ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-11172-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-07-01
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Brian J Olivo
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Amerizona Builders LLC
DBA: Amerizona Builders,
License No. ROC 328113,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-11172-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: June 5, 2025
APPEARANCES: Brian J Olivo (hereinafter “Complainant”) appeared on behalf of himself. Greg De Thomas appeared on behalf of Amerizona Builders LLC DBA: Amerizona Builders LLC (hereinafter “Respondent”).
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. On April 4, 2021, Complainant entered into a new construction project with Respondent for the amount of $548,250.00.
2. On September 9, 2021, Respondent started work.
3. On October 4, 2022, Complainant began occupying the home.
4. As of October 2, 2024, the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (hereinafter “Registrar” or “ROC”) received a complainant from Complainant alleging that Respondent performed poor work when it build Complainant’s home.
5. The Registrar assigned the complaint to an investigator for the Registrar, Cliff Corlett (hereinafter “Investigator Corlett”).
6. On November 5, 2024, Investigator Corlett conducted a job-site inspection.
7. On December 30, 2024, the Registrar issued a Directive to Respondent requiring Respondent to correct the following complaint items 3, 4, and 7, by appropriate means, no later than 5:00 p.m. on January 24, 2025. The December 30, 2024 Directive provided, in relevant part, as follows:
.............................................................
Complaint Item: 3 - 2 Panels on garage RV damage prior to
OC/contractor agreed to fix/panels arrived 28"should be 24"
Investigator’s Observation: Respondent stated at onsite meeting that
replacement panels were on order and would be installed as soon as possible.
RESPONDENT SHOULD CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS.
Governing Rule: 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.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 4 - Same garage company came to install and
found other issues with doors (motor, Springs) affecting the
operation/
Investigator’s Observation: Respondent stated at onsite meeting that door
company would be contacted to adjust RV garage door as needed as soon as
possible.
RESPONDENT SHOULD CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS.
Governing Rule: 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.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 7 - Garage office HVAC not working properly.
Investigator’s Observation: Garage office air conditioning does not and
cannot have any return air to the house HVAC system. (against code). Without
a return air to the HVAC system, the "office" will not cool properly.
RESPONDENT SHOULD INSTALL A PROPER / CODE COMPLIANT HVAC
SYSTEM IN GARAGE OFFICE.
Governing Rule: 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.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
.............................................................
Errors in original.
8. Complainant subsequently filed an addendum to the complaint regarding mismatching stucco.
9. On January 23, 2025, the Registrar issued an Amended Directive requiring that Respondent correct complaint items 2, 3, 4, and 7, by appropriate means, no later than 5:00 p.m. on February 14, 2025. The Amended Directive provided, in relevant part, as follows:
AMENDED WRITTEN DIRECTIVE FROM THE REGISTRAR
(Complaint item # 2 regarding mismatching stucco is amended to the
“needs correction” items listed at the top of the Written Directive)
Compliance due date is also amended to February 14, 2025
**NOTE** The ROC was informed the Respondent is installing an electrical
run to facilitate the compliance with Item 7: HVAC for garage “office”.
Respondent must comply with all state and local building permit
requirements if this work requires a city permit, the Respondent should
properly obtain any required permits and inspections.
Dear Respondent:
After investigation, the Registrar determined that you failed to meet the requirements of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A), and now issues this Directive requiring you to take appropriate corrective action. Failure to comply with this Directive constitutes a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22) and may result in the issuance of a citation, discipline of your license, and a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E) of up to $500.00. You must notify the Registrar’s assigned Investigator of your compliance with this Directive prior to 5:00 p.m. on or before February 14, 2025.
(Amended Date)
RESTRICTIONS
You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license.
If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons1, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Amended Complaint Item: 2 - Stucco repair. Not matching at
all/needs resprayed/contractor advising no date from company
Investigator’s Observation: Most construction repairs/corrections have some
degree of visibility. Complainant contends the match is unacceptable, and that
the Respondent had agreed to recolor the areas.
AMENDED COMPLAINT ITEM: After a review of the documentation and text
messages the Complainant sent in on 12/30/24 and again on 1/9/25 (copies
attached) it appears that there were agreements between Mr. Olivo and the
Respondents foreman, (Brent) to recolor the walls where the damaged windows
were replaced.
RESPONDENT SHOULD PROPERLY RECOLOR THE STUCCO WALLS IN THE AREAS OF THE WINDOW REPLACEMENT TO MOR CLOSELY MATCH THE SURROUNDING AREAS.
Complaint Item: 3 - 2 Panels on garage RV damage prior to
OC/contractor agreed to fix/panels arrived 28"should be 24"
Investigator’s Observation: Respondent stated at onsite meeting that
replacement panels were on order and would be installed as soon as possible.
RESPONDENT SHOULD CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS.
Governing Rule: 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.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 4 - Same garage company came to install and
found other issues with doors (motor, Springs) affecting the operation/
Investigator’s Observation: Respondent stated at onsite meeting that door
company would be contacted to adjust RV garage door as needed as soon as
possible.
RESPONDENT SHOULD CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS.
Governing Rule: 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.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 7 - Garage office HVAC not working properly.
Investigator’s Observation: Garage office air conditioning does not and
cannot have any return air to the house HVAC system. (Against code). Without
a return air to the HVAC system, the "office" will not cool properly.
RESPONDENT SHOULD INSTALL A PROPER / CODE COMPLIANT HVAC
SYSTEM IN GARAGE OFFICE.
Governing Rule: 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.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A) (3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Errors in original.
10. On March 13, Investigator Corlett conducted a compliance job-site inspection. Investigator Corlett concluded that Respondent had appropriately corrected complaint items 3 and 4. Investigator Corlett concluded that Respondent had failed to appropriately correct complaint item 2. Investigator Corlett’s compliance job-site inspection notes regarding complaint item 2 provided, “Respondent has recolored several areas on rear and west side of house. Color variation is quite noticeable/unacceptable. Respondent is NOT in Compliance.” Investigator Corlett concluded that Respondent had failed to appropriately correct complaint item 7. Investigator Corlett’s compliance job-site inspection notes regarding complaint item 7 provided, “Compliance Observation: Respondent has installed a mini-split for
the garage store room/office. Respondent has not removed the unnecessary HVAC ductwork box from RV garage wall.”
11. On April 10, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent’s license alleging that Respondent violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A) (3) and (22); Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-109.
12. Respondent field a timely answer to the Citation.
13. The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an evidentiary hearing.
14. A hearing was held on June 5, 2025.
15. At hearing, Investigator Corlett testified regarding his investigation of the complaint. Investigator Corlett testified consistently with his job-site inspection and compliance job-site inspection notes, and the Directives.
16. Complainant explained that Respondent performed poor work during the new home build. Mr. De Thomas stated that he believed that all of the items in the Directive were resolved. Mr. De Thomas also stated that it was difficult to build the hoe during the COVID pandemic.
17. Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record as reflected on the Registrar’s public website on July 1, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. ROC 328113 was issued on March 14, 2020 and is currently active. Such prior License record shows that there is one open complaint. against Respondent’s license. Such prior License record shows that no complaints have resulted in discipline against Respondent’s license. Respondent’s lack of disciplinary history is considered a mitigating factor in the imposition of discipline.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. sections 32-1101 et seq.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violation by a preponderance of the evidence. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. section
41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(1); see also Vazanno v. Superior Court, 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)
3. The Administrative Law Judge may consider Registrar’s administrative
record. See A.A.C. § R4-9-118.
4. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent’s work failed
to meet minimum workmanship standards, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(A).
5. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent correctly repaired complaints item 3 and 4.
6. Upon review of the evidence, the Administrative Law Jude concludes that Respondent provided insufficient evidence to establish that it corrected complaint items 2 and 7 that were listed in the Directive, by appropriate means. The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent failed to correct the Directive items without valid justification, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(22).
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend license number 328113 held by of Amerizona Builders LLC DBA: Amerizona Builders for two days. It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $250.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 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 Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1101(A) (7), 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 1, 2025.
/s/ Velva Moses-Thompson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
Amerizona Builders LLC
DBA: Amerizona Builders
[email redacted]
Brian J Olivo
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff