BUILDER ("Applicant" and TARION WARRANTY CORPORATION ("Respondent ...

The Supervisor's evidence was that the workmanlike standard for mortar was that
there be no big chunks or globs or mounds of mortar appearing on the brick. In the
close-up photos taken by Tarion on March 10, the white marks or stains were mostly
flat or flush with the face of the brick and therefore not protruding from the face. His
evidence further was that if the chunks, globs or mounds were "everyhere", the
masonry was not a clean job. At the same time, a house would never be clear of all
such materiaL.
Hallatts notes from her February 3 attendance give a minimal description of the
deficiency. This is in contrast to the other deficiencies such as the cabinets that
were apparently entitled to considerable detail, but in the end were found not to be
chargeable items. As for the mortar, there is no detail, for example, about the
thickness of the splatter or the degree of protrusion from the brick face.
The Supervisor's evidence coincided with that of the Builder's Representative. He
stated that he and another employee, also from the Builder, came to the site on
September 29, 2008. He instructed the employee to use a "bucket and brush" to
clean the excess mortar. According to the Supervisor, this took the larger
imperfections off the bricks. However, the Builder's Representative felt that the first
cleaning did not come out as well as intended and arranged for the Supervisor and
the employee to reattend. They in fact did so on November 28, 2008. On this
second occasion, there was no "bucket and brush" routine, but rather a second
power wash. The Supervisor confirmed the evidence of the Builder's
Representative, mainly that there was a third attendance, which he thought took
place in approximately January, 2009, and just involved a power wash touch-up to
the front of the house. His evidence was that there were, in effect, "two and a half'
cleanings.
The Supervisor testified as to the Builder's concern about using a high pressure
power spray, his fear and experience being that it could displace mortar between the
bricks and cause unintended damage.
The Builder was conscientious in trying to resolve the matter, and also investigated
the possibility of tinting the smear on the bricks through the assistance of a company
10