ALJDEC - Licensing
2024A-10572-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-05-15
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
AC Pro Inc,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Aztech Mechanical Inc,
License No. ROC 288067,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2024A-10572-NPC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: April 25, 2025
APPEARANCES: Teresa Ito represented AC Pro Inc. (Complainant). No person appeared on behalf of Respondent.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Kay A. Abramsohn
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Registrar Notice of Hearing packet (Packet).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Aztech Mechanical Inc. is the holder of License No. 288067 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar or ROC) on January 30, 2014.
On September 13, 2024, the ROC received from Complainant a Non-Payment Complaint Form alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant for materials obtained in the summer of 2024. In that Complaint, Complainant alleged that its invoices in the total amount of $50,733.04 remained unpaid.
On November 20, 2024, ROC issued its Citation citing Respondent for alleged violation of Arizona Revised Statute (Ariz. Rev. Stat.) § 32-1154(A)(10), failure to pay monies in excess of $750.00 when due for services rendered.
On December 4, 2024, Respondent filed an Answer to the Citation indicating that Complainant had been extremely helpful and professional as to their working relationship. Respondent noted that, earlier in the year, it had worked on a project on which the owner had gone bankrupt and that Respondent had been owed over $200,000.00 on that work. Respondent further indicated that his legal team was working to collect that account and he hoped to have the situation cleared up soon.
The Complaint was not resolved informally and the ROC subsequently set the matter for hearing.
On January 28, 2025, the parties discussed the matter and determined to come to a verbal agreement regarding possible settlement. The matter was then continued to allow the parties to resolve the matter.
On February 20, 2025, Complainant notified the Tribunal that the matter has not been resolved. The matter was reset for hearing to convene on April 25, 2025.
Respondent failed to appear at the April 25, 2025 hearing to present any evidence.
At hearing, Ms. Ito testified that Respondent had been making payments on invoices until one particular check was returned for nonsufficient funds in August of 2024 and, after that, Complainant received no further payments.
Ms. Ito testified that Complainant wrote off one more service charge from the invoices, reducing Respondent’s unpaid balance to $50,463.33.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction and has been properly brought before OAH for adjudication.
The purpose of the Registrar’s licensing statutes is to protect the public from unscrupulous, unqualified, and financially irresponsible contractors.
The Registrar may resolve contractual disputes if such resolution is ancillary to its regulatory mission and may penalize a contractor’s license by ordering payment of restitution if a proven statutory violation was not remedied by corrective action.
Unless otherwise provided by law, a party asserting a claim, right, or entitlement bears the burden of proof; a party asserting an affirmative defense has the burden of establishing the affirmative defense. The standard of proof on all issues in this matter is that of 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.” A preponderance of the evidence is “[t]he greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still sufficient to incline a fair and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.”
Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10) includes among the grounds for suspension, revocation, or other disciplinary action against a contractor’s license,
[f]ailure by a licensee or agent or official of a licensee to pay monies in excess of $750 when due for materials or services rendered in connection with the licensee's operations as a contractor unless the licensee proves that the licensee lacks the capacity to pay and has not received sufficient monies as payment for the particular construction work project or operation for which the services or materials were rendered or purchased.
The hearing evidence established that Respondent was invoiced a total of $50,733.04 owed to Complainant for materials supplied. The hearing evidence established that, on its own accord, Complainant reduced the amount owed to $50,463.33.
Respondent failed to demonstrate any statutory justification or excuse for failing to issue payment to Complainant. Respondent failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it lacked the ability to pay Complainant for the supplies obtained from Complainant.
Based on the hearing record, Complainant established that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) by failing to pay Complainant $50,463.33 for materials obtained from Complainant in connection with Respondent’s contracting business.
Based upon Respondent’s violation of the provisions of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10), grounds exist to impose discipline against Respondent’s license.
RECOMMENDed order
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that, on the effective date of the Registrar’s final order, the Registrar suspend the Aztech Mechanical Inc. License No. 288067 until Respondent has provided to the Registrar, and the Registrar has accepted, documents that establish that Respondent has paid Complainant $50,463.33 in certified funds.
It is further recommended that when and if the Registrar does receive and accept Respondent’s evidence that Respondent has paid Complainant $50,463.33 in certified funds, the Registrar shall close the matter.
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 the outstanding $50,463.33 to Complainant.
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, May 15, 2025.
/s/ Kay A. Abramsohn
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
AC Pro Inc
11700 Industry Ave
Fontana, CA 92337
[email redacted]
Aztech Mechanical Inc.
PO Box 13489
Mesa, AZ 85216
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff