2023A-06984-NPC-ROC Notice of Hearing and Packet MAILED

2023A-06984-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2023-09-25

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Alfredo's Drywall LLC, Case No. 2023-06984 COMPLAINANT, Docket No. 2023A-06984-NPC-ROC v. NOTICE OF HEARING ON SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC CONTESTED CASE DBA: Signature Construction & Development License No. ROC 334339, RESPONDENT.

This Notice of Hearing is issued under A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D).

HEARING INFORMATION The hearing is set for:

November 15, 2023 1:00 PM Tammy Eigenheer Google Meet. A link will be provided directly from The Office of Administrative Hearings. Go to www.azoah.com to request to appear in-person.

If you have requested to appear in-person at the hearing, the hearing will be held at 1740 W Adams Street, Phoenix, AZ 85007.

You must attend this hearing. This is an adversarial hearing before an administrative law judge, and is conducted in a similar manner as judicial proceedings. Thus, you must be prepared to present evidence, including witness testimony and documents, in support of your case.

STATEMENT OF LEGAL AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION The State of Arizona has determined that the licensing and regulation of construction

contractors is a proper state function, and has vested authority in the Registrar of Contractors

to administer Title 32, Chapter 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. A.R.S. §§ 32-1101 et seq.

All hearings for alleged violations of Title 32, Chapter 10 are conducted under Title 41,

Chapter 6, Article 10. A.R.S. § 32-1156.

The statutes and rules governing the hearing can be found at: Arizona Revised

Statutes §§ 41-1092 to -1092.12, and Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-101 to -122.

PARTICULAR ARIZONA STATUTES AND RULES INVOLVED The statutes and rules the Respondent is alleged to have violated are cited in the

complaint and citation, which were served on the Respondent on August 10, 2023.

SHORT AND PLAIN STATEMENT OF THE MATTERS ASSERTED The complaint and citation allege that the Respondent committed the following act(s):

Charge: 1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10)

THE PARTIES TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING Because Respondent is a licensee and is charged with an act(s) or omission(s) that is cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Respondent is a party to this case and will be a party to the hearing. Because Complainant alleged Respondent committed an act(s) or omission(s) that is cause for the suspension or revocation of a license, Complainant is a party to this case and will be a party to the hearing. Respondent and Complainant, as the parties to the hearing, will present evidence and argument to the administrative law judge.

RIGHT TO BE REPRESENTED The parties to the administrative hearing may choose to be represented by an attorney.

A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(B). If one of the parties is a company, the company may be represented

by an officer or employee if that person satisfies the conditions set forth in A.R.S. § 32-

1156(B).

CHANGE OF ADDRESS Each party must inform the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings of

any change of address within five (5) days of the change. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04.

HEARING PROCEDURES AND RULES The administrative hearing will be conducted in accordance with A.R.S. §§ 41-1092

to -1092.12, and A.A.C. R2-19-101 to -122. The parties should review the statutes, rules, and

processes governing the administrative hearing. Copies of the statutes, rules, and articles

regarding the administrative hearing process can be found at https://www.azoah.com/.

REGISTRAR’S APPEARANCE BY VIDEO CONFERENCE OR TELEPHONE The Registrar’s investigators, employees, and attorneys will appear at the hearing via video conference or telephone unless requested by a party to appear in-person. Requests for the Registrar’s investigators, employees, or attorneys to appear in-person must be filed with the Registrar and the Office of Administrative Hearings no later than seven (7) calendar days prior to the hearing date. HEARING PACKET In the interests of administrative efficiency, the Registrar compiles and discloses certain documents to the parties and the Office of Administrative Hearings. These documents are attached to this Notice of Hearing as the “Hearing Packet.” If any party wishes to submit additional evidence, they must do so during the hearing after completing a disclosure statement. See “Disclosure Statement” section below.

SUBPOENAS FOR TESTIMONY FROM A WITNESS OR DOCUMENTS The parties to the hearing must be prepared to present evidence in support of their case. If a party wants to obtain testimony from a witness or documents not in the party’s possession, the party must prepare and file a written subpoena for the Administrative Law Judge to review and sign, if approved. A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(C). Forms for requesting a subpoena can be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’ website at www.azoah.com. The party seeking a subpoena must serve notice on all the parties to the hearing, and on the Registrar. A.R.S. § 41-1092.04. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT At least seven calendar days before the hearing, each party must prepare and serve a disclosure statement on all other parties, and file it with the Office of Administrative Hearings. A.A.C. R4-9-118; A.A.C. R2-19-108. The disclosure statement must include any exhibit the party will use at the hearing. A party’s failure to timely disclose any witness or exhibit, without good cause, may result in the administrative law judge excluding those witnesses or exhibits from being used at the hearing. A.A.C. R4-9-118(C). A sample disclosure form is available on the Registrar’s website at https://roc.az.gov/content/prehearing-disclosure- statement.

CHANGING THE HEARING DATE

The date of the hearing may only be advanced or delayed on the agreement of the

parties or on a showing of good cause. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(C). The date of the hearing may

be changed by filing a written agreement of the parties to change the date of the hearing. The

written agreement must be filed with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the

assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmitted to the Registrar and all other parties. The

assigned Administrative Law Judge may be found on the Office of Administrative Hearings’

web portal at www.azoah.com

If a party would like to move the date of the hearing without agreement of all parties, the party must file a written motion with the Office of Administrative Hearings, directed to the assigned Administrative Law Judge, and transmit a copy to the Registrar and all other parties. The motion must state in detail good cause for why the date of the hearing should be advanced or delayed, and the position of all other parties regarding the advancement or delay. A party may also file a motion asserting a right to an expedited hearing upon a showing of extraordinary circumstances or the possibility of irreparable harm. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(E).

RESOLUTION SHORT OF ADJUDICATION

In any case which is resolved or settled by the parties, or which is withdrawn by the

Complainant without objection from Respondent after the Notice of Hearing is issued, the

parties must notify the Office of Administrative Hearings of the resolution or settlement. Any

such cases will be listed on the Registrar’s website and its records under the category: “Closed

Complaints – Resolved/Settled/Withdrawn.”

Dated September 25, 2023.

By: /s/ Erika Hoskin Erika Hoskin Legal Secretary Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors

Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail September 25, 2023 to: Respondent(s) SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC DBA: Signature Construction & Development 4630 E Elwood Street Ste #7 Phoenix, AZ 85040 William H. Breier, Esq. 15205 N Kierland Blvd Ste 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

Complainant(s) Alfredo's Drywall LLC PO Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064 Copy sent electronically this same date to: Respondent at email address on record with the Registrar Respondent’s Attorney at email address of record with Registrar Complainant at email address on record with the Registrar

Case No. 2023-06984 /

Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

Hearing Packet FAQ What is the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet is a packet of certain documents collected or issued by the Registrar over the course of its investigation.

Who gets the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet is assembled and distributed to all parties and to the Office of Administrative Hearings (“OAH”) prior to an administrative hearing.

What types of cases does the Registrar prepare a Hearing Packet for?

The Registrar prepares a Hearing Packet for Complainant-Handled Cases and No-Pay Cases. Note: If the Docket Number on the Notice of Hearing contains a “CHC” or “NPC”, your case is a Complainant-Handled Case or a No-Pay Case.

What is in the Hearing Packet?

The Hearing Packet contains essential case-specific documents and at a minimum will include the following documents:

● Original complaint;

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

● Citation; and ● Answer.

The Hearing Packet will also contain the following documents (if applicable):

● Jobsite inspection notices, notes, and photos; ● Written directives; and ● Compliance inspection notices, notes, and photos.

What if there are documents missing from the Hearing Packet?

If there is any evidence you submitted to the Registrar that are not included in the Hearing Packet it is your responsibility to introduce that evidence at the administrative hearing. Note: The administrative law judge assigned to your case does not have access to the entire Registrar record.

If there is additional evidence you submitted to the Registrar during the investigation that you also want to introduce as evidence during your hearing, it is your responsibility to:

● Properly disclose that evidence to the other party; and ● Introduce the evidence during your hearing.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

Douglas A. Ducey, Governor Jeffrey L. Fleetham, Director

How do I disclose evidence I intend to use at a Hearing?

You must properly disclose any and all documents and witnesses you intend to use at your hearing according to the Registrar’s Prehearing Disclosure Rules. See Arizona Administrative Code Section R4-9-118.

A sample prehearing disclosure form and instructions are provided to the parties by the Registrar.

How do I obtain documents I previously submitted to the Registrar?

If you previously submitted documents to the Registrar and need a copy of these documents, please contact the Registrar’s Legal Department or submit a public records request at https://roc.force.com/AZRoc/s/roc-public-request.

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Within AZ 877.692.9762 · Fax 602.542.1599 · roc.az.gov Hearing Packet FAQ

June 23, 2023

Respondent Signature Mechanical INC 4630 E Elwood Street Ste #7 Phoenix, AZ 85040

Complainant Alfredo's Drywall LLC PO Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064

Via U.S. Mail and Email

Re: Complaint No. 2023-06984

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

The Registrar received a complaint filed against Signature Mechanical INC for non- payment of materials or services rendered. This complaint is complete and will be substantively reviewed by the Registrar.

Respondent is free to raise any issue or affirmative defense to this complaint by filing a response with the Registrar by June 29, 2023. Please reference the complaint number listed above if you file a response. Respondent may file a response by:

Mail: P.O. Box 18244, Phoenix, Arizona, 85005-8244 In-Person: 1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007-2812 Fax: (602) 364-0416 Email: [email redacted]

The Registrar will not issue a citation before June 29, 2023, and will review Respondent’s response, if one is submitted.

Please be advised that a response to the complaint is not the same as a written answer. If the Registrar issues a citation Respondent must file a written answer to that citation in accordance with A.R.S. § 32-1155.

Sincerely,

/s/ Eric Ulinger Eric Ulinger Legal Department 1700 W Washington St. Ste 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007 602-771/6756

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812 602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg100 4/21 Printed Name Signature Date Edwin Alfredo Perdomo Mejia RECEIVED LEGAL 6/26/2023

William H. Breier (029626) RADIX LAW 15205 N. Kierland Blvd., Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 [email redacted] (602) 606-9300 Attorneys for Respondent

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA ALFREDOS DRYWALL LLC, Case No. 2023-06984 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF Complainant, COUNSEL v.

SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC dba SIGNATURE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, ROC License No. 334339, Respondent.

William H. Breier of Radix Law hereby gives notice of his appearance as counsel of record for Respondent Signature Mechanical Inc. dba Signature Construction & Development (“Respondent”). Please direct all future filings, correspondence, and all other communications on behalf of Respondent to Mr. Breier at the address listed above. DATED: June 26, 2023. RADIX LAW /s/ William H. Breier William H. Breier Attorneys for Respondent /// /// /// 1442761.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/26/2023

Original e-mailed/mailed on June 26, 2023, to: REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS P.O. Box 18244 Phoenix, AZ 85005-8243 [email redacted] Copy mailed and emailed same date to: Alfredo’s Drywall LLC P.O. Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064 [email redacted] Complainant

By: /s/ Kelsey Slocum

1442761.1 RECEIVED 6/27/23, 12:24 PM State of Arizona Mail - ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 LEGAL 6/26/2023

Legal New Mail - AZROC <[email redacted]>

ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 message

Kelsey Slocum <[email redacted]> Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 9:25 AM To: Legal New Mail - AZROC <[email redacted]> Cc: "[email redacted]" <[email redacted]>, Will Breier <[email redacted]>

Good Morning,

Please find enclosed the Notice of Appearance of Counsel filed on behalf of Respondent in this matter. A hard copy will also follow via U.S. Mail. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Kelsey Slocum, Paralegal 15205 N. Kierland Blvd, Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Phone: 602-606-9321

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained herein may be privileged and protected by the attorney/client and/or other privilege. It is confidential in nature and intended for use by the intended addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby expressly prohibited from dissemination, distribution, copy or any use whatsoever of this transmission and its contents. If you receive this transmission in error, please reply or call the sender and delete this transmission from your email and/or network.

Notice of Appearance (6-26-23).pdf 121K

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/ADwNV_fVZKq-CS-zFzoZp-n37G9eC6u3hfJHieBT8itwcw2pAXMI/u/0/?ik=d3afebeda9&view=pt&search=all&permthid=t… 1/1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

William H. Breier (029626) RADIX LAW 15205 N. Kierland Blvd., Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 [email redacted] (602) 606-9300 Attorneys for Respondent

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA ALFREDOS DRYWALL LLC, Case No. 2023-06984 RESPONSE TO NO-PAY Complainant, COMPLAINT v.

SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC dba SIGNATURE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, ROC License No. 334339, Respondent.

Respondent Signature Mechanical Inc. dba Signature Construction & Development (“Signature”) files this Response to the most recent No-Pay Complaint filed by Complainant Alfredo’s Drywall LLC (“Alfredo’s”) on or about June 23, 2023 (“Complaint”) 1. I. INTRODUCTION AND RELATIONSHIP OF THE PARTIES As an initial note, the ROC should take notice that this is the second No-Pay Complaint filed by Alfredo’s against Signature, after unsuccessfully filing an earlier complaint in April 2023 (the “April Complaint”). The instant Complaint alleges payment is owed to Alfredo’s on projects known as the MD Hawkins Veterans Center and the

1 The Complaint was filed by an individual named Edwin Alfredo Perdomo Mejia. 1442729.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

Fairfield Hotel Chandler (collectively “Projects”). These are the same Projects alleged in the April Complaint. Indeed, the invoices (#525, #534, #547, and #540) referenced in both Complaints are also the same, only this time, Alfredo’s acknowledges partial payments received. Alfredo’s also requests payment for $1,305.32 for “material receipts” yet the Agreement was for labor only. For the reasons set forth below, the instant Complaint, like the April Complaint, should be dismissed without any further action taken. II. THE COMPLAINT SHOULD BE DISMISSED On or about February 23, 2023, Signature and Alfredo’s entered into a written Subcontractor Agreement (“Agreement”). 2 The Agreement outlines the terms and conditions for the parties’ working relationship. In its Complaint, Alfredo’s completely ignores the agreed upon terms and conditions, as set forth below. In the Complaint, Alfredo’s alleges that Signature owes $46,426.07. That amount is taken from four invoices identified as. As set forth below, the Complaint fails on many levels and should be dismissed. A. An Ongoing Dispute Exists Between Signature and Alfredo’s Pursuant to Section 4 of the Agreement, compensation to Alfredo’s was conditioned on work being completed properly. Section 4 expressly states:

The work performed by Alfredo’s on the Projects was extremely defective and/or incomplete. Pursuant to Section 4, infra, Signature notified Alfredo’s of the issues and gave it the opportunity to correct the deficiencies. When Alfredo’s refused to correct the deficiencies, Signature exercised its right to bring in a third party to correct/complete the A copy of the Agreement was provided with the Complaint. Another copy is enclosed herewith as Exhibit 1 for reference. 1442729.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

defective work and hold Alfredo’s financially responsible. This exercise is commonly known in the construction industry as a “back charge.” The payments marked “paid” as reflected in the invoices submitted with Alfredo’s instant Complaint indicate the partial payments Signature made. Because the extent of the back charge amounts is still unknown, pursuant to Section 4, Signature is withholding future payments to Alfredo’s. Once the corrective/completion work is complete, the costs will be deducted from any amounts which may be owed to Alfredo’s. If the corrective/completion work exceeds what Alfredo’s may be owed, Alfredo’s will be responsible to pay Signature the excess amount. Signature believes that Alfredo’s disputes the back charges. As such, this dispute is not proper before the ROC. Indeed, Section 9 of the Agreement addresses “Settlement of Disputes.” That Section describes a procedure for dispute resolution. In light of the dispute and the pending back charges arising out of Alfredo’s work on the Project, the ROC should summarily dismiss the Complaint on this basis alone. B. Alfredo’s “Material Receipts” Do Not Exist The Agreement, more specifically the Exhibit A prepared by Alfredo’s, provides that Alfredo’s was providing labor only. Yet the Complaint alleges non-payment of $1,305.32 for “material receipts.” There are no material receipts provided with the Complaint. Put simply, Signature has no information about the claimed $1,305.32 for “material receipts.” C. Alfredo’s Did Not Certify the Complaint The Complaint was filed by an individual named Edwin Alfredo Perdomo Mejia without even a reference to Alfredo’s. Moreover, the Complaint was not signed or dated by Mr. Mejia or anyone on behalf of Alfredo’s. Indeed, both the “Certification” and “Declaration & Signature” sections of the Complaint are not signed or dated. The Complaint should be dismissed on this basis as well.

1442729.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

III. CONCLUSION As set forth above, the Complaint, much like the April Complaint, is completely without merit. There is an ongoing dispute between the parties over the adequacy of Alfredo’s work, the extent of which is still ongoing. Alfredo’s did not provide any support for its material receipts claim and agreed it would only be providing labor. Alfredo’s did not certify the Complaint. As such, Signature requests for the Complaint to be dismissed without the ROC taking any further action taken. DATED: June 28, 2023. RADIX LAW /s/ William H. Breier William H. Breier Attorneys for Respondent

Original e-mailed/mailed on June 28, 2023, to: REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS P.O. Box 18244 Phoenix, AZ 85005-8243 [email redacted]

Copy e-mailed/mailed same date to:

Alfredos Drywall LLC P.O. Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064 [email redacted] Complainant

By: /s/ Kelsey Slocum

1442729.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

EXHIBIT 1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023 RECEIVED 6/30/23, 3:52 PM State of Arizona Mail - ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 LEGAL 6/28/2023

Legal New Mail - AZROC <[email redacted]>

ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 Kelsey Slocum <[email redacted]> Wed, Jun 28, 2023 at 9:26 AM To: Legal New Mail - AZROC <[email redacted]> Cc: "[email redacted]" <[email redacted]>, Will Breier <[email redacted]>

Good Morning,

Please find enclosed Respondent Signature Construction & Development’s Response to the No-Pay Complaint, along with the exhibit in this matter. A hard copy will also follow via U.S. Mail. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

[Quoted text hidden]

Response to No-Pay Complaint (6-28-23).pdf 3492K

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AAW1or-EtQx52CUjQ2auF7n0CU7G1elc6IugzwzT11j9LCn4Xced/u/0/?ik=d3afebeda9&view=pt&search=all&permmsgi… 1/1 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Case No. 2023-06984 Alfredo's Drywall LLC,

COMPLAINANT, v. CITATION Signature Mechanical INC DBA: Signature Construction & Development License No. ROC 334339, RESPONDENT.

The Registrar issues this Citation to Signature Mechanical INC DBA: Signature Construction & Development (“Respondent”) under A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). If Respondent fails to answer this Citation by August 25, 2023, then under A.R.S. § 32-1155(C), Respondent’s failure to answer may be deemed an admission of the act or acts charged in the underlying complaint, and the Registrar may then suspend or revoke Respondent’s license(s). THE WRITTEN COMPLAINT On June 20, 2023, Alfredo’s Drywall LLC (“Complainant”) filed a written complaint with the Registrar. A copy of that Complaint is attached to this Citation. A FORMAL STATEMENT OF THE CHARGES AGAINST RESPONDENT The Registrar investigated this matter and finds cause to charge Respondent with violation(s) of Title 32, Chapter 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. Respondent is charged with violating: Charge 1: A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) Failure by a licensee or agent or official of a licensee to pay monies in excess of $750 when due for materials or services rendered in connection with the licensee's of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 operations as a contractor unless the licensee proves that the licensee lacks the capacity to pay, and has not received sufficient monies as payment for the particular construction work project or operation for which the services or materials were rendered or purchased.

If the matter proceeds to a hearing and the administrative law judge determines that any of the charges listed above are supported by a preponderance of the evidence, then Respondent’s license(s) may be subject to suspension or revocation, and Respondent may be subject to other penalties provided by law, including civil penalties under A.R.S. §§ 32-1154(E) and (F). FILING A WRITTEN ANSWER Respondent must appear by filing with the Registrar a written answer to the citation and complaint showing cause, if any, why Respondent’s license(s) should not be suspended or revoked. A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). Respondent’s written answer should contain the heading “Written Answer to Citation and Complaint” and should include the case number, which is Case No. 2023-06984. How to File a Written Answer: Respondent’s written answer may be submitted in the following ways: In-Person: 1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007-2812 Mail: P.O. Box 18244, Phoenix, Arizona, 85005-8244 Fax: (602) 364-0416 Email: [email redacted] The Registrar’s normal office hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. If Respondent submits a written answer by mail, it is not filed with the Registrar until the Registrar actually receives it. Deadline for Filing a Written Answer: Respondent must file a written answer with the Registrar no later than August 25, 2023. This deadline is calculated under A.R.S. §§ 32-1155(A) and (B), which provides a of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 deadline ten days after service of the Citation. Service of the Citation and Complaint is complete five days after the Registrar mails a copy of the Citation and Complaint to Respondent’s latest address of record in the Registrar’s office. Consequences for Failing to File a Written Answer: If Respondent fails to answer, Respondent’s failure may be deemed an admission of the act or acts charged in the written complaint. A.R.S. § 32-1155(C). The Registrar may then suspend or revoke Respondent’s license(s). THE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING If Respondent files a timely written answer contesting any charges in the Complaint, then the Registrar will request the Office of Administrative Hearings set a date for an administrative hearing and will notify all the parties at least 30 days before that hearing. A.R.S. § 41-1092.05(D). RESPONDENT’S RIGHT TO REQUEST AN INFORMAL SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE Under A.R.S. § 41-1092.06, if Respondent submits a request to the Registrar for an informal settlement conference, the Registrar must hold a conference within 15 days after receiving the request. Respondent’s request for an informal settlement conference must be in writing and must be filed no later than 20 days before the administrative hearing. A.R.S. § 41- 1092.06(A). The Registrar will not close or settle any case without both parties’ appearance at the Settlement Conference. The parties participating in the settlement conference must have the authority to settle the case and must waive their right to object to the participation of the Registrar’s settlement conference representative in the final administrative decision. A.R.S. § 41-1092.06(B). Any statements, either written or oral, made by the parties at the conference, including a written document, created or expressed solely for the purpose of settlement negotiations, are of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 inadmissible in the administrative hearing. A.R.S. § 41-1092.06(B). RESPONDENT’S PRIOR RECORD Under A.A.C. R4-9-117, in determining the appropriate discipline, the administrative law judge and the Registrar may consider not only facts in the current case, but also facts in prior cases and any documents regarding Respondent on file with the Registrar. Respondent’s prior disciplinary record and current license(s) status may be considered as a mitigating or aggravating factor in determining the appropriate discipline. EVIDENTIARY DISCLAIMER By issuing this Citation, the Registrar is directing Respondent to file a written answer to the Citation and Complaint, showing cause, if any, why Respondent’s license(s) should not be suspended or revoked. A.R.S. § 32-1155(A). This Citation does not constitute proof that any charge or allegation in Complainant’s written complaint is in fact true. This Citation does not constitute proof that Respondent violated any statutory provision or rule adopted by the Registrar. Dated August 10, 2023. By: /s/ Robert Stirling Robert Stirling Legal Department Arizona Registrar of Contractors COPY of the foregoing mailed by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, August 10, 2023 to: Respondent Certified Mail No: [number redacted] Signature Mechanical DBA: Signature Construction & Development 4630 E Elwood Street Ste #7 Phoenix, AZ 85040 of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 Copy mailed by USPS First Class mail this same date to: Signature Mechanical INC DBA: Signature Construction & Development 4630 E Elwood Street Ste #7 Phoenix, AZ 85040 William H. Breier, Esq. 15205 N Kierland Blvd Ste 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254

Complainant Alfredo's Drywall LLC PO Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064

Copy sent electronically this same date to: Respondent at email address on record with the Registrar Respondent’s Attorney at email address of record with Registrar Complainant at email address on record with the Registrar

Case No. 2023-06984 / eu

of 5

1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105 · Phoenix AZ 85007-2812

602.542.1525 · Toll Free 877.692.9762 · roc.az.gov Lg101 8/21 June 23, 2023

Respondent Signature Mechanical INC 4630 E Elwood Street Ste #7 Phoenix, AZ 85040

Complainant Alfredo's Drywall LLC PO Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064

Via U.S. Mail and Email

Re: Complaint No. 2023-06984

Dear Complainant and Respondent:

Mail: P.O. Box 18244, Phoenix, Arizona, 85005-8244 In-Person: 1700 W. Washington St., Ste. 105, Phoenix, Arizona, 85007-2812 Fax: (602) 364-0416 Email: [email redacted]

The Registrar will not issue a citation before June 29, 2023, and will review Respondent’s response, if one is submitted.

Sincerely,

/s/ Eric Ulinger Eric Ulinger Legal Department 1700 W Washington St. Ste 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007 602-771/6756

Eric Ulinger <[email redacted]>

Alfredo's drywall LLC Complaint No. 2023-06984 message

A C <[email redacted]> Thu, Jun 29, 2023 at 2:10 AM To: Eric Ulinger <[email redacted]>

This is the second lawsuit against signature mechanical because in the first his lawyer said that they had not paid because the general contractor had not paid yet. Was in the contract they were going to pay when they received the payment.

They did not pay as they said in the first lawsuit when they asked for it to be closed, they only gave part of the money.

About material , Mr. Steve, the president of signature company called me on the phone, personally authorized me to buy the material. When I started the job they did not have material. Kirk the superintended of mechanical, he is a witness to this, even they fired him for not having the material.

Signature ordered drywall in the home depot of thunderbird and freeway 17, which I picked up with my workers in my trucks and they said to buy the rest of the material screws in another store that home depot didn't t have. They say that the receipts never existed and that they did not give authorization, but they are paying me one of the receipt of which they say do not exist.

As the contract and their lawyer say, I was hired to work for the amount of $45.00 per hour for each worker to install drywall and tape. That's why in the signed contract it does not determine the level of finished in the tape or drywall. Because we were working for hours under the supervision of their superintended and from him.

When it is a contract work and not for hours, the contractor chooses the level of tape that he wants to finish and in the time that the contract must be terminated and if it includes the material. Both they and their lawyer should know this and not I should have to remind them. From the beginning, they don't want to pay for the work because they are not honest.

Every day my employees signed a sheet of paper with the assistance, they had supervisors so that everything went well. I have a message from them that say that my workers are doing a very good job. On March 16, I received a message from the superintendent of Signature at VA work saying that he is going to stop work for three weeks. Message confirmed by the President of the company.

On March 15, Steve asked me for a budget to do what was missing from work. He asked me for a budget to work under contract. Because they had already spent a lot on the project. I sent him the price and he told me that he would call me later. I never received any calls, or text, or email saying that the job was wrong. I was working for hours and not for a contract, when something is wrong, it is notified soon to be corrected for that are the supervisors. when a bad job is being done, that's not my case.

It was not until twenty-five days after I had to receive the payment that was in reply with an email, saying that I had not received the invoices until that day. I told him that I had the evidence that I had already sent them twenty-five days ago. Then his answer noy pay because I brought undocumented and minors because the general contractor had told them.

I contact the general contractor and by text he said that he never mentioned that. And that he had already paid all the invoice by Signature. Then Steve sent another email again saying that they would not pay because he had done a bad job. When all the work was done as the asked for it for this, it had already been

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=63a6c7f277&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:[number redacted]%7Cmsg-f:[number redacted]&simpl=msg-f:[number redacted]&mb=1 1/2 6/29/23, 8:20 AM State of Arizona Mail - Alfredo's drywall LLC Complaint No. 2023-06984

twenty-five days since we stopped working for them. We went to work and were denied access by their order. Because they knew that the job wasn't bad. They are lying or presenting evidence saying otherwise.

After stop work on March 16, Signature employed another company to finish the unfinished areas of the first floor and corridors. Thank you. .

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=63a6c7f277&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-f:[number redacted]%7Cmsg-f:[number redacted]&simpl=msg-f:[number redacted]&mb=1 2/2 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/26/2023

William H. Breier (029626) RADIX LAW 15205 N. Kierland Blvd., Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 [email redacted] (602) 606-9300 Attorneys for Respondent

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA ALFREDOS DRYWALL LLC, Case No. 2023-06984 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF Complainant, COUNSEL v.

SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC dba SIGNATURE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, ROC License No. 334339, Respondent.

By: /s/ Kelsey Slocum

1442761.1 RECEIVED 6/27/23, 12:24 PM State of Arizona Mail - ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 LEGAL 6/26/2023

Legal New Mail - AZROC <[email redacted]>

ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 message

Kelsey Slocum <[email redacted]> Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 9:25 AM To: Legal New Mail - AZROC <[email redacted]> Cc: "[email redacted]" <[email redacted]>, Will Breier <[email redacted]>

Good Morning,

Please find enclosed the Notice of Appearance of Counsel filed on behalf of Respondent in this matter. A hard copy will also follow via U.S. Mail. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Kelsey Slocum, Paralegal 15205 N. Kierland Blvd, Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Phone: 602-606-9321

Notice of Appearance (6-26-23).pdf 121K

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/ADwNV_fVZKq-CS-zFzoZp-n37G9eC6u3hfJHieBT8itwcw2pAXMI/u/0/?ik=d3afebeda9&view=pt&search=all&permthid=t… 1/1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

William H. Breier (029626) RADIX LAW 15205 N. Kierland Blvd., Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 [email redacted] (602) 606-9300 Attorneys for Respondent

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA ALFREDOS DRYWALL LLC, Case No. 2023-06984 RESPONSE TO NO-PAY Complainant, COMPLAINT v.

SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC dba SIGNATURE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, ROC License No. 334339, Respondent.

1 The Complaint was filed by an individual named Edwin Alfredo Perdomo Mejia. 1442729.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

1442729.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

Original e-mailed/mailed on June 28, 2023, to: REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS P.O. Box 18244 Phoenix, AZ 85005-8243 [email redacted]

Copy e-mailed/mailed same date to:

Alfredos Drywall LLC P.O. Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064 [email redacted] Complainant

By: /s/ Kelsey Slocum

1442729.1 RECEIVED LEGAL 6/28/2023

Legal New Mail - AZROC <[email redacted]>

Good Morning,

Thank you,

[Quoted text hidden]

Response to No-Pay Complaint (6-28-23).pdf 3492K

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AAW1or-EtQx52CUjQ2auF7n0CU7G1elc6IugzwzT11j9LCn4Xced/u/0/?ik=d3afebeda9&view=pt&search=all&permmsgi… 1/1 Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

William H. Breier (029626) RADIX LAW 15205 N. Kierland Blvd., Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 [email redacted] (602) 606-9300 Attorneys for Respondent

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

ALFREDOS DRYWALL LLC, Case No. 2023-06984

Complainant, v. ANSWER TO CITATION SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC dba SIGNATURE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, ROC License No. 334339,

Respondent.

Pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1155(A), Respondent Signature Mechanical Inc. dba Signature Construction & Development (“Signature”) submits the following as its formal written Answer to the Citation issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors on August 10, 2023, regarding Complainant Alfredo’s Drywall LLC (“Alfredo’s”) No-Pay Complaint (“Complaint”). For the foregoing reasons, Signature requests the Citation and Complaint be summarily dismissed without the need for a formal hearing or further action taken. I. INTRODUCTION Signature denies violating A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) (the “No Pay Statute”). As a threshold issue, Signature disputes the Arizona Registrar of Contractor’s (“ROC”) jurisdiction to adjudicate amounts owed in this contractual dispute and contends they Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

cannot impose discipline until such dispute is resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. As a result of these issues, a good faith dispute as to the amount owed exists. On this basis alone, the Complaint should be dismissed. If the ROC retains jurisdiction in this matter, as set forth below, the various invoices submitted by Alfredo’s are disputed as due and owing on multiple grounds, including reduction by an executed Unconditional Waiver and Release on Final Payment pursuant to A.R.S. § 33-1008, as well as offsets for failure to complete the scope of work and workmanship related issues. II. LEGAL ARGUMENTS A. The ROC Lacks Jurisdiction Alfredo’s submits what amounts to a contract dispute between contractors as a No Pay Complaint. This is the improper forum for such a Complaint as the ROC is tasked with disciplinary proceedings against contractors, not determining what amounts, if any, are owed between contractors when deals go wrong. The ROC has many investigatory and disciplinary powers, as found in A.R.S. § 32-1104, et al. Notably missing from those powers, however, is the power to adjudicate amounts alleged to be due and owing in the face of a good faith dispute over such amounts. That power lies with the civil courts, and as such, the ROC lacks jurisdiction. The Administrative Courts have repeatedly recognized this limitation and have recommended dismissal of No Pay Complaints until the monetary dispute is reduced to a judgment by a civil court of competent jurisdiction. This is especially true when the Respondent’s defense relies on contractual obligations and offsets for damages caused by the Complainant. See Jeff Kraust v. Allied Window Coverings LLC, No. 2012A-4225-ROC (Jan. 24, 2013); Polygon U S Corporation f/k/a Munters Corporation v. Puroclean Water Mold Fire and Trauma Specialists Inc., No. 2012A-528-ROC (Aug. 20, 2012); and Sharp Industrial Control Inc. v. E T W Control Group Inc., No. 03F-2115-ROC (Oct. 01, 2003). In such instances, the Administrative Courts have routinely recommended dismissal of the No Pay Complaint since the monetary dispute needs to first be resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

In the present case, a contractual dispute exists over an amount allegedly owed under the Subcontractor Agreement (for the VA Project) and an unwritten agreement (for the Fairfield Project), with Signature rightfully withholding offsets due to additional costs incurred in engaging alternate forces to complete the work Alfredo’s agreed to perform. Similar to the circumstances in Allied Window Coverings LLC, Puroclean and Sharp Industrial Control Inc., supra, Signature disputes the entirety of the claimed amounts. In light of these conditions, it would be appropriate to dismiss this Complaint pending a proper adjudication of the dispute. B. Signature’s License Should Not Be Disciplined As stated in the Complaint, Alfredo claims payment is owed on two separate projects known as the MD Hawkins Veterans Center (the “VA Project”) and Fairfield Hotel Chandler (the “Fairfield Project”). If the ROC is inclined to retain jurisdiction in this contract dispute, Signature provides the following explanation to demonstrate why Alfredo’s is not entitled to any payments at this time. For the reasons set forth below, the Complaint should be summarily dismissed without any further action taken. 1. Alfredo's Executed An Unconditional Waiver And Release On Final Payment On The VA Project

The Complaint alleges $42,357.75 remains unpaid for the VA Project, broken down by the following three invoices: Invoice Date Invoice Number Outstanding Amount February 28, 2023 525 $6,915.00 March 1, 20223 534 $16,407.75 March 15, 2023 540 $19,035.00 On May 16, 2023 (over three months after the latest alleged outstanding invoice date), Alfredo’s executed an Unconditional Waiver and Release on Final Payment using the statutory form proscribed in A.R.S. § 33-1008 (“Unconditional Final”). Signed Unconditional Final enclosed as Exhibit 1. In the Unconditional Final, Alfredo’s expressly waived and released all of its rights to payment on the VA Project, except for Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

$16,250 it deemed to be disputed. Id. As a result, the claimed $42,357.75 should be reduced to $16,250. 2. Signature is Entitled to an Offset for Corrective Work on the VA Project

The “disputed” $16,250 is subject to an offset for Signature exercising its contractual right to correct Alfredo’s deficient and poor work and charge Alfredo’s for the costs in doing so. As referenced in the Response, the written agreement between the parties permits Signature the ability to withhold payment from Alfredo’s in the event of defective or incomplete work. Indeed, Section 4 of the Agreement expressly states:

In March 2023, Signature informed Alfredo’s that it’s work was defective and/or incomplete, putting Alfredo’s on notice pursuant to Section 4 of the Agreement. When Alfredo’s failed to correct the deficiencies, Signature exercised its right to retain another company to correct/complete Alfredo’s scope. The cost of the corrective work totaled $16,250. Payment records related to the replacement company for the VA Project are enclosed as Exhibit 2. As a result, Alfredo’s is not owed any additional money on the VA Project. 3. The Fairfield Project The Complaint alleges $3,500 is owed on Invoice #547. This Invoice is dated March 22, 2023, and is included with the Complaint, states it relates to the Fairfield Project. This amount, similar to the VA Project discussed above, is subject to an offset for Signature needing to bring in another company to correct/complete Alfredo’s work. Although there is no written contract between the parties for the Fairfield Project, the analysis is the same. Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

At the same time Signature informed Alfredo’s of issues on the VA Project, Signature also informed Alfredo’s that its work was defective and/or incomplete on the Fairfield. Alfredo’s refused to make any corrections on that one too. Subsequently, Signature had to retain another company to do so at a cost of $3,500. Payment records related to the replacement company for the Fairfield Project are enclosed as Exhibit 3. As a result, Alfredo’s is not owed any additional money on the Fairfield Project. 4. No Justification Exists For The Material Receipts Claim The Complaint also alleges $1,305.32 is owed for “material receipts.” As noted in the Response, Alfredo’s has not provided any justification or evidence to support the claim for payment for material receipts. As a result, Alfredo’s is not owed any money for materials. III. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, Signature requests for the Complaint to be dismissed without any further action taken. The ROC lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate amounts owed in the face of a good faith contractual dispute and/or the amounts sought are offset by incomplete or defective work. In addition, Alfredo’s has failed to provide any justification or support for its material receipts claimed. As a result, Signature’s license should not be disciplined, and the Complaint should be summarily dismissed. DATED: August 23, 2023. RADIX LAW

/s/ William H. Breier William H. Breier Attorneys for Respondent

Original e-mailed on August 23, 2023, to:

REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS P.O. Box 18244 Phoenix, AZ 85005-8243 [email redacted] Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

Copy e-mailed/mailed same date to:

Alfredos Drywall LLC P.O. Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064 [email redacted] Complainant

By: /s/ Kelsey Slocum Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

EXHIBIT 1 Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

EXHIBIT 2 Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

EXHIBIT 3 Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 08/23/2023 ROC Legal Received 8/24/23, 8:18 AM State of Arizona Mail - ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 08/23/2023 ROC Legal

Answers - AZROC <[email redacted]>

ROC Complaint No.: 2023-06984 message

Kelsey Slocum <[email redacted]> Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:20 AM To: "[email redacted]" <[email redacted]> Cc: "[email redacted]" <[email redacted]>, Will Breier <[email redacted]>

Good Afternoon,

Please find enclosed Respondent Signature Construction & Development’s Answer to Citation in this matter. Please let us know if you have any questions.

Thank you,

Kelsey Slocum, Paralegal 15205 N. Kierland Blvd, Suite 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Phone: 602-606-9321

Answer to Citation w exhibits (8-23-23).pdf 15106K

https://mail.google.com/mail/b/AEoRXRRW2Kwjx7Auj5AeIHJqF3yfLwQopf2Jmeg_HdfRJzRNat9B/u/0/?ik=581c53cf5c&view=pt&search=all&permthid… 1/1 9/19/23, 4:09 PM State of Arizona Mail - Case 2023-06984-Order Denying Request To Dismiss-Do Not Reply

Douglas Ulmer <[email redacted]>

Case 2023-06984-Order Denying Request To Dismiss-Do Not Reply message

Douglas Ulmer <[email redacted]> Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 4:00 PM To: [email redacted], [email redacted] Cc: Douglas Ulmer <[email redacted]> Bcc: [email redacted]

Good Afternoon,

Attached please find an electronic courtesy copy of the Order Denying Request to Dismiss issued in Case 2023-06984. This document was also sent to your attention via US Mail.

Please do not reply directly to this email. Any reply or response should be addressed to [email redacted].

Thanks,

Douglas Ulmer Arizona Registrar of Contractors 1700 W. Washington St., Suite 105 Phoenix, AZ 85007 [email redacted] (602) 542-1525 www.roc.az.gov

20230919 Order Denying Request to Dismiss 2023-06984.pdf 301K

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ik=bac2c3e6c6&view=pt&search=all&permthid=thread-a:r-[number redacted]%7Cmsg-a:r-[number redacted]… 1/1 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Alfredo's Drywall LLC, Case No. 2023-06984

COMPLAINANT, v. Signature Mechanical Inc., ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO DBA: Signature Construction & Development, DISMISS License No. ROC 334339, RESPONDENT.

BACKGROUND On August 10, 2023 the Registrar issued a citation against Respondent’s License No. ROC 334339. Respondent filed its Answer on August 23, 2023. The Answer included a request to dismiss the citation and close the complaint. ANALYSIS Respondent argues that the Registrar does not have jurisdiction over this matter because it involves contractual disputes that should be first resolved by a court of competent jurisdiction. Further, Respondent asserts that its license should not be disciplined. The Registrar issued the Citation in this matter pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1101 et seq., which authorizes the Registrar to impose disciplinary sanctions against licensees for violations of Title 32, Chapter 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes. Contrary to Respondent’s assertion that the Registrar lacks jurisdiction in this matter, the Registrar may resolve contractual disputes that are ancillary to it regulatory functions. J.W. Hancock Enterprises, Inc. v. Registrar of Contractors, 142 Ariz. 400, 406 (App. 1984). While the civil courts clearly have concurrent jurisdiction to resolve such disputes, the Registrar is not aware of a pending civil case between the parties.

of 3 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St.– Ste. 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 Toll Free (877)692-9762 Lg127 5/21 Here, the Citation charged Respondent with a possible violation of A.R.S. § 32- 1154(A)(10), which prohibits a licensee from failing “to pay monies in excess of $750 when due…” The amount in dispute in this matter plainly exceeds $750. While Respondent’s arguments essentially assert that payment is not yet due, this issue is disputed by Complainant. Therefore, because there are genuine factual disputes between the parties, these issues are best to be resolved before an Administrative Law Judge at the Office of Administrative Hearings. ORDER IT IS ORDERED that Respondent’s request to dismiss is DENIED. The issues underlying the Citation and Complaint are suitable for presentation before the Office of Administrative Hearings. Respondent is free to raise the arguments and defenses presented in its request to dismiss before the administrative law judge. A Notice of Hearing will be issued in due course. Dated September 19, 2023. By: /s/ Margaret Lindsey ___________ Margaret Lindsey Assistant General Counsel Arizona Registrar of Contractors

Copy mailed via USPS First Class mail on September 19, 2023, to: Respondent Signature Mechanical Inc DBA: Signature Construction & Development 4630 E Elwood Street Ste #7 Phoenix, AZ 85040 Respondent’s Attorney William H. Breier, Esq. 15205 N Kierland Blvd Ste 200 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Complainant Alfredo's Drywall LLC PO Box 32571 Phoenix, AZ 85064

of 3 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St.– Ste. 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 Toll Free (877)692-9762 Lg127 5/21 Copy sent electronically this same date to: Respondent at email address on record with the Registrar Respondent’s Attorney at email address of record with Registrar Complainant at email address on record with the Registrar Case No. 2023-06984/du

of 3 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St.– Ste. 105 – Phoenix, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 Toll Free (877)692-9762 Lg127 5/21 Mediation Notice

Mediation Services Mediation services are available to the parties. What is Mediation? Mediation is a method of resolving disputes where the parties can end conflict without the expense and time associated with the full administrative process. Who Participates in During mediation, a mediator will attempt to help the Mediation? parties find an optimal solution to the conflict. Both parties must agree to participate in mediation, and both parties must bring a representative to mediation that has full authority to settle the entire matter. Mediation Is Not Neither the Registrar nor the Office of Administrative Mandatory Hearings will penalize a party for not agreeing to mediation. Where do the Parties The parties will meet at the Office of Administrative Meet for Mediation? Hearings to participate in mediation.

The Office of Administrative Hearings is located at 1400 West Washington, Suite 101, Phoenix, Arizona 85007. When does Mediation can occur after the Registrar issues a citation, but Mediation Occur? before the administrative hearing. Why Should Parties Mediation can be an alternative to the full administrative Consider Mediation? process. Mediation is beneficial because it is (1) time- efficient, (2) cost-effective, (3) confidential, and (4) capable of providing flexible solutions to complex problems. How to Request If the parties wish to mediate this case, they must file a Joint Mediation Request for Mediation with the Office of Administrative Hearings. A Joint Request for Mediation is included with this Mediation Notice. REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA _________________________ Case No. _______________ COMPLAINANT,

v. JOINT REQUEST FOR MEDIATION _________________________ RESPONDENT.

REQUEST

The parties jointly request that this matter be referred to mediation in the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH). ☐ This matter is set for hearing on __________________(date). ☐ This matter is not currently set for hearing. MEDIATION AGREEMENT By requesting this mediation and signing below, the parties understand, represent, and agree: 1. The parties are prepared to commence mediation and will be ready for mediation on _____________________(date); 2. The parties will participate in the mediation process in good faith; 3. This request for mediation is not intended to hinder or delay administrative proceedings; 4. No party will contend that the mediation limits the power of OAH and its administrative law judges to conduct an administrative hearing and issue decisions under A.R.S. §§ 41-1092 – 1092.12; 5. The parties will be courteous and respectful throughout the mediation process to all participants; 6. The mediation is completely voluntary and the principal purpose is to allow the parties a full and fair opportunity to discuss settlement; of 3 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – PHOENIX, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 7. The mediator may conduct joint and separate meetings with the parties and may suggest resolutions to the parties’ dispute, but the mediator has no authority to impose a settlement upon the parties; 8. The mediation process is confidential. Communications made, material created for or used during, and acts occurring during mediation are confidential and may not be discovered or admitted into evidence in any proceeding except as provided by A.R.S. § 12-2238; 9. The mediator is not subject to service of process or a subpoena to produce evidence or to testify regarding any evidence or occurrence relating to the mediation except as provided in A.R.S. § 12-2238(C); 10. Neither the mediator, nor the Registrar of Contractors, nor the Office of Administrative Hearings is subject to civil liability for any act or omission in connection with any mediation service or activity except for acts involving

intentional misconduct or reckless disregard of a substantial risk of injury to the rights of others; 11. Throughout the mediation process, each party must have a representative present who will have full settlement authority to settle all claims at issue in the administrative

proceeding. 12. The mediation process will terminate when: a. The parties reach settlement; b. The mediator determines that further efforts at mediation are no longer likely

to achieve a settlement; or c. One of the parties withdraws from mediation. _____________________________________ _______________________ Complainant (or representative) Date

_____________________________________ _______________________ Respondent (or representative) Date

of 3 REGISTRAR OF CONTRACTORS 1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105 – PHOENIX, AZ 85007-2812 Telephone (602)542-1525 1-877-692-9762 PREHEARING DISCLOSURE STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS ***DO NOT SUBMIT THESE INSTRUCTIONS WITH THE PREHEARING DISCLOSURE FORM***

ADMINISTRATIVE RULES A copy of the Arizona Administrative Code’s Rules for the Registrar of Contractors can be located on the Registrar’s Website.

PREHEARING DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(A), before a hearing, the parties must prepare a disclosure statement. The disclosure statement must contain: • A list of all the witnesses the party will call to testify, including the witnesses’ contact information and a brief description of the subject matter of the witnesses’ expected testimony; and • A list of all the exhibits that the party will use at the hearing.

FILE PREHEARING DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS • The Prehearing Disclosure Statements and Exhibits may be submitted to the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings using any of the following: • Electronically: https://portal.azoah.com/submission/ • In-Person or by Mail: 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level, Phoenix, Arizona 85007

EXCHANGING DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS AND EXHIBITS Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(B) (effective November 5, 2017), a party to the hearing must serve on every other party and file with the Office of Administrative Hearings a copy of: • The disclosure statement; and, • Any exhibit that the party will use at the hearing. Service: The disclosure statement and exhibits must be served on all parties in accordance with Arizona Administrative Code R2-19-108 Filing Documents. Under A.A.C. R2-19-108, service is completed by: • Personal delivery; • 1st class, certified or express mail; or • Facsimile. Timing: The disclosure statement and the exhibits must be served and filed not less than seven calendar days before the date of the hearing. Under A.A.C. R2-19-108, a document is served on a party: • On the date it is personally served; • Five days after it is mailed by express or 1st class mail; • On the date of the return receipt if it is mailed by certified mail; or • On the date indicated on the facsimile transmission.

CONSEQUENCES FOR FAILING TO DISCLOSE Under A.A.C. R4-9-108(C), if a witness or an exhibit is not timely disclosed as required the rules, and good cause for the failure to disclose is not shown, then the administrative law judge may: • Order that certain witnesses or exhibits not be used at the hearing; • Order that a particular fact is or is not established for the record; or, • Order that a charge, a defense, a claim, or some portion thereof, be dismissed.

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 10/08/2019 Instructions Form PREHEARING DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FORM RC-L-800A

PART 1: WITNESS LIST DOCKET NO. Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(A), before a hearing, a party must prepare a disclosure statement containing a list of all the witnesses the party will call to testify, including the witnesses’ contact information and a brief description of the subject matter of the witnesses’ expected testimony. If you need additional space to list all witnesses, complete and attach additional Witness Lists. Example 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

John Doe (123) 456-7890 [email redacted] 4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

John Doe will testify regarding the poor workmanship and poor installation of the Garage Door. Mr. Doe will also testify regarding the invoices and change orders for the project.

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Witness 1. Name 2. Telephone Number 3. Email Address

4. Subject Matter of Expected Testimony

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 1/15/2019 Page 1 of 3 PART 2: EXHIBIT LIST DOCKET NO. Under A.A.C. R4-9-118(A), before a hearing, a party must prepare a disclosure statement containing a list of all the exhibits that the party will use at the hearing. Note: All exhibits listed below must be provided to all parties to the hearing. See A.A.C. R4-9-118(B). If you need additional space to list all witnesses, complete and attach additional Exhibit Lists. Example Contract for new garage door. Invoice #10001 – Cost for garage door replacement.

Exhibit Exhibit Name

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 1/15/2019 Page 2 of 3 PART 3: ACKNOWLEDGEMENT & SIGNATURE I certify that the above information is true and correct and that I will serve a copy of this disclosure statement and any exhibits listed in Part 2 to all parties to the hearing in accordance with A.A.C. R4-9-118. I acknowledge and understand that if I fail to properly disclose a witness or exhibit, the administrative law judge may: • Order that certain witnesses or exhibits not be used at the hearing; • Order that a particular fact is or is not established for the record; or, • Order that a charge, a defense, a claim, or some portion thereof, be dismissed.

I am the (check one):  Complainant  Respondent Docket No.

Print Name Signature Date

Form RC-L-800A Prehearing Disclosure Statement Rev. 1/15/2019 Page 3 of 3