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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Hallatt did not take photographs from six metres distance on February 3. Her evidence was that she did not do so because there was a light snow falling at the time of her observations from the six metre distance. I understood this to mean that the snow would interfere with the quality of the photographs, but she may also have meant that it would interfere with the requirement of CPG 4.16 in that the view from a distance of six metres had to take place under natural lighting conditions "when dry". The snowfall may have interfered with the requirement for the brickwork to be dry. In any event, Hallatt took no photographs from a distance of six metres or more on her February 3 attendance. She had a tape measure with her but did not measure or record the distance when she made her observations. Hallatt felt that she did not need to use a tape measure. The only photographs that Ms. Hallatt took on February 3 were taken in close proximity to the masonry (four photos collectively forming Exhibit 5 ) and definitely not from 20 metres or more. These photographs were taken from approximately 3 to 4 feet away from the brickwork. Ms Hallatt stated that she only took photographs to back up her observations. Tarion did not require photos to be taken at an inspection. The photos were only intended to serve as a reminder to her observations. One of the homeowners, also gave evidence at the hearing on behalf of Tarion. He confirmed that he was present at the inspection on February 3 and that there was a light snow falling at the time that he was outside with Ms Hallatt and the Builder. He stated that the owners themselves had taken no photographs from 20 feet or more. He was not present with Ms. Hallatt when she took photographs that day. Ms. Hallatts field notes, based on her February 3 inspection, are found at exhibit 11. The relevant field note merely states that the exterior mortar splatter on bricks around the house needs to be washed off and makes reference to a power wash. There were no other Tarion field notes being relied upon with respect to the alleged deficiency. Ms. Hallatts evidence was that if there was something blatant, she made a detailed field note but otherwise they were really "just to jog memory". 6
Tiffany Hallatt reattended at the site on March 10, 2009, to see if the Builder had corrected the mortar situation. She again found that the mortar splatter and stains were excessive and had not been remedied. Her evidence is that she made these observations from a distance of six metres or more. However, again she did not take photographs from a position of six metres. She had a tape measure with her but did not measure the distance in making her observations. Ms. Hallatt took a large number of photographs (37) on March 10, but they were all from locations very close to the brickwork. Her evidence was that she took the photographs from the close location in order to see if the earlier complaints about the mortar splatter and stains had been corrected. Her evidence was that the close-up photos continued to show excessive mortar splatter and stains on the masonry. Her view was that if the Builder's clean-up happened, it was ineffective in its result. In her evidence, she identified many locations on the 37 photographs which she considered to reflect excessive mortar splatter and stains. At the hearing Ms. Hallatt was also presented, for the first time, with photographs taken by the Representative of the Builder a few weeks prior to the hearing. These photographs were taken from 20 feet, according to the evidence of the Builder. Ms. Hallatt quickly identified what she considered to be excessive mortar splatter and stains on the photographs taken by the Builder representatives. i allowed these photos taken by the Builder into evidence even though they were not taken on the date of the conciliation. The last cleaning by the Builder had taken place before the conciliation and thus there had been no change to the brickwork between February 3, the conciliation date, and the taking of these photos a few weeks prior to the hearing. Thus, these were the only 20 foot photos available for the arbitration and reflected the condition of the brickwork and what the Tarion representative would have seen on February 3. Ms. Hallatt gave evidence as to her experience. She had several years of building industry experience prior to Tarion, working mainly as a customer contact for builders and often liaised with Tarion as to deficiency complaints from owners. She 7
Page 1 and 2: IN THE MATTER OF THE ONTARIO NEW HO
Page 3 and 4: March 9, 2009 was the deadline for
Page 5: Reference will frequently be made t
Page 9 and 10: BUILDER'S EVIDENCE The first witnes
Page 11 and 12: experienced in changing the colour
Page 13 and 14: splatter problem than the sides and
Page 15 and 16: uilder in the immediate vicinity. T

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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?