A BC landlord sought to overturn a Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) arbitrator’s decision that would cost him nearly $40,000 for 12 months of compensation to a former renter.
Sudesh Mishra filed a petition for judicial review, asking the BC Supreme Court to set aside the arbitrator’s decision ordering him to pay a renter $38,559.97, which included a damage deposit.
The BC Supreme Court case revolves around a rental property in East Vancouver.
On or around September 1, 2023, Mishra served Lucas Hansen with a two-month eviction notice, citing the landlord’s use of the property as the reason. The effective move-out date was November 1, 2023. The property in question is located around East 1st Avenue in Vancouver.
When Hansen moved out as requested, his rent was $3,075 per month.
The BC Supreme Court decision cited the Residential Tenancy Act, which states that if a landlord is ending the tenancy to occupy the vacated unit, “He must pay the tenant an amount that is equivalent to 12 months’ the monthly rent payable under the tenancy agreement unless the landlord establishes that the stated purpose for ending the tenancy was accomplished within a reasonable period after the effective date of notice and that he occupied it for a period of six months.”
The decision says that the landlord could be excused from this if there are “extenuating circumstances that prevent the landlord from accomplishing this.”
After Hansen had moved out, the new tenants, who weren’t the landlord, contacted him. They provided a copy of an order of possession they obtained from the RTB against the landlord on February 22, 2024.
The new tenants moved in early November 2023, shortly after Hansen moved out. Another tenant moved in December 2023.
“A subsequent dispute unfolded regarding the tenants and the landlord on December 16, 2023,” the court decision states without going into detail.
The arbitrator found sufficient evidence to suggest that the landlord did not follow through with his reason for evicting Hansen.
“Based on the evidence, the arbitrator concluded that the petitioner did not prove that he had occupied the property within a reasonable time and for at least six months,” the BC Supreme Court decision reads.
The landlord claims that he moved his belongings into the rental property on November 1 and then left on a trip to eastern Canada on November 5 for military training until December 9. He said that during that time, the property was occupied by one “extra person.” He added that the unit was “so full of belongings that he was not able to reoccupy the room that he had reserved for himself.”
The BC landlord also claimed that the roommates were “using injectable hard drugs and possessed drug paraphernalia, the usage of which was documented during the eviction.”
Mishra suggested that he was denied procedural fairness, a claim the BC Supreme Court investigated. He couldn’t attend an August 2024 RTB hearing because he participated in a different military operation. However, the RTB did give him the option to engage in a review process, during which he could’ve presented his case and provided explanations.
“While the initial hearing may have been problematic due to his absence, the review process provided a meaningful remedy, allowing him to rectify any procedural gaps. Importantly, fairness in administrative proceedings does not guarantee a perfect process, but requires that the process as a whole is fair and provides the affected parties a reasonable opportunity to be heard,” the court said.
The BC Supreme Court decision pointed to some relevant case law. Blouin v. Stamp, 2021 BCSC 411, established that a landlord couldn’t satisfy the requirement to occupy a rental by taking over a portion of the unit while renting out the remainder.
“In Blouin, the landlords reclaimed one bedroom of a two‑bedroom rental unit for personal use as an office space while reconfiguring and renting out the remaining space on an Airbnb.”
In conclusion, the decision pointed to a probably smoking gun that suggested that while Hansen was paying $3,075 per month after Mishra took over, he tried to rent out the rooms for $4,000 per month.
Mishra’s claim that the decision was unreasonable was dismissed, and the BC Supreme Court upheld the arbitrator’s decision.