ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-02193-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-10-28

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Reynaldo Miranda,

COMPLAINANT

v.

Chandler 480 Painting LLC,

License No. ROC 328638,

RESPONDENT

No. 2025A-02193-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: October 9, 2025.

APPEARANCES:

For Complainant: Reynaldo Miranda.

For Respondent: Alicia Vazquez.

For the Registrar of Contractors: Aaron King.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Samuel Fox

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Administrative notice was taken of the Notice of Hearing Packet submitted by the Registrar of Contractors.

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

Chandler 480 Painting LLC (Respondent) was the holder of License No. 328638 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) on April 28, 2020.

On or about February 8, 2025, Reynaldo Miranda (Complainant) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, painting.

On or about March 4, 2025, Complainant filed a Licensed Complaint Form with the Registrar, claiming poor work.

The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Aaron King, who conducted a noticed Jobsite Inspection on April 22, 2025.

Following the inspection, Investigator King issued a Written Directive From the Registrar to Respondent on April 23, 2025, that required Respondent to perform corrective work for Complaint Item 1 by May 9, 2025. On May 27, 2025, an extension was granted to June 13, 2025. On June 19, 2025, an extension was granted to July 8, 2025. Complainant notified Inspector King that no work had been performed.

On July 16, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, finding cause to charge Respondent with violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), R4-9-108(A), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

Respondent submitted an Answer to the Citation on July 31, 2025.

The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.

The hearing was originally set for September 22, 2025; that morning, Respondent requested a continuance, demonstrating good cause. On or about September 29, 2025, the parties were notified the hearing was continued to October 9, 2025. The order granting the continuance from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties of how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet.

Investigator King testified in support of his findings.

Complainant testified in support of Investigator King’s findings.

Respondent’s representative did not contest the workmanship issues or that the work was not corrected. She apologized to Complainant for the inconveniences caused and that Respondent was unable to resolve the issue to Complainant’s satisfaction.

Administrative notice was taken of Respondent’s prior License record on October 28, 2025. According to that record, Respondent’s License No. 328638 was active and had one complaint.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.

Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. Respondent bears the burden of proof to establish an affirmative defense 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 preponderance of the evidence established that Respondent failed to perform all work in a professional and workmanlike manner in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(A).

The preponderance of the evidence established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action following a written directive from the Registrar in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

“The registrar may impose a civil penalty of not to exceed $500 on a contractor for each violation of subsection A, paragraph 22 of this section.” If a licensee fails to pay the civil penalty, their license is automatically revoked “thirty days after the effective date of the order providing for the civil penalty.” Additionally, any “person who is or was named on a license. . . may not receive a new license under this chapter until the entire civil penalty is paid.”

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend for three days Respondent’s License No. 328638.

It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $350.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E).

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, October 28, 2025.

/s/ Samuel Fox

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Reynaldo Miranda

[email redacted]

Chandler 480 Painting LLC

[email redacted]

Aaron King

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff