ALJDEC

97F-P0225-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1998-07-07

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

| |§| | |BERNICE KOZIMOR, |§|CASE NO.: P97-0225 | | |§| | |Complainant, |§|DOCKET NO.: 97F-P0225-ROC | | |§| | |-v- |§| | | |§|RECOMMENDED | |License No. 063818, Class B- of |§|DECISION AND ORDER | |Michael Richard Wing d.b.a. |§| | |MICHAEL WING BUILDERS (INDIV), |§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: Wednesday, June 24, 1998, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared on her own behalf. The Respondent appeared on his own behalf. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for hearing on June 24, 1998. The Complainant appeared on her own behalf and the Respondent appeared on his own behalf. Evidence and testimony were presented and, based upon the entire record, the following Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Recommended Order are made:

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent is the holder of a Class B- License issued by the Registrar of Contractors.

2. This is a residential matter where the Respondent constructed a new residence for the Complainant.

3. The Complainant was dissatisfied with the Respondent’s workmanship and failure to correct its work despite repeated requests that it do so. The Complainant then filed a formal complaint, against the Respondent, with the Registrar of Contractors.

4. Pursuant to the filing of the formal complaint, an assigned Agency Inspector conducted an on-site inspection and issued a written corrective work order directing the Respondent to perform designated corrective work on the Complainant’s residence.

5. Credible evidence, presented at hearing, established that the Respondent substantially complied with the terms and conditions of the corrective work order.

6. In addition to the items set forth in the corrective work order, the Respondent agreed to properly correct a loose drawer front in the master bath. Respondent shall properly comply with his offer and properly correct the loose drawer front.

7. Credible evidence established that the construction of the roof complies with all applicable industry and code standards.

8. Credible evidence established that the square footage of the residence, as built, substantially complies with the plans and specifications and applicable industry standards.

9. Credible evidence established that the masonry siding installation on the Complainant’s residence complies with all applicable industry standards and code requirements.

10. Credible evidence established that the installation of the French door in the residence is in compliance with all applicable industry standards and code requirements.

11. Credible evidence established that the construction and appearance of the garage floor was within applicable industry standards.

12. The parties’ dispute regarding the cost of the grading and excavation work performed in the Complainant’s back yard is found to be a good faith dispute which should be resolved, if at all, in a civil court of competent jurisdiction.

13. Notice is taken of the Respondent’s prior License record with the Registrar of Contractors.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The credible evidence of record established that the Respondent substantially complied with the terms and conditions of the corrective work order issued in this matter.

2. The credible evidence of record failed to establish any existing violations, by the Respondent, of the provisions of A.R.S. §32- 1154(A), as charged in the Citation in this matter.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that Citation No. P97- 0225, together with the Complaint upon which it is based, be closed.

Dated this day 6th day of July, 1998.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of July, 1998, to:

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

Transmitted by:

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