STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF ) PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, FLORIDA ) CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING ) BOARD, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 84-0765

) DPR CASE NO. 0035375

PHILLIP SHEFFIELD, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

A formal hearing was held on May 18, 1984 in Room 409, Richard P. Daniel Building, 111 East Coast Line Drive, Jacksonville, Florida. Respondent did not attend the hearing. Petitioner has waived the rights and opportunities to submit a proposed recommended order. See Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Douglas A. Shropshire, Esquire

Department of Professional Regulation

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

For Respondent: Mr. Phillip Sheffield

Route 2, Box 706

Branford, Florida 32008 Respondent: No appearance.

ISSUE

The issues are based upon an administrative complaint brought by the State of Florida, Department of Professional Regulation against Phillip E. Sheffield, Respondent. In particular, Respondent is said to have violated the building code of the City of Jacksonville, Florida by failing to obtain a building permit before commencing construction work related to a roofing project and building the roof to a slope that was contrary to that local building code. For violations of the City of Jacksonville building code, Respondent is said to have violated Section 489.129(1)(d), Florida Statutes, by willful or deliberate violation and disregard for the applicable building code of the municipality.

Finally, Respondent is said to have violated Section 489.113(3), Florida Statutes by failing to subcontract roofing work.

FINAL ORDER

1. Respondent, Phillip E. Sheffield, is a registered general contractor having been issued license number RG 0001502 by the Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board. In 1979 he entered into an agreement with Watson Realty of Jacksonville, Florida to de re-roofing work at a residence owned by Watson Realty at 7062 Holiday Road, Jacksonville, Florida. That work was done in March, 1980. Prepared shingle roof covering was used in this project. The pitch and run in the re-roofing done by Respondent was 1.5/12.

   
   

2. Subsequently, the house was sold by Watson to a Leslie E. Sutton, Jr. The roof then began to leak due to the improper installation on the part of Respondent, causing Sutton to employ other roofers to repair the Sheffield job at a cost of approximately $1,100. Before hiring someone else to satisfactorily perform the roofing job, Sutton contacted Sheffield several times and Sheffield's son came to the job site twice but did not fix the leaking roof. On the third telephone call, the son indicated that the job was his father's and not the son's and that the father had left town, and the son would not be coming back for a third attempt at rectifying the problem. There was a meeting between the Respondent and Sutton at the instigation of the Department of Professional Regulation after Sutton had had the roof fixed by other roofing contractors. Thus, the meeting did not assist in repairing the roof.

   
   

3. Respondent had failed to receive a permit from the City of Jacksonville, Florida, before doing the roofing work at 7062 Holiday Road in Jacksonville, Florida, on the house than was purchased by Sutton. In doing the work, the prepared shingle roof, as stated before, carried a pitch and run of 1.5/12 as opposed to 2/12 called for by the manufacturer's recommendation as to the proper pitch and run.

   
   

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

   
   

4. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties to this action. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

   
   

5. Respondent failed to obtain a building permit from the City of Jacksonville before installing the roof at the Sutton house in Jacksonville, Florida in violation of Section 900-103(1)(a)(6) Building Code, City of Jacksonville, Florida. The roof covering failed to comply with the pitch and run established by the manufacturer at 2/12. The actual pitch in the roof was 1.5/12 and this failure constituted a violation of Section 900-802, Building Code, City of Jacksonville, Florida. Non-compliance with these code provisions was a deliberate disregard and violation of those provisions and constitutes a violation of Section 489.129(1)(d), Florida Statutes, and subjects the Respondent to the penalties set forth in that statute.

   
   

6. No proof has been shown that the Respondent had violated Section 489.113(3), Florida Statutes. No indication was given that any special competency exam was required by the City of Jacksonville related to roofing work and the roof installed was of a shingle type.

7. Based upon a full consideration of the facts found and the conclusions of law reached, it is

RECOMMENDED:

That a final order be entered which imposes a fine of $750 for the violations shown.

DONE and ENTERED this 25th day of May, 1984 in Tallahassee, Florida.

CHARLES C. ADAMS

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building

2009 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 25th day of May, 1984.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Douglas A. Shropshire, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Mr. Phillip Sheffield Route 2, Box 706

Branford, Florida 32008

James Linnan, Executive Director Construction Industry Licensing Board

Post Office Box 2 Jacksonville, Florida 32202

Fred M. Roche, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Docket for Case No: 84-000765

Orders for Case No: 84-000765