ALJDEC

99F-S0148-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-12-15

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|DEBBIE WATKINS, |§|CASE NO.: S99-0148 | | |§| | |Complainant, |§|DOCKET NO.: 99F-S0148-ROC | | |§| | |-v- |§| | | |§| | |License No. 109641, Class B- of |§|RECOMMENDED | |Kirk Alexander Sawyer d.b.a. |§|DECISION AND ORDER | |THE SKILLFUL WORKS (INDIV), |§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: December 9, 1999, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared on her own behalf. The Respondent appeared through his attorney, Gary W. Ramaeker. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for hearing on December 9, 1999. The Complainant appeared on her own behalf and the Respondent appeared through his attorney, Gary W. Ramaeker. 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 performed remodeling on, and constructed an addition to, the Complainant’s existing residence.

3. The Complainant was dissatisfied with the Respondent’s workmanship and filed a complaint against the Respondent which led to a corrective work order and eventually to a pay-out from the Contractors’ Recovery Fund.

4. After the issues in the first complaint were resolved via the Contractors’ Recovery Fund, the Complainant experienced a flooding problem and discovered problems with the installation of her spa-type bathtub.

5. The Complainant then filed a second formal complaint, against the Respondent, with the Registrar of Contractors.

6. 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.

7. The Respondent declined to perform corrective action on the Complainant’s residence asserting that the two year statute of limitations had expired and that the Registrar of Contractors no longer had jurisdiction over this matter.

8. Credible evidence established that the Complaint at issue was received by the Registrar of Contractors on June 9, 1999.

9. Credible evidence, produced at hearing, established that the Respondent completed construction work on the Complainant’s residence no earlier than June 17, 1997.

10. The Complaint at issue is found to have been filed within the applicable two years statute of limitations and to be within the jurisdiction of the Registrar of Contractors.

11. The electrical work for the spa-tub installation was performed by one of the Complainant’s employees rather than a licensed electrician. Credible evidence established that this work should have been performed by a properly licensed electrical contractor and that the Respondent was performing electrical work beyond the scope of his Class B- License.

12. The Respondent’s electrical work on the spa-tub installation was shown to be in violations of applicable electrical and UBC provisions and to constitute a health and safety danger.

13. The Respondent shall have all of the electrical work performed on the Complainant’s residence, including the spa-tub installation, inspected by a properly licensed electrical contractor. The Respondent shall cause the electrical installation work on the spa-tub to be properly corrected and the Respondent shall cause any other electrical deficiencies in the electrical work performed by the Respondent to be properly repaired or replaced.

14. Credible evidence, presented at hearing, established that the spa-tub access door, as installed by the Respondent, does not comply with the manufacturer’s recommendations and fails to provide sufficient access to the spa-tub for proper maintenance of the spa-tub motor. The Respondent shall cause the access door to be properly corrected so as to comply with the manufacturers’ recommendations.

15. Credible evidence established that the motor for the spa-tub was not installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendations and that it has failed. The Respondent shall cause the spa-tub motor to be properly replaced, ensuring that the motor is installed in accordance with applicable industry standards and the manufacturer’s recommendations.

16. The trim for the French doors was shown to have been unpainted. The Respondent shall cause the trim on the French doors to be properly painted.

17. The paint on the bathroom ceiling from prior repairs does not comply with applicable industry standards and is unacceptable. The Respondent shall cause the paint on the bathroom ceiling to be properly touched up.

18. There is unacceptable water ponding by the kitchen door. The Respondent shall cause the water ponding problem to be properly corrected.:

19. The French drain in the rear was shown to have failed. The Respondent shall cause the French drain to be properly repaired or replaced.

20. The remaining enumerated items set forth in the complaint at issue and presented at hearing were insufficiently proven to be the Respondent’s responsibility.

21. 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), (23) and (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 revoked unless the Registrar of Contractors receives proof that the Respondent has properly caused the accomplishment of the corrective action set forth above in Finding of Fact Nos. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 and 19. It is further recommended that if the Respondent properly accomplishes the above described corrective action, on or before the effective date of this Order, then the above provided License revocation shall not take place and Citation No. S99-0148 shall be closed.

Dated this 17th day of December, 1999.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. DOUGLAS Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of December, 1999 to:

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

Transmitted by: ----------------------- Office of Administrative Hearings 100 North Stone, Suite 704 Tucson, Arizona 85701 (520) 628-5488