The applicant appealed a decision by Tarion Warranty Corporation denying his claim that the builder breached a warranty by installing an acrylic shower base instead of a ceramic tile base in his new condominium.
The applicant argued the Agreement of Purchase and Sale (APS) implied a ceramic base by describing a 'site-built ceramic tiled shower'.
The Tribunal found the APS did not explicitly specify a ceramic base and limited ceramic tile selection to the walls.
As the APS lacked the required specificity, no substitution occurred under section 19 of Regulation 892.
The appeal was dismissed, and the Tribunal declined to award costs against the applicant despite his failure to disclose his legal training.
