ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-12067-CHC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-04-02

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Anabel Valenzuela,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

Cranmore Carpet Cleaning, LLC

DBA: Cranmore Flooring Sales,

License No. ROC 317468,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-12067-CHC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: March 25, 2026

APPEARANCES: Complainant Anabel Valenzuela appeared on her own behalf. Ty Cranmore appeared on behalf of Respondent Cranmore Carpet Cleaning, LLC, doing business as Cranmore Flooring Sales. Arizona Registrar of Contractors Investigator James Carter appeared as a witness.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella

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

FINDINGS OF FACT

Cranmore Carpet Cleaning, LLC, doing business as Cranmore Flooring Sales (“Respondent”), is the holder of License Number 317468, a Specialty Dual CR-8 Floor Covering License issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”). This license classification is limited to the installation and repair of the following floor covering materials: i) Carpet; ii) Floor tile; iii) Wood; iv) Linoleum; v) Vinyl; vi) Asphalt; vii) Rubber; and viii) Concrete coatings. Ty Cranmore is Respondent’s Qualifying Party and sole Member.

In or about July 2023, Anabel Valenzuela (“Complainant”) contracted with Respondent for Respondent to perform the repair work to Complainant’s kitchen and dining room after those areas sustained water damage. The contract price was $16,214.77. Complainant has paid Respondent approximately $16,103.00.

On or about November 20, 2025, the Registrar received a Complaint against Respondent from Complainant alleging abandonment and poor work with respect to the project.

The Registrar assigned the Complaint to Investigator James Carter. After a December 15, 2025 Jobsite Inspection that Respondent did not attend, Investigator Carter issued a Written Directive to Respondent dated December 15, 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 Wednesday, January 7, 2026.

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

Complaint Item: 1 - No disclosure for cabinet installation, lowering the pony and plumbing, drywall/sheetrock, painting and adding electricity

Investigator’s Observation: I verified that the Respondent has lowered the kitchen island pony wall and in the process relocated the garbage disposal switch as well as not properly installing the outlets under the sink. Respondent has also relocated the plumbing in the pony wall. Respondent has also not properly unclosed the vent duct in the cabinets over the stove. No permit was pulled for the relocation of the outlets the plumbing and the duct work. The Respondent will need to correct this issue by the appropriate means. Since the Respondent is not appropriately licensed to do this work, the appropriate means will be the two parties coming to a resolution to have an appropriately licensed contractor obtain permits and to construct or reconstruct as required by the building official.

Complaint Item: 2 - Drywall is bumpy and many outlet covers don’t fit

properly because its uneven and the cut out is larger

Investigator’s Observation: I confirmed that the texture on the kitchen wall is not properly finished. The texture is rough and inconstant. There are gaps around the outlets where the drywall and/or texture is cut to short. Texture under the pony wall is so rough the outlets covers do not fit on properly and do not sit flush to the wall. There is a large gap under the countertop on the drywall on the pony wall. The Respondent will need to correct this issue by the appropriate means. Since the Respondent is not appropriately licensed to do this work, the appropriate means will be the two parties coming to a resolution to have an appropriately licensed contractor complete the corrective work.

Also on December 15, 2025, Investigator Carter issued three Warning Letters to Respondent. The first Warning Letter was issued because Respondent failed to obtain building permits for the project. The second Warning Letter was issued because Respondent’s contract document was missing some of the statutorily required

elements, specifically, Respondent’s license number, an estimated date of completion for the project, and the advisement that the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the Registrar. The third Warning Letter was issued because Respondent was contracting beyond the scope of its CR-8 Floor Covering license.

On January 6, 2026, Respondent contacted Investigator Carter and told him that Respondent had received the Written Directive on that date. Investigator Carter advised Respondent that Respondent was not licensed to perform the corrective work and would need to find an alternate resolution with Complainant.

On January 8, 2026, Investigator Carter contacted Complainant who informed him that she had received no communication from Respondent and she declined to extend the deadline date for compliance with the Written Directive.

Thereafter, Investigator Carter forwarded the Complaint to the Registrar’s Legal Department. The Registrar issued a Citation against Respondent charging possible violations of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a) and (b), A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12), namely, A.R.S. § 32-1158, A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(16), and A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(22).

Respondent timely filed a written Answer to the Citation and the matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent State agency, for an administrative hearing.

Investigator Carter testified consistently with the findings contained in the Written Directive and the three Warning Letters. Investigator Carter testified that the work performed by Respondent required a permit because Respondent moved and relocated electrical outlets and plumbing lines, as well as HVAC exhaust duct.

Investigator Carter testified that Respondent contracted for and performed work outside the scope of its license as Respondent is only licensed to perform flooring work, not painting, drywall, electrical, plumbing, and HVAC work. Consequently, in order to comply with the Written Directive, Respondent would have had to reach a financial resolution with Complainant.

Investigator Carter testified that Respondent’s contract documents did not contain Respondent’s license number, an estimated date of completion for the project, and the advisement that the property owner has the right to file a written complaint with the Registrar, as required by statute.

Investigator Carter explained that after the expiration of the Written Directive deadline, Complainant was no longer required to communicate with Respondent or allow any work to be completed by Respondent.

Complainant agreed with Investigator Carter’s testimony, and also testified that Respondent “left a mess” and incomplete work. Complainant testified that the cut outs for the outlets are much larger than they should be, and that Respondent moved electrical and the exhaust duct.

Ty Cranmore testified that he was willing to send fully licensed contractors to perform the corrective work, and that he “never does work,” but rather, “his guys do it.” Mr. Cranmore asserted that he was not aware of some of the issues with the work. Mr. Cranmore testified that it was “an awkward situation for personal reasons.”

Administrative notice is taken of Respondent’s prior License record on April 1, 2026. Such prior License record reflects that Respondent’s License Number 317468 was first issued on January 23, 2018, and is active. Such prior License record also reflects that there is only the instant open Complaint, no resolved/settled complaints, and no 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 is such proof as convinces the trier of fact that the contention is more probably true than not.”

The evidence established that Respondent disregarded or departed from plans and specifications in regard to the pony wall and garbage disposal switch, failed to obtain a permit for the project, and performed work without a permit. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(2)(a) and(b).

The evidence established that Respondent’s contract documents did not contain all of the statutorily required elements. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent failed to comply with the Registrar’s statute in violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(12).

The evidence established that Respondent knowingly contracted beyond the scope of its license by performing work unrelated to flooring. Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(16).

The evidence established that Respondent failed to comply with the Registrar’s Written Directive. Further, Respondent failed to establish any affirmative defense to establish valid justification for such failure. 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 317468 for a period of ten (10) 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 (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.

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 (9) terms required by A.R.S. § 32-1158(A). If Respondent fails to establish to the Registrar that it has brought its contracts into compliance with A.R.S. § 32-1158(A) within thirty (30) days, its contractor’s license shall be suspended until it demonstrates that it has done so.

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, April 2, 2026.

/s/ Sondra J. Vanella

Administrative Law Judge

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

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Anabel Valenzuela

[email redacted]

[email redacted]

Cranmore Carpet Cleaning, LLC

DBA: Cranmore Flooring Sales

[email redacted]

[email redacted]

James Carter

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff