Builder agrees to a contract with Owner to construct a high$-$rise condominium project. The contract provides that $10$ percent of the total price will be withheld by owner, and will be released to Builder only if Architect $($an independent professional retained by Owner to supervise the project$)$ issues a certificate of completion. When the building is complete, Architect refuses to issue a certificate because she believes there are certain very minor deficiencies $($less than $1\%$ of the contract price$)$ that need correction. Builder agrees that there are deficiencies, but does not want to fix them because its crews have already moved on to other projects. Owner demands that Builder remedy the defects, and refuses to release the final payment without the certificate $.$ If Builder sues, Owner's best argument against liability is probably: B$,$ and C are all good arguments $.$ Owner's duty is conditioned on the certificate, and the certificate has not been issued, so no duty to pay exists $.$ Builder did not substantially perform the contract. Builder was obligated to do the work perfectly, and it failed to do so$.$