**Case Overview**
The following is a summary of the administrative hearing for consolidated cases *Rex E. Duffett v. Suntech Patio Homes Homeowners Association* (Nos. 18F-H1818025-REL and 18F-H1818027-REL). The hearing took place on April 4, 2018, before Administrative Law Judge Tammy L. Eigenheer,. While the hearing addressed two petitions, the following summary focuses primarily on Case No. 18F-H1818027-REL as requested.

**Case No. 18F-H1818027-REL (Records Request)**

* **Key Facts and Main Issue:**
The Petitioner filed a complaint alleging the Respondent failed to comply with A.R.S. § 33-1805(A) regarding a request for documents made on December 22, 2017. The Petitioner had faxed a request to the Respondent’s management company seeking meeting notices and minutes related to discussions of rules, regulations, and dues increases,. Under A.R.S. § 33-1805(A), an association must make financial and other records reasonably available for examination within ten business days of a request.

* **Hearing Arguments:**
The Respondent was represented by new management (Pride Community Management), which had taken over from the previous company (The Management Trust) on February 1, 2018. The Respondent argued that the previous management company left sparse records and failed to communicate the request,. Additionally, the Respondent argued that the Petitioner's request regarding meetings where "rules and regulations were discussed" was unclear because such topics are discussed at virtually every meeting.

* **Legal Findings:**
The Administrative Law Judge determined that while the Petitioner’s request was "somewhat vague," it was clearly a request for documents. The Judge ruled that the Respondent’s former management company failed to respond or request clarification within the ten-day statutory window. Consequently, the Petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent violated A.R.S. § 33-1805(A).

* **Outcome:**
The Petitioner was deemed the prevailing party in this matter.

**Consolidated Case Context (Case No. 18F-H1818025-REL)**
In the accompanying consolidated case, the Petitioner alleged the Respondent failed to repair cracks in the exterior walls of his unit. The Judge denied this petition, finding that the black-and-white photographs submitted by the Petitioner were insufficient to prove the existence or severity of the alleged damage by a preponderance of the evidence,.

**Final Decision and Order**
Based on the findings in Case No. 18F-H1818027-REL, the Administrative Law Judge ordered the following: