ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-04140-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-09-18
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Fairway Homes West Inc.,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
K & K TRADING LLC.,
License No. ROC 340801,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-04140-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: August 29, 2025 at 9:00am
APPEARANCES: Chad Dennis on behalf of Complainant Fairway Homes West, Incorporated. Investigator Arlo Houston on behalf of the Arizona Registrar of Contractors. No representative appeared on behalf of Respondent K & K Trading, LLC.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nicole Robinson
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Arizona Registrar of Contractors Notice of Hearing packet (“Packet’).
FINDINGS OF FACT
K & K Trading, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 340801, first issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”) on September 16, 2022.
Fairway Homes West, Incorporated (“Complainant”) is a general contractor for new home builds. Complainant hired Respondent as a subcontractor to install windows and a sliding door at a residential home located in Tucson, Arizona.
On or about May 16, 2023, Complainant entered into a contract with Respondent in the amount of $11,105.88 and paid that total amount. The work began in May 2023 and was completed around February 2024.
On or about April 24, 2025, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work with respect to the project.
The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Arlo Houston. On May 27, 2025, Investigator Houston conducted a jobsite inspection.
On May 28, 2025, Investigator Houston issued a Written Directive to Respondent that provided 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 Wednesday of June 18, 2025.
. . . .
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Complaint Item 3: - The top flange of the sliding door is not installed correctly, with the following specific issues observed: b. Middle of door appears to be pushed up and flange nailed not level or even with rest of door.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified. Upon inspection at this JSI I observed for: The exterior top of the frame of the slider was bowed/warped on left and right sides (operable and non-operable sides). I did not observe for signs of discoloration and/or cracking of the door frame (from possible warping in place after installation) and the screws on the nail fins did not appear distressed/pulled. In the opinion of this investigator, the door appears to have been installed in the condition observed at the time of the JSI.
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.
After the deadline in the directive expired, Investigator Houston was notified that no corrective work had been performed.
On June 26, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108(A); and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(22).
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 9:00am on August 29, 2025. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record. On July 22, 2025, a Google Meet order from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties on how to connect to the hearing via Goggle Meet. The hearing was held via Google Meet on August 29, 2025.
Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed 15 minutes, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.
Hearing Evidence
Investigator Houston testified that the sliding door was unable to move from side to side when he performed his investigation. Investigator Houston stated that Respondent disagreed with the Directive and informed him that they “will not do the corrective work.”
Chad Dennis, Operations Manager, on behalf of Complainant testified that he agreed with Investigator Houston’s findings. Mr. Dennis testified that Complainant hired a licensed local company to repair the sliding glass door. The local company removed the stucco, repaired drywall, installed a new sliding door, and painted. Mr. Dennis further testified that the installation with the local company went “smooth,” however, the cost to make the necessary repairs totaled $8,150.15. Mr. Dennis stated, the $8,150.15 was the total amount paid to the third-party local company to correct the project and “the homeowner is happy with the repair.”
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on August 29, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. ROC 340801 was Active and reflected no discipline against Respondent’s license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
The copies of the Notice of Hearing that the Register mailed to Respondent at its address and email address of record were reasonable and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing.
Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of the evidence means “[p]roof which leads the trier of fact to find that the existence of the contested fact is more probable than its nonexistence.”
In this case, the work performed by Respondent included installation of the sliding door which was not done properly. As such, the evidence established that Respondent’s work was not in conformity with the Registrar’s standards. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent did not complete the project in a workmanlike manner in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108(A).
The evidence established that Respondent did not attempt to complete the corrective work following the Directive being issued. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to take appropriate corrective action following a written directive from the Registrar in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(22).
The Tribunal has considered restitution per Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1156.01, however, believes that it would be better resolved in a different legal forum.
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing,
It is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License No. ROC 340801 for a period of five (5) days.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 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 Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 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, September 18, 2025.
/s/ Nicole Robinson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
c/o Legal Department
1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105
Phoenix, AZ 85007
[email redacted]
Arlo Houston
ROC Investigator
[email redacted]
Fairway Homes West Inc.
DBA: FHW
2720 S J St
Tacoma, WA 98409
[email redacted]
K & K TRADING, LLC
1048 E 6TH PL
MESA, AZ 85203
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff