James Wallace

The applicant appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying most of his claims regarding defects in his newly constructed luxury home.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the electrical, minor, and most structural claims, finding that the builder's use of alternative solutions for building paper and weep holes complied with the Ontario Building Code.

However, the Tribunal found that the builder breached its warranty by unilaterally substituting 6mm exterior sheathing for the 12.7mm specified in the construction plans, and by installing an oak veneer staircase instead of the solid oak staircase required by the purchase agreement.

The Tribunal ordered the builder to repair a masonry post and ordered Tarion to pay the applicant $14,170 in damages for the sheathing and staircase substitutions.

The applicants appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying their claims for a major structural defect warranty regarding their new home.

The applicants raised concerns about foundation cracks, soil settlement, the septic system, and other issues.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the applicants failed to provide evidence that the defects rendered the home uninhabitable or unsafe, and thus did not meet the statutory definition of a major structural defect.

The applicants appealed Tarion Warranty Corporation's decision to deny their claims regarding various construction defects in their new home, including grading, brickwork, ceramic tiles, roofing, and foundation cracks.

The Licence Appeal Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding that the applicants failed to prove their case on a balance of probabilities.

The Tribunal preferred the evidence of Tarion's representative and expert, who had tested their conclusions, over the applicants' expert, whose theories were untested.

Furthermore, the applicants failed to provide evidence of the costs of the repairs they sought.