ALJDEC

99F-T0325-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 1999-06-08

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

|SWEETWATER GROUP, LLC., |§| | | |§|CASE NO.: t99-0325 | |Complainant, |§| | | |§|DOCKET NO.: 99f-t0325-roc | |-v- |§| | | |§| | |License No. 096224, Class L-60 |§|RECOMMENDED | |of |§|DECISION AND ORDER | |Richard Henry Caretto d.b.a. |§| | |CARRETO CUSTOM CABINETS (INDIV),|§| | | |§| | |Respondent. |§| | | |§| |

HEARING: May 24, 1999, at 1:30 p.m. APPEARANCES: The Complainant appeared through its authorized representative, Randy J. Robison. The Respondent appeared through his attorney, Neal Eckel. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: M. Douglas

This matter came on for hearing on May 24, 1999. The Complainant appeared through its owner and authorized representative, Randy J. Robison, and the Respondent appeared through his attorney, Neal Eckel. 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 L-60 License issued by the Registrar of Contractors.

2. This is a commercial matter where the Respondent entered into a written subcontractors agreement to fabricate and install cabinets and tops for the El Pueblo Neighborhood Center and Clinic remodeling project. The Complainant functioned as the general contractor for the project.

3. During the course of construction, the parties became embroiled in a sharp dispute regarding the correct interpretation of applicable contractual specifications and applicable industry standards and the Complainant became increasingly concerned with the Respondent’s workmanship.

4. The parties began to have repeated, sharp interchanges at the job-site and on the telephone.

5. Following a disagreement regarding the meaning of the contractual specifications for the construction of the cabinets and counter-tops, the Respondent sent the Complainant written notice that he was “returning the project” and stopped work on the project.

6. The parties are in dispute as to whether the parties’ dispute regarding the meaning of contractual specifications of their written agreement constitutes a legal basis for the Respondent’s actions in stopping work on the project.

7. The Complainant then retained an alternative subcontractor to complete the project and now seeks its additional costs incurred as a result of having the project completed by the alternative contractor.

8. The Respondent does not dispute that an alternative contractor had to complete the project but does assert that the cost of completion is unreasonably high and that the Respondent is entitled to a set-off for the percentage of work that he had completed prior to stopping work on the project.

9. The parties are also in sharp dispute as to the percentage of the project that the Respondent had completed at the time he stopped work on the project.

10. The Respondent’s dispute regarding the legal basis for his stopping work on the project and his dispute as to the Complainant’s claim for monetary damages are found to be good faith disputes.

11. The Respondent’s dispute regarding the Complainant’s claim for monetary damages and his dispute regarding the legal basis for his stopping work on the project, having been found to be a good faith disputes, are found to constitute matters which would necessarily involve an adjudication and award of money damages and which should be resolved, if at all, in a civil court of competent jurisdiction.

12. Notice is taken of the Respondent’s prior license record with the Registrar of Contractors.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The Registrar of Contractors is not empowered to adjudicate and award money damages. Until and unless any claimed obligation for damages is reduced to judgment by a civil court of competent jurisdiction no violation by the Respondent of the provisions of A.R.S. §32-1154(A) would be supportable.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

In view of the foregoing, it is recommended that Citation No. 99-0325 be closed. . . . . . . Dated this 8th day of June, 1999.

OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

_________________________________ M. DOUGLAS Administrative Law Judge

Original mailed this day of June, 1999 to:

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

Transmitted by:

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