ALJDEC

99F-C989253-BFS · Department of Building and Fire Safety · 1999-05-21

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|LORNE GAMEZ AND KAREN OBERG, |§| | | |§|DOCKET NO.: 99F-C989253-BFS | |Complainants, |§| | | |§| | |-v- |§| | | |§| | |AL-TEX HOMES INC., |§|RECOMMENDED | |d.b.a. SOUTHERN ENERGY HOMES OF |§|DECISION AND ORDER | |TEXAS, License No. 6385, |§| | |Class M-9C, |§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: May 4, 1999, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainants appeared through Karen Oberg. The Respondent appeared through its attorney, Michael Monroe. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for hearing on May 4, 1999. The Complainants appeared through Karen Oberg and the Respondent appeared through its attorney, Michael Monroe. 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 M-9C License issued by the Department of Building and Fire Safety.

2. The Complainants purchased a new residence manufactured by the Respondent. The new residence was manufactured on July 8, 1998 and the home was installed on August 28, 1998.

3. Shortly after moving into the manufactured residence, the Complainants began noticing several areas of unsatisfactory workmanship.

4. The Complainants were dissatisfied with the Respondent’s workmanship and failure to correct its work despite repeated requests that it do so. The Complainants then filed a formal complaint, against the Respondent, with the Arizona Department of Building and Fire Safety, Office of Manufactured Housing.

5. Pursuant to the filing of the formal complaint, an assigned agency inspector conducted an on-site inspection and verified portions of the formal complaint.

6. The Respondent performed some corrective work on the residence. The parties were in sharp dispute as to whether the corrective work satisfactorily complied with applicable industry standards so a second on-site inspection took place and the assigned agency inspector issued a second Verified Complaint and Sign-Off form.

7. The Respondent again performed corrective action on the residence and the parties are again in sharp dispute as to whether the Respondent’s corrective actions comply with applicable industry standards.

8. The Respondent continues to deny responsibility for most of the problems with the residence asserting that the majority of problems were caused by the entity that set the manufactured residence up.

9. Credible evidence established that the assigned agency inspector was aware of the Respondent’s position as to the alleged cause of the problems with the manufactured residence and issued the second Verified Complaint and Sign-Off form with full knowledge that the Respondent denied responsibility for most of the problems with the residence.

10. Credible evidence, presented at hearing, established that the Respondent has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the verified complaint.

11. The following items of the Verified Complaint were shown to fail to comply with applicable minimum industry standards and to require proper corrective action by the Respondent:

l. Item 2, the crack in the master bedroom ceiling has been repaired but the crack repair does not match the color of the surrounding ceiling. The Respondent shall cause the crack repair to be properly touched-up, if necessary the Respondent shall cause the entire master bedroom ceiling to be repainted.

m. Item 4, the master bedroom closet doors are still out of alignment and out of level. The Respondent shall cause the master bedroom closet doors to be properly repaired or replaced.

n. Item 11, the crack in the master bath ceiling has not been repaired to within minimum industry standards. The Respondent shall cause the ceiling crack to be properly corrected and touched-up.

o. Item 12, the wall/window frame in the master bath still has an unacceptable bow. The Respondent shall properly correct the wall/window frame.

p. Item 13, the kitchen pantry door does not latch. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the latch on the kitchen pantry door.

q. Item 15, the kitchen counter-top is now at two different levels. The Respondent shall cause the kitchen counter-top to be properly repaired or replaced.

r. Item 17, the crack in the kitchen ceiling has not been corrected to within applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall properly correct and touch-up the crack in the kitchen ceiling.

s. Item 22, the kitchen window jamb is still bowing out and is canted. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the kitchen window jamb.

t. Item 23, the crack in the living room ceiling has not been corrected to within applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall cause the crack in the living room ceiling to be properly repaired and touched up.

u. Item 25, the second bedroom door and door jamb have been removed by the Respondent. The Respondent shall properly replace the second bedroom door and door jamb.

v. Item 27, the crack in the second bedroom ceiling has not been repaired to within applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall properly repair and touch up the ceiling crack in the second bedroom ceiling.

w. Item 28, the replacement wall panel does not match the surrounding wall panels. The Respondent shall properly replace the replacement wall panel with a wall panel that matches the surrounding wall panels.

x. Item 29, the second bedroom closet door is out of level. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the second bedroom closet door.

y. Item 30, the crack in the third bedroom ceiling has not been repaired to within applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall properly correct and touch-up the ceiling in the third bedroom.

z. Item 31, the hardware plunger is not catching the strike plate in the door frame. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the hardware for the second bath door.

aa. Item 39, the master bath wall to the right of the step-down counter is still bowed and three walls of the furnace compartment are bowed and display unacceptable cracking. The Respondent shall properly correct the bowed wall in the master bath and properly correct the cracking and bowing in the three walls of the furnace compartment.

ab. Item 40, the Respondent shall properly repair or replace the loose trim at the cabinet by the entry door and the batt at the right side wall corner.

ac. Item 41, the high joist in the master bath has not been corrected to within applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall properly correct the high joist in the master bath.

ad. Item 42, the master bath shower door is loose. The Respondent shall properly correct the master bath shower door.

ae. Item 44, the rear door does not properly latch. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the hardware in the rear door and rear door frame.

af. Item 46, several roof shingles display unacceptable fish mouthing and curling. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the unacceptable roof shingles.

ag. Item 47(a), there is still unacceptable ceiling sagging in the master bedroom, the master bath, the kitchen area, the living room, bedrooms 2 and 3, the guest bath, and the hall. The Respondent shall properly correct the unacceptable ceiling sagging.

ah. Item 48, there is still missing insulation under the residence. The Respondent shall properly replace the all missing and damaged insulation under the residence.

ai. Item 49, the shower walls are not square at the top and not square at the vanity. The Respondent shall properly correct the shower walls.

aj. Item 52, the trim in the master bath has been poorly cut, poorly repaired, and damaged in prior repair efforts. The Respondent shall properly replace the trim in the master bath.

ak. Item 53, the caulking in the master bath is poorly done and incomplete. The Respondent shall properly re-caulk the master bath.

al. Item 55, the wall behind the tub in the master bath is bowed. The Respondent shall properly correct the wall.

am. Item 56, the pantry walls are out of plumb. The Respondent shall properly correct the pantry walls.

an. Item 58, the exposed sheet rock above the stove does not comply with applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall properly correct the exposed sheet-rock.

ao. Item 60, the trim was improperly installed. The Respondent shall properly replace the trim in this area.

ap. Item 62, there are unacceptable bubbles, or ripples, in the vinyl flooring. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the kitchen vinyl.

aq. Item 65, there are nails protruding from the repaired panels in this area. The Respondent shall properly correct the protruding nails.

ar. Item 66, there is still an unacceptable gap around the trim in the repaired area. The Respondent shall correct the trim.

as. Item 69, there is a gap in the floor that allows insects into the interior of the residence. The Respondent shall properly correct the gap.

at. Item 73, the panel next to the receptacle is unacceptable and requires replacement. The Respondent shall properly replace the panel.

au. Item 74, the floor joist under the living room is bowed beyond applicable industry standards. The Respondent shall properly correct the bowed floor joist.

av. Item 75, the trim has not been completed. The Respondent shall properly complete the trim.

aw. Item 76, the window is out of square. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the window.

ax. Item 78, the window does not open or close properly. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the window.

ay. Item 79, the window is out of square. The Respondent shall properly repair or replace the window.

az. Item 81, the musty smell is still present. The Respondent shall properly eliminate the musty smell.

53. The remaining items of the verified complaint were either shown to be duplicates of other items or shown to have been corrected to within minimum applicable tolerances.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. A.R.S. §41-2186(7) subjects a licensee’s License to sanction for a departure from or disregard of any code or any rule adopted by the board.

2. A.R.S. §41-2186(12) subjects a licensee’s License to sanction for a failure to respond relative to a verified complaint after notice of such complaint.

3. A.R.S. §41-2186(20) subjects a licensee’s License to sanction if the licensee fails to manufacture or install, in a workmanlike manner, all subassemblies, units and accessory structures which are suitable for their intended purpose.

4. The credible evidence of record established violations, by the Respondent, of the provisions of A.R.S. §41-2186(7),(12), and (20).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Class M-9C License (No. 6385) be suspended for a period of 30 days commencing on July 30, 1999. . . . . . . . . . It is further recommended that if the Respondent properly accomplishes the proper correction of the items set forth above in Finding of Fact Nos. 11(a) through 11(00), inclusive, then the above provided License suspension shall not take place and that Citation No. 98-9/253 shall be closed.

Dated this 21st day of May, 1999.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. DOUGLAS Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted this day of May, 1999, to:

N. Eric Borg, Director Building of Fire and Safety ATTN: Michelle Castaneda E. Virginia, Suite 100 Phoenix, AZ 85004

Transmitted by:

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