California Architects

Administrative Citations:  

Pedro Aguilar

Bakersfield, CA - The Board issued a two-count citation that included a $3,000 administrative fine to Pedro Aguilar, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code sections 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect) and 5536(b) (Misrepresentation; Stamp) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134(a) (Use of the Term Architect). The action alleged that Aguilar, a draftsman, used the stamp, signature, and title block of his employer, a California licensed architect.

The action alleged that homeowners from Bakersfield paid Aguilar over $10,000 to design a balcony and staircase for the second floor of their home. The homeowners alleged that Aguilar misrepresented himself as an architect, signed their contract using the title “ARCH. PEDRO AGUILAR,” and offered to provide “Architectural Services.” Aguilar also used the email address “archfaco@gmail.com.”

Aguilar’s contract, billing invoices, and plans contained his employer’s logo and business name that includes the term “architect.” The description of his services as “Architectural,” his use of the title “Architect” and his email address, are devices that might indicate to the public that Aguilar is an architect or qualified to engage in the practice of architecture in violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134(a).

The plans created by Aguilar included the title block, logo, stamp, and signature of Aguilar’s employer, a California licensed architect who had no knowledge of the project, in violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536(b). The citation became final on August 20, 2020. 

Steve Balikian

Santa Barbara, CA - The Board issued a two-count citation that included a $2,000 administrative fine to Steve Balikian AKA Estabon Balikian, dba SB Builders AKA Santa Barbara Builders, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect) and Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) as described in Business and Professions Code section 5536.5 (State of Emergency; Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). The action alleged that Balikian’s LinkedIn, Houzz, and Yelp profiles, as well as his business website, offered “Architecture” and “Architectural” services and stated that he had a “team of architects.” Balikian’s business website also had a page titled “Re-Building after the Thomas Fire,” which offered resources for victims of the fire that was declared a state of emergency by Governor Jerry Brown on or about December 5, 2017. The page also stated, “If you need help building in this stressful time…we have in-house architects,” and then offered a free consultation. The citation became final on July 12, 2020.

Elmer Barco

Orange, CA - The Board issued a two-count citation that included a $3,500 administrative fine to Elmer Barco, dba Bar International Design and Development Co., Inc. (Bar International), Bar Building Division, LLC, and The Development Bar, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). The action alleged that an auto and truck services company (client) hired Barco and his company, Bar International, in September 2014, to design and engineer a 1,400 square foot gas station convenience store in Bell Gardens, California. The contract between the client and Bar International dated September 29, 2014, was signed by Barco’s unlicensed partner Michael Burke as “Architect for Bar International Design & Development Inc.,” and promised schematic design, architectural sheets, and “plans finalized for architectural stamp.” Change orders dated October 14, 2014; October 30, 2014; January 8, 2015; February 10, 2015; and April 3, 2015, included an “Architect’s Project Number,” specified “Not valid until signed by architect,” and were signed by Michael Burke.

Barco’s invoices to the client dated October 2, 2014, October 8, 2014, October 14, 2014, October 30, 2014, and November 13, 2014, itemized conceptual design, schematic design, and design development of “plans finalized for architectural stamp.” The company’s contract with an outside engineering firm dated March 5, 2015, designated Michael Burke of Bar International as the architect of record. Preliminary design sheets for the Bell Gardens project displayed a title block listing Commercial Design and Architecture under Bar International’s description of services. A design agreement between the client and Bar Building Division, LLC dated March 24, 2016, promised “Complete architectural drawings” and “All documentation for planning commission submittal.” Barco used a contract signed by Michael Burke as Architect for Bar Building Division, LLC, Project Status Reports specifying “architectural/ planning commission submittal,” and an Estimated Timeline for “complete architectural” services.

As new commercial construction, the designs for a gas station convenience store, restaurant, and expansion are not exempt from licensing requirements under Business and Professions Code section 5537. Barco represented his company as an architectural firm, provided architectural services, and included architecture in his company’s description of services without an architect who was in management control of the services that were offered and provided by the business entity and either the owner, a part-owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity, which violated Business and Professions Code section 5536 and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134.

In February 2020, Barco’s business, The Development Bar, maintained a website offering project management and design services and featured the design of the client’s gas station convenience store among its many commercial design accomplishments. By advertising non-exempt commercial architectural services through his company’s website, Barco violated Business and Professions Code section 5536(a). The citation became final on July 30, 2020.

Spencer C. Decker

San Francisco, CA - The Board issued a one-count modified citation that included a $500 administrative fine to Spencer C. Decker, architect license number C-25211, for an alleged violation of Business and Professions Code section 5600.05(b) (License Renewal Process; Failure to Maintain Records of Completion of Required Coursework). The action alleged that Decker failed to maintain records of his continuing education coursework for two years from the date of license renewal and failed to make those records available to the Board for auditing upon request. Decker paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on July 20, 2020.

Jon F. Edelbaum

Santa Cruz, CA - The Board issued a two-count citation that included a $1,500 administrative fine to Jon F. Edelbaum, architect license number C-31763, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code sections 5600.05(a)(1) (License Renewal Process; Audit; False or Misleading Information on Coursework on Disability Access Requirements); 5584 (Willful Misconduct) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(b)(2) (Failure to Respond to Board Investigation). The action alleged that Edelbaum certified false or misleading information on his 2019 License Renewal Application and failed to respond to the Board’s requests for information regarding his continuing education coursework within 30 days. The citation became final on July 30, 2020.

Sonia Ekmakji

West Hills, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $2,000 administrative fine to Sonia Ekmakji, dba Archi-Tec, Archi-Tec Design and Remodeling, Archi.Tec Designer, and Architec1, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect). The action alleged that Ekmakji prepared a written contract to provide architectural services for a new recreation room by preparing plans through submittal and approval of permits and Title 24 clearance at her client’s home located in West Hills, California for a total “architectural fee” of $6,597.95. The agreement was signed in the name of “ARCHI-TEC DESIGN AND REMODELING.”

Ekmakji’s business card included the business name “ARCHI TEC” and the email address ARCHITEC1@YAHOO.COM. Ekmakji’s Yellow Pages profile included the business name “Architec1” and was categorized under “Architectural Designers” and her OpenGovUs profile was operating under the business name “Archi Tec Designer.” Ekmakji used the term “Arch” in her company names or description of services, without an architect who was in management control of the services that were offered and provided by the business entity and either the owner, a part-owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity, a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) as defined in California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134. Ekmakji paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on July 22, 2020.

Alan Gregory Estrada

Pleasant Hill, CA - The Board issued a two-count modified citation that included a $1,250 administrative fine to Alan Gregory Estrada, architect license number C-20258, for violations of Business and Professions Code sections 5584 (Negligence) and 5536.22(a)(4) and (5) (Written Contract) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(a)(2) (Professional Misconduct).

The action alleged Estrada executed a contract to obtain a building permit for a second dwelling unit remodel in Oakland, California. The contract was not executed by Estrada and did not include either a description of the procedure to accommodate additional services, or a description of the procedure to be used to terminate the contract.

The design for the project was rejected by the city of Oakland because the design did not meet setback and size requirements. Estrada had assumed the distance to the property line based on the location of a fence and failed to initiate a survey in order to determine the correct setback.

Mark Allen Gaxiola

Eureka, CA – The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $500 administrative fine to Mark Allen Gaxiola, architect license number C-23899, for an alleged violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536.22(a) (Written Contract).

The action alleged that on or about January 17, 2019, Gaxiola provided a contract to a client to develop preliminary design documents to upgrade an existing lodge for the project located in Dinsmore, California for a fixed fee of $10,000. The client signed the contract and provided Gaxiola with an initial payment of $2,500. The contract did not include Gaxiola’s license number, a description of the procedure for accommodating additional services, or a termination clause for the above-referenced project. In an invoice to the client dated April 22, 2019, Gaxiola billed $1,410 but did not provide a description of services or tasks provided, and this led to a dispute over the fees.

Gaxiola’s failure to include in the written contract his license number, a description of the procedure that he and the client would use to accommodate additional services, and a description of the procedure to be used by either party to terminate the contract constituted a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536.22(a). Mr. Gaxiola paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on October 22, 2020.

Julio C. Gener

Costa Mesa, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $500 administrative fine to Julio C. Gener, architect license number C-20599, for a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536.22(a) (Written Contract).

On or about August 18, 2017, Gener entered into a contract with a client to obtain a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for an auto display and gun range located in the city of Huntington Beach. This contract's scope was to create as-built plans to get the project approved for a CUP and provide production plans, which excluded any additional design or engineering. The CUP was obtained from the City of Huntington Beach on or about February 1, 2018. On or about March 2, 2018, Gener submitted construction documents for the project remodel to the city of Huntington Beach for plan check approval and feedback. These documents were dated February 7, 2018, and included a new restroom, kitchen, and parking layout.

On or about March 6, 2018, after submitting the preliminary drawings to the city, Gener emailed the client a written contract "memorializing" their oral amendment to the initial contract, but the client never signed it.

A dispute arose regarding the timeline and Gener was terminated from the project on or about March 23, 2018. Gener had worked on the project without an executed contract until his termination, a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536.22(a). Gener paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on July 24, 2020.

John F. Hussey

El Cajon, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $500 administrative fine to John F. Hussey, architect license number C-16803, for an alleged violation of Business and Professions Code section 5600.05(a)(1) (License Renewal Process; Audit; False or Misleading Information on Coursework on Disability Access Requirements). The action alleged that Hussey certified false or misleading information on his 2019 License Renewal Application and completed the coursework on disability access requirements after his August 31, 2019 license renewal date. The citation became final on June 19, 2020.

Nancy Keenan

Pleasanton, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $500 administrative fine to Nancy Keenan, architect license number C-17751, for an alleged violation of Business and Professions Code section 5600.05(a)(1) (License Renewal Process; Audit; False or Misleading Information on Coursework on Disability Access Requirements). The action alleged that Keenan certified false or misleading information on her 2019 License Renewal Application and completed the coursework on disability access requirements after her November 30, 2019 license renewal date. Keenan paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on June 17, 2020.

Roland Ketelsen

Sacramento, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $2,500 administrative fine to Roland Ketelsen, architect license number C-23046, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5584 (Negligence) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(a)(2) (Professional Misconduct). The action alleged that the Elk Grove Water District (EGWD) hired Ketelsen to provide professional architectural and engineering services for a new Information Technology Center containing offices, a meeting room, and a server room. EGWD is a department of the Florin Resource Conservation District (FRCD) and operates the City of Elk Grove's water system. The server room contained the computer servers that manage all the water district’s computer systems, including the system that allows water treatment operators to monitor the public drinking water system that serves more than 39,000 people.

Ketelsen and his mechanical engineering sub-consultant Sigma Engineering specified a 1.5-ton Mitsubishi M-Series split system air conditioning unit for the server room. Based on that specification, the 1.5-ton M-series unit was purchased and installed. On December 10, 2018, the air conditioning unit stopped providing cooling air. The temperature in the server room rose to 115-degrees Fahrenheit and the computer servers shut down due to heat overload. The next morning, an independent air conditioning company (COAC) was brought in to diagnose the problem. The COAC technician determined that, according to the manufacturer’s data sheet, the installed M-series unit was designed for comfort cooling, not for equipment cooling, and that the P-series Mitsubishi should have been specified. The M-series coolant, in a separate “split” unit outside the building, freezes when the outside temperature drops too low, causing the air conditioner to shut down.

Ketelsen was notified of the improper specification and took no immediate action to address the problem. On December 17, 2018, the same problem occurred with the M-series unit and temperatures in the server room again rose to dangerous levels. Due to the criticality of the computer servers to the water district’s operations, the water district had COAC remove the M-series and install a P-series unit at a cost of $8,201. On January 14, 2019, a meeting to discuss the problem was scheduled between the Mitsubishi Sales Engineer/Area Manager, the General Manager of the water district, the FRCD General Manager, Ketelsen, and the principal of Sigma Engineering. Ketelsen and the representative from Sigma Engineering both failed to show up for the meeting. The representative from Mitsubishi confirmed that the P-series air conditioner is the proper unit for a server room, and the M-series is not recommended for that application.

Ketelsen’s failure to specify and design the appropriate HVAC system, and his failure to assist the owner in resolving the problem constitute negligence in the practice of architecture, violations of Business and Professions Code section 5584 and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(a)(2). The citation became final on July 30, 2020.

Robert Alan Massetti

Rocklin, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $2,500 administrative fine to Robert A. Massetti, architect license number C-12648, for violations of Business and Professions Code section 5584 (Negligence) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(a)(2) (Professional Misconduct).

The action alleged Massetti executed a contract with an unlicensed individual to provide consultation and working drawings with stamp and signature for a new two-story single-family residence. The architectural plans were approved by Sacramento County for a building permit but the stair dimensions were not compliant with the current California Building Code.

Massetti’s failure to apply the correct building laws and codes by signing and stamping plans with non-compliant stair dimensions constituted a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5584 and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(a)(2). Massetti paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on July 10, 2020.

Joseph Pazcoguin

Los Angeles, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $2,500 administrative fine to Joseph Pazcoguin, dba Plan and Permit, Inc., an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect).

The action alleged that Pazcoguin’s website for Apartment to Condo Conversion, at apartment2condo.com, stated "Our company hired the best architects," and described the company as "A place where design and architecture serve to create new and exciting possibilities for our clients." The "Our Services" page had a heading for "Architecture," under which it listed "basic architectural stages" and "Conceptual Architectural Design."

The action further alleged that Pazcoguin’s website for Apartment to Condo Conversion, at besta2c.com, stated that they help with all phases of new home construction, including "architecture and design," described the company staff as "architects and designs" on the "About" page, and described the company as "A place where design and architecture serve to create new and exciting possibilities for our clients." The "News & Event" page on the website contained a link to an interview titled "Bob Peterson Interviewed A2C CEO Architect Joseph Pazcoguin." The website's "Our Team" page listed a design associate who "assists the architects on designs and permits." The page also advertised two unlicensed employees as a "Senior Design Architect" and a "Civil works Architect."

The action also alleged that the website pages for Loyola Academy, Rolling Hills Estates, Prezi, and Press Newsroom; Youtube videos for The Mentor Project I and II; and the Plan and Permit, Inc. website preview, all referred to Pazcoguin as "Architect."

Pazcoguin’s websites, apartment2condo.com and besta2c.com, which referred to Pazcoguin as an "architect," advertised that he had "architects" on staff, and offered architectural services such as "architectural design;" the website pages for

Loyola Academy, Rolling Hills Estates, Prezi, and Press Newsroom; Youtube videos of the interview titled The Mentor Project I and II; and the Plan and Permit, Inc. website preview, all referring to Pazcoguin as "Architect," are devices that might indicate to the public that Pazcoguin is an architect or qualified to engage in the practice of architecture in California. Such conduct constitutes violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a). The citation became final on October 23, 2020.

Agustin De Jesus Garcia Rivas

Menifee, CA - The Board issued a one-count modified citation that included a $1,000 administrative fine to Agustin De Jesus Garcia Rivas, aka Agustin Garcia, dba Jenkins & Garcia Architecture, an unlicensed individual, for violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536 (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134(a) (Use of the Term Architect).

On or about January 27, 2017, Rivas prepared and executed a written contract to provide architectural services for a project in Lakeview, California for a fixed fee of $4,000. The contract included “Lic# 4179,” which belonged to Rivas’ deceased business partner, architect Robert G. Jenkins, who had passed away on August 8, 2016. The contract used the terms “architect,” “architecture,” and “architectural” to describe Rivas’ services. Rivas continued to use the business name “Jenkins & Garcia Architecture” in advertising until 2018.

Rivas’ contract and advertising, wherein Rivas offered “architecture” and “architectural” services, are devices that might indicate to the public that Rivas is an architect or qualified to engage in the practice of architecture in California.

Rivas’ use of the business name “Jenkins & Garcia Architecture” without an architect who was in management control of the services that were offered and provided by the business entity and either the owner, a part-owner, an officer, or an employee of the business entity violated Business and Professions Code section 5536 and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134(a). The citation became final on June 27, 2020.

Luis A. Robles

Pacifica, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $500 administrative fine to Luis A. Robles, architect license number C-21700, for an alleged violation of Business and Professions Code section 5600.05(a)(1) (License Renewal Process; Audit; False or Misleading Information on Coursework on Disability Access Requirements). The action alleged that Robles certified false or misleading information on his 2019 License Renewal Application and completed the coursework on disability access requirements after his December 31, 2019 license renewal date. Robles paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on October 22, 2020.

Aaron Robinson

Santa Barbara, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $1,500 administrative fine to Aaron Robinson, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134(a) (Use of the Term Architect).

The action alleged that Robinson used the business name “re:design Architectural Studios” to do business in California and used the website www.redesignarchitecturalstudios.com to offer architectural services in Santa Barbara, as well as other locations in California. The website advertised “bespoke architectural design,” “efficient architectural home design plans,” “detail oriented architecture,” and “architectural / landscape design.” The website also showed a design concept for a three-story residence titled “The Bermuda,” which is not an exempt structure under Business and Professions Code section 5537.

The website for the Bontena Brand Network contained an interview with Robinson that described him as “Owner and Principle Designer of re:design architectural studios from Santa Barbara.”

Robinson’s Yelp, Houzz, Facebook, and LinkedIn profiles used the business name “Redesign Architectural Studios,” listed the business as located in Santa Barbara, and referred to Robinson as the “Senior Architectural Designer.” The profiles also referred to the business as an “architecture and design firm” which offered “architectural plans” and “architectural design” services in Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, Southern California, and “anywhere you want to live.” Robinson’s business profiles on Yellowpages, Payhip, and Alignable used the name “re:design Architectural Studios,” and the address in Santa Barbara, California.

Robinson’s business name, website, online profiles, and articles, wherein he described himself as an architectural designer and his services as “Architecture “ and “Architectural," are devices that might indicate to the public that Robinson is an architect or qualified to engage in the practice of architecture in California. Such conduct constitutes violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134(a). The citation became final on September 3, 2020.

Jeffrey T. Smith

San Clemente, CA - The Board issued a one-count modified citation that included a $500 administrative fine to Jeffrey T. Smith, architect license number C-19093, for an alleged violation of BPC section 5600.05(b) (License Renewal Process; Failure to Maintain Records of Completion of Required Coursework). The action alleged that Smith failed to maintain records of his continuing education coursework for two years from the date of license renewal and failed to make those records available to the Board for auditing upon request. The citation became final on July 23, 2020.

Kyle K. Smith

Torrance, CA - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $2,000 administrative fine to Kyle K. Smith, dba West Palm Group, an unlicensed individual, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536(a) (Practice Without License or Holding Self Out as Architect) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 134(a) (Use of the Term Architect). The action alleged that a homeowner from southern California hired Smith and his company West Palm Group to perform architectural and engineering services to repair damage done to their home. The homeowner alleged that Smith misrepresented himself as an architect and an engineer. Smith’s business card for West Palm Group included the description of services “ARCHITECTURE, ENGINEERING, PLANNING.”

The action alleged that Smith submitted plans to the City of Torrance building department with a circular stamp with the following written on it. “LICSENSED [sic] ARCHITECT”; the name and license number of a California licensed architect, “Exp. 12/31/2019”; and “STATE OF CALIFORNIA.” In addition, page A1.0 of the plans dated April 15, 2019, stated “DRAWN: KKS” and “APPROVED: KKS.” The license number used belongs to an architect who had no involvement with the Respondent or the project. The stamp used was deceptively similar to that required for licensed architects by Business and Professions Code section 5536.1(b) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 136. The citation became final on June 17, 2020.

Wendell W. Veith

Indio - The Board issued a one-count citation that included a $2,500 administrative fine to Wendell W. Veith, architect license number C-5297, for violations of Business and Professions Code sections 5582 (Aiding Unlawful Practice) and 5582.1 (Signing Other’s Plans or Instruments; Permitting Misuse of Name), and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 151 (Aiding and Abetting).

The action alleged that Veith stamped plans, dated May 22, 2019, that were prepared by an unlicensed individual for a remodel and addition of a property in Mammoth Lake, California. Veith did not have a written agreement with the unlicensed individual, a violation of Business and Professions Code sections 5582 and 5582.1 and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 151. Veith paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on October 14, 2020.

Chiou-Yeong Wu

Rowland Heights, CA - The Board issued a one-count modified citation that included a $250 administrative fine to Chiou-Yeong Wu, architect license number C-26073, for alleged violations of Business and Professions Code section 5536.22(a) (Written Contract Requirements) and California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(f)(1) (Informed Consent). The action alleged that on or about October 22, 2018, Wu prepared a written contract to provide Mr. W.C.C. (client) with schematic design, design development, and construction documents for an existing garage conversion to be permitted as an Accessory Dwelling Unit located on Hollis Street in Hacienda Heights, California for a fixed fee of $3,800. On or about October 22, 2018, the client signed the contract and provided Wu with an initial payment of $1,900. The contract did not include Wu’s license number. In an invoice to the client, dated July 26, 2019, Wu billed $1,520 for a second payment, $200 for “Additional works for unpermitted addition to existing garage,” and $380 for a third payment. The “Additional Services” provision in Wu’s contract stated that the additional services shall only be provided if authorized or confirmed in writing by the owner. There was no written document with the client’s permission to do this “additional” work, and this led to a dispute over the fees. Wu’s failure to include his license number in the written contract for the above-referenced project constitutes a violation of Business and Professions Code section 5536.22(a). Wu also materially altered the scope of the project without obtaining the consent of his client in writing, a breach of his contract and violation of California Code of Regulations, title 16, section 160(f)(1). Wu paid the fine, satisfying the citation. The citation became final on June 11, 2020.

 

Administrative Actions:  

Ethan Wilson Cliffton

Santa Rosa, CA - Effective July 6, 2020, Ethan Wilson Cliffton’s architect license number C-11466 was revoked. The action came after a Default Decision was issued by the Board.

An Accusation filed against Cliffton alleged six causes for discipline for violations of: (1) Business and Professions Code (BPC) section 5585 and California Code of Regulations (CCR), title 16, section 160(a)(2) (Incompetency); (2) BPC sections 5536.4(b), 5578, and 5584 (Willful Misconduct, Failure to Release Instruments of Service); (3) BPC sections 5584 and 5585 (Willful Misconduct and Recklessness); (4) BPC section 5584 (Willful Misconduct); (5) BPC sections 5536.22(a)(3) and (4) and 5578 (Failure to Comply with Contract Requirements); and (6) BPC section 5584 and CCR, title 16, section 160(b)(2) (Willful Misconduct, Failure to Respond to Request for Evidence).

The Accusation alleged that on or about April 15, 2015, Cliffton executed a contract to design a new residence to replace his clients’ existing home in Redwood City, California. The contract did not contain Cliffton’s architect license number or a description of the procedure to accommodate additional services.

Cliffton initially told his clients that construction drawings would be completed by May 2015; however, after several delays and revised completion dates, Cliffton indicated that his final drawings would be submitted to the building department on September 22, 2015. Based on this anticipated submission date, Cliffton then recommended that the clients demolish their existing home in preparation for the construction of their new home. Acting on his advice, the clients demolished their home in September 2015. For over three years, the clients then rented another home awaiting completion of construction.

On or about January 14, 2016, Cliffton suggested the clients obtain a partial permit for foundation and slab construction, but they were unable to do some because Cliffton had not finished the construction drawings. The clients had paid all of Cliffton’s invoices to that date, approximately $52,000, but never received completed construction drawings from him and had to engage another architect to complete the project.

Cliffton then refused to release his drawings to the new architect unless the clients paid him an additional $35,000. He later increased this amount to $65,000. Additionally, Cliffton told the clients’ structural and mechanical engineers and Title 24 consultant, who were under contract with the clients, to cease work and destroy all their documents.

On July 1, 2016, the Board requested a written response to the allegations and supporting documents from Cliffton. In response, he provided only a brief statement, copies of his correspondence to the Better Business Bureau, and the clients’ draft lawsuit against him.

The Board’s Default Decision and Order was issued on June 5, 2020, and became effective on July 6, 2020.