ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-07921-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-12-17

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Dave's Construction Service, Inc.,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

Tonto Basin Concrete, Inc.,

License No. ROC 250184,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-07921-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: December 8, 2025

APPEARANCES: Melissa Trudelle appeared on behalf of Complainant Dave’s Construction Service, Inc. Respondent Tonto Basin Concrete, Inc. failed to appear. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator Christopher Allison appeared as a witness.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: None; Administrative Notice taken of Agency Record

FINDINGS OF FACT

Tonto Basin Concrete, Inc. (“Respondent”) is the holder of License Number 250184 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”).

On or about April 21, 2024, Dave’s Construction Service, Inc. (“Complainant”) contracted with Respondent for Respondent to perform the concrete work for a new home build, to include the footings and stem, the floor, patios, sidewalk, breezeway, and driveway, the garage footings and stem, and the garage floor. The total contract price for Respondent’s scope of work was $33,650.00. Complainant has paid Respondent a total of $31,075.00.

On or about August 11, 2025, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging poor work with respect to Respondent’s scope of work.

The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator Christopher Allison. Investigator Allison performed a Jobsite Inspection on August 25, 2025, at which both parties were present, and issued a Written Directive to Respondent dated September 4, 2025, 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 Thursday, September 25, 2025.

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

Complaint Item: 3 - Door Thresholds not completed

Investigator’s Observation: Respondent agreed to smooth exposed stem.

Respondent shall correct as agreed too.

ITEMS NOT REQUIRING CORRECTION

The following complaint items require no action by the Respondent:

Complaint Item: 1 - Concrete holding water in multiple locations

Investigator’s Observation: At the time of the inspection the Complainant was unable to show this item due to no water onsite.

Insufficient evidence to verify allegation.

Complaint Item: 2 - No Expansion material used between stem and slab as per plans

Investigator’s Observation: Expansion material was used.

No violation

Complaint Item: 4 - Stem not square with garage on Westside

Investigator’s Observation: At the inspection, Complainant stated this item was okay.

No violation.

Complaint Item: 5 - Concrete sloping in multiple areas

Investigator’s Observation: At the inspection, Complainant stated this item was okay.

No violation.

Investigator Allison did not receive any communication from Respondent during the period of the Written Directive. On September 29, 2025, after the deadline for compliance with the Written Directive had expired, Investigator Allison received an email from Complainant stating that Respondent had not performed any corrective work.

Thereafter, Investigator Allison 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.

On November 3, 2025, the Registrar issued a 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 November 13, 2025, the Tribunal issued to the parties an Order that reiterated the hearing date and time and contained the Google Meet information to join the hearing by video or phone. That Order was sent to Respondent’s email address of record.

On the date and at the time set for hearing, Melissa Trudelle appeared on behalf of Complainant. Investigator Allison was also present. 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 Allison testified consistently with his findings contained in the Written Directive. Investigator Allison explained that Complainant had filed two identical complaints concerning two separate properties, and that Complaint item number 2 was not relevant to this property. Regarding Complaint item numbers 4 and 5, although they had not been corrected, Complainant chose to move forward with the construction and found a solution to the issue during the framing process.

Ms. Trudelle agreed with Investigator Allison’s testimony. Ms. Trudelle testified that Complainant moved forward in the construction of the homes notwithstanding that Respondent did not perform the required corrective work and has been non-responsive throughout the Complaint process.

Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on December 16, 2025. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License Number 250184 was first issued on November 17, 2008, and is active. Such prior License record also reflects that there are two (2) open complaints, including the instant Complaint, no resolved/settled complaints, and no 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 evidence of record established that portions of Respondent’s work were 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 250184 for a period of two (2) days.

It is further recommended that the Registrar require Respondent to pay the sum of $200.00 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, December 17, 2025.

/s/ Sondra J. Vanella

Administrative Law Judge

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

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Tonto Basin Concrete, Inc.

[email redacted]

Dave's Construction Service, Inc.

Melissa Trudelle

[email redacted]

Chris Allison

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff