Page: 8
2011, for a total cost of $578,875.40, including GST, added interior drywall and exterior stucco
to the contract price: Exhibit 1-C-2.
[34] The Plaintiffs’ bank required a price quote for the entire cost of building the home,
including all interior finishing. During an in-person meeting in early August 2011, Metcalfe
provided a quote for the entire construction project. The written quote (Exhibit 1-C-3) is dated
August 4, 2011 and totals $1,064,348.00. It sets out specified allowances to cover exterior and
interior finishes. Metcalfe subsequently provided the Plaintiffs with a document dated August 21,
2011 (Exhibit 1-C-20) that set out in great detail the projected costs to construct the entire
residence. After listing a number of items totalling $352,251.00, he added the “part from Tru-
Square Homes”, $659,510.00, for a total of $1,011,761.00.
[35] Metcalfe expressed no reservations about his ability to follow the plan and construct the
home. He told the Plaintiffs that he would fly back from Phoenix periodically to keep a handle
on the job.
[36] The parties signed three separate contracts at a sod farm near the location of the
Plaintiffs’ recreational trailer on August 22, 2011. The meeting lasted approximately 40 minutes,
during which time there was a discussion regarding Tru-Square’s obligation to meet Code
requirements and to ensure that all trades on site would have insurance and WCB coverage.
While the parties signed more than one contract at the time, there is no dispute that the
agreement reached that day required the Defendants to build to the lock-up stage only, with
framing to start in late September 2011 and completion to lock-up stage by early 2012.
[37] The first contract, Exhibit #1-C-5, involved construction of the residence to the lock-up
stage, including stucco and drywall, in the revised amount of $692,485.50.
[38] A second contract was signed the same date for a total contract price of $1,011.760.00,
plus GST of $50,588.00, for a total contract price of $1,062,348.00, Exhibit 1-C-6. That contract
was for the construction of the residence to completion.
[39] A third pre-printed form of contract, Exhibit 1-C-4, the ANHWP contract, was brought to
the meeting by the Plaintiffs. This contract also covered the construction of the entire residence
at a cost of $1,062,348.00.
[40] The Plaintiffs obtained a building permit from the county. At the request of the county,
they also obtained a geotechnical inspection (Exhibit 1-A-3) dated July 2011, prepared by Curtis
Engineering Associates Ltd of Calgary. The report recommended the use of Type 50, Sulphate
Resistant Portland Cement for the foundation due to the soil composition. A copy of the report
was provided to Metcalfe.
[41] The Plaintiffs retained Quality Dirt Works (“Quality”) to do excavation work and pour a
concrete pad for a planned future workshop on the property. While James Quartz, the principal
of Quality, was on site, Ms. Swanby suggested to Metcalfe that Quality undertake the excavation
work for the property. Metcalfe, who was familiar with Quality’s work, agreed as Quality’s
equipment was already on site. The Plaintiffs paid Quality’s invoice of $16,803.15 (Exhibit 4) as
excavation was not part of the contract with Tru-Square.
[42] As noted above, Snell recommended that the Plaintiffs use an ICF foundation for the
residence. However, Metcalfe advised that he did not like ICF foundations and would never
install one. He told the Plaintiffs that if they wanted him to build their home, they would have to
accept a standard foundation. They agreed, though they told Metcalfe that he was required to