An engineering firm is suing a Campbell River developer for nearly half a million dollars and requests the land at Race Point be sold to recover the debt.
ISL Engineering and Land Services Ltd. claims Ripple Rock Estates developer Niclas Haglund owes $369,547.83, plus interest, for engineering and consulting services it performed in 2021.
ISL alleges it carried out the work, as agreed in the contract with Haglund, the owner of the numbered company that operates as Ripple Rock Estates. However, after submitting the invoice, ISL claims Haglund "refused or neglected" to pay, despite continued demand for payment. Interest over two years of non-payment adds up to $96,258.29.
ISL filed a lien against Haglund for the outstanding bill. The engineering firm says it's entitled to request the land be sold to settle the debt. The firm is also seeking to recover its legal fees.
Four other construction and engineering companies, as well as one credit union, have filed liens in the past two years. Upland Contracting Ltd. filed the first two liens back in 2023, one for $1.6 million and another for more than $600,000 for grading and paving work. The others include First West Credit Union for an undisclosed sum, McElhanney Ltd. for over $60,000, Tybo Contracting Ltd. for $310,000, and Ryzuk Geotechnical Ltd. for $14,000.
In recent years, developers have faced significant challenges with the dramatic spike in costs for materials and labour, alongside ballooning borrowing costs. Residential construction expenses jumped 58 per cent over three years. The borrowing costs for builders have hit their highest levels since the beginning of the century, as banks have set a prime interest rate of 7.2 per cent.
Last January, Upland also filed a lawsuit against Haglund for the more than $2-million tab, and later, filed a response to Haglund's counterclaim in September.
READ ALSO:
In its lawsuit, Upland claims it fulfilled all its contractual obligations and "duly performed" the tasks under both agreements. It claims Haglund's numbered company "failed or neglected" to pay two outstanding amounts for more than $2 million.
Haglund files counterclaim alleging negligence
On Sept. 24, Haglund filed a counterclaim, alleging that Upland left the site with poor water management measures, which led to a sediment "washout" onto the beach and the ocean. This resulted in a Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) inspection on Oct. 12, and the issuing of a corrective measures order.
Haglund's counterclaim also alleges that Upland created two settling ponds that required mechanical pumping each time it rained. Due to pumping and turbidity in the water being pumped, Environment Canada also conducted an inspection of the site. It issued a warning notice on Jan. 3.
Upland files response denying every allegation
On Sept. 20, Upland fired back with a response to Haglund's counterclaim, in which the company denied all the claims made against it, except where it entered into two contracts with Haglund. Upland claims any environmental consequences arising from water management were "caused or contributed" by the developer's failure to provide an adequate design for managing and controlling water, and erosion and sediment. In addition, Upland denies Haglund suffered any damage or loss associated with the DFO's corrective measures order and the warning notice.
Campbell River Mirror contacted DFO for an update on its investigation after reaching out in September. Because the investigation is ongoing, DFO declined to comment.
The Ripple Rock development was approved by Campbell River city council in 2021. The property is located at 6805 Island Hwy, about 10 kilometres north of the city. The plan outlined building nearly 200 new homes overlooking Ripple Rock and Seymour Narrows, with additional plans for a new hotel and commercial spaces. The property is now listed for sale and advertised as a 100-acre waterfront residential and mixed-use investment opportunity.
ISL's civil claim was filed in B.C. Supreme Court last month. No response has been filed. None of the allegations in the claims, counterclaim, or response to the counterclaim have yet to be proven in court.
