ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-11795-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-09-17
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Victoria Lynnette Adam,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Whetstone Construction, LLC
DBA: Whetstone Roofing,
License No. ROC 180592,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-11795-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: September 2, 2025
APPEARANCES: Ryan Bailey, Esq. represented Complainant Victoria Lynette Adam, who was present. Dale Dickamore appeared on behalf of Respondent Whetstone Construction, LLC, doing business as Whetstone Roofing. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator David Cooke appeared as a witness.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Administrative Notice taken of Agency Record; Neither party submitted exhibits.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Whetstone Construction, LLC, doing business as Whetstone Roofing (“Respondent”), is the holder of License Number 180592 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). Dale Dickamore is Respondent’s Qualifying Party and sole Member.
On or about December 30, 2022, Victoria Lynette Adam (“Complainant”) contracted with Respondent for Respondent to repair the roof on Complainant’s home and to perform work on the deck and deck railing.
On or about October 22, 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 Mike Springer, and the Complaint was thereafter re-assigned to Investigator David Cooke. After a December 23, 2024 Jobsite Inspection, Investigator Cooke issued a Written Directive to Respondent dated December 23, 2024, 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 1/13/2025.
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Complaint Item: - The deck railings had been painted in a substandard, sloppy manner with missing or incomplete paint.
Investigator’s Observation: The deck railing had incomplete and insufficient paint in several areas.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
Complaint Item: - Several areas of the posts, beams and attached downspouts had overspray from the deck paint.
Investigator’s Observation: Overspray observed on posts, beams, downspouts and electric shutters.
Complaint Item: - Club house: The shingles have been improperly installed. Insufficient overlap, uneven courses.
Investigator’s Observation: Upon inspecting the roof, improper overlap and uneven courses were observed
Complaint Item: - Detached Garage, Office Building. The fasteners for the shingles were exposed at several areas.
Investigator’s Observation: Exposed fasteners were observed
Complaint Item: - All the shingles at the gabled ends were poorly trimmed at the gabled end leaving a ragged line-
Investigator’s Observation: Uneven and jagged edges were present at the drip edge
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION
The following complaint items require no action by the Respondent:
Complaint Item: - -above the drip edge.
Investigator’s Observation: Continuation of complaint above
All errors and emphasis in original.
At the request of Respondent, the deadline for compliance with the Written Directive was extended by Investigator Cooke to January 20, 2025, through the issuance of another Written Directive dated January 16, 2025. The only change in the Written Directive was the compliance deadline date.
Thereafter Investigator Cooke issued an Amended Written Directive to Respondent that was identical to the original Written Directive, with the exception of extending the compliance deadline once again, to February 4, 2025.
On February 6, 2025, Investigator Cooke conducted a Compliance Inspection. According to Investigator Cooke’s Compliance Notes, the only outstanding item of Complaint was the following:
Complaint Item: - The deck railings had been painted in a substandard, sloppy manner with missing or incomplete paint.
Investigator’s Initial Observation: The deck railing had incomplete and insufficient paint in several areas.
Compliance Observation: Upon inspection, areas lacking paint were observed. A northern post on the patio had two different shades of paint visually noticeable.
Thereafter, Investigator Cooke forwarded the Complaint to the Registrar’s Legal Department. The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).
Respondent timely filed a written Answer to the Citation and the matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent State agency, for an administrative hearing.
At the outset of the hearing, the parties stipulated that the only remaining item of Complaint was the paint on the deck railing.
Investigator Cooke testified consistently with the findings contained in the Written Directives and Compliance Notes. Investigator Cooke testified he observed at the Compliance Inspection, that the railing had another coat of paint, and that it appeared as through Respondent did not utilize a ladder when re-painting the railing because the top foot of one post of the railing was not repainted, nor were the sides of “a few wooden spindles.”
Complainant agreed with Investigator Cooke’s testimony, and reiterated that Respondent attempted to repair the railing, however, failed to properly perform the painting of the railing.
Mr. Dickamore testified on behalf of Respondent. Mr. Dickamore asserted that he “wished [Complainant] would have pointed out the areas at the time.” Mr. Dickamore testified that Respondent was willing to perform further corrective work, however, Complainant refused the offer stating that Respondent had ample opportunity to perform the corrective work.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on September 15, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License Number 180592 was first issued on January 24, 2003, and is active. Such prior License record also reflects that there are no open Complaints, however, the instant Complaint is open, no resolved/settled complaints, and one complaint resulting in 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 is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.”
The evidence established that a small portion of Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent did not complete the project in a professional and workmanlike manner in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(A).
The evidence established that Respondent did not fully complete the corrective work following the Written Directive being issued and acknowledged such. The evidence further established that Respondent attempted to make all corrections, and the sole remaining item requires only minor corrective work. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to fully take appropriate corrective action following 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 Order, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License Number 180592 for a period of one (1) day.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $100.00 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 (30) 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)(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, September 17, 2025.
/s/ Sondra J. Vanella
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
Ryan D. Bailey, Esq.
Stone Canyon Law
[email redacted]
Victoria Lynnette Adam
[email redacted]
Whetstone Construction, LLC
DBA: Whetstone Roofing
[email redacted]
David Cooke
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff