ALJDEC - Licensing

2025A-05300-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2025-11-18

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Custom Sheet Metal,

COMPLAINANT,

v.

MASCO & SONS TOO, LLC

License No. ROC 333480,

RESPONDENT.

No. 2025A-05300-NPC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: October 30, 2025.

APPEARANCES:

For Complainant: Connor Dubois.

For Respondent: Dustin Mascaro.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Samuel Fox

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Notice of Hearing Packet submitted by the Registrar of Contractors.

_____________________________________________________________________

FINDINGS OF FACT

MASCO & SONS TOO, LLC (Respondent) was the holder of License No. 333480 issued by the Arizona Registrar of Contractors (Registrar) on May 25, 2021, and suspended on November 17, 2025.

On multiple occasions, Custom Sheet Metal (Complainant) provided materials to Respondent.

On or about May 29, 2025, Complainant filed a Non-Payment Complaint Form with the Registrar, claiming Respondent had failed to pay $67,633.12 for materials.

On or about June 13, 2025, the Registrar notified Respondent that it had received a complaint and the Complainant could raise issues and defenses.

On July 15, 2025, the Registrar issued a Citation, alleging that Respondent violated Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 32-1154 (A)(10). Respondent timely submitted an Answer on July 29, 2025.

The matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings for an administrative hearing.

At the hearing Respondent did not dispute the amount owed.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

This matter lies within the Registrar’s jurisdiction.

Complainant bore the burden of proof to establish Respondent’s statutory violations by a preponderance of the evidence. Respondent bore the burden of proof to establish an affirmative defense 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.”

A.R.S. § 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.

In Arizona, when construing statutes, we look first to a statute’s language as the best and most reliable index of its meaning. If the statute’s language is clear and unambiguous, we give effect to that language and apply it without using other means of statutory construction, unless applying the literal language would lead to an absurd result. Words should be given “their natural, obvious, and ordinary meaning,” unless defined by the legislature.

Upon review of the evidence submitted this case, Complainant established that any monies were “due” for materials or services rendered to Respondent in connection with Respondent’s operations as a licensed contractor.

The preponderance of the evidence showed that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) as alleged. Therefore, the Administrative Law Judge found grounds to impose discipline against Respondent’s license.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that Respondent pay Complainant $67,633.12 within thirty (30) days of the Order becoming effective, and if Respondent fails to do so, the Registrar shall suspend Respondent’s License No. 333480 until Respondent provides proof that it has paid Complainant in full.

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, November 18, 2025.

/s/ Samuel Fox

Administrative Law Judge

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

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

MASCO & SONS TOO, LLC

[email redacted]

Custom Sheet Metal

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff