Tarion shelled out tens of millions to homebuyers whose houses were never built. Now it's suing this Ontario developer to recoup those losses
In two separate lawsuits filed in February,
Tarion
is seeking at least $87 million in damages the agency says it has suffered in compensating more than 900 StateView Homes purchasers.
The litigation marks a new low in the tumultuous collapse of StateView, which in just three years went from a rising star to being embroiled in scandal and insolvency. In May, Ontario's Home Construction Regulatory Authority
charged seven StateView companies
and their three executives in 'the illegal sale' of hundreds of pre-construction homes across the Greater Toronto Area.
In its lawsuit filed Feb. 12, Tarion sued three StateView Homes executives — brothers Carlo and Dino Taurasi, and former chief financial officer Daniel Ciccone — for alleged breach of contract. The second suit, filed about two weeks later, targets not only the executives, but also their spouses as well as a large group of StateView-affiliated firms. The second lawsuit also alleges fraudulent conveyance and unjust enrichment.
Tarion says both statements of claim intend to cover the same losses but the second one has not been served on the defendants.
In response to the first claim, StateView Homes CEO Carlo Taurasi, one of the defendants, denies all allegations in a statement of defence. If Tarion has sustained any of the alleged damages, 'those damages are not attributable in whole or in part to any actionable act or omission on the part of Carlo,' he said in the defence.
StateView Homes's Carlo Taurasi (left) and Dino Taurasi (right).
Ciccone says he intends to defend. Dino Taurasi, vice president of the StateView group of companies, did not respond to requests for comment.
An
October 2023 Star investigation
found StateView collected tens of millions of dollars in deposits from homebuyers for hundreds of homes that it did not have authorization to sell. In at least one case, the developer solicited deposits for unbuilt houses on land StateView did not yet own.
Tarion alleges in the Feb. 12 suit that the three executives refused to honour the agreements to indemnify the agency for losses from its repayment of the purchasers' deposit claims, and seeks more than $87 million to cover its deposit payouts and associated fees.
Under the agreements, Tarion claims that the Taurasi brothers and the former CFO agreed to 'indemnify and save Tarion harmless' from any losses that may arise resulting from the failure of StateView to perform its obligations, or from the payment by Tarion of the purchasers' deposit claims.
An indemnity agreement involves a person other than the builder agreeing to indemnify Tarion if the builder does not satisfy its obligations, according to Tarion.
Under a controversial new rule, some homebuyers may end up getting less deposit coverage if things go awry with their builders.
Under a controversial new rule, some homebuyers may end up getting less deposit coverage if things go awry with their builders.
In his statement of defence, Carlo denied that he is responsible for any alleged unmet obligations to Tarion and denies agreeing to indemnify Tarion from any losses arising from the failures of StateView businesses. The CEO also denies 'being a party to any agreements' with Tarion, and denies that Tarion is entitled to any damages regarding the alleged agreements.
'In any event, the alleged damages are too excessive and too remote,' he states.
None of the allegations have been tested in court. The litigation is still in the early stages and there are no scheduled court dates.
The second lawsuit, filed on Feb. 27, alleges that the StateView companies have fundamentally breached purchase agreements by failing to construct and deliver the homes to purchasers, failing to hold the deposit in trust, and failing to refund deposits to purchasers. It also alleges the developer failed to indemnify Tarion for all losses and costs that Tarion suffers by StateView's failure to perform obligations.
Tarion has not served the statement of claim on the defendants. In Ontario, a claim can be served within six months after filing.
The lawsuit identifies the Taurasis, Ciccone and their spouses as well as 15 StateView-affiliated companies as those who could have received the deposit proceeds, and alleges that the recipients have been unjustly enriched by withholding or receiving the deposits from homebuyers.
It alleges that the deposit proceeds were transferred out of the StateView companies associated with development projects when StateView knew that it was on the eve of insolvency. Tarion alleges that the developer moved the monies 'with the intent to hinder, delay, or prejudice the purchasers, and/or to prefer the interests of other creditors over those of the purchasers.'
Most of the pre-construction developments that StateView Homes marketed between 2020 and 2023 have never been built.
Ciccone, a defendant of the claim, told the Star, 'The purported second claim by Tarion has not been served nor did I have any awareness of the action prior to your inquiry. It would be inappropriate for me to comment or for you to publish information relating to a matter which has not been served on the defendants.'
The Taurasi brothers did not respond to requests for comment about the allegations contained in the second lawsuit.
After a rapid expansion around 2020, at least eight StateView-affiliated companies were put under receivership, and most of the pre-construction developments they marketed between 2020 and 2023 have never been built.
The 2023 Star investigation found that the Taurasi brothers appeared to have spent money lavishly when StateView allegedly sold pre-construction homes without authorizations across the GTA. They bought nine units in the Woodbridge industrial plaza for $15 million, one of which was seen at the time storing cars including a 2002 Corvette and a leased Maserati. In 2022, videos posted on TikTok appeared to show Dino Taurasi taking private jet trips, one to the Bahamas and another to Aruba.
StateView previously told the Star that it worked diligently to make sure that it had the required approvals for any development. Carlo Taurasi said while StateView always intended to complete all the projects, they could no longer do that because of events that were outside their control.
Even if Tarion is successful in its lawsuits, it's unclear how much there'll be to recoup.
The statements of claim came at the tail end of a slew of insolvency proceedings where StateView's assets and funds have been distributed to pay back its secured creditors such as mortgage providers and suppliers.
One of the firms, StateView Homes (On the Mark) Inc., has been assigned into bankruptcy by a receiver. It owed a creditor $19.6 million at the time and the sale of the company's assets covered about $13 million.
Several other StateView firms have been discharged from receivership proceedings after the receiver distributed tens of millions of dollars of funds to the creditors.
In one case, StateView Homes (BEA Towns) Inc. owed its 'first priority' creditor nearly $50 million. The receiver said in a report that the sale proceeds of its property would not be sufficient to repay the creditor in full. BEA Towns was previously marketed as a 218-unit townhome project in Barrie. It remained undeveloped by the time the receivership began.
In total, Tarion has paid out more than $77 million to more than 950 purchasers who were impacted by StateView's actions, Tarion's spokesperson told the Star.
To put that into perspective, the total amount of deposit claims Tarion paid from 2005 to 2021 was about $15 million, just under $1 million per year.
The drain StateView homebuyers' deposit claims took on Tarion's war chest played a big part in impelling Tarion to introduce a controversial new measure to require freehold home purchasers to notify the agency within 45 days after entering into a purchase agreement. If the purchasers fail to do so, they may face reduced deposit coverage should anything go wrong with the development.
Tarion said the new requirement, set to kick in on July 1, will help identify rogue builders earlier but critics say it could end up punishing consumers instead of proactively policing the new home construction industry.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
China Frets Over Nvidia H20 AI Chips, Nvidia Denies Any Backdoors or Tracking Hardware
Now that Nvidia finally has US approval to sell its H20 chips to China, the country is voicing concerns about the AI hardware. It's the latest move in a long-running struggle between the US and China over China's access to modern technology. The announcement is surprising, considering that China's appetite for H20 AI chips is enormous. 'When a type of chip is neither environmentally friendly, nor advanced, nor safe, as consumers, we certainly have the option not to buy it,' Yuyuan Tantian, a China Central Television-affiliated account, wrote on WeChat according to Reuters. The post also suggests that Nvidia may have built a backdoor into its H20 that could, among other things, shut down the chip — in other words a kill switch. Rather than provide its own evidence that the H20 chip is a threat, China seems to want Nvidia to prove that it isn't one. Adding to China's worries is a bill in the Senate that could lead to tracking hardware being attached to chips bound for certain regions and organizations. China's Cyberspace Administration (CAC) brought in Nvidia execs to get details, but the WeChat post suggests that China still has doubts. Credit: Nvidia Nvidia, meanwhile, is having none of this. It responded by telling CNBC that 'cybersecurity is critically important to us. Nvidia does not have 'backdoors' in our chips that would give anyone a remote way to access or control them.' China's concerns about the H20 are likely part of the overall trade tensions between it and the Trump administration. Tariffs (and the threat of them) played a major role in those tensions this year. Although the US has placed tariffs in place that affect a wide swath of products and regions, the H20 chip has endured a particularly public tug-of-war. The US put the brakes on H20 sales to the US earlier out of concern that the chips give China's military technological capabilities that the US has long sought to hamper. Nvidia reportedly has an inventory as large as 700,000 H20 chips ready for sale to businesses in China and ordered more from TSMC, which manufactures the AI chips. But a report by the BBC suggests that Nvidia will pay the US 15% of its revenues from China in a remarkable deal that, in the eyes of some experts, could run afoul of the Constitution. AMD also has apparently agreed to this deal, making it that much more of a dramatic change in US policy.
Business Wire
2 days ago
- Business Wire
Pediatrix Medical Group Announces $250 Million Share Repurchase Program
FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Pediatrix Medical Group, Inc. (NYSE: MD), a leading provider of physician services, today announced that its Board of Directors has authorized a share repurchase program of up to $250 million of the Company's outstanding common stock. 'In view of our strong cash flow, current and forecasted cash balances and relatively low debt levels, our Board has authorized a $250 million share repurchase program, which we plan to use opportunistically,' said Mark S. Ordan, Chair of the Board and Chief Executive Officer. 'We will weigh the use of the repurchase program continually against other potential strategic uses of cash to provide the best long-term return to our shareholders and the strongest future for our business.' The timing and actual number of shares repurchased will depend on a variety of factors, including market price of the shares, general business and market conditions, applicable legal requirements, and alternative investment opportunities. The Company intends to execute the repurchase program consistent with its capital allocation strategy of prioritizing investment to grow the business over the long term. Repurchases may be made through privately negotiated transactions or open market transactions, including pursuant to a trading plan in accordance with Rule 10b5-1 and/or Rule 10b-18 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The repurchase program has a three-year term and may be suspended for periods or discontinued at any time. ABOUT PEDIATRIX MEDICAL GROUP Pediatrix® Medical Group, Inc. (NYSE:MD) is a leading provider of physician services. Pediatrix-affiliated clinicians are committed to providing coordinated, compassionate and clinically excellent services to women, babies and children across the continuum of care, both in hospital settings and office-based practices. Specialties include obstetrics, maternal-fetal medicine and neonatology complemented by multiple pediatric subspecialties. The group's high-quality, evidence-based care is bolstered by significant investments in research, education, quality-improvement and safety initiatives. The physician-led company was founded in 1979 as a single neonatology practice and today provides its highly specialized and often critical care services through approximately 4,400 affiliated physicians and other clinicians. To learn more about Pediatrix, visit or follow us on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and the Pediatrix blog. Investment information can be found at Certain statements and information in this press release may be deemed to contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the 'Securities Act'), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements may include, but are not limited to, statements relating to the Company's objectives, plans, strategies and financial performance, statements regarding the amount, timing and execution of, and sources of funding for, repurchases under the repurchase program, and all statements, other than statements of historical facts, that address activities, events or developments that we intend, expect, project, believe or anticipate will or may occur in the future . These statements are often characterized by terminology such as 'believe,' 'hope,' 'may,' 'anticipate,' 'should,' 'intend,' 'plan,' 'will,' 'expect,' 'estimate,' 'project,' 'positioned,' 'strategy' and similar expressions, and are based on assumptions and assessments made by the Company's management in light of their experience and their perception of historical trends, current conditions, expected future developments and other factors they believe to be appropriate. Any forward-looking statements in this press release are made as of the date hereof, and the Company undertakes no duty to update or revise any such statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to risks and uncertainties. Important factors that could cause actual results, developments, and business decisions to differ materially from forward-looking statements are described in the Company's most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and its Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, including the sections entitled 'Risk Factors', as well the Company's current reports on Form 8-K, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and include the impact of the Company's practice portfolio management plans and whether the Company is able to achieve the expected favorable impact to Adjusted EBITDA therefrom; the impact of the Company's termination of its then third-party revenue cycle management provider and transition to a hybrid revenue cycle management model with one or more new third-party service providers, including any transition costs associated therewith; the impact of surprise billing legislation; the effects of economic conditions on the Company's business; the effects of the Affordable Care Act, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and potential additional healthcare reform; the Company's relationships with government-sponsored or funded healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, and with managed care organizations and commercial health insurance payors; the Company's ability to comply with the terms of its debt financing arrangements; the impact of management transitions; the timing and contribution of future acquisitions or organic growth initiatives; the effects of share repurchases; and the effects of the Company's transformation initiatives, including its reorientation on, and growth strategy for, its hospital-based and maternal fetal medicine businesses.
The Hill
2 days ago
- The Hill
Ex-DOJ antitrust official tears into agency leadership over MAGA-friendly lobbying
A former top official in the Department of Justice's (DOJ) antitrust division slammed several members of the agency's senior leadership Monday for allegedly allowing politically connected lobbyists to influence decision making. Roger Alford, who previously served as principal deputy assistant attorney general, was fired last month amid internal divisions over the handling of the Hewlett Packard Enterprise-Juniper Networks merger. In his first remarks since the ouster, Alford described a battle within the DOJ's antitrust division between 'MAGA reformers and MAGA-In-Name-Only lobbyists.' 'The MAGA-In-Name-Only lobbyists and DOJ officials enabling them are pursuing a different agenda,' he said at the Tech Policy Institute Aspen Forum. 'Their loyalty is not to the President's antitrust agenda or to rebuild confidence and integrity in the DOJ,' he continued. 'Regardless of the outcome, their commitment is to exert and expand their influence and enrich themselves as long as their friends and supplicants are in power.' Alford was dismissed for insubordination last month, alongside Bill Rinner, deputy assistant attorney general and head of merger enforcement. At the center of the dispute is the HPE-Juniper merger, which the Trump administration sued to block in January. However, the DOJ announced a proposed settlement in late June, allowing the merger to go forward as long as HPE divests its division for small and medium businesses and licenses Juniper's software to competitors. The settlement was approved after Attorney General Pam Bondi's chief of staff Chad Mizelle stepped in and overruled Gail Slater, the head of the antitrust division, according to CBS News. Alford took particular aim at Mizelle, as well as Stanley Woodward, who is nominated to serve as associate attorney general. 'The core problem is simple: AG Bondi has delegated authority to leaders like her Chief of Staff Chad Mizelle and Associate Attorney General nominee Stanley Woodward who do not share her commitment to the rule of law and to one tier of justice for all,' he said Monday. 'Although I am limited in what I can say, it is my opinion that in the HPE/Juniper merger scandal, Chad Mizelle and Stanley Woodward perverted justice and acted inconsistent with the rule of law,' Alford added. He accused some at the DOJ and in the Trump administration of favoring parties and lobbyists considered as being on the 'same MAGA team,' while disfavoring 'enemies of MAGA.' 'Aware of this injustice, companies are hiring lawyers and influence peddlers to bolster their MAGA credentials and pervert traditional law enforcement,' he said.. Slater has reportedly told companies not to engage with the administration through Trump-affiliated lobbyists, spurring additional tensions within the antitrust division. 'The Department of Justice is now overwhelmed with lobbyists with little antitrust expertise going above the Antitrust Division leadership seeking special favors with warm hugs,' Alford said. 'On numerous occasions in a variety of matters we implored our superiors and the lawyers on the other side to call off the jackals,' he continued. 'But to no avail. Today cases are being resolved based on political connections, not the legal merits.' The Hill has reached out to the Justice Department for comment on Alford's criticism. Several Senate Democrats have called for the DOJ inspector general to conduct an investigation into the HPE-Juniper settlement, pointing to 'possible politicization' in how the agency analyzes mergers and acquisitions. They also pressed HPE over its hiring of consultants, which they described as 'an apparent attempt to assert undue influence, if not coercion' to settle the DOJ lawsuit. The company has argued its $14 billion acquisition of Juniper was 'appropriately approved with certain remedies' and is 'in the public interest and will promote further competition' in the market.
