ALJDEC

99F-P0089-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-10-12

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|VICTORIA COX, |§| | | |§|CASE NO.: p99-0089 | |Complainant, |§| | | |§|DOCKET NO.: 99f-p0089-roc | |-v- |§| | | |§| | |License No. 123357, Class B- of |§|RECOMMENDED | |William John Stewart d.b.a. |§|DECISION AND ORDER ON REHEARING | |S AND S CUSTOM BUILDERS (INDIV), |§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: September 28, 1999, at 1:30 p.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 rehearing on September 28, 1999. 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. The Respondent’s License is delinquent and suspended.

2. This is a residential matter where the Respondent constructed a new residence for the Complainant. There was no dispute that while the Respondent was the general contractor for the residence the Complainant did perform, or cause to be performed, some of the construction work on the residence. 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. After the corrective work order was issued, the Complainant amended her complaint adding new items that were not addressed in the corrective work order. The new items were addressed at hearing but are not addressed in the corrective work order and no civil penalty can be assessed for any failure by the Respondent to address the items set forth in Complainant’s addendum.

6. Credible evidence, produced at hearing, established that the Respondent has performed corrective action on all of the items set forth in the corrective work order. However, credible evidence established that further corrective action is required on some of the items.

7. The following items were shown to be either unauthorized deviations from plans and specifications or to constitute unworkmanlike construction and to require appropriate corrective action by the Respondent:

h) The roof for the front porch does not comply with applicable plans and specifications. The Respondent shall properly repair, or replace, the front porch roof ensuring that it complies with all applicable plans and specifications including pitch.

i) The replacement siding on the gable ends have not been painted to match the residence. The Respondent shall properly paint the replacement siding to match the rest of the residence.

j) There are still uncorrected nail pops in the interior of the residence. The Respondent shall properly correct all known interior nail pops.

11. The Respondent’s actions in his unauthorized deviation from plans and specifications in the construction of the front porch roof and his failure to correct the roof despite demands that he do so are found to constitute a wrongful act.

12. There was no dispute that the floor covering in the kitchen area has failed. However, credible evidence, produced at hearing, established that the floor covering was installed by the Complainant rather than the Respondent and the Complainant is found to be responsible for its proper repair or replacement.

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 violations by the Respondent of the provisions of A.R.S. (32-1154 (A) (7) (Wrongful Act) and (3); namely, Rule R4-9-108. . . . . . . . . . . . .

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Class B- License be revoked on the effective date of this order.

It is further recommended that if the Respondent properly accomplishes the corrective action set forth above in Finding of Fact Nos. 7(a) through 7(c), inclusive, on or before the effective date of this Order, then the above provided License revocation shall not take place and Citation No. P99-0089 shall be closed.

Dated this 12th day of October, 1999.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. DOUGLAS Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of October, 1999 to:

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

Transmitted by:

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