Homebuyers' mouldy final walkthrough from hell leads to civil case

A pair of homebuyers’ final walkthrough from hell is a reminder to anyone either purchasing or renting a home to heed the warning signs when viewing a new place.

In some findings revealed through a BC Civil Resolution Tribunal case, Daniel and Amanda Kerr purchased a home from Trevor Michalkow.

The Kerr family claimed Michalkow failed to hold up his end of the bargain, which meant ensuring things like toilets, bathrooms, air conditioning, and light fixtures were all in working order.

Michalkow claims any breakdown occurred after the Kerrs took possession of the home.

You might also like:
• "Day and night": Resident takes strata to court in prolonged noise complaint saga
• BC court says Airbnb host had every right to evict a family from property
• Someone abandoned their cats for five years then sued the new owners

The Kerrs viewed the home on March 12, 2022. The contract of sale was signed the very next day. One of the contract terms was that a final inspection would be able to take place, which happened on March 28.

During that inspection, some issues were discovered, including that the “main floor bathroom toilet was leaking and had damaged the surrounding flooring and the ceiling below. It said concealed damage was expected.”

On March 30, the initial contract was amended, with a possession date of July 2.

“The amendment also said that the respondent agreed to complete certain repairs, including to the main floor bathroom toilet, and provide proof with receipts or photos.”

The incident that would trigger any homebuyer was, in this case, a final walkthrough from hell.

A real estate agent accompanied the Kerrs on this walkthrough when they discovered the basement ceiling under the main floor toilet was wet.

Michalkow agreed to cut a hole in the affected area, and it was revealed that the toilet leaked when it was flushed. He claimed that the Kerrs had tampered with the toilet.

The tribunal declared, “I find this explanation unlikely as the ceiling was already wet.”

Worse, it was later determined that there was significant mould growth in the area.

The air conditioning system was also not in working order, and a contactor part was filled with ants. Unfortunately for the new buyers, the air conditioner was likely not working during the initial viewing, meaning a breach of contract had not occurred.

Ultimately, the tribunal sided with the Kerrs, stating it had “found that the applicants are entitled to reimbursement of $2,734 for the plumbing repairs, $503.49 for irrigation repairs, $300 for weeding, and $114.87 for the ensuite bathroom light fixture. This totals $3,652.36.”

After tribunal fees, the Kerrs were awarded nearly $4,000.