Roberts v. Canada Creative Exhibits Inc. Date:, 2012 BCPC 427

Citation: Roberts v. Canada Creative Exhibits Inc. Date: 20121127 2012 BCPC 0427 File No: 24343 Registry: Richmond IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN: Warren Roberts/PTIFA CLAIMANT AND: Canada Creative Exhibits Inc. dba Exhibit Creative DEFENDANT REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HIS WORSHIP B. WALLACE Appearing in person: Warren Roberts Appearing for the Defendant: Stephen Samchuck Place of Hearing: Richmond, B.C. Date of Hearing: 23 November 2012 Date of Judgment: 27 November 2012 1 . The Claimant seeks the refund of $2144.80, the amount he paid to the Defendant for a 10 ft. pop-up display including podium and

1 . The Claimant seeks the refund of $2144.80, the amount he paid to the Defendant for a 10 ft. pop-up display including podium and graphics, for use at conventions and conferences by the Claimant’s business, Pacific Training Institute for Facial Aesthetics (PTIFA). 2 . Mr. Vet, the employee of the Defendant from whom the Claimant had ordered the display, as part of the agreement to supply the display, delivered and assembled it for the Claimant at the Pacific Dental Conference in Vancouver in March 2011. He did so at a time when the Claimant was not onsite.

The Claimant saw the display the next day and observed that it was an 8ft. not a 10ft display and there were no graphics on the podium. 3 . The Claimant is in no doubt and the documents tend to support that he ordered a 10ft. display. Mr. Samchuck sought to cast doubt on that assertion, but has no direct knowledge of the order, and did not call Mr. Vet to contradict the Claimant’s evidence. Mr. Vet no longer works for the Defendant. I am satisfied that the display delivered was not what the Claimant had ordered and paid for. 4 .

After failing to come to an accommodation with the Defendant, the Claimant purchased a 10ft display from another supplier. The Claimant says he returned the 8ft display to the Defendant on June 30, 2011. He was accompanied at that time by Jim Larson, who corroborated in his testimony the Claimant’s account of returning the display. 5 . Again the Defendant seeks to cast doubt on the account of returning the display presented to me by the Claimant and Mr. Larson, but presented no evidence to contradict that account. 6 .

I am satisfied that the display supplied by the Defendant was not what the Claimant ordered and paid for. I am also satisfied that the Claimant returned the 8ft. display to the Defendant. 7 . The Defendant counterclaims for a. Courier and bookkeeping costs related to this action, b. Costs related to the quality of the graphics, and c. Set up and delivery costs. 8 . The costs in a. of the previous paragraph are not normally recoverable, and in particular are not rrecoverable given the result here. The services to which the costs in b. and c. relate were part of the contract to supply the display. 9 .

The Claim is allowed in the amount of $2144.80 plus costs of $180.00. The counterclaim is dismissed. ____________________ Brian J. Wallace, Q.C. Adjudicator