ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-13071-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-06-05
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Irene Schindler,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Karlina Marie Cooper
DBA: Agri Construction,
License No. ROC 349313,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-13071-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: May 16, 2025 at 9:00am
APPEARANCES: Complainant Irene Schindler on her own behalf. Investigator Charles Riddlehoover 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”).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Karlina Marie Cooper, DBA: Agri Construction (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 349313 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”).
On or about October 24, 2024, Irene Schindler (“Complainant”) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, an exterior and interior painting job project and drywall work (popcorn ceiling removal). The work was to be performed at Complainant’s residential home located in Glendale, Arizona. There was no written contract for this project. The Registrar requested Complainant to provide a written statement describing the project due to the lack of a contract and Complainant complied.
Complainant paid Respondent $12,000.00 for the project, work began on October 25, 2024, and work stopped on November 1, 2024, with the project left incomplete. Respondent left behind painting supplies, ladders, and a shop vacuum which were still at Complainant’s home.
On or about November 25, 2024, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging abandonment and poor work with respect to the project.
The Registrar assigned the complaint initially to Investigator Lisa Melton. On or about January 2, 2025, the Registrar reassigned the case to Investigator Charles Riddlehoover.
On February 4, 2025, a jobsite inspection took place and Respondent was not present. On February 12, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover 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 2/28/2025.
. . . .
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Complaint Item: 1 – Exterior not prepped for painting and paint on trim has cracked. Exterior and interior painting not finished.
Investigator’s Observation: During our inspection it was observed that the respondent did not meet minimum standards with the work performed. Multiple areas not painted around window trim, garage door unpainted, rear patio unpainted, the interior upstairs unpainted, the handrail area of the stairs unpainted, front screen door unpainted, side gate unpainted and garage door trim was not prepped before paint. Also upon our inspection it was noted the respondent dripped paint across the driveway. Respondent shall correct by the appropriate means.
. . . .
Complaint Item: 2 – Windows, doors, plant shelf and walls not covered for popcorn ceiling removal. Debris left in window and door tracks
Investigator’s Observation: Respondent shall correct by the appropriate means.
. . . .
Complaint Item: 3 – No straight lines in painting. Did not finish painting.
Investigator’s Observation: Allegation is a duplicate of allegation #1.
. . . .
Complaint Item: 4 – Didn’t clean up. Left used painting supplies in yard and in house. Also left 2 ladders and shop vac behind.
Investigator’s Observation: During our inspection it was noted that the respondent left behind tools and trash in the back yard. Respondent shall correct by the appropriate means.
. . . .
Following the issuance of the Written Directive, Respondent did not come back to the worksite. After the deadline in the directive expired, Investigator Riddlehoover was notified that no corrective work had been performed.
On March 18, 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(A), and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(22). The Registrar did not issue a warning letter or cite Respondent for the lack of a contract.
The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing at 9:00am on May 16, 2025. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record.
On April 8, 2025, an order from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties of how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet. The hearing was held via Google Meet on May 16, 2025.
Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed 15 minutes, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.
Hearing Evidence
Complainant testified that her homeowners association required her to paint the exterior of her home. Complainant went online to search for painting companies where she found Respondent and they agreed to complete the project. The agreement included that Respondent would paint the exterior of the home, remove all of the popcorn ceiling in the interior, paint the interior and install wallpaper in the master bedroom. Complainant testified that, although this work was to be done prior to Thanksgiving 2024, not only was the work not completed by the holiday, but all communication stopped on November 8, 2024.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on May 16, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. ROC 349313 was first issued on December 26, 2023, and is Active. Such prior License record also reflects that there were no prior complaints resulting in discipline against Respondent’s license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
The Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Respondent at its address and email address of record was reasonable, and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of the evidence means “[p]roof which leads the trier of fact to find that the existence of the contested fact is more probable than its nonexistence.”
In this case, the evidence clearly established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards and that the job was abandoned. 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(A).
Furthermore, the evidence established that Respondent did not attempt to complete the corrective work following the Directive being issued. 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 revoke Respondent’s License No. ROC 349312.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 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, June 5, 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]
Karlina Marie Cooper
6336 N Oracle RD STE 326
TUCSON, AZ 85704
[email redacted]
Charles Riddlehoover
[email redacted]
Irene Schindler
6347 W Delmonico Ln
Glendale, AZ 85302
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff