> If a contractor takes your down payment and then never installs the toilet is that criminal theft?

To the extent that the funds were entrusted to the contractor on the premise they would be used to purchase third-party goods and services on your behalf, the crime would seem to me to be embezzlement, which is usually distinct from theft but often punished similarly and part of the broad family of property crimes. Advanced payment for services to be rendered, I’m less sure of fitting into that.

> If a contractor installs your toilet without advance payment and then you never pay her, is that criminal theft?

In California, the wage theft law applies to contract as well as W-2 employment.

Note that in either case, there may be a compensable civil wrong without the intent requirement for crime, even if the general scenario described can fit a crime.

IANAL, and I don't know how this question relates to the bit you quoted, but in this incredibly vague hypothetical situation, there's probably a contract in place and breach of contract is usually handled in civil court. It could be criminal and prosecuted by the state if any fraud has taken place. That would depend on details not given though.

I believe that the typical remedy in both hypotheticals would be civil court -> breach of contract (written or implied) -> place a lien.

You're not exactly refuting them, just pointing out that there are other forms of effective theft not considered criminal.

I suspect most people would be perfectly happy with people facing criminal punishment in large scale wage theft cases. The same probably isn't true for toilet installation disputes.

>You're not exactly refuting them, just pointing out that there are other forms of effective theft not considered criminal.

Correct. The point was to raise the question, if that, why not also this?

Why shouldn't it be considered criminal theft?