ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-03476-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-11-06
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Sonna Sweeney,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Sundell Design & Construction LLC,
License No. ROC 305275,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-03476-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: October 3, 2025, and October 16, 2025. Record held open until October 17, 2025.
APPEARANCES:
For Complainant: Sonna Sweeney.
For Respondent: Clay Sundell.
For the Registrar of Contractors: James Dimond.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Samuel Fox
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Notice of Hearing Packet submitted by the Registrar of Contractors. Complainant’s Exhibits.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
Sundell Design & Construction LLC (Respondent) was the holder of License No. 305275 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) on May 6, 2016, and suspended on November 21, 2024.
On or about December 21, 2023, Sonna Sweeney (Complainant) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, constructing a building.
On or about April 7, 2025, Complainant filed a Licensed Complaint Form with the Registrar, claiming abandonment and poor work.
The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator James Dimond, who conducted a noticed Jobsite Inspection on May 21, 2025.
Investigator Dimond issued a Written Directive From the Registrar to Respondent on June 5, 2025, requiring Respondent to perform remedial work by appropriate means and notify Inspector Dimond of Respondent’s compliance.
Respondent did not perform any corrective work.
On June 27, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, finding cause to charge Respondent with violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1); A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), specifically R4-9-108(A); and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).
Respondent submitted an Answer to the Citation on July 8, 2025.
The Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
On July 18, 2025, the Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing on Contested Case setting the hearing for August 28, 2025. The Hearing was reset for October 3, 2025, and an additional hearing date was set for October 16, 2025.
Investigator Dimond testified in support of his findings.
Complainant testified about her dissatisfaction with Respondent’s performance on the job.
Respondent testified that some of the work passed inspection. He also made arguments about insufficient funding and the subcontractors.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
Respondent’s suspended license does not deprive Complainant of the right to prosecute the complaint or prevent the Registrar from determining the merits of the complaint.
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 abandoned the project or refused to perform work without a legal excuse in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1). Respondent’s testimony and arguments were not a legal excuse in defense against the allegations.
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 five days Respondent’s License No. 305275.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $250.00 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, November 6, 2025.
/s/ Samuel Fox
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
Sonna Sweeney
[email redacted]
Sundell Design & Construction LLC
[email redacted]
Jim Dimond
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff