House From Hell

[Isamu]

@Really_Not_All_That_Bright

Just the threat of a bar complaint or malpractice action is likely to produce quick results.

Yup. I’ve only had to use that threat once so far in my career, but it produced overnight results (payment) in a case where they had been ignoring me and dodging my calls for months.

[Hodge]

@watchwolf49

Citation? I’m clear about basement walls being waterproof, but those are basement walls that also serve as the structural foundation. I’m referencing structural foundation that’s just foundation, not anything else. The example is a simple post-and-beam floor framing system.

Basements here are rare, with such a high water table these tend to start floating … and that’s a bad thing.

Just to elaborate on foundation waterproofing in Ontario, where Rickjay and I live:

From Part 9 of the Ontario Building Code (2012 ed.):

“9.13.2.1. Dampproofing
(1) Except as provided in Article 9.13.3.1., where the exterior finished ground level is at a higher elevation than the ground level inside the foundation walls, exterior surfaces of foundation walls below ground level shall be dampproofed.”

Rickjay, sorry to hear about your troubles. I’m a structural and architectural CAD tech. and I’ve worked with several architects and engineers throughout the years and they all seem to have their own “charming” quirks. With architects, a small sub-set of them can be a little flighty with their heads in the clouds or be diva-like and difficult to work with. You really have to ride some of these types pretty hard to get the attention that you, as a paying client, deserve.

Also, I’m afraid your foundation contractor is probably also to blame for the lack of inspections. Oakville is a large city and only has a limited number of building inspectors to cover a large area where there are probably dozens, if not hundreds of ongoing jobs at the same time. It is ultimately the responsibility of the owner or his/her representative to notify the city when an inspection is required.

If your contractor failed to notify the city for an inspection and then back-filled around the foundations, he (or, ultimately, you) is at fault. If your contractor did notify the city but got impatient waiting for the inspector and then back-filled, anyway, he (or, ultimately, you) is still at fault.

Of course, you have plenty of other legitimate grievances and I wish you the best of luck in resolving them.

[RickJay]

@Hodge

If your contractor failed to notify the city for an inspection and then back-filled around the foundations, he (or, ultimately, you) is at fault. If your contractor did notify the city but got impatient waiting for the inspector and then back-filled, anyway, he (or, ultimately, you) is still at fault.

What if the town said they inspected it, but in fact did not physically do so, but rather just took the foundation contractor’s word for it, as in fact appears to be the case? (Or, alternatively possible if unlikely, came and looked but somehow did not see that there was no damp-proofing?)

[Muffin]

@RickJay

What if the town said they inspected it, but in fact did not physically do so, but rather just took the foundation contractor’s word for it, as in fact appears to be the case? (Or, alternatively possible if unlikely, came and looked but somehow did not see that there was no damp-proofing?)

Much would depend on whether or not you were the general in addition to being the owner. If you were the general, then you would be SOL. If you were only the owner and not also the general, then you might have a case against the town, but see what your construction law lawyer has to say about that before making a decision.

[Muffin]

Ingles v. Tutkaluk Construction Ltd., [2000] 1 S.C.R. 298

52 The concept of “flouting”, therefore, must denote conduct which extends far beyond mere negligence on the part of an owner-builder. The word suggests that the owner-builder in fact mocks the inspection scheme. Certainly, an owner-builder who submitted false plans and documents to receive a permit would be mocking the scheme. Similarly, an owner-builder who never contacted an inspector to conduct an inspection would show a lack of respect for the inspection scheme and certainly no reliance on it. However, in this case the appellant did not act in these ways. He certainly acted negligently. The trial judge, however, found that he did not participate in a conscious effort to undermine the building code regime. In my view, such conduct does not amount to a “flouting” of the building code. As a result, I find that the Court of Appeal erred in absolving the city of all liability.