ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-06203-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-03-18

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Michelle Totra,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

Pro Power Painting And Restoration LLC,

License No. ROC 315211,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-06203-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: March 3, 2026

APPEARANCES Complainant Michelle Totra appeared on her own behalf. Kyle Polansky appeared on behalf of Respondent Pro Power Painting And Restoration LLC. Registrar of Contractors Investigator Cliff Corlett appeared via Google Meet.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Adam D. Stone

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Complainant’s Exhibits 1-14 and Respondent’s Exhibits A-H were admitted into evidence.

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

Pro Power Painting And Restoration LLC (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 315211 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).

On or about June 6, 2025, Complainant hired Respondent to resurface her pool deck and walkway as well as paint the exterior of her residence in Lake Havasu City, Arizona. The total contracted price was $9,900.00, and Complainant paid $5,900.00.

On or about June 23, 2025, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work with respect to project.

The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Cliff Corlett. The jobsite inspection was performed on July 14, 2025.

Investigator Corlett then issued a Written Directive on or about August 4, 2025, which provided in pertinent part 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 or before August 22, 2025.

. . .

DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS

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

Complaint Item: 1 - Pool Decking - 40 + hallow spots and cracking. Investigator’s Observation: Numerous "Hollow sounding" areas were detected around pool deck.

RESPONDENT SHOULD DETERMINE CAUSE AND CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS

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

Complaint Item: 2 - Surface Transitions,

Investigator’s Observation: "Crack" at transition from entry stoop to walkway is typical expansion/contraction and requires no action from the Contractor.

The Contractor has several areas where the deck coating is running off the edges of the concrete walkway and should be properly trimmed back to edge of concrete.

RESPONDENT SHOULD CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS.

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

Complaint Item: 3 - River Rock,

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent has some deck coating and or paint on some areas of river rock.

RESPONDENT SHOULD CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS.

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

Complaint Item: 4 - Pool Filter,

Investigator’s Observation: Complainant has had pool and filter cleaned by others. Complainant supplied copies of text messages where Respondent agreed to pay for pol and filter cleaning service.

RESPONDENT SHOULD PAY POOL CLEANING BILL.

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

Complaint Item: 5 - Paint Touch Ups,

Investigator’s Observation: Respondents repairs will require some paint touch-up. RESPONDENT SHOULD CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS.

RESPONDENT SHOULD ALSO PROPERLY CORRECT PAINT OVERSPRAY ON GATES ETC.

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

Complaint Item: 6 - Debris

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent should leave project with all construction debris cleaned up.

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

. . .

(All errors contained in the original).

Investigator Corlett conducted a Compliance Jobsite Inspection on September 25, 2025, and noted the following in pertinent part:

. . .

Compliance Jobsite General Notes: On 8/4/25 the ROC issued a Written Directive for Pro Power Painting & Restoration LLC to properly correct the 6 items from the 6/23/25 complaint subission. That directive had a compliance due date 0f 8/22/25. The parties agreed to an extension of time in regards to the pool deck coating. On or about 9/22/25 the Respondent had ground off the pool deck coating and had demonstrated (via a short text video) that there was an area where the existing concrete pool deck had “hollow sounding” when struck with wooden dowel. Complainant requested an ROC inspection and this investigator, the Complanant ant two of Respondents employees were onsite 9/24/25.

There were a few small areas of existing concrete decking that sounded hollow when struck. Complainants email from 9/25/25 stated that the Respondent has satisfied 5 of the 6 items on the directive with only the deck coating unfinished.

Respondents 9/25/25 emails indicate an unwillingness to proceed any further until the balance due on original contract is paid in full.

Compliance Findings: RESPONDENT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE

Complaint Item: 1 - Pool Decking - 40 + hallow spots and cracking.

Investigator’s Initial Observation: Numerous "Hollow sounding" areas were detected around pool deck.

RESPONDENT SHOULD DETERMINE CAUSE AND CORRECT BY APPROPRIATE METHODS

Compliance Observation: Respondent has ground off the pool deck coating, Respondent sent the ROC a brief text video demonstrating an area where the existing concrete pool deck had a hollow sound. Respondent is unwilling to proceed further until balance due on original contract is paid.

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.

CORRECTED ☒ NOT CORRECTED

. . .

(All errors contained in the original).

On September 29, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) – R4-9-108(A); A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12) - A.R.S. § 32-1158; and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

On or about October 14, 2025, Respondent submitted an Answer to the Registrar.

On or about November 17, 2025, a Notice of Hearing was issued setting a hearing on December 22, 2025, at the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency.

After a continuance, the hearing was held on March 3, 2026.

At hearing, Investigator Corlett testified as to the Registrar’s involvement and the above timeline and findings. He also testified that while a majority of the corrective work had been performed, Respondent left the pool deck exposed and unrepaired.

Investigator Corlett also testified that Respondent’s contract did not meet the minimum requirements as outlined in the statute.

Complainant testified that despite the repair to the coping being included in the contract, Respondent never addressed the same.

As to the cool deck, Complainant testified that Mr. Polansky never appeared at the jobsite to perform any of the work and only appeared during Investigator Corlett’s inspections. Further, she testified as to the 40 hollow spots from the initial installation. Finally, Complainant testified that once Respondent ground the cool deck down, he left the same uncovered and now her decking (and pool) were unusable.

Mr. Polansky testified that he believed that even though he was not present for the work, his workers installed the same perfectly and within a workmanship guidelines. Mr. Polansky disputed that the hollow sports were caused by his application of the cool deck, rather it was due to underlying issues in the concrete.

Finally, Mr. Polansky testified that he believed that his invoice contained all of the statutorily required elements.

Administrative notice was taken of Respondent’s prior License record on March 18, 2026. Such prior License record reflected that Respondent’s License No. 315211 was first issued on September 8, 2017. The license record also reflected that there was one open case, namely the present case, and one disciplined case.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See A.R.S. § 32-1101 et seq.

Complainant bears the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. See A.R.S. § 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(1); see also Vazzano v. Superior Court, 74 Ariz. 369, 372, 249 P.2d 837 (1952). “A preponderance of the evidence is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.” Morris K. Udall, Arizona Law of Evidence § 5 (1960).

The preponderance of the evidence established that there was a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(3) – R4-9-108(A), as the installation of the cool decking resulted in numerous hollow spots.

The preponderance of the evidence established that there was a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12) - A.R.S. § 32-1158.

Finally, the preponderance of the evidence credibly established that the pool deck was not satisfactorily repaired. 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 No. 315211 for a period of three 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 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.

It is further recommended that Respondent submit a new sample contract which complies with the statute, to the Registrar within 30 days of the final Order.

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, March 18, 2026.

/s/ Adam D. Stone

Administrative Law Judge

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

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Pro Power Painting And Restoration LLC

[email redacted]

Michelle Totra

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff