A Staunton builder went on trial this week on felony construction fraud charges after two clients paid more than $600,000 combined for homes that were never finished. The case turns on the exact line the Virginia Business and Law exam tests: when a failed project stops being a civil breach of contract and becomes a crime.
This is an independent study aid, not affiliated with DPOR, the Board for Contractors, or PSI. It is a study summary, not legal advice. The charges are allegations, the trial was still in progress at publication, and the defendant is presumed innocent unless proven guilty.
What happened
Amy J. Argenbright, 46, of Staunton, owner of A&Co 2002 LLC, went on trial Tuesday, October 20, 2026 in Augusta County Circuit Court in Verona. She faces two counts of felony construction fraud, described by the Staunton News Leader as felony failure to perform construction. Prosecutors dropped a third charge before trial. The case is a bench trial, so Circuit Judge Shannon Sherrill decides guilt or innocence. Augusta Free Press reports a maximum penalty of 40 years in prison if she is convicted on both counts.
The two clients who testified:
- Candy Burchett. In June 2024 she signed a $523,000 contract with A&Co 2002 LLC for a 1,700-square-foot, 3-bedroom, 2-bath home in Valley Manor Subdivision west of Staunton, with completion expected March 15, 2025. She testified she paid $245,013.50, received no refund, and found only a foundation and a vacant lot in September and October 2025.
- David Wiegley. In May 2023 he signed a $518,000 contract for a home on a 20-acre lot on Entry School Road, scheduled for completion in mid-to-late March 2024. By August 2024 he had paid $366,306.38 for a house lacking insulation, countertops, and drywall. Another builder finished the shell for an additional $428,000.
Together the two payments total $611,319.88. Argenbright was first indicted in July 2025, with two more indictments in November 2025.
Assistant Augusta County Commonwealth's Attorney Caleb Kramer argued the case is criminal, not civil, and that he must prove Argenbright acted with fraudulent intent. Defense attorney Thomas Weidner IV argued there was no fraud, only a struggling business and a pair of civil contract disputes. The trial continued Wednesday, October 21, with the prosecution finishing its case and the defense to follow. No verdict had been reported when this post was drafted.
Reporting has not stated whether A&Co 2002 LLC held a Virginia contractor license. Do not assume license status from the criminal charges.
Why this matters for the exam
Virginia's construction fraud statute, Section 18.2-200.1 of the Code of Virginia, is the criminal counterpart to the Board for Contractors discipline rules covered in the Virginia Business and Law exam. The trial is a live test of the statute's hardest element: fraudulent intent at the time the advance was taken. A contractor who takes money, does poor or incomplete work, and goes broke has a civil problem. A contractor who takes an advance with fraudulent intent, fails to perform, and fails to make the advance good crosses into criminal liability. That distinction is what the prosecution and defense spent opening arguments fighting over, and it is a distinction exam questions probe directly.
The civil and licensing track runs in parallel. Abandoning a project and diverting funds are prohibited acts under the Board for Contractors rules summarized in Virginia contractor license requirements, and a homeowner with an unpaid judgment against a licensed contractor may have a claim on the Virginia Contractor Transaction Recovery Fund.
Testable numbers and rules to memorize
- Section 18.2-200.1 elements. Taking an advance of money or other thing of value, with fraudulent intent, on a promise to perform construction, removal, repair, or improvement of a building or structure permanently annexed to real property, then failing or refusing to perform and failing to substantially make good the advance.
- Deemed larceny. A person who meets those elements is deemed guilty of larceny of the advance. Grading follows the larceny value rules, which is why court listings label the felony charge "advance pay, construct" over $1,000.
- 15 days, certified mail. The larceny attaches if the contractor fails to return the advance within 15 days of a request sent by certified mail, return receipt requested, to the last known address or the address in the contract. The demand method and the 15-day clock are both in the statute.
- Fraudulent intent is the dividing line. Breach of contract alone is civil. The state must prove the intent to defraud, which is why a failing business, standing alone, is the standard defense.
- 40 years here is 2 counts. Augusta Free Press reports a 40-year maximum on the two counts combined, so each felony count carries up to 20 years on these facts.
- Recovery Fund cap: $20,000 per claimant. Section 54.1-1123 limits one claimant's recovery from the Virginia Contractor Transaction Recovery Fund to $20,000 on an unpaid judgment arising from a single transaction, and a Fund claim requires a judgment based on the improper or dishonest conduct of a licensed regulant. Against losses like the $245,013.50 and $366,306.38 testified to here, the Fund is partial relief at best.
Drill the surrounding licensing rules with the Virginia Business and Law practice test sample questions.
Try the free practice quiz
Test yourself on Virginia Business and Law topics, including prohibited acts and consumer protection. Take the free 12-question Virginia Business and Law practice quiz with explanations for every answer.
Sources
- Augusta Free Press, "Amy Argenbright case: Testimony reveals realtor's missed deadlines, failure to build," October 20, 2026: https://augustafreepress.com/news/amy-argenbright-case-testimony-reveals-realtors-missed-deadlines-failure-to-build/
- Augusta Free Press, "Augusta County: Felony construction fraud trial set to start on Tuesday," October 16, 2026: https://augustafreepress.com/news/augusta-county-felony-construction-fraud-trial-set-to-start-on-tuesday/
- Staunton News Leader, "Staunton businesswoman stands trial in $600K construction fraud case," October 21, 2026: https://www.newsleader.com/story/news/local/courts/2026/10/21/amy-argenbright-faces-construction-fraud-trial-in-augusta-county/92352851007/
- Code of Virginia, Section 18.2-200.1, Failure to perform promise for construction, etc., in return for advances (official Legislative Information System): https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title18.2/chapter6/article7/
- Code of Virginia, Section 54.1-1123, Limitations upon recovery from Fund: https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/virginia/va-code/virginia_code_54-1-1123