ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-03797-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-08-11

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Southwest Mobile Storage Inc.,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

Anvil Construction LLC,

License No. ROC 336237,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-03797-NPC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: July 23, 2025.

APPEARANCES:

For Complainant: Daniel Alday.

For Respondent: Failed to appear.

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

Anvil Construction LLC, (Respondent) was the holder of License No. 336237 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) on January 10, 2022.

Southwest Mobile Storage Inc. (Complainant) performed storage work for Respondent.

On or about April 14, 2025, Complainant filed a Non-Payment Complaint Form with the Registrar, claiming Respondent had failed to pay $3,029.94.

On May 19, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation, alleging that Respondent violated Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 32-1154 (A)(10), and Respondent timely submitted an Answer on May 30, 2025. Respondent’s answer indicated that Respondent had not been paid by their client.

The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an administrative hearing. The Notice of Hearing was issued on June 9, 2025, setting the hearing for July 23, 2025, at 1:00 PM, and a Google Meet order was issued on June 24, 2025, providing the virtual login information.

Complainant’s witness testified in support of their complaint.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.

Respondent was deemed to have received the Notice of Hearing by methods reasonably calculated to effect notice. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing on Contested Case to its address and email address of record, and the Office of Administrative Hearings sent the order, containing virtual hearing information, to Respondent at its email address of record.

Complainant bore the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. Respondent bore 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.”

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.

In Arizona, when construing statutes, we look first to a statute’s language as the best and most reliable index of its meaning. If the statute’s language is clear and unambiguous, we give effect to that language and apply it without using other means of statutory construction, unless applying the literal language would lead to an absurd result. Words should be given “their natural, obvious, and ordinary meaning,” unless defined by the legislature.

Respondent’s answer to the Citation was not a sworn statement. The answer also failed to assert that Respondent lacked capacity to pay Complainant.

The preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that Respondent owed Complainant $3,029.94 for materials or services rendered to Respondent in connection with Respondent’s operations as a licensed contractor.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that Respondent pay Complainant $3,029.94 within thirty (30) days of the Order becoming effective, and if Respondent fails to do so, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License No. 336237 until Respondent provides proof that it has paid Complainant in full.

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, August 11, 2025.

/s/ Samuel Fox

Administrative Law Judge

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

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Southwest Mobile Storage Inc

[email redacted]

Anvil Construction LLC

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff