ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

2025A-00911-CPA-LS-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-11-18

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Arizona Registrar of Contractors,

COMPLAINANT,

Dustin Sanders.

DBA: AZBA Framers LLC,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-00911-CPA-LS-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: October 29, 2025 at 9:00am

APPEARANCES: Assistant Attorney General Mona Baskin represented the Arizona Registrar of Contractors with witness Investigator Brandon Smith. Respondent Dustin Sanders appeared on his own behalf for dba AZBA Framers, LLC.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nicole Robinson

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Department Exhibits 1 through 9.

FINDINGS OF FACT

On or about August 6, 2024, Dustin Sanders dba AZBA Framers, LLC (“Respondent”) presented a contract to Anthony Imbronone, wherein Respondent offered to perform construction work at 2935 West Stampeded Drive, Chino Valley, Yavapai County, Arizona, for the amount of $8,600.00.

On July 31, 2024, Mr. Imbronone paid Respondent a total of $1,000.00 as a pre-payment for materials and a document was signed by both parties.

On August 1, 2024, Mr. Imbronone paid Respondent a total of $2,900.00 as a first draw of three payments for labor and signed by Mr. Sanders. The receipt reads “Tiger Construction” at the top which was Mr. Imbronone’s contracting business.

On August 17, 2024, Mr. Imbronone paid Respondent a total of $1,800.00 as an advance on second draw per contract by check 5025.

Mr. Imbronone paid a total amount of $4,600.00 to Respondent towards the contracted project. The contract document, receipts nor Respondent’s business card included the language, “not a licensed contractor.”

Brandon Smith is a criminal investigator for the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). Investigator Smith investigates unlicensed individuals acting in the capacity of a contractor. Investigator Smith has years of experience working in law enforcement.

On November 1, 2024, Investigator Smith received an email from Deputy Peter Franco from the Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office stating he received a complaint regarding an unlicensed contractor.

Investigator Smith searched the Registrar’s database and found that Respondent did not have an active, suspended or revoked contractor license. Investigator Smith also found:

There are several entities registered to Dustin Sanders. AZBA Framers LLC ACC#23628860 was the only entity that I can tie to Dustin Ray Sanders 06/01/1990.

On November 8, 2024, Investigator Smith met with Mr. Imbronone as a part of his investigation. Investigator Smith noted, in pertinent parts, as follows:

Mr. Imbronone hired Respondent to perform work on a shop construction project.

The shop had masonry walls up and trusses that were painted green which were to be installed and exposed from the inside. Mr. Imbronone paid Respondent and his crew $1,000.00 to paint the rafters.

Mr. Imbronone hired Respondent to install the framing for the shop. Mr. Imbronone received Respondent’s name from the Truss Company. As such, he believed Respondent to be a reputable contractor.

Mr. Imbronone and Mr. Sanders filled out a subcontractor agreement which both men signed. Mr. Sanders filled in DR Building Services, Carpenter Division (“DR”) and signed the bottom of the contract using DR Building Services ROC Number. The total amount of the contract was $8,700.00.

The terms of the contract included Mr. Imbronone to pay Mr. Sanders $2,900.00 at signing, and two additional progress payments which totaled $8,700.00.

On August 1, 2024, Mr. Imbronone paid Mr. Sanders $2,900.00 in cash.

On August 13, 2024, Mr. Imbronone paid Mr. Sanders $1,800.00 with Check #5025.

Mr. Sanders sent two workers to Mr. Imbronone’s home to paint the rafters. Mr. Imbronone never saw Mr. Sanders again.

Mr. Imbronone called Mr. Sanders to no avail. One day, Mr. Sander’s wife called and informed Mr. Imbronone that Mr. Sanders was in the hospital and that he will not be performing the framing job. Mr. Imbronone told Mrs. Sanders that he needed his $4,600.00 dollars refunded.

Mr. Imbronone called DR, and a representative told him that Mr. Sanders was not affiliated with DR and had no business signing a contract under DR.

Mr. Imbronone emphasized that as a license contractor himself, he would have never hired an unlicensed contractor for a framing job, due to its inherent risk.

Mr. Imbronone identified Respondent as the person that he hired to perform construction at his home in a photograph lineup.

Investigator Smith attempted to interview Mr. Sanders but he no longer lived at his last know residence at 3855 Dale Drive in Prescott Valley, Arizona and no longer owned phone number 928-460-0640.

On January 27, 2025, Investigator Smith issued Respondent with a Cease and Desist Order and Civil Citation for violating the provisions of Arizona Revised Statutes (hereinafter “Ariz. Rev. Stat.”) § 32-1151. A civil penalty in the amount of $1,500.00 was assessed for one count of contracting without a license. In addition, a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1165, for one count of advertising without a license and assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $1,000.00.

At some point, Mr. Sanders hired an attorney due to an alleged bicep injury he received on Mr. Imbronone’s property while moving a truss. Investigator Smith discovered Mr. Sander’s attorney was named ‘Larry Cohen’ because Mr. Cohen wrote a demand letter to Mr. Imbronone. Based on the demand letter, Investigator Smith served the Cease and Desist Order and Civil Citation on Mr. Cohen, who served the letter to Mr. Sanders on or about March 7, 2025.

On April 7, 2025, Mr. Sanders called Investigator Smith to discuss the matter. Investigator Smith interviewed Mr. Sanders where he denied receiving $4,600.00, from Mr. Imbronone. In addition, Mr. Sanders told Investigator Smith that DR allowed him the use of its ROC license number.

Respondent requested a hearing regarding the Cease and Desist Order and Civil Citation.

The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an evidentiary hearing.

On July 22, 2025, the Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing on Appealable Agency Action setting the above-captioned matter for hearing on September 3, 2025, at the Office of Administrative Hearings. The Notice of Hearing provided that the issue set for hearing was, “As stated in the Citation issued to Respondent, the Registrar found that Respondent engaged in an act of contracting that required Respondent to be licensed. The Registrar issued the Citation, including assessment of a civil penalty, under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1166.01(C).”

The matter was continued to October 29, 2025 at 9:00am.

At the hearing, Mr. Sanders testified on behalf of himself and his business. Investigator Smith testified consistently with his Investigation Report.

Mr. Sanders expressed that he would not misrepresent his relationship with DR and that DR was fully aware that for larger jobs, he would utilize its ROC license number. Mr. Sanders was on DR’s payroll for about one year back in 2021 through 2022. Mr. Sanders testified that he takes full responsibility but that he acted in good faith. Mr. Sanders testified that he did receive $4,600.00 and that he was not aware of the handyman exception. Mr. Sanders testified that his business card was used to contact business and was not aware he needed to put unlicensed language on the business card.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. The Registrar bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1151 and § 32-1165 by a preponderance of the evidence.

2. Arizona contracting law prohibits a person from acting as a contractor without a license. The law allows an exemption from licensure, with certain limitations, for a “handyman.” An unlicensed handyman can perform construction work, with certain exclusions, such as that the work does not require a permit, as long as the aggregate price for the job, including labor and materials, does not exceed $1,000.00. The Registrar can order a person who performs contracting without a license and who is not exempt from licensure to cease and desist such activity and may impose a civil penalty of between $200.00 and $2,500.00 for each violation, but not more than $2,500.00 per day.

3. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1151 provides as follows:

It is unlawful for any person, firm, partnership, corporation, association or other organization, or a combination of any of them, to engage in the business of, submit a bid or respond to a request for qualification or a request for proposals for construction services as, act or offer to act in the capacity of or purport to have the capacity of a contractor without having a contractor's license in good standing in the name of the person, firm, partnership, corporation, association or other organization as provided in this chapter, unless the person, firm, partnership, corporation, association or other organization is exempt as provided in this chapter. Evidence of securing a permit from a governmental agency or the employment of a person on a construction project shall be accepted in any court as prima facie evidence of existence of a contract.

4. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1165 provides as follows:

Except as authorized by section 32-1121, subsection A, it is a class 1 misdemeanor for any person to advertise that the person is able to perform any service or contract for compensation subject to regulation by the Registrar under this chapter unless the person first obtains a license under the terms of this chapter.

Upon consideration review of all the evidence, the Tribunal concludes that the preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent engaged in contracting and advertising without a license.

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1166(A) authorizes the Registrar to assess “a civil penalty in an amount of at least two hundred dollars for each violation but not more than two thousand five hundred dollars for the multiple violations committed on the same day.” With respect to the appropriate amount of the civil penalty for Respondent’s violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1151 and § 32-1165, Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1166.01(G) allows the Registrar to “adopt rules covering the assessment of a civil penalty that give due consideration to the gravity of the violation and any history of previous violations.” Under Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1166.01(G), the Registrar adopted Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-131. Evidence received in this matter supports the imposition of a $2,500.00 penalty pursuant to Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-131(10).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based upon the foregoing, it is recommended that the Registrar affirm the finding that Dustin Sanders violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1151 and § 32-1165 and affirm the decision to assess a civil penalty in the amount of $2,500.00 to be paid in certified funds to the Registrar on or before the effective date of the Registrar’s final Order in this matter.

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.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, November 18, 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]

Dustin Sanders

DBA: AZBA Framers LLC

6810 E Spouse Drive Apt#224

Prescott Valley, AZ 86314

[email redacted]

Brandon Smith

[email redacted]

Arizona Registrar of Contractors

1700 W. Washington St. Suite 105

Phoenix, Arizona 85007

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff