ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-05543-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-11-04

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Priscilla Hernandez,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

United Roofing and Restoration, LLC

License No. ROC 332538,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-05543-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: October 27, 2025

APPEARANCES: Complainant Priscilla Hernandez appeared on her own behalf. Respondent United Roofing and Restoration, LLC failed to appear. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator Clifford Corlett appeared as a witness.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Complainant Priscilla Hernandez’s Exhibits 1, 3 and 5; Administrative Notice taken of Agency Record

FINDINGS OF FACT

United Roofing and Restoration, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License Number 332538 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”).

On or about December 12, 2022, Priscilla Hernandez (“Complainant”) contracted with Respondent to replace the roof at her home. The contract price was $12,449.00. Complainant paid Respondent in full on December 16, 2022. Complainant further contracted for and paid Respondent an additional $7,175.00 for the removal and re-installation of the existing solar panels.

On or about October 2, 2023, Complainant filed an initial complaint against Respondent with the Registrar due to leaks in the roof. Respondent addressed that complaint by applying mastic, and the complaint was closed in December 2023.

In January 2025, the leak returned and Complainant made many attempts to contact Respondent to request that Respondent remedy the situation. Respondent failed to do so. Consequently, on June 5, 2025, Complainant filed the instant Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging poor work with respect to Respondent’s scope of work.

The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator Clifford Corlett. After a June 30, 2025 Jobsite Inspection, Investigator Corlett issued a Written Directive to Respondent dated July 15, 2025, that provided as follows:

Suspended 3/31/25 Non-renewal

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 or before 8/01/25.

RESTRICTIONS

You may not perform or hire other contractors to perform work that is outside the scope of your license.

If your license is currently suspended for administrative reasons, or is inactive, expired, or cancelled, you may not perform any corrective work nor contract in any manner, which includes hiring other contractors to perform work, until the suspension of your license(s) has been lifted or your license(s) has been reactivated.

You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:

Complaint Item: 1 - Multiple roof leaks in dining room have damaged drywall.

Investigator’s Observation: Areas identified and "repaired" during complaint 2023-11483 have had recurring leaks and interior damage.

Additionally, many repairs made for case 2023-11483 appeared to be substandard application of excessive roof mastic (tar) rather than properly repairing issues with a new roof.

RESPONDENT SHOULD REMOVE ALL EXCESS ROOF MASTIC AND

PROPERLY CORRECT ALL ROOF LEAKS AND REPAIR INTERIOR

DAMAGE.

Complaint Item: 2 - Roof leak in bedroom, ceiling sagging down.

Investigator’s Observation: Areas identified and "repaired" during complaint 2023-11483 have had recurring leaks and interior damage.

Additionally, many repairs made for case 2023-11483 appeared to be substandard application of excessive roof mastic (tar) rather than properly repairing issues with a new roof.

RESPONDENT SHOULD REMOVE ALL EXCESS ROOF MASTIC AND

PROPERLY CORRECT ALL ROOF LEAKS AND REPAIR INTERIOR

DAMAGE.

Complaint Item: 3 - Kitchen roof leak

Investigator’s Observation: Areas identified and "repaired" during complaint 2023-11483 have had recurring leaks and interior damage.

Additionally, many repairs made for case 2023-11483 appeared to be substandard application of excessive roof mastic (tar) rather than properly repairing issues with a new roof.

RESPONDENT SHOULD REMOVE ALL EXCESS ROOF MASTIC AND

PROPERLY CORRECT ALL ROOF LEAKS AND REPAIR INTERIOR

DAMAGE.

Complaint Item: 4 - New roof leaks every time it rains.

Investigator’s Observation: Areas identified and "repaired" during complaint 2023-11483 have had recurring leaks and interior damage.

Additionally, many repairs made for case 2023-11483 appeared to be substandard application of excessive roof mastic (tar) rather than properly repairing issues with a new roof.

RESPONDENT SHOULD REMOVE ALL EXCESS ROOF MASTIC AND

PROPERLY CORRECT ALL ROOF LEAKS AND REPAIR INTERIOR

DAMAGE.

On August 5, 2025, after the expiration of the Deadline specified in the Written Directive, Complainant emailed Investigator Corlett to inform him that she had not heard from Respondent and Respondent did not perform any corrective work.

Thereafter, Investigator Corlett forwarded the matter to the Registrar’s Legal Department. The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

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

The hearing of this matter was scheduled to convene on October 27, 2025, at 1:00 p.m. On the date and at the time set for hearing, Complainant appeared on her own behalf. Investigator Corlett was also present. Respondent did not appear.

On September 11, 2025, the Registrar issued the Notice of Hearing advising the parties of the hearing date and time, and that the Office of Administrative Hearings would issue a Google Meet link for participation in the hearing. The Notice of Hearing was sent to Respondent’s mailing and email addresses of record with the Registrar.

On September 19, 2025, the Tribunal issued to the parties an Order that reiterated the date and time of the hearing and contained the Google Meet information to join the hearing by video or phone. Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Because Respondent failed to appear, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.

Investigator Corlett testified consistently with his findings contained in the Written Directive. Investigator Corlett testified that because Respondent’s license was suspended for non-renewal on March 31, 2025, Respondent would have had to renew its license prior to performing any corrective work. Investigator Corlett referenced the photographs taken during the Jobsite Inspection to illustrate the deficiencies in Respondent’s workmanship. Investigator Corlett testified that Respondent’s work was initially poorly performed and the repairs performed by Respondent during the initial complaint process, were even worse. Investigator Corlett likened Respondent’s previous repair attempt to a “Band-Aid.” Investigator Corlett explained that one should “not see mastic smeared everywhere.”

Complainant testified that she agreed with Investigator Corlett’s testimony. Complainant testified that she has not heard from Respondent since February 5, 2025. Complainant last called Respondent on June 5, 2025, prior to filing the instant Complaint, and Complainant emailed, called, and texted Respondent numerous times, with no response.

Complainant testified that she has consulted with other licensed roofing contractors and they all stated that the roof was incorrectly installed, is beyond repair, and that it needs to be fully replaced.

Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on November 3, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License Number 332538 was first issued on March 9, 2021, and is suspended for non-renewal. Such prior License record also reflects that there are two open complaints, including the instant Complaint, three resolved/settled complaints, and no complaints resulting in discipline against Respondent’s license.

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. “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.”

The credible, probative, and substantial evidence of record 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 professional and workmanlike manner in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely A.A.C. R4-9-108(a).

The evidence established that Respondent did not complete the corrective work following the issuance of the Written Directive and that valid justification for such failure did not exist. Therefore, Complainant 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).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License Number 332538 for a period of fourteen (14) days.

It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $500.00 as a civil penalty pursuant to A.R.S. § 32-1154(E).

It is further recommended that if Respondent fails to pay the entire amount of the civil penalty on or before thirty (30) 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 A.R.S. § 32-1101(A)(7), 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, November 4, 2025.

/s/ Sondra J. Vanella

Administrative Law Judge

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

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

United Roofing and Restoration, LLC

[email redacted]

[email redacted]

Priscilla Hernandez

[email redacted]

Cliff Corlett

Registrar of Contractors

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff