| Multiplicity of roles |
- Tarion’s multiple roles (e.g., regulator, warranty provider, adjudicator and rule maker) creates a perception of a conflict of interest
|
- Tarion continues to perform all of its current functions (i.e., regulate builders and vendors, administer the warranty program, adjudicate claims, and make the rules). Changes are made to its operations and the legislation to clearly articulate Tarion’s role and mandate
- place some or all of the functions in separate organizations (e.g., separate the warranty provider function from the regulatory function or move the adjudication function so that it is arm’s length from the warranty provider)
|
| Single warranty provider |
- Tarion is the sole mandatory new home warranty provider in Ontario
|
- continue with single warranty provider
- introduce multiple warranty providers (this option could still accommodate a not-for-profit provider)
|
| Procedure /process |
- the first 30 days of possession may not be sufficient time after taking possession for a new home owner to assess defects and complete a form
- the 120 day builder repair time period is too long for homeowners
- some builders may use strict timelines to avoid making repairs
- the warranty period may start before the condominium’s common elements are completed
- it may be difficult to identify latent or concealed defects within the current timelines
|
- maintain the current timelines but establish a more consistent approach to the Early Intervention Process
- extend the claim submission time periods, but implement shorter timelines for builder repairs
- replace the current claim submission and builder repair timelines with a reasonableness timeframe
- develop a process for submitting latent and hidden defect claims
|
| Onus of proof |
- homeowners are required to prove defects which may be outside of their capability
|
- improve homeowner education, so that homeowners understand their onus to prove a defect
- revise the onus of proof so that the homeowner is only required to show evidence of credible symptoms of the problem, leaving it to Tarion to diagnose the cause of a defect
|
| Construction Performance Guidelines |
- areas of the Construction Performance Guidelines (Guidelines) are too subjective resulting in inconsistent decision making
- some areas of the Guidelines appear to be below other standards (e.g., the Code)
|
- revise the Guidelines to minimize subjective interpretations
- align the Guidelines with ongoing updates to the Code and industry construction standards
- formalize the process and timing to review the Guidelines
|
| Conciliation inspections and Licence Appeal Tribunal (LAT) |
- the term “conciliation” does not reflect how the dispute resolution process works
- field representatives are inconsistent in their decision-making
- the dual role of a field representative and lack of clarity at the transition point between the meditative and adjudicative process confuses homeowners
- Tarion pressures builders to resolve a claim even if the claim is not warrantable.
- Tarion allows vendor/ builder to determine the appropriate repair.
- at LAT, homeowners do not have the same access to information, technical expertise and financial resources that Tarion and builders/vendors may have
- costs of going to LAT can exceed the cost of the warranty claim
- vendor/ builders are added as a party to the LAT proceeding
- LAT members lack specialized knowledge of the building sector
|
- Tarion continues to adjudicate warranty claims, but modify the process (e.g., separate the role of the facilitator from the decision maker). The right of appeal to LAT remains
- remove Tarion’s role in adjudicating warranty claims. Claim adjudication is made through third party binding arbitration using technical expert adjudicators, with optional mediation as a first step
|
| Builder’s Arbitration Forum (BAF) |
- vendor/builders have a different process from homeowners to appeal a Tarion decision
- the BAF process does not allow for the submission of new evidence
|
- review the BAF process to consider changing the rules to permit new evidence
- align the dispute resolution process available to builders with the process available to homeowners
|
| Consumer education |
- home buyers do not get the right information at the right time
- other stakeholders involved with the home building and buying sector may have insufficient knowledge of the warranty program
- homebuyers need to take more responsibility in researching their potential builder
|
- Tarion continues to improve its communications with homeowners and engages other parties in educating consumers about the warranty program
- require partners in the new home building and buying process (e.g. builders, real estate professionals, home inspectors) to educate consumers about the new home warranty program
- establish a Consumer Advisory Office or Chief Customer Experience Officer to help consumers navigate the warranty claims process
|
| Warranty coverage and duration |
- given increasing home costs in some areas and changes to building practices, the current warranty coverage and duration may be insufficient to protect new home buyers and home owners
|
- modify Tarion’s process for assessing the warranty program coverage, amounts, and duration
- customize the warranty and deposit coverage based on building type and geography
|
| Initial registration and renewal requirements |
- Tarion’s registration requirements may discourage small builders from registering with Tarion
- registration requirements appear to be primarily focused on financial viability
|
- reform Tarion’s risk based registration approach to evaluating builders to ensure it reflects the diversity of builders in the sector
- establish different classes of builders based on builder size and home type
|
| Builder education |
- the current education requirements are only required for new builders/vendors
- Tarion’s education requirements for new registrants may deter new builders from entering the market
- lack of continuing education requirements
|
- extend the current educational requirements to existing builders/vendors, phasing in this requirement over time
- implement an education curriculum based on apprenticeship / practical requirements
- require mandatory continuing education
|
| Compliance tools |
- Tarion has a limited number of compliance tools to regulate builders Current focus is on compliance/disciplinary tools as opposed to preventative risk based tools
|
- provide additional enforcement tools (e.g., compliance orders and administrative monetary penalties) to achieve compliance
- implement a risk-based approach to compliance (e.g., conduct inspections with frequency related to past performance and implement a sliding scale for enrollment fees based on past performance)
|
| Builder Directory |
- lack of clarity regarding how an exception to a chargeable conciliation is applied
- the Builder Directory does not reflect the nature of the chargeable conciliation
- the Builder Directory can be difficult to navigate (e.g. challenging to identify a builder when they are registered under multiple names)
|
- review the appropriateness of the exceptions to chargeable conciliations and improve the transparency of how an exception is determined
- develop a rating system for chargeable conciliations to acknowledge not all chargeable conciliations are based on the same degree of defect or builder failure
- develop a system allowing the tracking of builders registered under multiple names, including the individuals involved in each registration
- publish builder scorecard and performance metrics
|
| Board governance |
- perception that the Board is builder dominated
- broader home building and buying industry is not represented on the Board (i.e., engineers, home inspectors, etc.)
- non-builder Board members may not have sufficient industry knowledge to perform their duties
|
- diversify the composition of the Board to include representation from other industry professionals (e.g., engineers, architects, building officials, and home inspectors)
- require that the Board composition be based on a pre-defined competency matrix that clearly describes the skills and expertise needed to ensure that they are able to fulfil their fiduciary duties to Tarion
- examine the role of government in the selection of Board members and Chair of the Board
|
| External oversight |
- there is a lack of independent oversight
|
- develop mechanisms that allow Tarion’s current ombudsperson to be more independent
- require external independent oversight (e.g., consumer advocacy office, compliance officer, Ontario Ombudsman, Auditor General)
|
| Government’s role |
- perceived conflict of interest in Tarion being able to make the rules as well as act as the regulator, warranty provider, and adjudicator
- lack of transparency regarding the value for money obtained for the oversight fee Tarion pays to the Ministry
|
- align Tarion’s Accountability Agreement with government with those of other administrative authorities (e.g., requirement to submit business plans to government and consult with government on amendment to by-laws relating to board governance)
- review Tarion’s unilateral ability to make regulations
- increase transparency regarding the government’s oversight function
|
| Disclosure of information |
- compensation information is not disclosed to the Minister or to the public
|
- increase disclosure of compensation information (e.g., to the general public and/or Minister)
|
| Definitions in the Act |
- some definitions in the ONHWP Act are unclear and have not been updated to reflect changes in building practices
|
- update and clarify key aspects of the ONHWP Act including definitions and concepts
|
| Illegal building |
- illegal building continues to be a problem in the building sector
|
- consider options for advising buyers on whether there is statutory warranty coverage on the home (e.g., through the home’s title, agreement of purchase and sale)
- remove the owner-builder exemption, requiring all builders to be registered and all homes to be enrolled with the warranty program
- formalize the process with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and integrate related legislative requirements to require proof of registration or exemption prior to obtaining a building permit
|
| Inspections |
- there are no required inspections on freehold homes by Tarion during construction, despite provisions that permit them to complete inspections
- Field Review Consultants may not be independent given they are paid by the vendor/builder
- concerns about the Field Review Consultant’s ability to understand architectural design and building plans
|
- implement proactive inspections for all building types
- review how Field Review Consultants are retained including qualification requirements
|
| Consumer Advisory Council and builder liaison committee |
- members of the Consumer Advisory Council (CAC) and builder liaison committee are anonymous
- the agendas and outcomes of the meetings are not published publically
- members of the builder liaison committee do not attend the CAC meetings and vice versa
|
- improve disclosure regarding the CAC and builder liaison Committee (e.g., meeting agendas, minutes)
- require that members of the builder liaison committee attend CAC meetings and vice versa
|
