A dispute between a landlord and tenant over a pet damage deposit that wasn’t returned reached the BC Civil Resolution Tribunal.
In the case posted online, a tenant who rented a room from the landlord failed to receive $220 of the full security deposit they paid when moving in.
According to the tribunal’s decision, the landlord said they were entitled to keep $200 because the renter had more cats than the parties agreed on, and they also kept $20 as a common area carpet cleaning fee “for grease stains.”
The landlord wanted the claim dismissed by the tribunal.
Both parties provided evidence and written arguments.
The tenant rented the room from May 20 until August 20, 2023. They agreed to pay $1,050 monthly for rent, $500 for a security deposit, and $200 for a pet damage deposit.
According to the agreement, the landlord was to repay the deposits to the tenant within 15 days of the end of the contract unless the tenant agreed in writing to allow the landlord to keep an amount “as payment for unpaid rent or damage.”
When the tenant moved out, the landlord deducted $200 for a “pet fee,” $20 for a common area cleaning fee, and $60 for a cleaning fee for the tenant’s bedroom, despite the tenant not agreeing to the deductions.
The landlord and tenant didn’t agree on some of the facts in the case. The landlord claimed the tenant agreed to pay a monthly pet fee of $100. The tenant says they initially offered to pay an additional monthly pet fee, but the parties didn’t formally agree to any fees aside from the pet damage deposit.
One of the landlord’s arguments was that the tenant temporarily brought a third cat into the home. However, the tribunal determined that the agreement did not mention any restrictions on the number of pets allowed.
“Text messages between the parties in evidence show that on May 6, 2023, the applicant asked the respondent if she could have two cats in the home for one month. In the messages, the applicant offered to pay an extra 100 yuan (approximately $20 CAD) in rent for that month and to pay for any damage the cats caused. The respondent replied that the cats could stay in the applicant’s room but could not go downstairs due to the respondent’s children’s allergies,” the tribunal decision states.
The landlord also could not provide proof that the cats caused any damage that warranted keeping the pet damage deposit.
Ultimately, the tribunal sided with the BC tenant, ordering the landlord to pay $357.84, which included $220 in damages and the rest in tribunal fees.