Notice of Review and Appeal Rights

Document Sample
Notice of Review and Appeal Rights Powered By Docstoc
               STATE OF OREGON
                                 for the

In the Matter of the Arbitration between:

BUDDY GEORGE,                                                    Complaint No: 186204-101

And                                                           ARBITRATION AWARD

                                  STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This complaint was timely filed in accordance with ORS 701.143. All items determined are within
the scope of ORS Chapter 701 and require licensing with the Board. Complainant alleges that
respondent performed improper work under their contract for the installation of vinyl flooring in
complainant’s home, located at 2687 Nonpareil Rd. in Sutherlin. An on-site investigation was
conducted by the Board on June 1, 2010, at which complainant was present but respondent was not.
Complainant subsequently filed a Statement of Damages form seeking monetary damages in the
amount of $8,068.00. Respondent filed a request for a hearing.

Pursuant to its authority under ORS 701.148(1), and subject to the provisions of ORS 701.148(4),
the CCB, on August 9, 2010, referred this matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, as
required under ORS 701.149, for binding arbitration, in accordance with OAR Chapter 812,
Division 10. A Notice of Arbitration Hearing, along with a copy of OAR Chapter 812 Division 10,
was served on the parties. David Marcus was appointed as the Arbitrator.

The hearing was held on September 29, 2010 in Salem, Oregon. Complainant appeared in person
with his attorney, Dan G. McKinney. Respondent appeared through its president, Paul Lettow.
Mr. George, Mr. Lettow, Rhonda Day, Michael George and CCB Investigator Len Sherr testified at
the hearing. Having duly heard the proofs and allegations of the parties, and having considered the
entire record, consisting of Exhibits 1 through 81 and C1 and a digital recording of the arbitration
hearing, I, the undersigned Arbitrator, enter the following:

In May 2009, complainant entered into a verbal agreement for respondent to provide and install
new vinyl flooring throughout his 28' x 68' manufactured home, with the exception of the two
bedrooms, which were carpeted. The total price agreed upon was $4,000.00, which complainant

George and Factory Carpet Warehouse, Inc., CCB complaint no. 186204-101                     Page 1 of 2
paid in full to respondent. At the time of respondent’s work, the house was empty except for a
large standing clock.

Respondent performed the work in June 2009. Once the flooring was installed, complainant
installed baseboard moldings himself, moved furniture in and occupied the home. Almost
immediately, complainant began observing bubbling of the vinyl flooring. Complainant reported
the problem to respondent but respondent did not return complainant’s calls for several months. In
November 2009, however, respondent did send a couple of his workers to inspect and correct the
problem. The remedial work they performed included placing ice on the bubbles and shooting glue
into the bubble areas using a syringe. These efforts were not effective in resolving the bubbling
problem. A second visit for repairs was also ineffective and complainant filed this complaint.

I find that respondent did not properly install the vinyl. I also find respondent’s claims that the
baseboard installed by complainant is the cause of the problem to be implausible. I also find
respondent’s claims that the existing vinyl can be rolled back and glued and re-laid satisfactorily to
meet industry standard to be implausible. Finally, I am persuaded that because of the bubbling, and
because the main seam that is quite visible was not properly cut and sealed and is splitting apart,
the flooring cannot be repaired to meet industry standards and must be replaced.

The reasonable cost to remove and replace the flooring with like quality vinyl properly installed is
$7160.51, as outlined in the F & W bid. Accordingly, complainant is entitled to recover that
amount. Pursuant to ORS 701.133(4)(a) and OAR 812-004-0250(2)(c), complainant is also
entitled to recover his complaint processing fee in the amount of $50.00. Based on these Findings,
and in accordance with ORS Chapters 701 and 36, and OAR Chapter 812 Division 10, I enter the

Respondent shall pay complainant $7,160.51, plus $50.00 in costs for complainant’s processing

Dated this 14th day of October, 2010

                                                     David Marcus, Arbitrator

George and Factory Carpet Warehouse, Inc., CCB complaint no. 186204-101                    Page 2 of 2

Shared By: