In 2006, Roman and Jennifer Cosner of Reynoldsburg, Ohio sued builder Maronda Homes because, as reported by the Columbus Dispatch, "[Maronda] sold them a defective house... and didn't correct the problems." Those problems, among "other structural problems," included a defective foundation, an undersized heating and air conditioning system, leaking plumbing and buckling roof shingles....which allowed moisture into the structure and caused mold to grow... on basement walls, within the heating and air-conditioning system and in subfloor and carpeting throughout the house."

The Cosners' problems began even before they moved in, as reported by Columbus Local News. Jennifer was assured a carpet stain "was a soda pop stain." But the spot returned in rainy weather and, ultimately, led to Jennifer finding "water squishing between her toes when she walked on the carpet." Visual inspections "found [mold] growing underneath the carpet in the dining room and a bedroom...A hole was also cut on the right side of the residence's stucco exterior and again, mold was found." The couple's son, Roman Jr., began to display symptoms of mold allergy.

The family put in a warranty claim with Maronda and were told to move into a hotel courtesy of the company until repairs could be made. Maronda, though, fought the Cosners throughout the process, going so far as to seek a gag order to have the couple remove critical signs from their property and not speak about the issue with others. According to a May 18, 2006 transcript from NBC 4 in Columbus, the company was chastised by the judge and Jennifer Cosner was able to point out mold in the house's ventilation and basement, an assessment of which revealed "five different molds." "[Maronda] said they'd cover our expenses," Cosner told NBC 4's Nancy Burton. "They have not. Now they're refusing to cover the hotel...They kept saying they'd fix the problems, but it's been 13 months and nothing's been fixed." At the time, only the hole in the stucco exterior had been repaired.

Shortly thereafter, the Cosners sued based on the Consumer Practices Act, which states, "No supplier shall commit an unfair or deceptive act or practice in connection with a consumer transaction" and defines "deceptive" in part as, "That the subject of a consumer transaction is of a particular standard, quality, grade, style, prescription or model, if it is not."

On February 19, the Franklin County Common Pleas jury awarded the couple $731,586 in compensatory damages and $1 million in punitive damages. But because of the Act, "compensatory damages will be tripled to nearly $2.2 million," according to the Dispatch. Additionally, "because jurors ruled that Maronda acted knowingly," the Cosners will also be compensated for their attorney's fees, which will be determined after a March 31 hearing. Dan Mordarski, one of the attorneys who won the case, said the Ohio law typically applies to contracts for future services, but that the trial judge found that it applied in this case because of the existing warranty to fix problems with the house. He added that the Ohio law is modeled on a uniform consumer protection statute and that several other states have similar laws. (By Jonathan Miller - Indoor Environment CONNECTIONS 4/2008)