A Vernon landlord couple that was penalized for violating the Residential Tenancy Act has lost an appeal and must now pay their former tenants $17,500.
Landlords Duc Lu and Phuong Trinh served the tenants of their Vernon rental home with a two-month notice to end the tenancy on June 16, 2022. According to a May 2 decision by the BC Supreme Court, the landlords were ending the tenancy so that one of their mothers could move into the unit, a type of eviction that is allowed in B.C.
However, court documents show the landlord's mother didn't move in for nine months, and the Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) found the tenants were entitled to compensation because the landlords had failed to have the mother move in within a reasonable period after ending the tenancy for that purpose 乌鸦传媒� a decision the BC Supreme Court upheld.
The tenants disputed the two-month notice and the two parties came to a settlement agreement in November 2022, by which the tenants would leave the property by Dec. 31, 2022, and also pay two months' rent owed to the landlords for a total of $2,700.
The tenants abided by this agreement and left the rental, ending the tenancy, but the landlord's mother didn't move in until August 2023, almost nine months later.
The tenants sought compensation through a dispute resolution process. A RTB arbitrator found the landlords hadn't followed through with their reasons for ending the tenancy and the tenants were entitled to compensation to the tune of $17,500.
After an unsuccessful appeal with the RTB, Lu an Trinh took the matter to the BC Supreme Court and argued the RTB had made a number of errors in coming to its decision.
The landlords claimed there were "extenuating circumstances" that explained why the mother did not move into the unit in a timely fashion, including that she needed to stay in Vancouver to see a doctor there who spoke Vietnamese. They also alleged the tenants had left the house with extensive damages and said they spent $140,000 on renovations to the rental.
However, Justice Steven Wilson took issue with the photos the landlords submitted as evidence of the damage.
"Although they display a general sense of disrepair and uncleanliness at the Rental Home, I note that it is difficult to draw any specific conclusions with respect to the damage done to the Rental Home due to the quality of the photographs," the Justice said. He added the quotes for the renovations amounted to no more than $10,000, far lower than the $140,000 they had claimed.
Regarding the landlord's assertion that the mother had doctors' appointments that didn't allow her to leave Vancouver, the Justice found it noteworthy that the mother attended one of these appointments remotely from Vernon after she moved into the rental home.
"The Landlords provided no further evidence that (the mother) needed to reside in Vancouver for her medical appointments. Finally, the evidence shows that (the mother) had no medical appointments in July or August that would have required her to continue living in Vancouver," Wilson said.
Ultimately, the Justice wasn't convinced by the landlords' arguments that the RTB had misapprehended evidence and concluded that the landlords had failed to prove that the RTB decision was unreasonable.
"This is not a case where the (RTB) Arbitrator failed to appreciate the Landlords乌鸦传媒� evidence or misapprehended that evidence. Rather, the Arbitrator did not accept the Landlords乌鸦传媒� evidence and arguments," Wilson said.
The landlords' petition was dismissed and they are now on the hook for $17,500 乌鸦传媒� equivalent to 12 times the monthly rent during the tenancy plus the security deposit and filing fees 乌鸦传媒� as well as court costs.
