The applicant succeeded in her building service complaint; the Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay $18,975.00 as the reasonable cost of remedying the defective roofing work, plus $2,277.00 in costs for the applicant's expert evidence. The case confirms that unauthorised building work by an unregistered provider constitutes a 'regulated building service' under reg 5A(2) of the BSCRA Regulations, enabling complaint jurisdiction. A respondent's persistent failure to engage with the complainant, the Building Commissioner, and the Tribunal may justify a departure from the default position that parties bear their own costs, warranting a costs order for the applicant's reasonable expert evidence expenses.
The full text is available to signed-in members.