Longform

Soiled Hands

Page 7 of 11

That's not a bad thing, necessarily. Most homeowners don't want a builder's license yanked; they want their houses fixed.

The problem is that builders seem to have little incentive to hustle. As long as they stay involved, they know they're not likely to lose their license. Fines are incredibly rare.

Even for homeowners who understand that construction fixes aren't easy, it seems to take forever.

That's where Todd Seifert is today. More than two years after he filed his initial complaint, the builder has acknowledged that there's a serious problem with the soils beneath his foundation.

According to their settlement agreement, which avoided a formal hearing, Ryland will move the Seiferts and all their belongings into an apartment for three weeks, remove their home's foundation, and fix the soil underneath.

But while the parties signed the agreement last August, it hasn't happened yet. The soil is still moving; the engineers thought it best to hold off on the work until it stabilizes.

Blake Reheis, director of operations for Ryland's western region, says the company has offered to do cosmetic patching in the meantime, even if it has to be done again after the soil fix.

"The Seiferts are a wonderful family," he says. "I think, eventually, they'll be able to say they were happy that they bought a Ryland home. We'll get there."

He notes that the company has also installed gutters and downspouts, at its expense. It didn't install them initially, he says, because it's just not "standard practice" in this area.

Reheis insists that the company does follow the recommendations of its engineers. He adds that Ryland would have done all the remediation it's doing now, even if Seifert hadn't gone to the state registrar: "I'm confident the end result would be the same, whether the Registrar was involved or not."

With expansive soils, Reheis says, you can do everything right and still have problems. "Even going above and beyond what's called for, there may be still be a handful of houses that have problems. With Mother Nature and these soils, it's a challenging thing."

Todd Seifert is trying to roll with the process. He can understand why the engineer has suggested waiting -- but he's incredibly frustrated.

He'd planned to sell his house, to upgrade to a custom home after just two years. But he can't sell. He's stuck.

And he's convinced that if he doesn't stay on the matter, and keep nagging his builder, nothing will ever happen.

"It's just emotionally and physically draining to go through this," he says. "My wife and I have been on this roller coaster three years."

The agency has never asked for a civil penalty against the builder. It has never moved to suspend its license.

And, if you check the Registrar's Web site, it lists no open complaints against Ryland, only 10 that have been "resolved/settled/withdrawn" -- one of them being Todd Seifert's.


In almost every regard, Todd Seifert's case is not unusual.

According to statistics from the Registrar, the agency received 9,903 formal complaints against builders in 2005.

It ordered fines in 119 cases -- just one out of every 83.

State inspectors say that isn't because the complaints are spurious. They may joke about "getting the ROC discount," because there is a percentage of homeowners who want to use the process to get money from their builder. But they believe that's less than 10 percent of the cases, at most.

For the most part, Registrar employees believe, the problems are real.

The reason that most never end in discipline? Few ever make it to a hearing. Roughly four of every five complaints are dropped by homeowners before they get that far.

Sometimes they just give up. The process isn't easy, and it relies on homeowners who are willing to push, and to keep pushing.

Often, though, just the threat of a hearing can bring a builder around. Hearings always start with the judge asking if both parties are willing to negotiate privately, one more time. It's a rare builder who isn't.

Bill Albright, who runs the Registrar's legal department, believes that's a good thing. "We try to help resolve complaints," he says, adding that it's in the best interest of the homeowner to solve things quickly.

But there's a bigger picture beyond resolving things for the homeowner, as the Arizona auditor general has concluded.

After all, the auditor wrote, there should be two parts to the Registrar's job: Helping the homeowner, and disciplining the builders.

That finding comes from a 2003 performance audit of the Registrar. The auditor general's chief complaint in that report: The Registrar did too little to help consumers.

KEEP PHOENIX NEW TIMES FREE... Since we started Phoenix New Times, it has been defined as the free, independent voice of Phoenix, and we'd like to keep it that way. With local media under siege, it's more important than ever for us to rally support behind funding our local journalism. You can help by participating in our "I Support" program, allowing us to keep offering readers access to our incisive coverage of local news, food and culture with no paywalls.
Sarah Fenske
Contact: Sarah Fenske