Landlord and Tenant Dispute
March 11, 2019
Property Return
March 15, 2019

contractor dispute

Suing The Contractor In Small Claims

Plaintiff claimed

Compensatory Damages.
The Plaintiff wanted the Defendant to either give back their money or complete the job. The Defendant filed a Defence and the matter moved to a Settlement Conference.

Settlement Conference

Photos of the unfinished work were shown and an Offer to settle was presented. Mississauga Paralegal Services drafted the terms of settlement which were then signed by both parties.

Terms of Settlement

Defendant Shall
Pay costs of amount claimed.

Repair the following

Fix loose interlocking stones, close gaps between interlocking stones and level any uneven stones on front and back patio and front and back patio stairs.
Level interlocking stones on front steps.
Minimize cut interlocking stones as several interlocking stones have been cut to fit, cut unevenly and are not consistent in measurements or design.
Complete the grey patterned boarder on front patio.
Correct measurements for back patio to reflect those measurements agreed upon in original contract.
Replace sod to any damaged areas.
Place interlocking under air conditioner to prevent water build up.
Treat weeds growing between interlocking stones.
Apply polymeric sand to interlocking stones and close gaps between stones.
If repairs are not completed, then an additional amount shall be paid to the Plaintiff as the cost to hire another contractor to complete the work.
Ensure that water goes away from the house to the pavement.
Place divider line between interlocking stone and grass.
The repairs shall have a 2 year warranty.
Payment of amount claimed shall be made before November 30th, 2011, prior to the Defendant commencing any repair work.
Repair work shall be completed before April 30 2013.

Outcome of Settlement

Plaintiff awarded:All repair work completed to full satisfaction and payment of $10,525.00


The Plaintiff had a strong case with documented photographic evidence of the unfinished work. This type of evidence proves effective when presenting an offer to settle as it significantly weakens a defense before the Courts. There was no question that the Defendant had failed to fulfill their end of the contract and therefore, it was simply a matter or how the Defendant would like to proceed.

When the matter was brought to a settlement conference, the Defendant was faced with a decision of finishing the work to the Plaintiff’s satisfaction and paying costs in consideration of the loss of use of the premise.

To the Plaintiff’s satisfaction, the Defendant decided to pay costs and complete the work!

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.

Mississauga Paralegal
Mississauga Paralegal
Legal Service Provider,Licensed by the LSO.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *