ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-01201-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-06-09
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Mark Kinsman,
COMPLAINANT
v.
Premier Landscape Developments LLC
License No. ROC 344500,
RESPONDENT
No. 2025A-01201-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: May 19, 2025
APPEARANCES: Complainant Mark Kinsman appeared on his own behalf. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator John Peru appeared as a witness. Respondent Premier Landscape Developments LLC did not appear.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Kay Abramsohn
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: ROC Notice of Hearing Packet (Packet); Complainant Exhibits 1 through 21.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Premier Landscape Developments LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 344500 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).
On September 5, 2024, the parties entered into a contract for landscaping and a pool and other related project items at a new home build in Surprise, Arizona. The contract amount was stated as $70, 045.00; Complainant made deposit payments of $57,159.00.
On February 4, 2025, the Registrar received a Licensed Complaint Form (Complaint) against Respondent. The Complaint alleged abandonment by Respondent with respect to the project. Complainant indicated that a subcontractor was scheduled to begin work on February 5, 2025 but notified Complainant on February 4, 2025 that his funds from the Respondent had been taken back from the subcontractor’s account due to insufficient monies in Respondent’s account.
The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator John Peru.
On February 28, 2025, Inv. Peru conducted a Jobsite Inspection and took 17 photographs. Respondent failed to appear for the Jobsite Inspection.
On March 3, 2025, Inv. Peru issued a Written Directive for Respondent to complete corrective work 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 Thursday, March 20, 2025.
RESTRICTIONS
• You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license.
• If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons1, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Complaint Item: 2 - Contractor failed to install front yard pavers on the side of garage to the rear yard gate.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. I observed the pavers to be onsite during this inspection. REF: (P) 4.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
Complaint Item: 3 - Contractor failed to install front yard landscape
lighting.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. I observed the front yard landscape lighting to be onsite during this inspection. REF: (P) 13, (P) 14.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 4 - Contractor failed to complete the final sanding of the
front yard walkway/porch/steps pavers.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. REF: (P) 1, (P) 2, (P) 3.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 5 - Contractor failed to plant front yard plants per contract.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. REF: (P) 5.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 6 - Contractor failed to install Travertine Pavers on the rear yard patio, and the rear yard pathways/hardscape per contract
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. The materials were NOT onsite during this inspection. REF: (P) 6, (P) 7, (P) 8.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 7 - Contractor failed to install rear yard turf artificial
grass).
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. The materials were NOT onsite during this inspection. REF: (P) 11
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 8 - Contractor failed to install rear yard crushed granite per contract.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. The materials were NOT onsite during this inspection. REF: (P) 9, (P) 10.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 9 - Contractor failed to install rear yard plants/landscape
irrigation.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. REF: (JSI PICS)
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
Complaint Item: 10 - Contractor failed to install rear side yard pavers.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
At the time of this inspection, the work is incomplete. The materials were
onsite during this inspection. REF: (P) 12.
Governing Rule: Violation of any rule adopted by the Registrar; Namely
A.A.C. R4-9-108(a): A contractor shall perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner.
A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) - R4-9-108(A) Workmanship
ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION
The following complaint items require no action by the Respondent:
Complaint Item: 1 - Contractor bounced payment to sub on pool (spool) and sub withdrew themselves from the job.
Investigator’s Observation: At the time of this inspection, the complainant
has proceeded to move forward with the construction of the spool water feature with a third party entity.
Governing Rule: Not Applicable
On March 25, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent charging possible violations of:
Charge :1 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1)
Abandonment of a contract or refusal to perform after submitting a bid on work without legal excuse for the abandonment or refusal.
Charge :2 A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22)
Failure to take appropriate corrective action to comply with this chapter or with rules adopted pursuant to this chapter without valid justification within a reasonable period of time after receiving a written directive from the Registrar. The written directive shall set forth the time within which the contractor is to complete the remedial action. The time permitted for compliance shall not be less than fifteen days from the date of issuance of the directive. A license shall not be revoked or suspended nor shall any other penalty be imposed for a violation of this paragraph until after a hearing has been held.
Respondent filed an Answer to the Citation on March 26, 2025, and the Registrar subsequently referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent State agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
The hearing was noticed to convene on May 19, 2025, at 9:00 a.m., via Google Meet. An April 4, 2025 Order from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties regarding how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet. The hearing was conducted via Google Meet on May 19, 2025.
On the date and at the time set for hearing, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Because Respondent failed to appear, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.
Inv. Peru testified regarding his inspection. Inv. Peru indicated that he had not received any correspondence from Respondent.
Complainant testified that he had contacted his credit card company and successfully disputed the charges with the exception of $5,000.00. Complainant last received a credit back on April 18, 2025.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s now-revoked License record on June 8, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. 344500 was first issued on April 19, 2023 and was revoked effective April 7, 2025. There are two open cases, one of which is the instant matter.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The copy of the Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Respondent at its address and email address of record was reasonable; therefore, Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing. A.R.S. §§ 41-1092.04 and 41-1092.05(D).
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See A.R.S. § 32-1101 et seq.
Respondent’s revoked license does not deprive Complainant of his right to prosecute the Complaint or prevent the Registrar from determining the merits of the Complaint. See A.R.S. § 32-1154(D).
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and A.A.C. R-19-119(B)(1); see also Vazzano v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz. 369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952). “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960).
The evidence of record established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards in that Complainant failed to complete the work for which it contracted. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent had abandoned the project in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1).
The evidence of record established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards in that Complainant left incomplete work that it had begun to perform and/or failed to provide materials for which it contracted to supply and install. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action to comply with this chapter or with rules adopted pursuant to this chapter without valid justification within a reasonable period of time after receiving 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 Registrar’s Order, the Registrar shall revoke Respondent’s License No. 344500.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 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 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)(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 8, 2025.
/s/ Kay Abramsohn
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted electronically to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
John Peru
[email redacted]
Premier Landscape Developments LLC
9034 E Vine Ave
Mesa, AZ 85208
[email redacted]
Mark Kinsman
17664 W Middlebury St
Surprise, AZ 85388
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff