ALJDEC

98F-A0243-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1998-08-25

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

| |§| | |LETA CHAPMAN, |§|CASE NO.: A98-0243 | | |§| | |Complainant, |§|DOCKET NO.: 98F-A0243-ROC | | |§| | |-v- |§| | | |§|RECOMMENDED | |License No. 109011, Class B- of |§|DECISION AND ORDER | |David Michael Councilor d.b.a. |§| | |ASPEN RIDGE CONSTRUCTION (INDIV),|§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: August 12, 1998, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared on her own behalf. The Respondent appeared through his attorney, Bruce Rosenberg. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for hearing on August 12, 1998. The Complainant appeared on her own behalf and the Respondent appeared through his attorney, Bruce Rosenberg. 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 his work despite repeated requests that he 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. The parties were in sharp dispute as to whether the Respondent had properly complied with the terms and conditions of the corrective work order.

6. Near the onset of the hearing, the parties stipulated that the Complainant could add new items to her complaint. Although the Respondent agreed to allow the Complaint to be amended to include the new items the Respondent denied that any of the new items alleged to be deficient were beyond applicable industry tolerances for such work.

7. During the hearing, the Respondent stipulated to certain acknowledged deficiencies and stipulated to properly perform the following designated corrective action: h) To seal the edges of the interior doors and to tighten the strike plates. i) To install tie-downs under the deck. j) To remove paint from all electrical face plates. k) To caulk and texture any bare drywall in the downstairs bath and utility rooms. l) To correct the gap between the shower pipe plate and the drywall in the shower. m) To replace the broken caster on the Complainant’s Bar-B-Q. n) To correct the appearance of the area where the tile and carpet join by the front door jamb. o) To remove, or cover, the stain drips by the concrete steps.

16. All other enumerated items of the Complaint, as amended at hearing, were contested.

17. The major contested item presented at hearing concerned the drainage of lot. Credible evidence, presented at hearing, established that the Respondent either knew, or should have known, of the existence of a culvert directing drainage water onto the Complainant’s lot.

18. The Respondent shall properly correct the drainage on the Complainant’s lot ensuring that any water is properly directed through the lot and that the water drainage area is properly protected against erosion. It is suggested, but not required, that the Respondent consult a soils engineer for a proper correction method.

19. Of the remaining disputed items, as presented at hearing, the following items were sufficiently demonstrated to constitute unacceptable workmanship attributable to, and remaining uncorrected by, the Respondent: t) The drywall in the interior stairwell area does not match the stairway. The Respondent shall properly replace, and touch-up, the drywall in the interior stairway area. u) The Respondent shall properly fill all holes in the interior doors. v) The Respondent shall inspect all interior doors for warpage and properly repair, or replace, any warped interior doors. w) The Respondent shall properly repair the hole in the wood side of the cabinet by the T.P. holder in the master bath. x) The Respondent shall provide the Complainant a written list of all subcontractors utilized in the construction of her residence. The list shall include company names, addresses, telephone numbers, and license numbers. y) The Respondent shall properly correct the staining on the decks, ensuring that the decks are one uniform color. z) The Respondent shall repair, or replace, the loose electrical outlet in the recreation room.

27. 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 violations by the Respondent of the provisions of A.R.S. (32-1154 (A) (3); namely, Rule R4-9-108.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Class B- License shall be temporarily suspended until the Registrar of Contractors receives proof that the Respondent has properly performed the corrective actions set forth above in Finding of Fact Numbers 7(a) through 7(h), 10, and 11(a) through 11(g), inclusive.

It is further recommended that if the Respondent properly accomplishes the above described corrective actions, on or before the effective date of this Order, then the above provided License suspension shall not take place and Citation No. A98-0243 shall be closed.

Dated this 24th day of August, 1998.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. Douglas Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of August, 1998 to:

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

Transmitted by:

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