Please read my new blog post: What does Tarion final review mean for consumers? Light at the end of the tunnel

Consumer's Reform Tarion

As I sat last week at the event where Minister MacCharles was scheduled to announce  the results of Justice Cunningham’s review of Tarion, I said to myself, “hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.”

The room was full of building and real estate executives, Tarion senior executives and board members, and ministry staff.

Many consumers have been working hard for years to get their voices heard on consumer protection issues regarding Tarion and the new home buying experience in Ontario. Tarion has operated under the same legislation for over 40 years as both building regulator and sole warranty provider, as an arms-length agency of government administering the “Ontario New Home Warranties Plan Act” (ONHWPA).

This event was a chance to hear the results of the review of  Tarion by Justice Cunningham, which the government commissioned in Nov. 2015.

As the speech began, I prepared myself for the same-old, same-old “working with Tarion” mantra we’ve heard for years.

I was wrong.

The minister, the Honourable Tracy MacCharles, announced many long-awaited and much-needed reforms to Tarion, based on the judge’s report. She clearly stated that modern transparency and accountability measures are needed at Tarion; she said if the government were creating Tarion today they would have put these measures in place, and would not have combined the building regulator and sole warranty provider in one entity.

This was welcome news to consumers. Finally on these two major issues consumers have been understood and taken seriously.

And there was more.  Much more.

By this time the hot meal on the table had gone cold, and I’d been live-Tweeting to our followers (@ReformTarion), telling them change is on the way.

The minister announced the government’s plans to bring a bill to the Legislature this fall to incorporate many of Justice Cunningham’s recommendations (37 of them in total). A breath of fresh air for consumers.

The judge recommended a multi-provider, competitive model, as in now in effect in other Canadian provinces. The minister said she wouldn’t go forward with that particular step at this point, but would go forward with many of the others.

Many consumers favour choice and multiple warranty providers, as the judge recommended. Accountability and transparency can be enhanced by competition in this field.

The review has cost the taxpayer about $750,000 so far. It would seem to be value-for-money for taxpayers if the government took the judge’s recommendations, all of them, and made the changes he recommended after this year-long review and thorough consultation.

A respected and seasoned judge has reviewed the complex problems festering away for years on Tarion, and has made his decision in writing to the government. There’s no turning back now. He’s clearly said: (pg. 1, letter to the minister):  “… this framework has given rise to real and perceived conflicts of interest and has presented it (Tarion) with challenges in fulfilling its multiple roles.” 

The judge’s review put wind in the sails of our consumer advocacy work. Many ordinary consumers have donated their time, efforts, and experience to help bring about these positive new developments.  This is a political problem, as we’ve said for years, and can only be fixed by our political representatives at Queen’s Park.

Let your MPP know you support these recommendations (summarized below) for transparency and consumer protection in the most important investment of your life, a new home.

Here are some of the judge’s key recommendations:

(The final review is on the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services website (under Tarion)

Some highlights of the judge’s recommendations:

i)  New home warranty should be provided through a competitive model, multiple providers. (Recommendation #1)

ii) A new not-for-profit corporation should assume existing home enrollments and participate in the new multi-provider model (#4)

iii) A separate entity should regulate builders (#5)

iv) The regulator should be subject to accountability and transparency oversight requirements (#7)

v) The new legislation should provide more compliance and enforcement framework for the building regulator (# 11)

vi) Current Tarion “Builder Directory” should be more transparent, accessible to consumers (#6)

vii) Homeowners should have access to neutral and independent dispute resolution by a body separate from the warranty provider (#9)

viii) Homeowners must only prove “credible symptoms” of the defect, not the cause of the defect (#25)

ix) The use of experts should be clearly defined by each warranty provider; an adjudicator may also hire an expert (# 26)

x) Adjudication of disputes must be “accessible, affordable, timely” with “attention to the needs of self-represented homeowners.” (# 27)

xi) Government should have final approval of rule-making on warranty protection and builder standards for registration. (#28)

xii) An immediate review of current deposit protection rules is advised. ( #31)

xiii) All new homes, even if owner-built for personal occupation, should have warranty protection (#35)

These are only some of the 37 recommendations the judge made in his review.

Please help us take these recommendations to the next step. Many can be introduced without the need for new legislation, according to the report.

Please write or Tweet your provincial MPP, or minister MacCharles at    Tell your Queen’s Park representatives what you think. Now is the time to make sure the consumer voice, which Justice Cunningham highlighted in his review, continues to be heard and understood in the drafting of new legislation.

If your MPP has ignored your concerns on Tarion to date, a new door has been opened now for them to listen. The current government, according to minister MacCharles, is in favour of significant change. The Liberal party has a majority in government, so it can pass new legislation more easily.

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is a train.”*  We need to get on this one.


*quotation by Charles Barkley.

Link to Judge Cunningham’s final report


Photo of the author (left) with minister MacCharles (right)


Filed under Uncategorized

11 responses to “Please read my new blog post: What does Tarion final review mean for consumers? Light at the end of the tunnel

  1. Kevin Wood

    What looks good on the exterior is hidden with defects. Tarion Warranty is one big can of warms.

  2. niclal

    There is no doubt that those recommendations must be adopted and implemented ‘ ill-done-by consumers have known it and reported so for decades . The costs that taxpayers have assumed for this tremendous study must not go unrewarded . The reward is transparent consumer protection .

  3. Krista

    For everyone who never gave up, the Tarion Report signifies a long overdue acknowledgment that we knew of what we were talking about all along. The need to restructure the way homeowners deserve to be protected is desperately needed. Thank you, Barbara, for your constant words of reason and your important role in the outcome to date of this monstrous project.

    • Thank you Krista. Your work and Earl’s fight for what was right was a guiding light for us all in this advocacy work. We understand the pain and anguish this flawed system brought your family and so many others. You fought for what was right, not for what was easy. Yours and Earl’s work will be always be a big part of any justice we can finally achieve. As the 1-year anniversary of Earl’s tragic passing approaches, thank you to your family for your 37 years of advocacy for new home buyer protection and justice. B.

  4. Syd

    Thank you Reform Tarion for advocate on behalf of consumers. We hope this Government would but consumers protection 1st a.d adapt all of Justice Cunningham recommendations.

  5. Kerry

    I’m scared to go to a multi provider platform. In Alberta and Saskatchewan they all pay double what we do to insure new builds! The multi provider platform in Ontario does NOT work, our home and auto rates in ontario are out of hand and these are the same company’s to insure these new builds on this senario. I like that MacCharles is not going forward with that step. As that step in Ontario is broken.

    • No need to be, as you say “scared” of a multi-provider warranty system. Many consumers want value for money in a new home warranty. As it stands now, we are forced by law to buy Tarion’s warranty, paying up to $1,800 for it. A monopoly like Tarion has no incentive to improve: we are forced to buy their product whether we like it or not. Tarion has put too many consumers through years of waiting to get construction defects fixed, and/or complex over-lawyering of problems. Competition would mean builders would couple themselves with different warranty providers and consumers can then choose this combo of builder/warranty provider. Also warranty providers would be able to inspect the builder’s work during construction, which is what Tarion rarely does. During construction is when defects occur, obviously. Also providers would have an independent dispute resolution process, which Tarion does not have, although they keep telling the public they do. There are too many gaps in Tarion’s consumer protection; many consumers who’ve experienced the Tarion process are very concerned about this. The regulation of builders by Tarion has been weak, according to the judge’s review, Tarion is “too far removed from government” oversight, says the Minister. Many consumers who’ve experienced the Tarion claims process agree. The judge’s review concluded multiple providers would provide better consumer protection. Shoddy or marginal builders may not like it, but consumers would be better served by the government getting rid of the monopoly model.

    • A Zeppieri

      You are comparing apples and oranges, a home warranty would be a one time expense, it’s not a home or car insurance.

      • Plus, the Tarion new home warranty is a monopoly, whereas we have choice in auto insurers, and can switch if their price or service is not what we want. For 40 years, we’ve been stuck with one government monopoly in new home warranties: Tarion. No choice, no ability to opt out, no independent scrutiny of what they do.

  6. Ms. Captijn,

    Thank you for being present to represent consumers when the government released the Tarion Review and spoke about their proposed action for the Ontario New Home Warranty Program (ONHWP).

    It is important to understand that while the government more than 40 years ago passed the original ONHWP Act, Tarion has been allowed to make its own regulations afterwards. These regulations are essentially laws which Tarion has used to control how it would implement or administer the warranty.

    Our experience has been they have used the regulations they made to get out of providing basic protections like providing us with any timeline for settling our claim. When we asked Tarion when they would settle our claim after years of inspections and waiting they quoted the regulations they had made in their defense.

    “However, you have not made reference to section 5.10 of the same Regulation, in which Tarion is given express and necessary discretion to extend or abridge timelines in a variety of circumstances. Tarion has done so in your case. Accordingly, contrary to your continued assertions, Tarion is not in breach of its own legislation.” (Michael P Doyle | Corporate Counsel Tarion Warranty Corporation)

    Tarion in my opinion is guilty of abusing its power to provide consumer protection to favour its own interests! We deserve better in Ontario and I hope the government finally acts to remove Tarion’s powers to make its own regulations, a power they should never have been given in the first place!!!

Leave a Reply to bcaptijn Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s