A contractor sued a homeowner for unpaid renovation invoices totalling approximately $40,996.60 after deducting payments already received.
The homeowner counterclaimed alleging defective workmanship and sought the cost of demolishing and redoing the work.
The court found that the renovation contract lacked clarity regarding the scope of work, that the parties ignored key contractual procedures such as written change orders, and that the invoices did not reliably establish the work performed.
Evidence showed deficiencies in tile installation, but the homeowner failed to prove the cost of remediation with admissible or reliable evidence.
Because neither party established their claims on the balance of probabilities, both the action and the counterclaim were dismissed.