Findings Of Fact At all times relevant hereto, respondent, George E. Feld, held certified general contractor license number CG C021801 issued by petitioner, Department of Professional Regulation, Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board. Feld has been a licensed contractor in Florida since June 1982. He has qualified George E. Feld and Associates, Inc. under his license and operates the business at 2131 Northeast 205th Street, North Miami Beach, Florida. After submitting the low bid, on or about March 1, 1985 George Feld and Associates, Inc. entered into a contract with the City of Tamarac to construct a 5,500 square foot recreation building for the City. The negotiated contract price was $195,950. The contract called for commencement of the project within ten days after the contract was signed and completion by July 27, 1985. Sometime prior to March 20, 1985, Feld met one David P. McCall and Marvin Weiss at a motel in North Miami. McCall was interested in doing work on the Tamarac project. He gave Feld a business card with the name "Arrow Head Development Corporation, Inc." printed on it, and which stated the firm was "state certified" and "licensed" as a general contractor. Feld also noted that Weiss held a general contractor's license, and he assumed that McCall and Weiss were working together. Relying on McCall's card, and later representations by McCall, but without checking with petitioner's office to verify if McCall or Arrow Head were licensed or qualified, Feld agreed to subcontract out the shell and sewer work on the Tamarac project to Arrow Head. To this end, Feld and Arrow Head entered into two contracts on March 20, 1985, for Arrow Head to perform the shell and sewer work. On June 21, 1985 McCall submitted a written "proposal" to Feld for the shell work on the job. The proposal had the following words and numbers typed on its face: "State License Number: #CGC 05961." It was not disclosed whose license number this was. Although McCall denied typing this document (because he does not personally know how to type), he did not deny that it was placed on the document at his direction or with his knowledge. It was not until sometime later that Feld learned that Arrow Head was not qualified by any licensee. Because of his mistaken belief that Arrow Head was qualified, Feld had never qualified that firm. Even so, there was no evidence that Feld intended to allow an unqualified firm to perform the work. Work proceeded on a timely basis as required by the contract. Feld visited the job site daily, and supervised all activities, including those performed by McCall. He routinely inspected the work, verified that it was being done according to specifications, and made corrections where needed. The job specifications called for trusses that were over forty feet in length. Because of this, and pursuant to the South Florida Building Code (Code), it was necessary for the City to hire an engineer to oversee their installation. The City hired one George Fink as engineer to supervise this phase of the project. However, Fink's responsibility was limited to just that, and once the installation was completed, Feld resumed responsibility for the remainder of the job. Trusses are a manufactured roof member and may vary in length, height and pitch. In this case, they were designed in the form of a cathedral roof, and were in excess of forty-seven feet in length. Further, because of the building's design, there were a number of trusses to be installed. The installation of the trusses was begun around 9:00 a.m. on Friday, June 27, 1985 and finished by 2:00 p.m. that same day. As required by the Code, Fink was present and supervised the installation of the trusses on the top of the shell. He confirmed at hearing that they were properly installed. The problem herein arose early that day when Fink had noticed that the building plans did not provide for lateral bracing of the trusses. However, according to Fink, this was not unusual since plans do not normally provide for lateral bracing. Even so, Fink told an unnamed person who "appeared to be the fellow running the erection crew" that lateral bracing should be added to the center and two side core members and that the four trusses on each end needed additional bracing. Fink also suggested to this unnamed individual that sheathing be added "as soon as possible" to the top and outside of the trusses to give added stability and protect them from wind damage and the like. In this regard, at hearing Fink conceded that it was "reasonable" for a contractor to erect trusses one day, and to place sheathing on them the following work day. Fink thought sheathing to be particularly necessary on this job since the trusses were high pitched," "long in length," and there were "no gables or anything in between to ... add any other support." By the end of the work day, the crew had placed the proper bracing on the trusses. However, no sheathing was applied. According to Fink, who was accepted as an expert in this proceeding, a prudent and competent contractor would be aware of the need for sheathing and added bracing because of the potential hazard of high winds caused by late afternoon thunderstorms in South Florida. By failing to place sheathing on the roof, Fink opined that Feld was grossly negligent and incompetent in the practice of construction on the Tamarac project. Sometime on late Sunday night or early Monday morning, most of the trusses on the roof collapsed. Some fell on an electrical wire running to the building. However, no injuries occurred. Only five trusses on the north side of the building remained in place. The City of Tamarac then filed a complaint with petitioner against Feld. The cause of the collapse was not disclosed, and even Fink was unable to state that the lack of sheathing was the cause of the accident. There was no evidence that strong winds or thunderstorms occurred on the night the trusses fell, or that bad weather was predicted when the work day ended on Friday afternoon. Feld acknowledged that no sheathing was placed on the trusses. He attributed this to the fact that the construction crew stopped work at 3:30 on Friday afternoon, and did not return to the job site until the following Monday morning. He intended to install the sheathing the following Monday but by then it was too late. This was in accord with the standard enunciated by Fink that it was not unreasonable for a contractor to erect trusses one day, and to place sheathing on them the following work day. Feld also stated that he was well aware of the need for bracing and sheathing on trusses by virtue of his long experience in the construction business. Feld hinted, but did not prove, that McCall may have been responsible for the accident because of bad blood between the two. In any event, he doubted that wind would have caused the trusses in question to fall. Finally, Feld pointed out that, even though city inspectors were present, no one had come to him on Friday afternoon and said the trusses might collapse over the weekend without sheathing. Feld is a graduate of the University of Buenos Aires with a degree in architecture, and has been engaged in the construction/architecture business for twenty-two years. He presently is an instructor of construction at Miami-Dade Community College. There is no evidence he has ever been the subject of a disciplinary action by the Board on any other occasion.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the administrative complaint against George E. Feld be DISMISSED, with prejudice. DONE AND ORDERED this 9th day of April, 1987, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DONALD R. ALEXANDER 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 9th day of April, 1987.
The Issue Whether Respondent, Robert C. Kany, P.E., committed the acts or omissions alleged in the Administrative Complaint; whether those acts or omissions constitute the violations alleged; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed (as submitted in the parties' Joint Pre-hearing Submission).
Findings Of Fact Based on the oral and documentary evidence presented at the final hearing, the following findings of fact are made: At all times material to the allegations in the Administrative Complaint, Respondent was a licensed Professional Engineer with license PE 16739. On or about February 12, 2004, Respondent signed and sealed two pages of plans for a project described as "Renovations to Existing Facilities 8245 Curryford Road, Orlando." Respondent did not have a contract with or any communication with the Curryford Road owner. Between April 26, 2002, and on or about July 8, 2003, Respondent signed and sealed five pages of plans for a project identified a "2008 Corena Drive." Respondent did not have a contract with or any communication with the Corena Drive owner. Petitioner is the State of Florida agent that provides investigative and prosecutorial services for the Florida Board of Professional Engineers. The Florida Board of Professional Engineers regulates the practice of engineering pursuant to Chapters 455 and 471, Florida Statutes (2001). Joint Exhibit 1, "Renovations to Existing Facilities 8245 Curryford Road, Orlando," and Joint Exhibit 2, "2008 Corena Drive," contain deficiencies regarding mechanical, electrical, and plumbing design. Some deficiencies can be cured by the plans examiner's refusing to approve the plans and requesting clarifying information regarding the noted deficiency. In Florida, an electrical contractor can assume responsibility for electrical design requirements for residential properties that require less than 600 amps systems. However, when an engineer seals the plans, the engineer assumes that responsibility. The initial step in plans approval in Orange County, Florida, is submission of the plans to the Orange County Zoning Department. Both sets of plans in question were initially reviewed by the zoning department. The "Curryford" plans were submitted to the Orange County Building Department for review and were not approved. While the "Corena" plans were retained by Orange County, there is no evidence that these plans were submitted for building department review. It is not atypical for plans to be rejected by the Orange County Building Department and returned to the engineer for additions or corrections. While one small deficiency exists to the structural design of Joint Exhibit 1, "Renovations to Existing Facilities 8245 Curryford Road, Orlando," there was no threat to public safety. There are myriad structural engineering deficiencies in Joint Exhibit 2, "2008 Corena Drive," which are the sealed plans for the residence at that address. The deficiencies may be a result of the fact that the plans were incomplete due to the owners' failure to decide on a cathedral or closed ceiling. If the plans were preliminary, Respondent should not have sealed them. The plans depicted in Joint Exhibit 2, "2008 Corena Drive," do not meet minimum engineering standards; the engineer of record, Respondent, was negligent in sealing these plans. It is acceptable practice in the engineering community for an engineer to work with a designer who drafts design documents and is independently employed. It is also acceptable practice in the engineering community for an engineer working with a designing draftsman not to visit a particular project site if sufficient detail of the project is related to the engineer by the draftsman. It is acceptable practice in the engineering community for a draftsman to design complete drawings and then present the drawings to an engineer for engineering review and approval as long as the draftsman is known to the engineer and the engineer is aware of the draftsman's skill and expertise. Respondent has practiced his profession for 65 years, the last 25 in Florida. He has known Robert Thomas, the individual who drafted both sets of plans in question, for seven or eight years. Respondent considers Mr. Thomas to be a "darn good" draftsman with considerable knowledge of the building industry. When Mr. Thomas brings plans to Respondent for review, they discuss the project and the plans; Respondent then makes appropriate changes to assure that the plans comply with or exceed code. This process meets the "responsible charge" standard.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Board of Professional Engineers reprimand Respondent, Robert C. Kany, P.E., for his negligence in sealing incomplete plans. DONE AND ENTERED this 14th day of March, 2006, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S JEFF B. CLARK Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 14th day of March, 2006. COPIES FURNISHED: Daniel M. Greene, Esquire Kirwin & Morris 338 West Morse Boulevard, Suite 150 Winter Park, Florida 32789 Bruce Campbell, Esquire Florida Engineers Management Corporation 2507 Callaway Road, Suite 200 Tallahassee, Florida 32303-5267 Josefina Tamayo, General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2202 Paul J. Martin, Executive Director Board of Professional Engineers 2507 Callaway Road, Suite 200 Tallahassee, Florida 32303-5267 Doug Sunshine, Esquire Vice President for Legal Affairs Florida Engineers Management Corporation 2507 Callaway Road Tallahassee, Florida 32303-5267
The Issue The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated Subsections 489.129(1)(n) and 489.129(1)(m), Florida Statutes (2005),1 and if so, what discipline should be imposed.
Findings Of Fact Page Wurts is a Florida State Certified Residential Contractor, whose license number is CRC 1327279. His initial date of licensure was July 12, 2004, and his licensure expires on August 31, 2010. Page Home Builders, Inc. has a Certificate of Authority as a Contractor Qualified Business in the State of Florida. The license number is QB 32526. The initial date of licensure was July 12, 2004, and the certificate of authority expires on August 31, 2009. Page Wurts is the primary qualifying agent for Page Home Builders, Inc. On September 9, 2005, Page Home Builders, Inc., entered into a contract with Trudy Capone for $112,000.00 to build, among other things, an addition to her home located at 1005 Verona Street, Belleair, Florida. On September 24, 2005, Ms. Capone and Page Home Builders, Inc. amended the contract to include the installation of a swimming pool and the renovation of a bathroom, including the replacement of the tub. The contract amount was increased by $37,700.00. On December 13, 2005, Ms. Capone and Page Home Builders, Inc., agreed to a change order for additional windows, increasing the contract amount by $3,200.00. On January 5, 2006, Ms. Capone and Page Home Builders, Inc., entered into a second amendment to the contract to include the installation of an air conditioning system, and the extension of the truss system over the patio, to be supported by columns. This amendment increased the contract amount by $19,485.00, bringing the total contract amount to $169,185.00. Page Home Builders, Inc. accepted approximately $153,265.00 on the contract. Ms. Capone agreed to credit Page Home Builders, Inc., with $1,084.50.00 for half the cost of a claw foot tub, which Page Home Builders, Inc., purchased. Subcontractors hired by Page Home Builders, Inc., cut several existing trusses without supporting the ceiling below and without approval of the architect, causing the ceiling of Ms. Capone’s home to collapse, damaging the floor, furniture, and other property of Ms. Capone. The collapsed ceiling nearly stuck Ms. Capone. As a result of the collapse, Ms. Capone was trapped in her house for approximately 30 minutes until she could be extricated. The hardwood floors were improperly installed. There were numerous gaps between butt and side joints with some in excess of 1/8 of an inch. There was glue smeared over the finished surfaces. Thresholds and reducers were missing. There is an area in the family room where butt joints are nearly aligned instead of being randomly staggered. Additional floating of the floors should have been done prior to the installation of the wood flooring, especially at the arched opening between the living room and hallway. The flooring color is mismatched where it transitions from the living room to the existing hall and bedrooms. John Bosley, an expert in construction, is of the credible opinion that due to the poor workmanship on the project Ms. Capone’s house was destroyed and made unlivable. The fit and finish of the work was some of the worst work that he has ever seen. Mr. Bosley is of the opinion that the poor work resulted from a lack of supervision of the subcontractors by the contractor. Mr. Bosley’s testimony is credited. It will cost over $50,000 to correct the poor workmanship. In a letter to the Department dated April 24, 2008, Page Wurts acknowledged that Ms. Capone was entitled to a credit of $650.00 for stucco and damage to plants and trellis. The difference between the credit to Ms. Capone for stucco and plant damage and the amount owed to Page Home Builders, Inc., for the tub is $434.50, bringing the total contract amount to $169,619.50. Ms. Capone made contract payments of $153,265.00, leaving $16,354.50 remaining unpaid on the contract. By subtracting the remaining contract amount from $50,000.00, which is the cost of repair, the amount owed to Ms. Capone to remedy the shoddy work is $33,645.50. The Department incurred investigative costs in this case, excluding costs associated with attorney’s time, in the amount of $477.52.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered finding that Respondent violated Subsections 489.129(1)(m) and 489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes, imposing a $10,000 fine, revoking Respondent’s certification (License Nos. CRC 1327279 and QB 32526), requiring Respondent to pay restitution to Ms. Capone in the amount of $33,645.50, and requiring Respondent to pay investigative costs of 477.52. DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of April, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S SUSAN B. HARRELL Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 6th day of April, 2009.
Findings Of Fact Until December of 1974, respondent William W. Lambert did business as a general contractor under the corporate name of Lambert Enterprises, Inc. As qualifying agent for the corporation, he built homes, poured concrete, laid sod, and did other general contracting. During 1974, respondent was in the process of acquiring a sod farm, as well as being engaged in the general contracting business. Lambert Enterprises, Inc. dealt largely with other contractors. When The Commonwealth Corporation went bankrupt, other contractors, notably the Collins brothers, also ended up in bankruptcy, and unable to make good on outstanding obligations to Lambert Enterprises, Inc. Respondent caused a voluntary petition in bankruptcy to be filed on behalf of Lambert Enterprises, Inc., on November 22, 1974. At that time he held all the stock in Lambert Enterprises, Inc., and served both as president and as a member of the board of directors of the corporation. Respondent Lambert has never been interested in any other corporation that has been declared bankrupt, and has never gone into bankruptcy personally. Mr. William E. Wingate, an investigator for the Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board, checks bankruptcy records twice monthly. By looking through bankruptcy records, he has learned of ten to twelve bankruptcies, in the Northern District of Florida, involving contractors in the last two years. He may have missed some, but every time he finds out about a contractor's bankruptcy, he reports it to the Board's Jacksonville office. On July 31, 1975, he first learned of respondent's corporation's bankruptcy. He obtained certified copies of pertinent papers which he then forwarded to other Board staff in Jacksonville. After Lambert Enterprises, Inc. failed, respondent obtained a general contractor's license as an individual, which is currently in force. Since December of 1975, respondent has been employed by Century Construction, first in Tallahassee, then in Jacksonville, where he is now a project manager for the company. Permits for work performed by Century Corporation are not pulled on respondent's license. Respondent's financial condition is now stable, and he is financially sound.
Recommendation Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED: That respondent be reprimanded. DONE and ENTERED this 25th day of April, 1977, in Tallahassee, Florida. ROBERT T. BENTON, II Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida COPIES FURNISHED: Barry S. Sinoff, Esquire Blackstone Building, Suite 1010 Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Daniel J. Wiser, Esquire Post Office Box 10137 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Mr. J. K. Linnan Executive Director Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board 1010 Blackstone Building Jacksonville, Florida 32202
The Issue Whether Respondent violated the provisions of Section 489.127(1), Florida Statutes (1999), as charged in the Administrative Complaint, and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken.
Findings Of Fact Based on the evidence, the following facts are found: At no time material hereto was Respondent licensed or had ever been licensed by the Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board to engage in contracting in the State of Florida. On or about August of 1999, Daniel Riveiro, Jr., responded to an advertisement in the local telephone yellow pages for Respondent's company, Taylor'd Home Improvements. At no time material hereto did Taylor'd Home Improvements have a qualified business number, nor was it ever qualified by any Florida State certified or registered contractor. Respondent advertised that, inter alia, he could and would perform kitchen and bath remodeling and construct decks in three Florida counties: Orange, Seminole, and Osceola. Respondent also advertised in the Orlando Sentinel newspaper that he would perform similar work. Respondent possessed an occupational license for his business from Orange, Osceola and Seminole Counties. Respondent had an oral agreement with Riveiro to construct a deck, tear out and remodel a room, and create an archway in an interior room in Riveiro's house, located in Belle Isle, Florida, for the contract price of $13,500. This project would include doing electrical, structural and air conditioning work, and construction of a deck at Riveiro's residence. From his former fiancée April Rosenbloom's account, Riveiro paid Respondent an initial down payment totaling $4,750 with two checks dated September 15 and September 20, 1999, respectively. Respondent did little or no work on the agreed-upon project. Respondent's testimony that the parties never reached an agreement on the scope of the work is not credible. Respondent returned only a small portion of the down payment he received to the homeowner. The homeowner sued Respondent for the remaining amount that was owed and unpaid. A Final Judgment against Respondent, doing business as Taylor'd Home Improvements, in the amount of $3,069 was entered by the Orange County Court. The total investigative and prosecution costs to Petitioner excluding costs associated with any attorney's time, were $443.78.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is recommended that the Construction Industry Licensing Board enter a final order as follows: Finding Respondent guilty of having violated Section 489.127(1)(f), Florida Statutes (1999), as alleged in the Administrative Complaint; and Imposing as a penalty an administrative fine in the amount of $5,000; and assessing costs of investigation and prosecution, excluding costs associated with an attorney's time, in the amount of $443.78. DONE AND ENTERED this 20th day of March, 2002, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DANIEL M. KILBRIDE Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 20th day of March, 2002. COPIES FURNISHED: Brian A. Higgins, Esquire Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 Anthony S. Taylor 1589 Hilltop Road Orlando, Florida 32707 Hardy L. Roberts, III, General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2202 Suzanne Lee, Executive Director Construction Industry Licensing Board Department of Business and Professional Regulation Northwood Centre 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792
