ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-08061-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-12-11
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
MARK HAWKINS,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Construction With Quality By Williams and
Sons LLC
License No. ROC 251435,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-08061-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: December 2, 2025 at 1:00pm
APPEARANCES: Complainant Mark Hawkins appeared on his own behalf. Investigator Arlo Houston 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
Construction with Quality by Williams and Sons, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 251435 first issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”) on December 14, 2008.
On or about May 25, 2024, Mark Hawkins (“Complainant”) entered into a contract with Respondent for, among other things, to install a concrete foundation for a new, residential home build located in Vail, Arizona. Complainant was to obtain the permit with the government officials.
The contract was in the total amount of $56,900.69 and Complainant paid Respondent $30,137.18 which included excavation. Respondent’s contract did not include the following information: the estimated date of completion of all work to be performed under the contract, Registrar contact information, and the property owner’s rights with the Registrar.
Complainant received the permit in May 2025.
On or about August 11, 2025, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging job abandonment with respect to the project.
The Registrar assigned the complaint to Investigator Arlo Houston. On September 3, 2025, Investigator Houston conducted a jobsite inspection, Respondent was not present.
Later that day, on September 3, 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 Tuesday, September 23, 2025.
. . . .
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
The Respondent is required to submit an updated version of a contract template for future use to the Registrar that complies with the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1158.
Complaint Item: 1 – They did not show to do the work. No call. Later that day said we are not doing it and we are filing for bankruptcy. I paid 50% down and they have had my money for a long time. Now I must find someone else. More delays. And ~28K with interest gone. They were here 7/21/25. They were to start on 8/11/25. They just told me they are fillng for bankruptcy. I want my $28K back.
Investigator’s Observation: Verified.
-Upon inspection at this JSI I observed that the work per contract had not been completed by the respondent and had been abandoned by the respondent.
-Respondent to complete work per contract.
Governing Rule: Abandonment of a contract or refusal to perform after submitting a bid on work without legal excuse for the abandonment or refusal. A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(1).
After the deadline in the directive expired, Investigator Houston was notified that no work had been performed.
On September 25, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent, charging possible violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(1); Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(12) - Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158; 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.
On October 31, 2025, the Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing at 1:00pm on December 2, 2025. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record.
On November 6, 2025, an order from the Office of Administrative Hearings advised the parties on how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet. The hearing was held via Google Meet on December 2, 2025 at 1:00pm.
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 he received no communication from Respondent.
Complainant testified that it took approximately one year to receive a permit mainly because the property lines “were incorrect on their county records,” which took more time to obtain the permit. Complainant testified that he tried to communicate with Respondent, to no avail. Complainant informed the Tribunal that he received two cashier checks from Respondent in the amounts of $5,000.00 and $1,137.18 which equated to $24,000.00, that Complainant was still owed.
Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on December 2, 2025. Such prior License record reflected that Respondent’s License No. ROC 251435 was Active. Such prior License record, also reflected that there were no other open complaints and two prior 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 means “[p]roof which leads the trier of fact to find that the existence of the contested fact is more probable than its nonexistence.”
The evidence established that Respondent submitted a bid for Complainant’s project and did not perform the work in the bid. Regardless of the length of time that it took for Complainant to obtain the permit, Respondent received and accepted $30,137.18 in anticipation of performing the work. Accordingly, Complainant established that Respondent abandoned the contract and failed to complete the project in a professional and workmanlike manner in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(1) and Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(3), namely Ariz. Admin. Code R4-9-108.
In addition, the evidence established that Respondent’s contract failed to include the required elements of a contract set forth in Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158(A). Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to comply with the Registrar’s statute in violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(12).
Lastly, 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 251435 for a period of ten 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.
It is further recommended that, on or before thirty (30) days after the effective date of the final order, Respondent shall provide a sample contract to the Registrar to demonstrate that it has amended its contracts to include the nine terms required by Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158(A). If Respondent fails to establish to the Registrar that it has brought its contracts into compliance with Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1158(A) within thirty days, its contractor’s license shall be suspended until it demonstrates that it has done so.
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, December 11, 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]
Construction With Quality By Williams and Sons LLC
4125 W Sunset Rd Mark Hawkins
Tucson, AZ 85743 19125 S SONOITA HWY
[email redacted] VAIL, AZ 85641-9151
[email redacted] [email redacted]
By: OAH Staff