Water damage in a B.C. rental suite kitchen led to forced repairs, and the renter claimed he faced eviction without notice, leading to a legal fight initiated by the tenant.
The applicant in a BC Civil Resolution Tribunal dispute, who was renting a room from the landlord, claimed he was evicted without notice. The claim included an accusation that the landlord did not provide quiet enjoyment of the property.
The renter claimed $5,000 for the return of the rental deposit, one-half month’s rent, relocation expenses, and damages for breach of quiet enjoyment.
In response, the landlord said there was no rental agreement and that the tenant damaged the property and “had to leave” so that urgent repairs could be completed. The landlord also counterclaimed $5,000 for property damage.
As you may have read in similar tribunal decisions, not having a formal written agreement does not necessarily mean there’s nothing binding in a tenancy.
According to the dispute decision, the tenant said he rented a room from the respondent’s apartment between Feb. 1 and March 28, 2025, paying a $400 deposit, with rent set at $700 per month.
The landlord was out of the country until Feb. 9 and told the tribunal that when she returned, she discovered water damage in the kitchen. An assessment from a restoration company on Feb. 14 suggested that the floor was unsafe and that there were electrical and biological hazards stemming from mould.
The landlord said a notice about the damage was posted in the apartment. She also said that the strata checked out the apartment, telling occupants to stay out.
There was no evidence provided about the cause of the water damage, and the tribunal said that the fact that the applicant was present does not equate to proof that he was responsible.
At some point, the applicant moved out, and she also asked the tenant to move out, but he refused. The decision states that the landlord claimed the renter stopped paying rent and was the only person still living in the apartment after she left. This was unproven.
The tenant also wasn’t able to prove that he was evicted without notice. He also tried to make a claim about the landlord not offering quiet enjoyment, when he pointed to the fact that the landlord had installed a camera in the living room, invading his privacy. He included a photo of the camera mounted on a wall as evidence.
The landlord said it was to protect the property, but it wasn’t clear what she was trying to protect the property from. At some point, the tenant unplugged the camera. The tribunal decision called it a “minor incident” and not a breach of quiet enjoyment.
While the tribunal dismissed most of his claims, it did agree he was entitled to a portion of March’s rent and his damage deposit.
As a result of the B.C. eviction dispute, the landlord was ordered to pay the tenant $488.19 in damages. The tribunal dismissed the landlord’s counterclaim due to a lack of evidence.
If you’re worried about your renter rights, including fear of wrongful eviction in B.C., you can check out the rules and what’s acceptable on the B.C. Government rental portal.