ALJDEC - Licensing
2023A-14619-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-07-16
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Michael Kruk,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Lumio HX, Inc.,
License No. ROC 340314,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2023A-14619-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: June 26, 2025
APPEARANCES: Complainant Michael Kruk appeared on his own behalf. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator David Cooke appeared as a witness. Respondent Lumio HX, Inc. did not appear.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Kay Abramsohn
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: ROC Notice of Hearing Packet (Packet).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Lumio HX, Inc. (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 340314, R-11 Electrical, issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar or ROC) in August 2022.
On or about February 10, 2023, the parties entered into a contract for solar power to a residence in Tucson, Arizona. The contract amount was stated as $60,046.00.
On or about December 28, 2023, the Registrar received a Licensed Complaint Form (Complaint) against Respondent. The Complaint alleged poor work and untimely responses of Respondent to issues. The full contract amount has been paid to Respondent.
The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator Mike Springer.
On March 6, 2024, Inv. Springer conducted a Jobsite Inspection and took multiple photographs. Respondent failed to appear for the Jobsite Inspection.
On March 6, 2024, Inv. Springer issued a Written Directive for Respondent to complete corrective work by March 22, 2024. In pertinent part, the Directive stated as follows:
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Compliance Item: 1 – Installation not complete and takes Lumio too long to respond to TEP inquiries
Investigator’s Observation: Installation is incomplete. Missing ground wires, incorrect lug size for main power wires.
Governing Rule: 32-1154(A)(3) R4-9-108(A)
Compliance Item: 2 – MPU that was installed isn’t up to code Main power wires from TEP were [trimmed] to fit into box
Investigator’s Observation: Missing grounds, incorrect lugs for supply wiring.
Governing Rule: 32-1154(A)(3) R4-9-108(A)
Compliance Item: panel isn’t grounded properly and many of the wires were loose
Investigator’s Observation: No grounds present in main box, ground lugs empty.
Governing Rule: 32-1154(A)(3) R4-9-108(A)
On April 1, 2024, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent charging possible violations of:
Charge :1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(a)
Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
Charge :2 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22)
Failure to take appropriate corrective action to comply with this chapter or with rules adopted pursuant to this chapter without valid justification within a reasonable period of time after receiving a written directive from the Registrar. The written directive shall set forth the time within which the contractor is to complete the remedial action. The time permitted for compliance shall not be less than fifteen days from the date of issuance of the directive. A license shall not be revoked or suspended nor shall any other penalty be imposed for a violation of this paragraph until after a hearing has been held.
Respondent filed an Answer to the Citation on April 16, 2024, indicating that the electrical work was performed by a third party, Lumanex, LLC and that the rest of the work was done by Allstate Roofing & Solar. Respondent acknowledged that it had “utilized its technical team to correct Lumanex’s work.
The Registrar subsequently referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), an independent State agency, for an evidentiary hearing and issued a Notice of Hearing.
The hearing date was continued multiple times for various reasons, including discussions about settlement and unavailability of the investigator on one occasion. On May 15, 2025, OAH issued an ORDER continuing the matter to June 26, 2025; the ORDER advised the parties how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet.
On the date and at the time set for the continued hearing, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Because Respondent failed to appear, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.
Inv. Cooke testified regarding the background in this matter. Inv. Cooke explained that the wires had been stripped and were exposed at the time of the jobsite inspection and that the wires had needed to be upgraded.
Complainant testified that he had lost the “advantage” of having solar power due to the extra costs and being unable to use the solar power and that he had to pay on the loan before he was able even use the equipment
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s License record on July 16, 2025. There is one open case, which is the instant matter.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The copy of the Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Respondent at its address and email address of record was reasonable; the same address and others as found within the administrative record were utilized by OAH to communicate with Respondent. Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing. A.R.S. §§ 41-1092.04 and 41-1092.05(D).
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See A.R.S. § 32-1101 et seq.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and A.A.C. R-19-119(B)(1); see also Vazzano v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz. 369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952). “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960).
The evidence of record established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards in that Respondent failed to complete the work for which it responsible. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent was in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3).
The evidence of record established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards in that Respondent left incomplete work that was begun to be installed and/or failed to provide all materials and correct material which was contracted to be installed. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action to comply with this chapter or with rules adopted pursuant to this chapter without valid justification within a reasonable period of time after receiving a written directive from the Registrar in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Registrar’s Order, the Registrar shall revoke Respondent’s License No. 340314.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E).
It is further recommended that if Respondent fails to pay the entire amount of the civil penalty on or before thirty days following the effective date of the Registrar’s final order, the Registrar revoke Respondent’s license, effective on such deadline date. No future license shall be issued to any entity consisting of persons associated with Respondent, as defined in A.R.S. § 32-1101(A)(5), unless Respondent tenders payment of any outstanding prior civil penalty.
Pursuant to A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(I), the licensee may accept the Administrative Law Judge Decision by advising the Office of Administrative Hearings in writing not more than ten (10) days after receiving the decision. If the licensee accepts the Administrative Law Judge Decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the Office of Administrative Hearings.
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.
Done this day, July 16, 2025.
/s/ Kay Abramsohn
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted electronically to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
David Cooke
[email redacted]
Michael Kruk
[email redacted]
Travis Wilson
Lumio HX, Inc.,
c/o CT Corporation System
3800 N Central Ave., Ste 460
Phoenix, AZ 85012
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff