ALJDEC

99F-S0119-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-08-12

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|CITY OF BISBEE, |§| | | |§|CASE NO.: S99-0119 | |Complainant, |§| | | |§|DOCKET NO.: 99F-S0119-ROC | |-v- |§| | | |§| | |License No. 109902, Class B- of |§|RECOMMENDED | |Daniel Dean Oldfield d.b.a. |§|DECISION AND ORDER | |MILE HIGH ENTERPRISES (INDIV), |§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: August 4, 1999, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared through its authorized representative, Brenda Mercer. The Respondent appeared on his own behalf. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for hearing on August 4, 1999. The Complainant appeared through its authorized representative, Brenda Mercer, 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. The Complainant filed the complaint at issue alleging that the Respondent failed to comply with the requirements of the Uniform Building Code and applicable provisions of the City’s code by the Respondent’s alleged failure to obtain required building permits and the Respondent’s failure to request intermediate and final inspections of his work.

3. There was no dispute that the City of Bisbee has adopted the Uniform Building Code and that Article 7.1.1 of the City’s Building Code provides as follows: “That certain documents known as the Uniform Building Code with its appendixes and changes, 1994 edition, and have been declared as public records by Resolution R-94-50 of the City of Bisbee, Arizona, and said Uniform Building Code is hereby referred to, adopted and made a part hereof as if fully set out in this ordinance and as subsequently amended every three (3) years by the International Conference of Building Officials. One (1) copy shall be on file at the Bisbee Municipal Building and one copy shall be filed in the public library, and kept available for public use and inspection.”

4. There was no dispute that the City of Bisbee requires that construction permits be obtained and that contractors and homeowners request intermediate and final inspections for construction work that requires a permit.

5. There was no dispute that the Respondent performed roofing work on a residence located at 309 Oak Avenue, Bisbee, Arizona, and that a construction permit was required for the performance of the roofing work that was performed on the said residence.

6. Credible evidence, presented at hearing, established that the Respondent failed to request an intermediate inspection and failed to request a final inspection for the construction project.

7. Credible evidence established that the Respondent either knew or should have known that it was his responsibility to request all required intermediate and final inspections for any construction work performed by him.

8. The Complainant also filed a companion criminal case to the one at issue. The criminal case was dismissed without prejudice pursuant to a stipulation between the parties. The dismissal without prejudice in the criminal matter is not found to have any res judicata effect on the matter at issue.

9. Credible evidence, presented at hearing, established that there have been several construction sites where the Respondent has failed to request intermediate and final inspections where such inspections were required.

10. The Respondent testified that he had stopped requesting inspections because various city inspectors had told him that they did not have time to perform the inspections.

11. The Respondent is not responsible for whether the City performs its required inspections. The Respondent is found to be responsible to properly ask for all required intermediate and final inspections regardless of the statements that may have been made by various city employees.

12. The Respondent’s actions in failing to comply with applicable city code requirements by failing to ask for intermediate and final inspections for his work are found to constitute a wrongful act.

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)(2) (7) (Wrongful Act), (12) and (13).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that the Respondent’s Class B- License be place on disciplinary probation for a period of 30 days and that the Respondent be formally admonished that he is expected to comply with all applicable building codes of the State of Arizona and its political subdivisions.

Dated this 12th day of August, 1999.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. DOUGLAS Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of August, 1999, to:

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

Transmitted by:

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