Complaints

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:01/11/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Fall of 2023 Found water / mold / bugs in basement.Hired ******************* to remove insulation / clean basement wall and floor. Company suggested water was coming from top of foundation. Contacted Minto. Removal of insulation revealed foundation crack. Minto *** stated crack under 6 mm, so no fault to Minto. I suggested the damage did not come solely from crack. He disagreed but did admit the damage was hidden due to how Minto installed vapour barrier wrapped around the frame holding the water for years.After foundation repair, water entry continued. Coming at various entry points down the sides of wall, indicating an issue with the flashing behind the brick exterior. I called Minto again and was told to enter Tarion ticket. Further help would cost ****** for a consult from them. I did not do this as my money was tight.With an estimate to fix the brick, the cold weather arrived and repair had to wait for Spring. The spring brought more rain water into my basement it was an endless ordeal every time it ************* was completed in July 2024. *************** reported the water was rolling under the brick between the angle iron lintel and top of foundation wall. The lintel was not correctly installed at time of construction as was the through wall flashing. The water entry issue was due to improper construction and evidence of the issue was hidden due to water sitting in vapour barrier pocket for years.This issue caused a high level of stress when the builder could have helped. The costs incurred by me due to work that should not have passed inspection at build time was astronomical. Minto should cover the repair expenses and property damage.I continue to have PTSD every time it rains.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/11/2024

  This home closed on March 20, 2017. In fall 2023 the homeowner contacted Minto regarding water infiltration in the basement.
  
  Upon conducting a review it was noted that water was entering from a minor settling crack in the foundation. We immediately investigated further to ensure the matter was not a ***** Structural Defect (MSD) and confirmed it was not. Following the new home warranty provided to this property, which is governed by the authority known as Tarion, water penetration after two years is not the responsibility of the builder to address, since at that juncture, it is unlikely that the construction of the home was the cause. 
  
  One of the expected maintenance items in a home is the repair of settlement cracks. Particularly in ******'s climate, settlement can occur that will cause cracks large enough to permit water through.  
  
  Having determined the crack was not a MSD, (which falls under a different part of the warranty that is in effect for seven years after taking delivery of the home), the homeowner asked us to complete the repair regardless. It is important we transparently follow the warranty guidelines and treat all of our customers consistently, and as such, advised the homeowner how to address the repair. 
  
  We feel we did our due diligence by immediately investigating the concern by the homeowner when they reached out to us and determining the cause. 
  
  As our inspection deemed this crack was not the result of an MSD and was therefore outside of the warranty term for such items, the homeowner was advised to consult with a professional to complete any repairs to that area. From our understanding, the homeowner did submit a claim to Tarion for MSD but did not proceed to have Tarion inspect the claim, and as such, Tarion closed the file.
  
  Following this our Warranty team received emails from the homeowner stating the fault was due to improperly installed flashing; however, emails from the person who conducted an inspection for the homeowner stated the contrary. The report the homeowner provided to us (and submitted in their initial complaint to the BBB) concluded the through-wall flashing was not the reason for the water penetration. 
  
  The several mandatory third-party inspections conducted on the home before it closed did not identify any additional defects, and we remain committed to addressing any warrantable items in the home for the duration of the warranty. 
  
  The homeowner mentions that damage was hidden due to how Minto installs the vapor barrier, however, we disagree with this statement. Any challenge in viewing this area is a result of the way the home is built, the nature of the materials used, and the presence of the vapour barrier itself which by design covers the area in question. Our vapour barrier design adheres to standards and best practices of Ontario Building Code and follows plans that are reviewed by professional Engineers and the municipality before being issued a building permit. Although it is not ideal at all to have water sitting in a pocket of the vapour barrier, the fact that the water was trapped there and was prevented from soaking into insulation or spilling in the home demonstrates the value of the installation method. 
  
  As this item falls outside of the terms of the New Home Warranty, and we have completed a thorough inspection of both the area in question and the subsequent reports by a third party, our position remains that repair to this area falls under home maintenance and is the homeowner's responsibility to address. 
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 16/11/2024

  Complaint: 22500955
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  

  Thank you for your response.
  
  
  I did submit a ticket to Tarion after finding the water entry continued after fixing the small foundation crack not because I felt there was NSD but because I reached out for more help and this was their response enter a ticket. I did even though I knew this would not result in any help. Tarion warranty's are known to be there to protect the builder rather than the client. Furthermore, the cost to get a conciliation was redundant as I needed my funds to pay to stop the water from entering my house. Furthermore, it was evident that,while the company is well versed in building of homes, there would be no offer of help for my very serious issue I was facing in trying to determine what was happening and who and how to fix this issue. I was on my own.
  
  
  The entire process was a nightmare. I had offers from various trades to dig outside my home and fix foundation from outside with workers claiming Minto didn't build the drainage correctly and therefore my basement wall was in jeopardy. I had siding people ready to tear off my siding to look for the leak. Another restoration company felt the leak could possibly be coming from a pipe leak in the wall. And finally a masonry company quoted me over $12,000.00 to remove 3 rows of brick for the entire house and fix the flashing etc. Truly where was I to begin. A single woman in her 50's who knows nothing about building houses which is why she purchased a NEW home from a reputable builder. As I mentioned previously, when the Minto representative came to measure the crack, I asked if it was possibly the water was coming from foundation top to which he said, It was impossible, he had been doing this for 35 years and that was NOT possible. But this proved false when it finally rained and revealed water and lots of it was coming from top of foundation.
  
  
  I could have hired and paid for several trades to come in and do costly repairs and still the water would have continued.
  
  
  Eventually I reached out to a friend who is a civil engineer and retired building inspector. She at first thought it was possibly an issue with the window installation in the basement concrete form but further speculation made her believe it had something to do with the flashing behind the brick not doing its job of directing water out of house rather than in.
  
  
  I also had a life long friend who happens to be in the masonry field but does not reside in ******. I asked his thoughts and he bluntly told me, there is no way to know what issues are happening behind the brick without REMOVING THE BRICK. It was the only way and would cost me.
  
  
  By this time it was now late November and too cold to remove the brick without the EXTRA costs to set up heat tents around the house to remove the brick. My engineer friend suggested to wait until spring and hope no more water came in over the winter. I had little choice at this point. I made it through the winter but once the spring thaw came, the water entry began once more. My out of town masonry friend eventually came to ****** to finally inspect and determine the issue was in fact the incorrectly installed lintel over the window which was also the reason the flashing was failing. Going forward I hired a local masonry company to fully remove the brick which also revealed the damp and rotted flashing where the water was running behind the building wrap and all had to be repaired and replaced. The company did the work around the window and after a water test found I still needed further correction 3 feet beyond the window and I approved this work. To date, it looks like the fix is good and no further work is necessary. I still do however need to fix and repair the interior wall (black tar paper, replace installation and new vapour barrier (estimate cost between ****** and 1000.00).
  
  
  This ordeal stretched out over 9 months. I learned way more about the construction of my home than I ever wanted to know. From the water,the mold (which answered why that summer I wasn't feeling well after working out in that room), the bugs, the cleaning, the searching for answers. A lot could have been averted if the builder had more integrity and concern for the client and their own reputation and put their efforts in to finding what the real issue was, taking interest in a SERIOUS CONSTRUCTION LAPSE and finding a solution rather than hiding behind a warranty and just helped the client.
  
  
  I understand warranty's are a must, but there are ALWAYS EXCEPTIONS. I feel this situation falls into that category. In sum the following occurred which has caused the client undo hardship, stress and costs. I did everything I could with limited knowledge to keep these costs down.
  
  
  Found insurmountable amount of water and mold and bugs in basement
  Needed restoration intervention.
  Minto incorrectly limited cause to small crack in foundation and refused to admit/consider other point of water entry.
  Minto representative did admit during visit that the way they install vapour barrier changes from time to time. At the point of the build of my home, they wrapped it around the frame and how it was UNLUCKYfor me that it did result in holding water and causing me to unknowingly live with water entering property for over 6 years.
  Finding:
  Both Minto and City Inspector failed to see the the problem with the window construction at the time of the build which contributed to the failure of through wall flashing and water entering home for over 6 years.
  Minto is hiding their responsibility behind limited warranty's that do not detail the responsibility they should carry for this exceptional finding.
  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** *******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 27/11/2024

  As a Tarion registered homebuilder in Ontario, Minto is committed to addressing and resolving all warrantable issues in a home following the processes outlined in the Agreement of Purchase and Sale and new home warranty. In order for an item to be addressed it must be reported through the official channels and an investigation conducted using building code and construction performance guidelines and experts to make an assessment. While this homeowner indicates that they did consider making a submission to Tarion, no further action was brought to our attention as the homeowner states they decided not to pursue the matter using the channel designated for when there is a dispute with our assessment of the matter.
  
  We stand by the findings by ourselves and as well Tarion that the home did not have any ***** Structural Defect (MSD) and as such, at the time the claim was made, the settlement crack in the foundation was not warrantable. As well our findings indicated that this home did not have code violations or construction performance guideline violations and that the source of the water infiltration was not due to improperly installed flashing.
  
  We respectfully disagree with the statement that Tarion favours homebuilders. The processes detailed above are the very ones in which they are meant to oversee and they the appropriate authority to rule on such matters through conciliation should it be necessary.
  
  We take very seriously the commitments we make in our contracts and our responsibilities to fairness for all of our homeowners. As such, we do not undertake repair work outside the bounds of the new home warranty and terms of our agreement with our homeowners. As far as we are aware, no further official evidence or findings on this matter were submitted through the warranty process as outlined in their Agreement of Purchase and Sale for us to investigate for warrantable action and consider the matter closed. 
  
  As this falls outside the terms of the new home warranty, we would suggest the homeowner consult with their home insurance provider with regards to a claim to cover any required work.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 13/12/2024

  Complaint: 22500955
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  
  Please see 'attached' Summary from the *************** of the work they completed at ********************** to repair the water entry issue and what was found behind the brick and the work completed to correct the problem. I attempted to convey it in my own words however perhaps my ability to convey in accuracy was lacking as I can admit I have limited knowledge of masonry and building codes however the company that did the work for me is a highly reputable company. They are first rate and only have positive reviews in all online platforms including BBB. If you review and have knowledge of how a home needs to be built in order for water to exit the building rather than going in, it needs to be done correct at the start. This issue did not start at or after the 2 year ***** It did not begin because the homeowner failed in some capacity to ensure general maintenance was completed. Their findings show it is conclusive that the issue was present at the time of the build. As a reputable builder, it should be important to take accountability for this serious build infraction that caused damage in many forms, to my property, my stress level and financially.
  
  
  Insurance companies do not cover leakage or seepage but I did have to prove my leak was fixed before they would renew my coverage at renewal time and my rates did increase.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ****** *******

  Customer Answer

  Date: 13/12/2024

  Please explain to me when I added clear information from the contractor who fixed the water leak bbb closed then complaint.  It makes no sense.  The builder made an error when building my home and I had to pay for it and you sided with the builder

• Initial Complaint

  Date:28/10/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I live in the **************************************************************************. This is a rental building owned and maintained by Minto. The heating system in this building is more than 50 years old and badly maintained. During the winter, the heating causes too much low frequency noise in the building. Even when the heating is off in the unit, noise can still come from other units. I have reported many times. And this is a ongoing issue last for months. I want this problem can be addressed soon. The 24h 7days non stopping noise already cause me to have some hearing and mental problems.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 08/11/2024

  We understand that dealing with heating and noise issues is disruptive and can appreciate that it may interfere with the enjoyment in the unit.

  In response to the concerns raised, the documentation that we have received shows that Minto has actively attempted to address the noise issue in the unit as it relates to the heating system.Starting back in April, 2024, the fan coil in the unit was replaced, as well we had the heating units within the vicinity of the unit inspected and they were all deemed to be in good working order and within the allowable decibel range. Minto and its HVAC contractor have also readjusted the fan coil motor in October to attempt to reduce the level of noise.

  Upon review of the available documentation,we believe that Minto and its HVAC contractor are taking this complaint seriously and have been working diligently to try and ensure the level of noise from the heating system in the unit is minimal. We do recognize that dealing with the consistent sound can be stressful. From the documentation we have seen, we believe that Minto is working to meet the necessary requirements with regards to heat within each unit and noise from the heating system itself.

  Minto is also currently working with the resident to try and find another suitable living situation within our portfolio. We look forward to working with resident to come to a resolution and your enjoyment for many years to come.

  We are hopeful that the continued coordinated efforts of Minto and the resident will result in a more enjoyable home.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/11/2024

   
  Better Business Bureau:
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ********, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.

  Minto currently is helping me to transfer to another building.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ********* ****

• Initial Complaint

  Date:02/10/2024

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  We purchased our Townhome from Minto and took possession on July 10, 2024. Immediately after, we encountered numerous defects, including issues with plumbing, electrical work, and flooring. While some electrical and plumbing concerns were partially resolved, the remaining issues, especially with the flooring, remain unaddressed.Our primary concern lies with the materials Minto recommended (Level 1), which are unsuitable for areas exposed to water, weather, or dust. Minto's design center advised us to install laminate flooring near the entrance, kitchen, powder room, and below the washing machine, dryer, and dishwasher. Shortly after moving in, the flooring began to buckle and disintegrate, particularly near the washing machine. Notably, some areas were already damaged before we took possession.Despite repeated communications with Minto, no progress has been made, and they have refused responsibility, claiming we are liable for the material choice due to signing design documents. I independently investigated the suitability of the flooring by contacting the manufacturer, consulting local dealers, and reviewing installation manuals and warranties. It became clear that this material is not intended for areas exposed to water, sand, steam, or moisture, and improper use voids the warranty. Given Canadian ******* and the proximity of these areas to water sources, it is unreasonable to expect complete protection from water exposure.Minto continues to deny responsibility and has taken no action to remedy the flooring issues.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 11/10/2024

  Please note the attachments have personal information and should not be shared publicly, only with the consumer. 
  
  As noted, this home was closed on July 10, 2024, and we understand the homeowner moved in soon after. 
  
  The customer states that after moving in, they encountered numerous deficiencies, specifically plumbing, electrical and flooring.
  
  Our response to these concerns was: As is typical in a new home and part of the usual warranty process, any items of concern are noted by the customer and forwarded to our warranty team. Our records indicate that all plumbing and electrical items are addressed and resolved within the timelines prescribed by the new home warranty and following the process noted in the Agreement of Purchase and Sale. In fact, we addressed the plumbing issue the same day as reported, (a faulty valve) and the electrical matter was followed up as soon as it was reported. See also attached, "Consumer signoff on Plumbing and Electrical Issues.pdf". 
  
  We continue to work with this homeowner to address the remaining, non-urgent items from their Initial Warranty submission (made in August 2024, as per the requirements of the warranty program).  We continue to follow the processes and timelines detailed in the new home warranty and that was provided when the consumer purchased. We are committed to resolve all warrantable issues in a timely manner; factoring in delivery times for materials (that can take several months) and coordinating Trade scheduling in accordance with the customer's availability to provide us access to the home. To our knowledge, the customer is satisfied with the action plan for all remaining items, except the matter of the flooring. 
  
  Regarding the flooring, we are aware of two concerns; chipping and damage caused by water. 
  
  Regarding the chips in the flooring, our records indicate that there was no damage to the floors at the time of the Pre-Delivery Inspection (which occurs before a homeowner takes possession of their keys and home) and further note that no chipping was reported on the closing damage waiver we have signed 48 hours after a home is delivered and closed.  Please see attached the form, "Consent of Completion 10-July-2024", which includes the homeowner's initials indicating completion of the plumbing and electrical items.  (( Please note the attachment contains personal information and as such, trust that the attachment will not be posted publicly. )) We also have no record of feedback from the homeowner after any service appointments noting damage by our Trades.
  
  As such, it is our position that damage to the floors took place after the owner took possession of the home and falls outside the scope of our responsibility to address.
  
  In regards to the damage caused by water; our findings indicate that the cupping and damage to the laminate floor boards are present in and around the laundry area where a leak occurred after the owner took possession of the home. Our investigation found no evidence of faulty plumbing installation or materials and that the nature of the leak suggested the source was the washing machine installed by the homeowner after taking possession. This finding of the source of the leak was not disputed by the homeowner. 
  
  As a homebuilder, we are not responsible for damage caused by leaks or accidents not caused by a deficiency of the home's construction. Since the apparent cause of the leak was the washer (either faulty installation or product), and because we did not supply or install said washer, we maintain it is outside our scope of responsibility to address this matter. Following our consistent practice concerning non-warrantable damages, we recommended the homeowner contact their insurance company to file a claim for damage. 
  
  The purpose of the warranty is to ensure that the home has been built correctly and all installations are free of defects, and this purpose is well documented and communicated to our customers, is noted on our website, is part of their Agreement of Purchase and Sale and is consistent throughout Ontario, since the warranty is provided by a third party, Provincially sanctioned organization known as 'Tarion'. As such, the new home warranty does not cover damage caused by the owner, however, the owner persists that since it occurred during the warranty period that it should be covered. While we understand this perception, it is important that we act with integrity and treat all our customers fairly and consistently. 
  
  As such, it is our position that damage caused by a homeowner's appliance is not the responsibility of the builder to address, however, we did provide information on what to do next. We feel open and transparent communication is very important when working with our homeowners and so in response to their disappointment, we communicated extensively by phone and email with the consumer about this matter, and have attached some of the correspondence that explained our position clearly. 
  
  See attached email "RE: Pre 30 Day deficiencies" where we informed the homeowner that pursuing this matter through insurance was the best course of action. 
  
  After we advised the homeowner that damage caused by a washer leak was not covered as part of our responsibilities, the homeowner notified us that they felt the core issue was that the flooring we had installed, a laminate product that visually resembles hardwood, should not have been selected and installed in the first place for locations where water could potentially leak. We did not agree with this assessment, nor with this being the cause of the damage. 
  
  As a quality production homebuilder, our considerations when selecting materials for our homes are to offer materials that are proven reliable, easy to procure, and meet building code requirements and best practices. Laminate flooring has been used in many of our homes for a number of years in the way in which it was installed in this home, and included in this case in the entrance, laundry room, and on the stairs. As part of our continuous process of reviewing our warranty claims, there is no pattern of water damage or issues with the quality or care of the product, even in rooms where water is used. Most flooring products should not be continuously subjected to high humidity, moisture, or standing water, which is also indicated in the product's warranty guide. Of note, the product page on the manufacturer's website for the product selected for this home includes an image of this flooring installed in a laundry room. Highland | TORLYS Homeowner 
  
  While feedback such as this homeowner provided is important for our considerations, and have been shared with our product designers, our position is that this floor material is suitable for this use and provides homeowners with a cost effective and attractive option. Further, all homeowners are advised and provided with the opportunity to select other flooring materials to suit their preference in cost and style, and this home was no different. For this particular model of home, laminate flooring is the standard included floor material as detailed in *********************** Features in the Agreement of Purchase and Sale. (Under the section 'Superior Interior Features').
  
  It is also noteworthy that during the selections phase before home construction begins, all homeowners are assigned a Design Consultant and invited to our ************* to review materials and make selections and upgrade choices based on their wants and needs with expert guidance from our staff. At the conclusion of their selections appointments this homeowner elected to have Minto install the included laminate flooring; the colour of which they selected.
  
  While we acknowledge this homeowner's concerns about this material being used in areas where risk of water is more apparent, our position is that this material is suitable for such an installation, and that incidences of prolonged exposure to high moisture or standing water would adversely affect most flooring materials. It is the responsibility of the homeowner to mitigate the related issues by taking steps to reduce exposure and remove standing water as part of general home maintenance and best practices. 
  
  Through several back-and-forth correspondences on this matter since the homeowner took possession in July 2024, we have consistently advised of the points made above, restated our commitment to addressing any warrantable items in the home, and advised that as the damage was not a result of installation or defect in materials that it is a matter best suited for a home insurance claim. Given that we did not provide or install the appliance that caused the leak, we maintain it is outside the scope of our responsibility to address damage caused by the leak. 
  
  Our warranty records have the homeowner noting where they feel there are deficiencies. You will note from the attached image of the floorplan (Floorplan Visualization.jpg) that Items 19, 20, and 22 occur in the vicinity of the washer/dryer room, circled in red.  
  
  Homeowner's submission: (Item 1 - INTERIOR Floor 01) Hallway - Floor Chipped Laminate
  Minto's response:  Was not reported within 48 hrs or after trade visit. It is located below the first step of the main staircase. No repair has been done as this is unknown damage.
  
  Homeowner's submission: (Item 19 - INTERIOR Floor 02) Living Room Floor - Space between the laminate floor on Floor 01 and 02
  Minto's response:  This is near the area where the leak occurred. All boards near the leak have cupped or separated.
  
  Homeowner's submission: (Item 20 - INTERIOR Floor 02) **************************** locks opening and already disconnected in a few spots
  Minto's response: This is near the area where the leak occurred. All boards near the leak have cupped or separated.
  
  Homeowner's submission: (Item 22 - INTERIOR Floor 02)  Bathroom Floor - The floor in the Powder room is squicking around the toilet.
  Minto's response: This is near the area where the leak occurred. All boards near the leak have cupped or separated.
  
  We continue to work with this homeowner to address the remaining items from their Initial Warranty submission following the processes and timelines detailed in the new home warranty and are committed to resolve all warrantable issues in a timely manner. While we cannot support on the matters noted above, we remain eager and committed to work with this household. 
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 23/10/2024

   
  Complaint: 22369783
  
  I am rejecting this response because:
  

  Subject: Urgent Attention Required Regarding Build Quality and Neglect
  
  
  I am writing to formally bring to your attention the ongoing and deeply concerning issues with the build quality of our Minto home, as well as the negligence shown during both construction and delivery. These issues are continuously compounding and, most recently, we discovered that some of the support beams on the first floor have rotted and require reinforcement. Minto was compelled to involve an engineer, who ultimately forced Minto to take action and begin reinforcing the compromised beams. As homeowners, we are alarmed and distressed, uncertain about how many other support beams may be affected or how stable the structure currently is. Most of the remaining beams are hidden behind walls, adding to our concern.
  
  
  This is far from the only defect we have encountered. Numerous other defects have been identified and reported. To make matters worse, Minto has attempted to close several Tarion warranty items without actually resolving them, in some cases without even taking any steps toward resolution. We have been forced to reopen these issues and escalate them to Mintos management team.
  
  
  Mintos claim that these issues were resolved to our satisfaction is simply outrageous. Imagine your largest investment falling apart just after youve taken possessionhow could anyone in this position feel satisfied? Electrical breakers are malfunctioning dangerously, and the mechanical room is frequently soaked with water. It is clear that Minto is attempting to cover up their poor choices in materials, and we are aware of other Minto homeowners experiencing similar issues, particularly with flooring. We are now considering our legal options as a group.
  
  
  The manufacturer warranty and dealer confirmations make it clear that the materials usedparticularly in high-moisture areas like main entrances, kitchens, and bathroomsare entirely unsuitable for these applications. Despite this, Minto continues to assert that we failed to report a chipped laminate within the first 48 hours, which is blatantly false. We reported the issue along with others within the first two days directly to Minto, and were assured that the 30-day inspection team would address it. Now, Minto is denying responsibility and retaliating against us.
  
  
  Additionally, the materials used in this project were chosen by Minto as part of the Level 1 package. After conducting our own investigation, it is evident that these materials are entirely unfit for installation in the areas of concern.
  
  
  To address Mintos so-called investigation, we obtained a third-party inspection, which found no issues with appliance installation or any other major problems. The technician did, however, point out that the space where the appliances are installed requires an additional fan to properly vent moisture and heat from the washer and dryer. Once again, Minto has denied responsibility, this time attempting to shift blame onto the City of ****** and the province of Ontario, claiming that the installation meets their standardsstandards which clearly ignore common sense and proper building practices.
  
  
  We expect immediate and satisfactory action from Minto to rectify these issues.
  
  
  Sincerely,
  

  

  Business Response

  Date: 01/11/2024

  We are dismayed that the homeowner feels they have been provided a low-quality product. While we agree the subject home is not without deficiencies, it is typical for some to be present, and Minto Communities has a dedicated team to support homeowners after providing the keys in full awareness that living in a new home will likely reveal some items that need correction within the first year of use. 
  
  There was minor damage noted to one joist in the basement, which we addressed. Each home is inspected for structural elements throughout its construction as well as granted an Occupancy Permit deeming the home safe for use. As part of the typical warranty process, the homeowner brought the concern about the basement ceiling beam to our attention, and we agreed it required correction. Our typical process when working with any structural elements is to have an Engineer inspect and provide sign-off to provide our homeowners with peace of mind. To address this concern, we hired an Engineer to review the installation and repaired the item as per the prescribed repair provided in their official report.
  
  As noted, the homeowner has also engaged a third-party to review the home and no other structural or safety concerns have been brought to our attention. There is a factor of safety built into all new homes with the Ontario Building Code including significant redundancies in its structural elements in full awareness that natural products, such as wood, and even concrete and steel, do, on occasion, experience deficiencies. Part of the purpose of the warranty and why as a homebuilder, we are engaged with our customers for a number of years after handing over the keys is to be there to address any of these issues that can and do arise when working with a human-made product with thousands of components and materials that can be imperfect. 
  
  The matters pertaining to the leak and water damage to the floor occurred after the homeowner took possession and were not deemed to be due to any deficiency in the plumbing or installation and therefore not warrantable.  As such, we have advised the homeowner to work through home insurance as we consistently do with other homeowners for damages that fall outside of the warranty. The laminate flooring product that was included with this home and used in the laundry room is our typical standard inclusion in this series of home. This product is used consistently in such areas where water and humidity may occur and its care is the responsibility of the homeowner, just like with any floor material. As such, the request to resolve this matter is asking us to address a matter that is best taken care of by home insurance, not the builder of the home.
  
  The concern that the laundry room ventilation was insufficient was not raised until the recent letter was provided and we have not been provided with an accompanying this 3rd party inspection report nor have we been able to confirm that the author of the letter is an accredited inspector. 
  
  All of our homes require HVAC plans that are created and reviewed by Engineers and professional HVAC installers, and this model of home was certified to have met all of the requirements necessary for such a space in terms of ventilation. While this contradicts the opinion provided to the homeowner by the appliance installer, we defer to the recommendations of professional Engineers, Ontario Building Code, and approved municipal building permits for each home.
  
  The homeowner is correct in that a chip in the laminate floor was reported to us. Our records indicate we received this notice around a week after the home closed. Items such as floor marks and damage that are not identified during the Pre-Delivery Inspection, or within 48 hours of taking possession in writing on a warranty submission as per the Tarion process are not the responsibility of the builder as such damage can often occur while moving in. Tarion, the third party entrusted to ensure homebuilders are meeting their responsibilities, is also aware of all details of this file. 
  
  We continually demonstrate our commitment to take responsibility for any warrantable items by continued communication and home visits to this property and have noted the involvement of the municipality and Ontario standards in an effort to offer peace of mind, given the homeowner's loss of faith in the company, not as a means to avoid any accountability. We have an exceptional history of standing behind what we build and continue to work with this homeowner despite their feeling that the product is of not good quality. 
  
  This home, as required for all new build homes in Ontario, was certified to be safe to close and was built to a rigorous standard, with evidence that those standards were adhered to. We have continued to work closely with the customer and are committed to addressing any matters relating to the construction quality of the home, with a detailed document (the Agreement of Purchase and Sale) that clearly states what we have promised to deliver.  It is a matter of business integrity for us follow through on what we say we will deliver and maintain that we have responded to and addressed all concerns raised by this homeowner that fall into the scope of our commitments. 
  
  
  

  Customer Answer

  Date: 08/11/2024

  Complaint: 22369783
  
  I am rejecting this response.
  
  It is, frankly, surprising to hear that Minto is "dismayed" by our concerns regarding the quality of craftsmanship,design, and planning, which, based on our experience, ********* below acceptable standards. It is difficult to maintain any level of trust in Mintos product after encountering significant issues, including a flood in the mechanical room on the first night, electrical breakers malfunctioning and exploding during the initial hours of occupancy (documented by an inspector),and an unsecured patio fence that nearly resulted in disaster. These are just a few of the many deficiencies we have encountered, all of which fall far outside the bounds of reasonable quality expectations.
  
  To further illustrate the ongoing issues, we recently identified additional problems, including a front door that is improperly mounted,allowing cold air and moisture to enter the home, a window that is not properly fixed in its frame (resulting in instability), and issues with the window opening mechanism, which also allows weather to enter the room. These concerns,among others, make it exceedingly difficult for us to overlook the significant defects we have faced. However, this is not a matter of personal dissatisfaction; rather, it is about the business relationship we have with Minto. As a well-compensated builder, Minto was contracted to deliver a high-quality product that would serve its intended purpose without failing shortly after occupancy.
  
  Regarding the joist issue, this only serves to further substantiate our claims. The visible damage should have been easily detected during Mintos initial inspection, well before the city inspectors involvement. Minto appears to be attempting to shift responsibility onto third parties, such as the City of Ottawa, but our contract is directly with Minto,and the ultimate responsibility lies with your company. The situation with the joist is not a trivial matter; as an engineer mandated repairs, and later oversaw the work conducted by the contractor. This indicates the critical importance of the repair. Additionally, we requested that Minto take action to ensure that no further framing issuespotentially hidden behind drywallremained unaddressed.Regrettably, Minto did not respond appropriately, instead attempting to direct us back to the city. It is evident that Minto neglected proper inspection procedures during framing, likely hoping these issues would go unnoticed. Given these circumstances, it is extremely difficult for us to place any trust in Mintos intentions or assurances at this point. Claims of providing us with "peace of mind" are not supported by the facts, and we will be providing documentation of our correspondence for reference.
  
  Mintos claim that water leaks and damage were not the result of deficiencies and only occurred after we occupied the property is concerning.The issues surfaced on the third day of our occupancy, as the flooring began to show signs of opening up. We believe that the water damage may have occurred prior to our taking possession, only becoming apparent over the following days.Mintos so-called investigation failed to include accredited inspectors, and therefore, any assertions regarding water damage caused by appliances will be treated as unfounded and dismissed.
  
  Most importantly, the warranty for the Trolys Highland laminate clearly states:
  
  1. Damage due to exposure to excessive heat, wetness, or ********** is recommended that the relative humidity in a home remain within the healthy range of 3060% throughout the year.
     Given the proximity to entrances, cooking appliances, dishwashers, and washing machines installed by Minto, it is extremely difficult to maintain the recommended humidity levels.Spills from cooking are inevitable, and immediate cleaning is challenging due to high temperatures, while steam from cooking and appliance use will likely exceed the vendors recommended limits.
  2. This Warranty does not cover splits, warping, soiling, or damages that result from abusive conditions.
     It is unreasonable to expect that areas near entrances, where moisture and soil exposure are frequent, will remain pristine despite protective measures like rugs.
  3. Damage caused by water or moisture trapped beneath the floor.
   It is inevitable that areas such as the powder room and kitchen will experience moisture and liquid spills,which cannot be fully avoided. We have already observed moisture infiltrating the laminate joints, which we believe will lead to long-term damage.
  
  These points suggest that Mintos design center did not adequately consider the suitability of the materials used, putting us in a position where unavoidable damage to the flooring is occurring. We have consistently raised concerns that the flooring issue is not confined to the laundry room, as Minto has suggested,but is much more widespread. Mintos attempts to downplay these concerns by focusing solely on the laundry room are insufficient. Moreover, a chip in the laminate near the main entrance was reported during the initial inspection and further substantiates our claims regarding the inappropriate material selection. By using this material, Minto has effectively voided the manufacturers warranty.
  
  In recent communication we received from Minto, once again, they have attempted to avoid answering very direct questions we raised and have instead tried to shift responsibility elsewhere. We have clearly explained how each condition is directly related to everyday use and its relationship to the warranty conditions.
  Upon reviewing the latest response from Minto and the attached documents, it appears that the Minto representative involved in this case, who is supposedly advocating for us as the client, is in fact representing Mintos interests in this dispute. This behavior raises serious concerns about Minto's commitment to their clients and calls into question the level of trust we can reasonably place in Mintos claims and intentions moving forward.
  Given the extensive and ongoing nature of these issues, we will not accept anything less than a full and satisfactory resolution. We expect Minto to replace the flooring in the affected areas with materials that are properly suited for installation, such as vinyl, ceramic, or another appropriate option or full compensation, and to address the other outstanding issues to our satisfaction.

  
  It is absolutely crucial to point out that Mino disclosed our private information, which is protected by Canadian law, without our explicit consent. Despite our repeated requests to resolve this issue, Mino has blatantly ignored them. As a result, we have now filed a formal complaint with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada under the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA).
  We will not tolerate such violations, and we are prepared to take all necessary legal actions to ensure this matter is fully addressed.

  
  Thank you for your attention to this matter. We trust the BBB will continue to support us in seeking a fair resolution.
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ********* *****

  Customer Answer

  Date: 14/11/2024

  Good morning, I want to confirm that no action from myself is needed at this time.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 14/11/2024

  Good morning, I am making sure to lat you know that according to your correspondance I am accepting your offer to mediate.

  I did not found any options to accept on a website so this email would serve as official confirmation.

  
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:17/10/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Im a new resident of Minto, actually l rented for 20 years from Minto prior before my husband passed. So ****** from 10 Deerfield, is my representative. I was just completing my lease and was paying for last months rent for *************************** ***. When ****** went on vacation so ***** took over. The lease was for November 9 2023. So ****** indicated before she left to go on vacation that if l wanted the keys earlier l just needed to pay the first November rent. She with her saying that , l presumed that l could pay the November 1, 2023 rent, October 31, along with the renters insurance and then , November 1 l could get my keys , so l booked U-Haul for November 4 Saturday to move in. Now l also emailed ***** about it , the day ****** went on vacation. I asked ***** many times about what l was doing, and got no response, plus l called the office 8 times to connect with someone about this situation l was told . That the man l spoke to was going to contact ***** and get to me. This went on the whole time ****** was away. Now l would understand if there were people still living there, but there is not , and what they need to do was paint and get the place in Order for me to move in. Then l get an email in regards to the place, only when ****** returned that **** Northview that asked me to send her emails asking for this early admission. . For l guess ***** never told her l was asking to pay November rent in the 31 of October . So l could move in on the 4 of November. So along with asking me to send evidence. Why would ***** not mention theses many emails which she ignored. ****** refused my early admission and said l could only move in on the 9 of November, that means l have to change everything l already planned like U-Haul and the labour l need . Not sure if l will be charged more money for changing the dates. Today is the 17 of October, and the only reason she said l cant move in on the 4 of Nov because they have to paint. Can it be Now.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 20/10/2023

  Good afternoon, 

  I am following up on complaint about move in dates.

  The lease was signed for November 9th and that is when the unit will be ready as well as keys. 

  I have attached a snapshot of the signed lease which indicates move in date.

  Thank you.

   

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/07/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Hi There,
  
  Hope all is well. We are writing to inform you the twisted tactics that Minto developers are taking to mitigate their lost due to their negligence by not having any security onsite. As you might be aware of the recent Avalon Visto explosion in Feb 2023. As per news reports:
  
  
  The blast was so intense. People from all over the east end felt it,” ***** said.
  
  Another indication of how powerful the blast was is that an earthquake monitor detected what it called a seismic event as far away as Carleton Place, around 70 km away.
  
  Ottawa police A/Insp. *** **** did not provide specifics on the number of people evacuated or how many home. here have been reports the blast was felt and heard even farther afield.
  
  ******* ***** in Chapel Hill South about five kilometres from the blast zone, said he felt his house shake.
  
  "Minto has previously declined to answer whether the construction site had security before the blast, citing the ongoing court case against ******. The fire department documents don't mention any pre-existing on-site security at the time of the explosion.A month after the explosion, two ******* ******** cars stood watch over the Avalon Vista entrance.****** *******, the owner of ******* ********, said his firm was hired by a company named ******* to provide security at the site beginning the day of the explosion through late April.******* directed questions about security to Minto.
  "Unfortunately, we are unable to provide further details at this time as this is a legal matter in the hands of authorities," Minto said Friday in an emailed statement.****** is scheduled to return to court on Wednesday"
  
  I went to meet the Minto rep on June 27 2023 for the pre-delivery orientation and was given a third party inspection report that only states a visual inspection was done and it is in the inspectors opinion that it is safe to enter the property for further full inspection(when asked for the full inspection report), minto stated any future damage should be covered under the Tarion 7 years warranty. How would I know what sort of damages the foundation sustained and to any other structure of the home. My home is a couple of hundred meters from the blast and the blast could be felt 70km away, I am sure I would be facing issues with the property in the near future. The visual inspection report was dated Feb 2023, why is it being handed to me only now a week prior to closing? Where is the full report? Why wasn’t a full third party report done as per earlier report? From the news report, we can gather Minto has failed to provide adequate security which could have avoided the explosion. The Minto rep told me to hand the report to the solicitor as I would need to fully disclosure about the explosion to any future buyer. In otherwords, the property now has a stigma which would limit the potential future buyers. The subject property was appraised at $886k and the purchase price is $881,xxx, we have a mortgage in place but we would not want to close the deal due to the stigma of the blast site and we do not feel safe and god knows what future damages I would be facing as it would take a couple of years for the house to settle and for any damage to appear after the warranty. The developer’s solicitors now stated they would be forfeiting our $70k deposit and could face further legal consequences. This clearly shows how brutal Minto can get furthermore due to their negligence for not safeguarding my investment, forcing us to close on a property that has a stigma, no full third party inspection report that was produced since there is a material change in the contract. The property has a stigma and I would need to fully disclosure about the explosion to future buyers. I am basically buying a property that might have problems in the near future.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 07/07/2023

  The home in question was under construction when the Feb. 13, 2023 explosion occurred in the same neighbour as the subject property, and at the time, the proper owned by Minto Communities, though it was pre-sold to the customer.
  
  All of our sites in Ottawa have 24-hour security monitoring. The crime that caused the explosion bypassed that security, similar to if a bank is robbed - it is not because there was a lack of security, but because the criminal(s) bypassed it. In an effort to respond to the increased worry by local residents after the explosion, because site access was restricted, and due to the number of people on site (Emergency and investigative services), we employed additional security measures in the aftermath on a temporary basis. 
  
  On February 15, 2023, we sent our first communication update regarding the incident to customers who had not yet taken possession of their home, (previously we were corresponding with those injured, who had moved in and had to be evacuated and our own staff) and subsequently sent 3 more updates by email on Feb. 23, Mar. 3, and Mar. 17th.
  
  The Mar. 3rd email included the following: "Please rest assured each unoccupied home that was under construction at the time of the explosion has been or will be inspected by a Structural Engineer. At your closing, in addition to the Occupancy Permit which demonstrates that the home passed all inspections by the City of Ottawa (who have also added additional inspections), we have volunteered to provide you with a letter from a Structural Engineer confirming the results of all inspections and any remedial work conducted."
  
  While additional Third party verification is not required, to help combat potential stigma or worries by existing or future homeowners and in light of the explosion, we have voluntarily offered to provide a document at closing that, above and beyond the Occupancy Permit for the home, demonstrates the home was inspected by a Structural Engineer after the explosion. In the case of this particular homeowner, we provided that document at the Pre-Delivery Orientation (prior to closing) to help enhance peace of mind.
  
  To my understanding, the purchasers attended their Pre-Delivery Orientation appointment on June 27, 2023, and their closing was scheduled for July 4, 2023, meaning we provided the voluntary additional document in advance of when we said we would. I will note that the document the customers received was stamped by a Structural Engineer, however, it did note that an additional report should take place. This second, follow up report was requested on the day of closing and provided to the purchaser's lawyers on the day of scheduled closing, upon request. 
  
  I would also emphasize that the home underwent additional inspections by the City of Ottawa in the wake of the nearby explosion, which is why the home was granted an Occupancy Permit by the municipality. The additional documentation provided by a Third Party Engineer is a courtesy we extended to our homeowners to be transparent and offer peace of mind. This document was provided on or before the closing date as noted, exceeding the inspections that are required.
  
  We also informed the customers that there is an additional precaution in place; like all our homes we build in Ontario, they remain under warranty and that in accordance with Tarion and their Agreement of Purchase and Sale, any major structural defects are warrantable for 7 years. There is no benefit to Minto to provide a deficient home. 
  
  Given that the home is built to the same standard as every other home we build and has been subjected to additional inspections, we have met the responsibilities of our contract (Agreement of Purchase and Sale) with the customers, and are ready to close on the home. We have further met our voluntary commitments and feel we have acted in good faith and with full transparency about the situation. 
  
  As such, we will not provide a mutual release. 

• Initial Complaint

  Date:05/06/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  We bought this condo on Jan-2021, and on March 3, 2021 - We raised the concern with Minto that We are having issues with the front door. Frozen water is coming inside and damaging our internal floor.
  Minto came to fixed this issue many times, which still not fixed.
  
  Now they are saying this issue falls under CONDO, but it is from day one and is a material/design flaw.
  
  Why should condo associations cover this issue?
  
  We need help fixing condensation and the floor.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 10/07/2023

  Good afternoon, 
  
  [3:34 p.m.] ******* ********
  Where condominiums are concerned, the unit door to the exterior is owned by the condo itself rather than by the individual unit owner. As such, concerns and service requests should go through the Condo Board as they are the owners of the door. It is very important to us that requests for repairs of this nature come from the Condo Board or their representative, the Property Manager, to ensure they are followed up correctly. 
  
  Please know this isn't a reluctance to review the situation further, but an effort to ensure the correct process is followed for such inquiries and complaints, as they must go through the owner of the item itself, in this case the exterior door.
  
  I do understand, however that we have looked at the door in the past and after consultation with the Condo Board and in an effort to provide enhanced customer service, we installed additional insulation around the door. 
  
  The request to substitute to a different kind of door is not possible as this door meets and was installed to Ontario Building Code requirements and code. We recognize that metal doors can stick as the seasons change and sometimes have condensation during rapid freeze thaw cycles, but it is important to maintain this type of door for fire safety. 
  
  Homeowner's are provided with educational resources including tips and best practices for managing indoor climate and humidity levels through published collateral on our website and in emails.
  
  We understand the homeowner has also escalated this issue to Tarion, and has filed a conciliation with them to make a ruling on the situation. As such, we will not taking further action until that conciliation takes place.
  
  

• Initial Complaint

  Date:21/04/2023

  Type:Service or Repair Issues
  Status:

  ResolvedMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  I am a senior over 72 years old and bought already built new home from Minto Communities closing on January 21, 2021. Because of closing during winter months , condition of outside interlocking front driveway, front entrance and backyard interlocking using concrete and stones work landscaping could not be examined. I was extremely surprised to look at outside landscaping very bad condition in June, 2022.
  My home is located on ** ******* ******* ******* ******* ****** * *** *** )in whitby and next lot *** ******* ******* was vacant without any structure but had a construction trailer on the lot when I first visited the home before buying it. Landscaping (front, driveway and backyard) was very nice and beautiful. Minto communities did not create any partition or fence before building home next door and used my outside of home to load construction materials and construction vehicles frequently and caused big damages to outside of my front and back of the home.
  Minto Communities told me that my outside driveway, entrance and backyard will be professionally redone and repaired.
  I have been trying to get completed from Minto since, of June, 2022 for last 9-10 months but nothing done.
  Hope and pray that *** can help me to resolve my problem.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 05/05/2023

  The customer is in a unique situation in that they bought a model home, which was several years old, under a contract stipulating they are purchasing 'as is'. This included the pre-constructed interlock pathway and driveway. We have attended this home many times to make adjustments, however, interlocking does naturally settle over time.
  
  That said, in light of the customer's ongoing concerns, we are re-reviewing the file and the expectations we set to ensure we are aligned. We commit to reach out to the homeowner by May 12, 2023 to communicate our decision. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 05/05/2023

  
  
  Complaint: 19967239
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because I purchased this home as new home with full Tarion warranty and paid additional $150, 0000 for upgrades including outside stone/concrete landscaping. this landscapping was badly damaged while builder constructed new home ** ******* ****** . their construction crew and staff did not make any fence or partition and used my outside for their construction.

  I paid additional more than two thousand dollars for enrolling in warranty and warranty was duly acknowledged by builder-Minto Communities. 

  thanks.
  
  
  
  *** *** ******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 11/05/2023

  Considering
  the homeowner’s ongoing concerns, we escalated this matter to our Director of
  Warranty (Toronto) who met with the customer in person at their house. We are
  negotiating a resolution that is mutually acceptable regarding all landscaping
  matters. Our understanding is that the homeowner is in agreement with the
  direction of the negotiations and resolution. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 11/05/2023

  
  
  Complaint: 19967239
  
  
  
  I am rejecting this response because because no formal resolution was provided.

  Minto Communities during our meeting today, just wanted to temporary touch ups rather than rectifying real damages done. it is because of very  poor initial workmanship and continuous damage done by negligence done to my landscaping while building next door home-** ******* ******.   

  Sincerely,
  

  
  
  
  *** *** ******

  

  Business Response

  Date: 19/05/2023

  As per the email sent to the homeowner on May 18, 2023, Minto Communities has provided a final, formal offer to settle the concern. There were some specific challenges and unprecedented requests for repair as the home was previously a showhome which has unique features and properties, mainly pertaining to landscaping/driveway. Our understanding is that the homeowner is satisfied with the resolution. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 19/05/2023

  
  
  ****** ******** *******
  
  
  
  I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 19967239, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me.
  
  
  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  
  
  *** *** ******