ALJDEC - Licensing

2026A-00669-NPC-ROC · Registrar of Contractors · 2026-06-04

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Escalante Concrete Construction Inc.,

COMPLAINANT

v.

Mc Creary Homes Inc.,

License No. ROC 083063,

RESPONDENT

No. 2026A-00669-NPC-ROC

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION

HEARING: May 19, 2026

APPEARANCES:

Complainant: Lori Escalante, President

Matt Dickens, Vice President

Sarah Vasquez, Controller

Respondent: LJ McCreary, President

Elise Townsend, Consultant

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Nedra-Su Kawasaki

EXHIBITS ADMITTED INTO EVIDENCE: Administrative notice was taken of the Notice of Hearing Packet submitted by the Registrar of Contractors.

FINDINGS OF FACT

Mc Creary Homes Inc. (Respondent) is the holder of License No. 083063 issued by the Registrar of Contractors (Registrar).

On or about January 19, 2026, Escalante Concrete Construction Inc. (Complainant) filed a Complaint against Respondent with the Registrar alleging that Respondent had failed to pay Complainant the sum of $16,960.00 for installation of concrete flatwork with color.

The parties were unable to resolve their differences, and Complainant requested an administrative hearing. The Registrar then issued a Citation alleging a violation of A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10).

Lori Escalante testified that the total due to Complainant was $16,960.00.

LJ McCreary testified, on behalf of Respondent, that Respondent had been paid in full by the project owner. Mr. McCreary further testified that a mistake had been made on the estimate given for the project and unbeknownst to him at the time of the project, Respondent’s bookkeeper was not properly or accurately processing payments. As a result of the combination of errors, Mr. McCreary and Elise Townsend testified, Respondent lost approximately $500,000.00 on the project.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

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.”

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.

The evidence established that Respondent owed a total of $16,960.00 for installation of concrete flatwork with color.

Although Respondent established that it lacked the ability to pay Complainant for the work performed, Respondent admitted it had been paid in full by the owner of the project for all work performed.

Therefore, Complainant established that Respondent violated A.R.S. § 32-1154(A)(10) by failing to pay Complainant $16,960.00 for services or materials rendered 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 the Registrar suspend Respondent’s License No. 083063 issued by the Registrar until it has provided to the Registrar, and the Registrar has accepted, documents that establish that it has paid Complainant $16,960.00 in certified funds.

It is further recommended that when and if the Registrar receives and accepts Respondent’s evidence that it has paid Complainant $16,960.00 in certified funds, the Registrar may close the Complaint in Case No. 2026A-00669.

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, June 4, 2026.

/s/ Nedra-Su Kawasaki

Administrative Law Judge

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

Tom Cole, Director

Registrar of Contractors

Escalante Concrete Construction Inc.

[email redacted]

Roscoe J. Mutz, Esq.

Farhang & Medcoff PLLC

[email redacted]

Mc Creary Homes Inc.

[email redacted]

By: OAH Staff