ALJDEC
99F-T0156-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-04-09
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
|LETICIA ALARCON CRUZALEGUI LEWIS,|§| | | |§|CASE NO.: t99-0156 | |Complainant, |§| | | |§|DOCKET NO.: 99f-t0156-roc | |-v- |§| | | |§| | |License No. 120844, Class B- of |§|RECOMMENDED | |JMC BUILDERS, INC. (CORP), |§|DECISION AND ORDER | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| | | |§| | | |§| |
HEARING: March 25, 1999, at 8:30 a.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared on her own behalf. The Respondent appeared through its attorney, Jack Lansdale. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas
This matter came on for hearing on March 25, 1999. The Complainant appeared on her own behalf and the Respondent appeared through its attorney, Jack Lansdale. 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 contracted to install a new roof, replace a cooler, construct a new carport, and construct a porch around the Complainant’s 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 with an addendum directing the Respondent to perform designated corrective work on the Complainant’s residence.
5. The Respondent failed to comply with the corrective work order.
6. There was no dispute that the Respondent failed to obtain a required permit before performing any of the construction work at the Complainant’s residence. As a result of the Respondent’s failure to obtain required permits, no county inspections were performed during the course of construction.
7. The Respondent shall obtain all required county permits and obtain all required county inspections. If the required county inspections require demolition of portions of the completed project, then the Respondent shall perform whatever work is required to enable the county inspector to perform the required county inspections.
8. The Respondent constructed the new carport on the Complainant’s existing concrete slab without obtaining a required county construction permit, without verifying whether a carport could be installed on the existing concrete slab in conformance with applicable county set-back requirements, and without a determination of whether the concrete slab had the required concrete footers necessary to support the new carport.
9. The Respondent shall either demolish the new carport and properly construct a replacement carport in conformance with applicable county set-back requirements or obtain a setback variance from the county and properly correct the concrete foundation of the new carport by installing required concrete footers and properly completing the carport after a permit is obtained. The Respondent shall ensure that all required county inspections are conducted and passed.
10. After obtaining all required county construction permits, the Respondent shall properly correct the following items which were shown to constitute unacceptable workmanship attributable to, and remaining uncorrected by, the Respondent:
k) The Respondent shall complete the re-roofing of the residence by installing new roofing over the storage area on the east side of the residence and at the east gable end of the carport. The Respondent shall inspect the entire roof and remove and replace all sagging plywood roof sheeting. The roofing shall be in conformance with the parties’ written agreement.
l) The Respondent shall submit written verification of the new roofing specifications to the Complainant. If the new roof fails to comply with the terms of the parties’ written agreement, the Respondent shall properly replace the roof in its entirety.
m) The Respondent shall properly repair all interior water damage in the interior of the residence, including the carport, front porch, hallway and storage area.
n) The Respondent shall properly correct the hole in the living room sheet-rock.
o) The Respondent shall install roof beams in the front porch as per applicable code and workmanship requirements.
p) The Respondent shall cause the carport and porch to be properly painted or stained.
q) The Respondent shall have a licensed electrician inspect all electrical work that has taken place on the project including the repair of replacement of the exterior light on the front porch. All electrical work shall comply with applicable code requirements.
r) If the existing carport does not have to be moved, the Respondent shall correct the framing of the carport so that it complies with applicable code and workmanship requirements.
s) The Respondent shall correct the framing of the front porch so as to bring the front porch into compliance with applicable code and workmanship requirements.
t) The Respondent, utilizing a properly licensed mechanical contractor, shall cause the Complainant’s evaporative cooler to be properly installed, including the application of sealant to the sheet metal ducts, leveling of cooler box, raising of exhaust/ vent ducts, and proper wiring.
21. Credible evidence established that the Respondent performed mechanical work on the Complainant’s cooler that is beyond the scope of the Respondent’s Class B License.
22. 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 be revoked.
It is further recommended that if the Respondent properly accomplishes the above described corrective action, as set forth above in Findings of Fact Nos.7, 9, and 10(a) through 10(j), inclusive, on or before the effective date of this Order, then the above provided License revocation shall not take place and Citation No. T99-0156 shall be closed.
Dated this 9th day of April, 1999.
OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
_________________________________ M. DOUGLAS Administrative Law Judge
Original mailed this day of April, 1999 to:
Michael P. Goldwater, Director Attn: Joyce Armijo Registrar of Contractors 800 W. Washington, 6th Floor Phoenix, AZ 85007
Transmitted by:
-----------------------