ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-04793-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-11-23
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Simon Estephan,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Fact HVAC LLC,
License No. ROC 322901,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-04793-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: November 10, 2025 at 1:00pm
APPEARANCES: Complainant Simon Estephan appeared on his own behalf. Investigator Charles Riddlehoover appeared on behalf of the Arizona Registrar of Contractors. No one appeared on behalf of Respondent.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nicole Robinson
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Arizona Registrar of Contractors Notice of Hearing Packet (“Packet”).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Fact HVAC, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 322901, first issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”) on December 10, 2018.
On or about March 11, 2022, Simon Estephan (“Complainant”) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, the installation of a new heating, ventilation and air conditioning (“HVAC”) unit.
On the contract/invoice dated March 11, 2022, the unit was detailed as such, “Bosch 20 SEER 5 TON Heat Pump Model #BOVA-60HDN1-M20G, Air Handler Model #BVA-60WN1-M20,” and the total amount of the project was $39,995.00. Complainant paid the total amount of the contract to Respondent. The installation work began on June 12, 2023 and work stopped on July 17, 2023.
In early May 2025, Complainant heard a strange noise coming from the HVAC unit and he called Respondent. Respondent sent a technician to diagnose and repair the HVAC unit. The technician informed Complainant that he had a four (4) ton unit and not a five (5) ton unit. The technician advised Complainant to call Respondent’s front office about the discovery.
On or about May 13, 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 Charles Riddlehoover. On June 10, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover conducted a jobsite inspection with Complainant, Respondent was not present.
On July 2, 2025, Investigator Riddlehoover 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 Friday, July 18, 2025.
. . . .
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Complaint Item: 1 – Wrong Air Condition unit was installed.
Investigator’s Observation: During our inspection it was noted and appeared a 4 ton air handler with the model number BVA-48WN1-M20 and serial number was installed near the hallway scuttle in the NE corner of the house. Respondent was contracted and specified in scope of work three 5 ton units to be installed. Respondent provided no change orders or confirmation from Complainant that change would occur. Respondent shall correct by the appropriate means.
Governing Rule: Departure from or disregard of: (b) A building code of this state or any political subdivision of this state in any material respect that is prejudicial to another. A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(b).
After the deadline in the directive expired, Investigator Riddlehoover was notified that no corrective work had been performed.
On July 21, 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).
On August 18, 2025, the Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
On August 27, 2025, the Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing at 1:00pm on September 29, 2025. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record.
On September 22, 2025, Respondent filed a Motion to Continue/Postpone Hearing. The Motion was granted. On September 29, 2025, an Order Granting Continuance and Google Meet Link for Virtual Appearance was issued and emailed to the parties. The hearing was rescheduled to convene at 1:00pm on November 10, 2025.
Prior to the November 10, 2025 hearing, 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 Riddlehoover testified that prior to the issuance of the Citation, Respondent informed him that there was a change order from a five ton unit to a four ton unit installation. Investigator Riddlehoover advised Respondent to provide documents to prove the change order. Respondent failed to provide the Registrar with any proof of a change order.
Complainant argued that there was no change order. Complainant testified that he contracted and paid for a five ton unit and believed that was installed until the technician revealed, otherwise. Complainant believed he was cheated by Respondent, “on purpose.”
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on November 10, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License No. ROC 322901 was Active. Such prior License record also reflects that there was one open complaint and no complaints resulting in discipline against Respondent’s license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
The Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed at its address and the September 29, 2025 Order that the Office of Administrative Hearings emailed to Respondent at its email address of record was 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 evidence clearly established that Respondent did not install the contracted tonnage unit paid for which has shown that its 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).
Furthermore, 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).
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 322901 for a period of three days.
It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $300.00 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 Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 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 23, 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]
Simon Estephan
8024 W Expedition Way
Peoria, AZ 85383
[email redacted]
Fact HVAC LLC
1000 E Vista Del Cerro
Tempe, AZ 85281
[email redacted]
Charles Riddlehoover
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff