The plaintiffs sued for unpaid amounts arising from an oral cottage renovation arrangement, asserting a substantial balance plus interest and non-pecuniary damages.
The court found the agreement was not a flat-price contract but an unsubstantiated time-and-materials arrangement, and fixed compensation on a quantum meruit basis.
Expert evidence established overbilling, deficient workmanship, and improper electrical and plumbing work by an unlicensed contractor.
Having concluded the plaintiffs had already been overpaid and were not entitled to interest or general damages, the court dismissed the action.
