ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-01140-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-09-08
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Versatile Roofing and Construction LLC,
COMPLAINANT
v.
R.P.W. Creative Contracting LLC
License No. ROC 334678,
RESPONDENT
No. 2025A-01140-NPC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: July 7, 2025, with the record held open for possible settlement
APPEARANCES: Conor Smith, Owner and Qualifying Party, appeared on behalf of Complainant Versatile Roofing and Construction LLC. Respondent did not appear.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Tammy L. Eigenheer
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Administrative Notice was taken of the Hearing Packet submitted by the Registrar of Contractors. Complainant’s exhibits were admitted.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
R. P. W. Creative Contracting LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 334678 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).
On or about February 3, 2025, Versatile Roofing and Construction LLC (Complainant) filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant the sum of $11,543.17 for work performed.
The parties were unable to resolve their differences, and Complainant requested an administrative hearing. The Registrar then issued a Citation for Alleged Violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10).
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 3:00 p.m. on May 27, 2025. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record.
A June 27, 2025 order from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties that the hearing had been continued to 10:30 a.m. on July 7, 2025, and provided information of how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet.
On the morning of July 7, 2025, Richard Whitlock, on behalf of Respondent, sent an email to OAH and Complainant stating he would be unable to attend the hearing due to his mother’s medical condition. Mr. Whitlock acknowledged Respondent owned Complainant for work performed and indicated a willingness to enter into a payment plan.
The hearing was held via Google Meet on July 7, 2025.
Conor Smith testified that the total due to Complainant was $11,543.17, but acknowledged that sum included late fees and interest. Mr. Smith stated the principal amount due was $9,741.00.
Respondent has acknowledged throughout that it owes Complainant for the work performed.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Respondent’s revoked license does not deprive Complainant of its right to prosecute its complaint or prevent the Registrar from determining the merits of the complaint.
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.”
A.R.S. § 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.
The evidence established that Respondent owed a principal amount of $9,741.00 for work performed.
Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) by failing to pay Complainant $9,741.00 for services or materials rendered in connection with Respondent’s contracting business.
Based upon Respondent’s violation of the provisions of A.R.S. § 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. 334678 issued by the Registrar until it has provided to the Registrar, and the Registrar has accepted, documents that establish that it has paid Complainant $9,741.00 in certified funds.
It is further recommended that when and if the Registrar receives and accepts Respondent’s evidence that it has paid Complainant $9,741.00 in certified funds, the Registrar may close the Complaint in Case No. 2025-01140.
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 8, 2025.
/s/ Tammy L. Eigenheer
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
Versatile Roofing and Construction LLC
[email redacted]
R.P.W. Creative Contracting LLC
[email redacted]
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff