The Plaintiff placed an order and paid $15,145.67 for the supply and installation of Brazilian Cherry 5” hardwood flooring from the Defendant.

The Plaintiff received a quote from the Defendant detailing the pricing of supplies, and paid the Defendant the full amount.

The Defendant informed the Plaintiff of the one year warranty on installation and a twenty-five year warranty on the wood by the manufacturer.

Shortly after installation was completed, the Plaintiff noticed gaps and cracks in the flooring. The following year, the flooring was inspected by a certified Hard Surface Specialist. The inspector provided the Plaintiff with a copy of his report including a summary and conclusion as to the anomalies in the flooring.

The Plaintiff further attempted to mitigate its losses by contacting the Defendant on numerous occasions in order to resolve the issues and lessen the loss. The Defendant refused to repair the damages and the Plaintiff commenced and action in Small Claims Court . The plaintiff relied on the Consumers Protection Act., 2002, Sales of Goods Act and Negligence Act which provides relief where the Act is contravened.


Settlement Conference:

Defendant offered to repair the damages to the areas that were defective, Plaintiff’s position was that the sub-flooring was incorrectly installed which could possibly cause the same problems to occur at a later date in other areas of the floor – in order for satisfaction to be reached the entire job would need to be ripped out and installed correctly. Settlement was not reached and the matter moved forward to trial.


This matter went to trial and was successful by way of producing evidence such as invoices, photo’s that revealed damages & an inspection report that directly supported the Plaintiff’s claim.


The Plaintiff awarded $15,145.67 plus cost.

Disclaimer:past results are not necessarily indicative of future results and that the amount recovered and other litigation outcomes will vary according to the facts in individual cases.

Recent Posts