| |
Tenancy Problems - Most Recent Answers
Q:
Landlord issued eviction claiming a wish to use the space for himself or family member.
I recently received an eviction notice and feel that is is completely unfair, morally more so than legally unfortunately. I'm think I am consider a “Tenant in Common” as I live with two other tenants where each of us pays individual rents to the landlord for use of a bedroom and share a living room, kitchen and washroom. We occupy approximately 70% of the basement space. The apartment shares the laundry room with the landlord who lives upstairs. The laundry room has two locking doors; one leading to his portion of the house and one leading into our apartment.
On May 4th, 2008, I delivered, via the landlord's mailbox, six posted dated cheques to pay the rent for the months of May thru October. The next day, May 5th, the landlord returned the cheques with a letter stating that the rent was now fifty dollars more thus bring my rent up to $500 and requested I rewrite the checks. He had mention in passing he might raise the rent February but was not specific on details and since then we had no further communications on the subject. Our relationship had since then soured due to illegal entries on his part which I objected too. Using the paper of the original letter I wrote note refusing to pay as the requested amount did not come with the proper three month written notification and the increase was greater than the allowable amount for 2008 without proper approval of the BC Residential Tenancy Office and returned it along with the original cheques. Five days later the landlord illegally enter my apartment by letting himself in using his own key, yet again, wanting to discuss the issue. Instead, I confronted him about this current, and past, illegal entry to which his response was, “This is not your home. I can come in here anytime I want.” At this point, I ordered him to vacate my home immediately and when he refused I phoned the police and reported him as trespasser. As I was finishing up my call with the 911 operator, the landlord finally revealed that he had entered with an eviction notice. The reason for the eviction was to allow the landlord, or family member, use of the space. Neither of the other tenants received similar notices and until May 10th, there had never been any mention to any of us that the landlord would be requiring the space (my room specifically). The next day I filed a dispute with the RTO under the belief the eviction notice was written up for the purpose of leverage against me to pay the rent increase.
My question would be, how do such eviction disputes typically play out? Is the situation stacked against me so to speak? What can a do present any kind of an argument against the eviction?
I feel the deck is stacked against me even though I feel sure that its my rights which have been violated here. I don't have any concrete evidence as he has the rent increase letter, with my written note on it, and my cheques are in his possession. The landlord has since produced notarized letters for the RTO hearing, from himself and his mother-in-law, stating she will be moving in to help care for the landlord's one year old daughter when his wife returns to work at the end of July. And, that my room is need for storage purposes so as to make room for her upstairs in a room there that is currently being used for storage. I still believe this to all be a ploy, I think that he as plenty of space to accommodate his mother-in-law. But now it's a ploy to get rid of a trouble maker. |
|
|
| A:
I take it that your question really is: "how do such eviction disputes typically play out?" Short version? My experience in handling actual cases similar to yours is that the landlord wins. The tenant disputes that the landlord really intends to use the premises for his own use (immediate family) with the argument being that the landlord isn't actually going to do what he says. Tough sell. The proof of the pudding, as is said, is in the eating. Even if it were initially all a ploy on the landlord's part to get rid of a troublemaker, and the landlord didn't really have a 'good faith intention' of actually doing what he said he would, when challenged the landlord will do what he says, if only to satisfy the letter of the law. In the situation you describe, you'll go to dispute resolution, argue the landlord really doesn't have a 'good faith intention', and the landlord will argue oh yes he does. The dispute resolution officer must make a judgement call, and base it on evidence presented - which means you've got an uphill push and must bring evidence that the landlord ain't gonna' do what he says. For you to be successful, you'll have to bring convincing evidence, which might involve past documented history of failing to do what he says in similar situations, witness accounts of grievous transgressions on the landlord's part along with believable evidence, and this usually the toughest evidence to furnish in landlord-tenant disputes. For you to be successful in fighting off the landlord you'll need to develop a detailed case, with convincing evidence, present it in a civilized, logical fashion, and you must avoid getting into an argument with the landlord during the hearing. The dispute resolution officer is frequently concerned with keeping order in hearings like these, because the nature of the dispute is so contentious and can quickly degenerate into an insulting match. Making it easy on the dispute resolution officer in the hearing by allowing the landlord to come across as a jerk and been seen as the obvious bad guy actually helps your case, and you are going to need all the help you can get in this one! Good Luck, you'll need it! |
|
|
