contractor in the State of Arizona, holding Class B License Number 118305.

2. The Complainant contracted with the Respondent on or about October 20th, 1996, for the Respondent to, in pertinent part, ”Install Insulated Roofover System to complete Mobile Home to include Tip out and Back Porch.”

3. The Respondent performed the work for which it was contracted, and the Complainant, on December 3rd, 1996, signed a “Certificate of Satisfactory Completion” relative to the job.

4. Later, the Complainant filed the instant complaint with the Registrar of Contractors. In the complaint the Complainant raised five items: 1. The Respondent left approximately two feet of steel attached to the aluminum installed; 2. Respondent left approximately ten inches of steel which voids manufacturer’s warranty; 3. Aluminum on porch rest was wrinkled (cracked) and patched; 4. A hole where the cooler was not reinforced before installing the roof, and 5. A roof leak at the addition to the Arizona Room.

5. Pursuant to the complaint, the Registrar of Contractors’ Inspector Mr. Buddy Brown conducted a job site inspection and issued a Corrective Work Order dated May 15th, 1997. The Corrective Work Order found that Items 1, 2, and 3, of the Complaint were acceptable, requiring no corrective work. Mr. Brown ordered corrective work be taken as to Items 4 and 5.

6. A service call was made by the Respondent to service the roof pursuant to the Corrective Work Order, on May 19th, 1997. The Respondent at that time performed the following: “1 End of addition where room joins trailer has been sealed. 2 Old cooler jack duct has been properly insulated & reinforced. 3 customer acknowledges receipt of warranty.” The Complainant signed the accompanying Service Requisition sheet, thus indicating that the service described had been satisfactorily completed. This was done May 19th, 1997.

Conclusions of Law

1. This hearing was held under authority of and pursuant to A.R.S. §32- 1156, and A.R.S. §41-1092.

2. The Citation and Complaint in the instant action charges the Respondent with possible violations of A.R.S. §32-1154.A.3., (namely A.A.C. R4-9- 108 Poor Workmanship), 7., and 23.

3. There is no credible and substantial evidence tending to show that the Respondent violated any of the provisions of law as set forth in the Citation and Complaint. Recommended Order

Wherefore, it is hereby recommended that Citation and Complaint P97- 0201, together with the complaint on which it is based, be dismissed, and this matter closed.

Dated this 15th day of December, 1997.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ Grant Winston Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of December, 1997, to:

Michael P. Goldwater, Director Registrar of Contractors 800 W. Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007

Transmitted by:

-----------------------