Opening Statement_ROC Hearing_Case# 2025-11380_TABOR.pdf

2025A-11380-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-05-19

Opening Statement – Complainant ROC Case Number 2025-11380

Your Honor,

Good afternoon. My name is Georgia Tabor, and I am appearing today with my husband, Michael Tabor. We are the Complainants in this matter concerning renovation work performed at our primary residence by Respondent Adam Bailey Construction Consulting PLLC.

This matter arises from a residential renovation project for which Mr. Bailey acted as a General Contractor responsible for procuring, coordinating, and supervising subcontractors, and for ensuring that the work was completed in a professional and workmanlike manner.

Following an inspection of the property, the Arizona Registrar of Contractors identified multiple workmanship deficiencies and issued a Directive for Corrective Work addressing six areas of concern.

Mr. Bailey was provided approximately 30 days of access to the residence to complete corrective work and returned to perform that work. Based on his own schedule, he allocated 3 hours for a plumber to disconnect plumbing and one day for the corrective work itself. However, upon reinspection, the project was determined to remain out of compliance, with five of the six corrective directives unresolved.

Accordingly, the issue before the Court is whether the Respondent fulfilled his obligations under Arizona contractor licensing standards and whether the corrective work was completed in a workmanlike manner sufficient to satisfy the Directive.

We will show, consistent with the ROC’s own findings, that the Respondent failed to meet applicable contractor standards under A.R.S. § 32-1154(A), including the requirement that work be performed in a professional and workmanlike manner as set forth in A.A.C. R4-9-108, that the work did not meet professional industry standards, and that the Respondent failed to provide a written contract as required under A.R.S. § 32-1158.

We have prepared a comprehensive and organized set of exhibits supporting the ROC’s findings and documenting the Respondent’s failure to correct the identified deficiencies. These include photographs, videos, communications, and related documentation of both the original workmanship and the attempted corrective work.

Regarding the allegations of vandalism and extortion introduced into the record by the Respondent, the evidence will demonstrate that these claims are unsubstantiated. While these accusations are part of the record, they do not alter the central issue before the Court, which remains the Respondent's failure to satisfy the ROC’s Directive. The evidence will show that despite being given the opportunity to correct the deficiencies identified by the ROC, the work was not completed to a workmanlike standard and the Directive was not satisfied.

Thank you, Your Honor.