ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-00172-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-04-21
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
JV7 Plumbing LLC,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Ultra Construction LLC
License No. ROC 330397,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-00172-NPC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: March 31, 2025 at 9:00am
APPEARANCES: Gabriela Zavala de Rojas and Jose Vasquez on behalf of Complainant, JV7 Plumbing LLC. No appearance on behalf of Respondent.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nicole Robinson
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Registrar of Contractors Notice of Hearing Packet (“Packet”); Complainant Exhibits 1-6.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Ultra Construction LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 330397 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”).
On or about January 6, 2025, JV7 Plumbing LLC (“Complainant”) filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant the sum of $5,000.00 for two plumbing jobs.
Respondent was contracted to remodel two residential homes in Sun City West, Arizona and subcontracted with Complainant. Complainant worked on project #1 which consisted of plumbing work which totaled $1,200.00 and billed on September 26, 2024. Project #2 consisted of plumbing work which totaled $3,800.00 and billed on September 26, 2024.
Complainant reached out to Respondent multiple times and tried to collect payment. The parties were unable to resolve their differences, and Complainant requested an administrative hearing. On January 30, 2025, the Registrar then issued a Citation for Alleged Violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10).
Gabriela Zavala de Rojas, Owner of Complainant business, testified that the total due to Complainant was $5,000.00. Mrs. Zavala de Rojas testified to the back and forth of emails that went on for many weeks. At one point, Respondent alleged that they never received the invoices. Complainant sent the invoices to Respondent by mail and email again, whereby Respondent finally acknowledged receipt. In one email, Kimberly Rice, an employee with Respondent, stated about the invoices on October 31, 2024, “I just received them last week and mailed out over $60K so it will be a week or so. I will let you know.”
In an email dated December 2, 2024, Ms. Rice wrote, “You will be talking to my lawyer because he will be contacting you. I don’t have the money to pay you. I did not have access to email while I was gone, and I am sorry that you are not as important than my family emergency....I absolutely [sic] no money to give right now and I apologize for that. Not like I haven’t been trying.” Respondent asserted in this email that it lacked the capacity to pay the amount Complainant asserted was due.
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 March 31, 2025. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record.
On February 27, 2025, an order was sent to the parties from the Office of Administrative Hearings which advised the parties how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet.
The hearing was held via Google Meet on March 31, 2025. Respondent did not request the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed approximately fifteen minutes, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any testimonial evidence to defend its license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The burden of proof at an administrative hearing falls to the party asserting a claim, right, or entitlement and the standard of proof on all issues in these matters is 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 copies of the Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Respondent at its address and email address of record were reasonable and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing.
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10) includes among the grounds for suspension, revocation, or other disciplinary action against a contractor’s license,
[f]ailure by a licensee or agent or official of a licensee to pay monies in excess of $750 when due for materials or services rendered in connection with the licensee's operations as a contractor unless the licensee proves that the licensee lacks the capacity to pay and has not received sufficient monies as payment for the particular construction work project or operation for which the services or materials were rendered or purchased.
In this case, the evidence established that Respondent owed a total of $5,000.00 for two plumbing jobs completed by Complainant. Although, in an email correspondence dated December 2, 2024, whereby Ms. Rice stated that Respondent did not “have the money to pay you,” there was evidence that it paid others at least $60,000.00.
As such, Respondent failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it lacked the ability to pay Complainant for the work performed.
Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10) by failing to pay Complainant $5,000.00 for services or materials rendered in connection with Respondent’s contracting business.
Based upon Respondent’s violation of the provisions of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10), grounds exist to impose discipline against Respondent’s license
RECOMMENDed order
Based on the foregoing,
It is Recommended that the Registrar suspend Respondent’s License No. ROC 330397 issued by the Registrar until it has provided to the Registrar, and the Registrar has accepted, documents that establish that it has paid Complainant $5,000.00 in certified funds.
It is Further Recommended that when and if the Registrar receives and accepts Respondent’s evidence that it has paid Complainant $5,000.00 in certified funds, the Registrar may close the Complaint in Case No. 2025-00172.
Pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 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, April 21, 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]
JV7 Plumbing LLC
1302 S. 123rd Ln
Avondale, AZ 85301
[email redacted]
Ultra Construction LLC
PO Box 1647
Litchfield Park, AZ 85340
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff