A former Naramata fire chief has been ordered to pay more than $300,000 plus interest for unpaid bills for building his home despite using a recording he made in secret as part of his defence. 

Anthony Trovao and his wife Jodi were named in the recently published Oct. 7 Supreme Court decision that found in favour of Solaris Custom Homes.

The lawsuit stems from the construction of the Trovaos' home on Ritchie Avenue in Naramata, which began in early 2019 and was completed by spring of 2020. 

Trovao had met the director of Solaris through his son's soccer team; the director, Ross Manning, coached the team. 

The pair entered into an oral contract, but the two sides had differing stories on what was discussed ahead of that agreement being made and construction beginning. 

Trovao had claimed that they had agreed on a rate of $250 to $300 a square foot for a total budget of $400,000, while Manning testified that because he wasn't provided detailed plans he couldn't give an estimate for how much the house would cost to build. 

Unlike other Solaris builds, Manning testified that the Trovaos did not go through and select things as flooring, counters, doors, windows, and interior and exterior finishes ahead of time, and that the selection process continued well into construction. 

"Both Mr. and Ms. Trovao agreed in cross-examination that the $250-$300 per square foot numbers came from them and were presented to Solaris," wrote Justice Greenwood. "Mr. Trovao explained that Solaris would not provide him with 'anything,' which I took to be a reference to any budget numbers.  He acknowledged that Solaris refused to commit to an overall cost for the house, but he was adamant that Mr. Manning had agreed to the budget range he suggested."

Construction began in 2019, and immediately costs began to grow as the water table had risen, forcing the foundations to be raised and the construction of a retaining wall. 

All through the build, Solaris kept a binder available to the Trovaos that was full of all the estimates, quotes and invoices for construction, subcontractors and materials. 

A new architect was brought on in August that brought changes to the design of the house, but by November of 2019 the home had reached the lock-up stage with all the exterior membranes, windows and doors installed. 

After two invoices had been already paid without issue, the third invoice billed to the Trovaos was too much for them and they paid $87,000 less than the full amount. 

At that point, the Trovaos had paid $544,000 out of the $631,000 they had been billed, and the couple asked to review the binder of invoices and find ways to cut costs. 

"Mr. Manning testified that it was at a subsequent meeting with the Trovaos and his partner Rocky Los, that there was a discussion about whether to proceed with the project," reads the judgment. "Mr. Manning could not provide them with a final figure for the cost of the house because there were still decisions for them to make."

At that point in time, dry wall, finishing work, interior doors, flooring, the exterior deck and work on the detached garage still remained incomplete.

Further emails were exchanged on costs for things like paint and tiles, up until April 2020 with the fourth and final invoice from Solaris for $280,225.28. 

The couple paid one subcontractor directly, and they received a credit on their first invoice due to a miscalculation, but they still owed $304,870.56 and they refused to pay Solaris. A lien was filed against the home before the end of the month. 

On May 1, the Trovaos, Los and Manning all met to discuss the situation, with Anthony Trovao secretly recording it all on his phone. 

The fact that the Trovaos knew they were being recorded and Los and Manning did not was pointed out by Justice Greenwood for giving credibility to the homebuilders since they were not speaking for posterity. 

Throughout that meeting, Trovao made repeated assertions that there had been a set budget agreed on between them. 

"He asserted that they had discussed the budget range of $250-$300 per square foot, and Mr. Manning was to tell him if he couldn91ÂãÁÄÊÓƵ™t do it, but he never did. Mr. Manning began to respond, and said 'actually91ÂãÁÄÊÓƵ¦' but he was unable to finish that sentence as Mr. Trovao continued," reads the judgment. "Mr. Trovao said they had the conversation 'multiple times,' but Mr. Manning said 'no. You never said a square footage cost.'

In the recording, Manning stated that he had told them he could not build the house for $400,000, and had attempted to explain excavation costs had ended up four times higher than expected before saying that maybe the project should have been shut down in December. 

At one point Trovao claimed that he had set a maximum budget fo $600,000 for the house and $50,000 for a roughed in garage, to which Manning and Los said they never would have started the project if they had been aware of. 

"The tone of the May 1, 2020, meeting was confrontational. On a number of occasions, Mr. Trovao put his version of past events and discussions to Mr. Manning in a leading fashion and presented them as undisputed facts, all while surreptitiously recording," reads the judgment. 

Justice Greenwood rejected Trovaos' claim that he had discussed the $250-$300 per square foot budget "five or six times" before the build started, or that Manning agreed to it, noting that Trovao was willing to exagerate after testifying that he mentioned it "30 or 40 times orally."

It was noted there was not a single piece of written correspondence, whether in a text message or email from the Trovaos seeking assurances the project would come in at a specific cost, outside of a single generic reference to the couple's "strict budget" without any figures associated with it. 

The only time two actual figures were discussed were for estimates of $498,000 for a rebuild cost to assign as a value for insurance purposes. 

"In my view, what happened in this case, was that the Trovaos had a set budget in their minds that they wished to spend on construction of a custom home," wrote Justice Greenwood. "They trusted Mr. Manning, who was a friend, and were content to proceed on a cost-plus basis in the hope and expectation that the $687,000 they expected to receive would be sufficient to pay for the new house, but they never took any steps to ensure that they obtained an estimate, or secured a commitment from Mr. Manning or Solaris not to exceed their budget."

The justice ordered the Trovaos to pay the remaining $304,000 that they owed Solaris, as well as interest accrued since they were invoiced. 

If the couple do not pay within 90 days, the property was ordered to be sold.