ALJDEC - Licensing
2025A-10761-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-03-11
IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
AAC Trucking,
COMPLAINANT,
v.
Sid Terry Concrete Construction LLC,
License No. ROC 355224,
RESPONDENT.
No. 2025A-10761-NPC-ROC
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION
HEARING: February 19, 2026 at 1:00pm
APPEARANCES: Alex Villalobos appeared on behalf of Complainant AAC Trucking. No one appeared on behalf of Respondent.
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nicole Robinson
EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Arizona Registrar of Contractors Notice of Hearing Packet (“Packet”).
FINDINGS OF FACT
Sid Terry Concrete Construction, LLC (“Respondent”) is the holder of License No. ROC 355224, first issued by the Registrar of Contractors (“Registrar”) on October 23, 2024.
On or about October 17, 2025, AAC Trucking (“Complainant”) filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant the sum of $2,340.00 for hauling materials.
Complainant issued Invoice A0007 to Respondent on October 3, 2025 for 13 loads of dirt hauled at $180.00 per hour.
The parties were unable to resolve their differences, and Complainant requested an administrative hearing. On November 7, 2025, the Registrar then issued a Citation to Respondent for alleged violation of Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10).
The Citation requested that Respondent file a written answer by November 22, 2025. Respondent filed its answer by email on November 3, 2025, stating in pertinent part, “The company in question refused to send an itemized bill for dirt delivered. Furthermore dirt that was delivered was not satisfactory for building pad. Dirt was full of rock that couldn’t be used for pad. 10 loads of dirt was supposed to be delivered at 150.00 per load.” Respondent did not assert that it lacked the capacity to pay the amount Complainant asserted was due.
On November 24, 2025, the Registrar referred the matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings, an independent state agency, for an evidentiary hearing.
The Registrar issued a Notice of Hearing, setting a hearing at 3:00pm on January 14, 2026. The Registrar mailed copies of the Notice of Hearing to Respondent at its address and email address of record.
The matter was continued and put into a status, in order, for the parties to try and reach an agreement. On January 30, 2026, Complainant informed the Office of Administrative Hearings to move forward with the hearing.
On February 4, 2026, an order was emailed from the Office of Administrative Hearings to the parties which advised them on how to connect to the hearing via Google Meet. The hearing was held via Google Meet on February 19, 2026 at 1:00pm.
Respondent did not request that the hearing be continued. Although the start of the hearing was delayed 15 minutes, Respondent did not appear through an authorized member, employee, or attorney. Consequently, Respondent did not present any evidence to defend its license.
Hearing Evidence
Alex Villalobos, owner of Complainant business, testified on behalf of Complainant. Administrative notice was taken of the Registrar’s packet which includes the Notice of Hearing.
Mr. Villalobos testified that Respondent hired Complainant as a subcontractor, both businesses agreed on a rate, Complainant provided the service, and Respondent was to pay as soon as the job was completed. Mr. Villalobos testified that he sent the invoice via text message to Respondent because that was how they communicated. After Mr. Villalobos received no response, he called Respondent, left text messages, and went to Respondent’s physical address. On November 25, 2025, Respondent informed Mr. Villalobos that he would have the money by that Friday, but Complainant did not receive any money. Complainant last texted Respondent on February 13, 2026, however, there has been no further communication.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Notice of Hearing that the Registrar mailed to Respondent at its address and email address of record was reasonable, and Respondent is deemed to have received notice of the hearing and of the order from the Office of Administrative Hearings.
The burden of proof at an administrative hearing falls to the party asserting a claim, right, or entitlement and the standard of proof on all issues in these matters is 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.”
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 purpose of the Registrar’s licensing statutes is to protect the public from unscrupulous, unqualified, and financially irresponsible contractors.
The preponderance of the evidence shows that Respondent owed Complainant more than $750.00 for materials/services provided in connection with Respondent’s operations as a contractor.
It was clear from the evidence and testimony provided that Complainant tried multiple avenues to retrieve payment from Respondent with no success. As such, the evidence established that Respondent owed a total amount of $2,340.00 for services provided.
Respondent failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that it lacked the ability to pay Complainant for the work performed.
Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-1154(A)(10) by failing to pay Complainant $2,340.00 for services or materials rendered in connection with Respondent’s contracting business.
RECOMMENDed order
Based on the foregoing,
It is recommended that the Registrar suspend Respondent’s License No. ROC 355224 issued by the Registrar until it has provided to the Registrar, and the Registrar has accepted, documents that establish that it has paid Complainant $2,340.00 in certified funds.
It is further recommended that when and if the Registrar receives and accepts Respondent’s evidence that it has paid Complainant $2,340.00 in certified funds, the Registrar may close the Complaint in Case No. 2025-10761.
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, March 11, 2026.
/s/ Nicole Robinson
Administrative Law Judge
Transmitted by either mail, e-mail, or facsimile to:
Tom Cole, Director
Registrar of Contractors
c/o Legal Department
1700 W. Washington Street, Suite 105
Phoenix, AZ 85007
[email redacted]
AAC Trucking
10672 W Yavapai Street
Goodyear, AZ 85338
[email redacted]
Sid Terry Concrete Construction LLC
34000 N 27th Dr. APT 3132
Phoenix, AZ 85085
[email redacted]
By: OAH Staff