Sebastian board fines roofing firm, places business on probation over altered inspection report

The City of Sebastian Construction Board voted to penalize Diamond Quality Roofing after staff presented evidence that a final roof inspection report for 241 Midvale Terrace had been altered and submitted to the building department.

Wayne Esseltine, the city's building official, told the board that permit 25‑156 — issued to Adrian Bustamante, the company's qualifying contractor — showed a final inspection entry with work order and inspection numbers that matched a separate, valid inspection completed on 04/15/2022 under permit 22‑955 at a different address. Esseltine said the evidence, verified by the city's software provider, indicated the later document had been doctored to show a completed final inspection when no inspection record existed for the Midvale Terrace job.

"It was readily apparent that the final inspection report was fraudulently altered in an attempt to deceive the homeowner and the building department," Esseltine said during his presentation. He cited Florida Building Code sections 1.10.1 and 1.10.3 and city ordinance 26‑1722/26‑1728 as the bases for disciplinary action.

Adrian Bustamante, the company's qualifying contractor, said the final report he was given came from an office employee and that the homeowner paid the final invoice after they received the document. "I got it from the girl at the office," Bustamante said. He maintained that the company believed the job was complete when the invoice was paid.

Homeowner Charles Cleavenger told the board he was satisfied with the work and that his insurance was reinstated after the building department conducted on‑site inspections and verified repairs. "We were happy with the job that they did," Cleavenger said.

Board members and city staff debated penalties, with the city attorney advising that the board send a strong message that falsifying or altering official documents is unacceptable and that, at minimum, the contractor should be placed on probation. Staff outlined the board's options, including administrative fines (up to $1,000 per violation), probation, suspension of permitting privileges, or cease‑and‑desist orders.

After deliberation, a motion was made and seconded to impose a $1,000 fine for the fraud violation, a $500 fine for the procedural violation, and to place the business on six months' probation. The motion passed on a voice vote. Board members discussed and directed staff to include language that permitting privileges should not be reinstated until the fine is paid.

The board's action addresses the city's responsibility to ensure inspections are performed and recorded, and it emphasizes that a licensed qualifying contractor is responsible for the actions of the company's office staff. The meeting record shows the building department later completed physical inspections and closed the permit so the homeowner could satisfy their insurer.

The board adjourned after confirming the disciplinary action. Staff did not announce a date for further review.