ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-11777-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-05-12
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Kelli Ramirez,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Keyway Management, LLC
DBA: Tarwater Plumbing,
License No. ROC 351960,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-11777-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: April 22, 2025 at 1:00pm
APPEARANCES: Complainant Kelli Ramirez on her own behalf; Jeramy Tarwarter on behalf of Respondent Keyway Management, LLC DBA: Tarwater Plumbing; and Investigator Lisa Melton on behalf of the Arizona Registrar of Contractors.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nicole Robinson
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Arizona Registrar of Contractors Notice of Hearing Packet (“Packet”); Supplemental Arizona Registrar of Contractors Job Site Inspection Recording.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Keyway Management, LLC, DBA Tarwater Plumbing (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 351960 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). Respondent’s license is classified as an R-37R Plumbing license which lists sewers, drains, and pipe laying as a task the licensee can be engaged.
In July 2024, Kelli Ramirez (“Complainant”) put in an offer of purchase for her current home located in Phoenix, Arizona. A third-party inspection was performed by Western State’s Home Inspections LLC, which included an inspection of the sewer line. This inspection observed and recommended the following:
We accessed the sewer line from the main plumbing vent stack at the rooftop and traversed through cast-iron and clay piping to the apparent sewer drop. We noted corrosion/deterioration in the cast-iron line with what appears to be a root intrusion and deterioration of the bottom of the cast-iron piping, we noted a misaligned pipe. We noted debris buildup throughout.
Due to the conditions noted, we recommend consulting with a licensed plumbing/sewer contractor to determine the timing, method, and cost of maintenance, repair, and/or replacement of the conditions noted in the sewer line.
Prior to moving into the home, Complainant received a referral from their realtor for Respondent and she contracted with them on August 5, 2024, to do the underground plumbing, a few indoor plumbing items, and the sewer line work. The total amount of the project cost $27,000 and the work began on August 12, 2024, and ended on August 27, 2024. As part of the sale of the home, the Sellers paid Respondent the $27,000 to perform in part the sewer line work. Respondent’s contract included in relevant part:
Replace missing exterior cleanout cover. Excavate around cast iron pipe, replace fitting with threaded fitting, and install cap flush to the ground.
Our skilled team will conduct a thorough inspection of the under home sewer drain to identify the exact location and nature of the issues identified in the inspection. We will then proceed with repairing the damaged section using high-quality materials and proven techniques to ensure a long-lasting solution. Our repair process may include excavation, relining, or replacement of the affected pipe. No matter the solution used to repair the affected areas, a thorough inspection to confirm the integrity of the entire system will be conducted. We take care to minimize disruption and restore the pipe to a satisfactory condition upon completion. Your satisfaction and the proper functioning of your sewer system are our top priorities.
Complainant and her family moved into the home on or about September 2, 2024. Complainant noticed that when she used her washing machine, there was water backed up on her floor.
On or about November 1, 2024, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work with respect to the project.
The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Lisa Melton. After a jobsite inspection, on January 21, 2025, Investigator Melton issued a Written Directive to Respondent that provided as follows:
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 February 10, 2025.
If additional time is required, due to conditions beyond Respondent’s control, Respondent should submit a request for extension and provide any relevant information substantiating the need for extension PRIOR to the expiration of the Written Directive.
RESTRICTIONS
You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license.
. . . .
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Compliance Item 1: Two drain lines were not inspected or repaired/replaced.
Investigator’s Observation: Unable to substantiate that these lines were part of Respondents scope, however, the Respondent did not obtain the required permit/inspection for the scope of work they have performed. Permit/inspection is part of code. Statute requires Respondent to comply with code. Permit required work performed by Respondent includes but may not be limited to remove and replace concealed plumbing. “We cut out a large portion of the main trunk line, fixed the misaligned pipes, applied a resin epoxy coating and installed new cleanouts on the main trunk line in the rear of the home” (Respondent email of 10/18/14 - Item #2) which is also described as “excavated sewer line, cutting out old cast-iron pipe and replaced section of sewer line to include dual-cleanouts...” (Invoice). Code requirements vary by jurisdiction. Respondent is responsible for identifying and complying with permit requirements for all of the work they perform including the work of their subcontractors.
Respondent should comply with all permit/inspection requirements for ALL permit required work performed relative to their scope of work for this Complaint. Respondent should provide the Registrar (Investigator Melton) with proof of passed/final/completed permit. Governing Rule: ARS §32-1154 (A) (3), Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(b): A contractor shall perform all work in accordance with any applicable building codes and professional industry standards. For work to be performed in accordance with professional industry standards, a contractor shall use such skills, prudence, and diligence in performing and completing tasks undertaken that the completed work meets the standards of a similarly licensed.
Following the issuance of the Written Directive, Investigator Melton became aware that Respondent hired ASAP Plumbing (“subcontractor”) to do the sewer line work and they did not obtain a permit prior to having performed the work. The deadline was extended to February 28, 2025, to obtain a permit. No further extensions were given to Respondent. After the deadline in the directive expired, Investigator Melton was notified no corrective work had been performed.
On March 5, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108(B), and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(22).
Hearing Evidence
Investigator Melton testified that all the water that exited the house would leave through the sewer pipe. Investigator Melton was informed about the lack of a permit pulled for the project and the fact that Respondent hired subcontractor to perform the sewer line work. Respondent was ultimately responsible for the sewer line work and subcontractor not having obtained a permit fell on Respondent. Investigator Melton was not willing to extend a second extension to Respondent due to the lack of movement during the first deadline extension period.
Complainant testified that initially Respondent did not find it was responsible for the laundry room water leak and after emails back and forth, Complainant moved and filed the complaint with the Registrar.
Jeramy Tarwater, on behalf of Respondent, testified that he was not aware a permit was needed for the sewer line work. Mr. Tarwater hired subcontractor because Respondent’s license “[i]s really new [and] I hired a third party to do [the sewer line work] because I knew that I didn’t have the equipment to do it and they didn’t get a permit and I hadn’t done that work before.” Mr. Tarwater did get the City of Phoenix inspector to come out to the house on February 3, 2025, and he was issued a permit, at that time.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on April 22, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. ROC 351960 was first issued on May 2, 2024, and is Active. Such prior License record also reflects that there was no discipline against Respondent’s license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of the evidence means “proof which leads the trier of fact to find that the existence of the contested fact is more probable than its nonexistence.”
In this case, Respondent and subcontractor did not obtain a permit for the underground sewer line pipe work prior to starting the project. As such, the evidence established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent did not complete the project in a workmanlike manner in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108(B).
The evidence established that Respondent did not complete the corrective work following the Directive being issued, even with an extension offered. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action following a written directive from the Registrar in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 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 Respondent’s License No. ROC 351960 for a period of two days.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $100.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 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. § 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, May 12, 2025.
/s/ Nicole Robinson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
c/o Legal Department
1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105
Phoenix, AZ 85007
[email redacted]
Lisa Melton
[email redacted]
Keyway Management, LLC
DBA: Tarwater Plumbing,
3946 East Kael Circle
Mesa, AZ 85215
[email redacted]
Kelli Ramirez
1937 W. Northview Ave
Phoenix, AZ 85021
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff