Enforcement Actions - O
Each page of the Enforcement Actions section is divided into subsections for citations, administrative actions, and convictions. You should check each subsection to see if an enforcement action has been taken against the individual you are seeking.
There are no citations to display.
Lance C. O’Donnell
Palm Springs—A Statement of Issues was filed against Lance C. O'Donnell, an unlicensed individual and candidate for licensure, after he appealed the Board’s denial of his application for licensure. The denial was based on evidence that Mr. O’Donnell had represented himself as an architect, in violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Holding Self Out as Architect). A stipulated settlement was negotiated with Mr. O’Donnell when he admitted to the allegations and acknowledged that there was cause for imposing discipline. The terms and conditions of the stipulation was effective March 7, 1997 and included the issuance of a license which was immediately revoked, the revocation was stayed, and Mr. O’Donnell was placed on three years’ probation and required to reimburse the Board $2,765 for its investigative costs.
Bryan Albert Osborn
Sebastopol—Effective October 1, 2010, Bryan Albert Osborn’s architect license number C-23628, was revoked; however, revocation was stayed, his license was suspended for 90 days, and he was placed on probation for six years with specific terms and conditions, including reimbursing the Board $9,543 for its investigative and prosecution costs. The action came after a stipulated settlement was negotiated and adopted by the Board.
On or about May 21, 2002, Osborn, who was also a licensed general building contractor, entered into a written time and materials contract with the homeowner for architectural and general contracting services in connection with the remodel of the homeowner’s newly-purchased residence.
An Accusation was filed against Osborn for alleged violations of BPC section 5584 (Negligence or Willful Misconduct). The Accusation alleged that Osborn did not complete design drawings and construction documents necessary to adequately define the scope of work, clarify compliance with the Building Code, and obtain a building permit. Osborn, nevertheless commenced construction, although he knew that building permits were required by law and that the drawings had not been reviewed or approved by either the city or county building department.
Throughout the course of the contract, Osborn provided only a few freehand sketches and four sheets of conceptual drawings illustrating the proposed master bath and living room fireplace design. Sketch-design features which violated the California Building Code included: 1) proposed stairs that did not include required handrails; 2) proposed bench/guardrail that did not include the proper degree of enclosure; and, 3) extension of the westerly deck adjacent to an existing window that did not include tempered glass - a design feature implemented during construction.
Osborn did not adhere to the schedule required by the contract or keep the homeowner informed of the project’s progress. He did not obtain the homeowner’s written authorization for change orders and/or additional work before proceeding with such work. Osborn abandoned the project, approximately nine months after the commencement of construction. The work had only progressed as far as the installation of drywall in many areas of the house. In total, the homeowner paid Osborn approximately $230,000 over the original design/build contract price.
On or about September 21, 2009, Osborn stipulated to the revocation of his general building contractor license in resolution of a disciplinary action brought before the Contractors State License Board, which resulted from the same facts set forth herein related to the above-referenced project.
There are no convictions to display.