Love it or lawsuit: Dispute over tiles and bathroom renovations ends up in BC court

A BC woman took a company to court over a dispute about renovations to a bathroom.

The BC Civil Resolution Tribunal case isn’t something you’d see on a typical day of programming on HGTV, with the applicant of the claim suggesting that the BC-based tile company tiled unevenly, failed to remove excess grout, and also left air bubbles and holes throughout the grout after it dried.

She claimed a partial refund of $2,968.

The applicant, Angela Simard, represented herself, while an employee represented Tilemart.

You might also like:
• Pew pew: Woman takes BC laser tag spot to court over pizza, poor service
• Food fight: East Van school and vending machine supplier battle over instant noodles in court
• Woman shocked to find imposter helped husband annul marriage in BC court

According to the court document, the whole case hinged on whether or not the work by Tilemart was indeed deficient.

In total, Simard paid $4,059.85 plus tax for labour and additional supplies. The court document states that Simard wasn’t always present while Tilemart was at work, which the tribunal member said meant that Simard couldn’t adequately monitor all of Tilemart’s work.

Simard complained about the work during and after it was done, and also emailed pictures to Tilemart to back her claims of deficiencies.

Tilemart agreed that some of the work needed to be redone, particularly the holes that had developed. Simard also wanted Tilemart to fix the shower niche and said that the grout’s colour wasn’t what she picked. Again, Tilemart agreed to most of these claims but didn’t fix the niche.

The tribunal member said that Simard adequately proved the deficiencies did exist, mainly thanks to the photographs she took.

A point of contention in the BC court dispute over was Tilemart’s claim that Simard didn’t give the company adequate time to complete the work. Simard proved that she had scheduled a day for the company to come in on one occasion, but employees failed to show up. Ultimately, the court sided with Simard, suggesting that she gave Tilemart a reasonable opportunity to fix the deficiencies.

While Simard claimed $2,968, she instead walked away with $2,114.35 due to a breach of contract and CRT fees.