ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-10075-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-02-24
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
Kacie Baker
COMPLAINANT,
v.
JB Coatings LLC
License No. ROC 350093
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-10075-CHC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: February 10, 2026
APPEARANCES: Kacie Baker appeared on behalf of herself. No one appeared on behalf of JB Coatings, LLC.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Velva Moses-Thompson
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: None.
_____________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS OF FACT
On or about May 28, 2023, JB agreed to remodel Ms. Baker’s home for
the amount of $7,900.00.
Ms. Baker paid JB the contract amount in full.
On or about May 30, 2023, JB started work.
On or about June 9, 2023, JB stopped work.
Ms. Baker filed a complaint with the Arizona Registrar of Contractors
(Registrar) alleging poor work on the part of JB in connection with a home remodeling project.
The Registrar assigned the complaint to one of its investigators, Ruben
Perez, Jr. (Investigator Perez).
On October 16, 2025, Investigator Perez conducted a job-site inspection.
On October 16, 2025, the Registrar issued a Directive to JB license that
provided, in relevant part, as follows:
.......................................................
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, October 31, 2025.
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 reasons1, 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.
DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS
You are directed to remedy the following violations by the appropriate means:
Complaint Item 2B: Flooring cracking, lifting, separating, and breaking throughout house.
Investigator’s Observation: Both parties reported respondent repaired flooring in front of refrigerator approximately one year after installation. The repair involved applying adhesive to two planks. Two planks in front of refrigerator were observed with some adhesive and separating at ends. Respondent to correct by appropriate means.
Governing Rule: ARS 32-1154(A) (3) specifically to Rule 4-9-108
.......................................................
JB did not provide Ms. Baker with a written contract that advised
Ms. Baker of her right to file a complaint with the Registrar against JB for an alleged violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A), within the time allowed by Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1162(A).
JB did not provide Ms. Baker with a written contract that included the
registrar’s telephone number and website address.
A hearing was held on February 10, 2026.
At hearing, Ms. Baker testified on behalf of herself. Investigator Perez
testified consistently with his job-site inspection notes and Directive findings.
No one appeared on behalf of JB at the hearing. JB did
not submit a request to appear telephonically, nor a motion for continuance. JB did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, JB did not present any evidence to defend its license.
There is no evidence that JB subsequently contacted OAH to
provide an explanation for not appearing at the scheduled hearing.
Administrative notice is taken of JB’s prior License record
on February 24, 2026. Such prior License record reflects that JB’s License
No. 350093 was first issued on February 6, 2024, and was revoked on February 9, 2026. Such prior License record also reflects that there is one open complaint against JB’s license and one complaint resulted in discipline against JB’s license.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. sections 32-1101 et seq.
The revoked status of JB’s license does not deprive Ms. Baker
of her right to prosecute the complaint or prevent the Registrar from determining the merits of Complainant’s complaint. This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.
Ms. Baker bears the burden of proof to establish Better Way’s statutory
violation by a preponderance of the evidence. JB bears the burden to establish affirmative defenses and factors in mitigation of the penalty by the same evidentiary standard. See Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 41-1092.07(G)(2); A.A.C. R2-19-119(A) and A.A.C. R2-19-119(B)(1); see also Vazanno 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 shows that JB did not perform
work in a professional and workmanship like manner, which is a violation of A.A.C. R4-9-108(A), and thereby of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(3).
5. The undisputed evidence established that JB’s contract did not include a statement that the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the Registrar for alleged violations of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A), which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(12) and Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1158. Furthermore, the undisputed evidence established that JB’s contract did not include the Registrar’s phone number and website address.
6. The preponderance of the evidence shows that JB failed to comply with the Registrar’s Directive without valid justification, which is a violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. section 32-1154(A)(22).
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that on the effective date of the Order, the Registrar shall revoke License No. 350093 issued to JB Coatings, LLC.
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, February 24, 2026.
/s/ Velva Moses-Thompson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
JB Coatings LLC
[email redacted]
Kacie Baker
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff