ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2022A-02232-RFA-LS-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-06-20

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Joshua J. Thomas

COMPLAINANT,

Anchor Home Renovation LLC

License No. ROC 319452,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2022A-02232-RFA-LS-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: June 3, 2025

APPEARANCES: Joshua J. Thomas (hereinafter “Complainant”) appeared on behalf of himself. Assistant Attorney General Charles Hover III appeared on behalf of the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (hereinafter “Registrar”). Jose Palacio appeared on behalf of Anchor Home Renovation LLC (hereinafter “Respondent”).

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Registrar’s Exhibits 1 through 7.

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. `On or about September 30, 2020, Complainant and Respondent entered into a residential remodeling contract for the amount of $66,690.00.

2. On March 20, 2022, Complainant filed a Complaint with the Registrar alleging poor work and abandonment on the part of Respondent. The Registrar’s investigator conducted a jobsite inspection. A directive was issued requiring Respondent to make specific repairs. Respondent failed to comply with the directive.

A Citation was issued to Respondent that ultimately resulted in discipline of Respondent’s license.

3. On November 7, 2024, Complainant filed a Residential Recovery Fund (hereinafter “Fund”) claim. In review of the clay, it was determined Complainant had the project completed by a contractor who holds a license that is not in scope to perform work on a residential structure or appurtenance.

4. On April 7, 2025, the Registrar issued a Notice and Order of Recovery Fund Denial denying the claim because Respondent did not have compensable damages.

5. Complainant requested an administrative hearing regarding the denial.

6. The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an evidentiary hearing.

7. A hearing was held on June 3, 2025.

8. At hearing, the Registrar presented the testimony of Tedi Quezada, Legal Assistant II at the Registrar’s legal department. Complainant testified on behalf of himself. Respondent did not present any testimony or evidence.

9. Complainant asserted that his repair contractor performed good work. Complainant also stated that he wanted to be reimbursed for the money that he paid Respondent.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1132(A) provides that “[a]n award from the fund is limited to the actual damages suffered by the claimant as a direct result of the contractor's violation but shall not exceed an amount necessary to complete or repair a residential structure or appurtenance within residential property lines. . . .” Respondent bears the burden of proof to establish that the proposed payout from the Fund is incorrect by a preponderance of the evidence.

“A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” A preponderance of the evidence is “[t]he greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still sufficient to incline a fair and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.”

An award from the Fund must not exceed the actual damages suffered by Complainant as a direct result of the contractor’s violation. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1132.01(B). Actual damages must be established by bid supplied or the value of work performed by a person that is properly licensed to perform the work. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1132.01(B)(2).

It is undisputed that the contractor hired by Complainant to perform the corrective work was not a licensed residential contractor in the State of Arizona. The preponderance of the evidence that the Registrar’s determination was proper.

Consequently, the Registrar appropriately denied Complainant’s Recovery Fund claim.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that Joshua J. Thomas’s appeal is dismissed.

In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be forty (40) days from the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, June 20, 2025.

/s/ Velva Moses-Thompson

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

[email redacted]

Anchor Home Renovation LLC

[email redacted]

Joshua J Thomas

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff