A landlord was unsuccessful in ousting their tenant for having more than the allowable number of pets, according to a 2024 B.C. Residential Tenancy Branch decision. Additionally, the presence of a Canadian flag caused further tension between the tenant and the landlord.
The tenants filed for dispute resolution on Jan. 26, 2024, requesting the cancellation of the landlord's one-month notice to end the tenancy for cause, according to RTB hearing documents.
The tenancy commenced on June 15, 2015, with a monthly rent of $850, and one-time payments of a security deposit of $425 and a pet deposit of $437.
The landlord's representative, identified in documents as "K.T.," said a one-month notice to end the tenancy was served to the tenant on Jan. 22, 2024, because the tenant or a person permitted on the property significantly interfered with or unreasonably disturbed another occupant or the landlord, jeopardized someone's health or safety, and for a breach of a material term of the tenancy.
The landlord said the tenant's "behaviour [was] out of control," including verbal threats and physical assaults of employees on the property. They added that the tenant refused to follow the lease's terms by keeping more than one animal on the property (as per the Oct. 16, 2016, agreement).
Further, the tenant refused after several verbal and written requests/reminders to remove a Canadian flag displayed in a window, claimed the landlord.
Landlord claimed tenant yelled at her, 'made her very uncomfortable'
The representative K.T. testified that when she went to conduct a planned unit inspection on Jan. 4, 2024, to see if there were additional cats, the tenant, identified in documents as "N.B.," "yelled at her, blocked her from entering a bedroom, and pushed past her."
While the tenant N.B. did not touch her, K.T. said "he did yell in her face and push up on her, which made her very uncomfortable." She added that he never threatened her or any other staff or other tenants, but now she "takes the building’s side door."
A copy of an audio recording from the Jan. 4, 2024, inspection was submitted into evidence. In the recording, an angry male voice asks why his home is being illegally entered while the "issue regarding unrepaired pipes is being ignored."
K.T. said the tenants were only permitted one cat, but they had four. She said the tenants were asked on Sept. 27 to reduce the number of cats to two, but the tenants refused. Since the tenants ended the inspection early, the inspector was unable to determine the number of cats.
K.T. also said the tenant frequently complained about noise from the boiler room, and alleged he made videos of staff coming in and out of the building for "unknown reasons." She added that he also yelled at staff and who submitted staff logs indicating the tenant was allegedly yelling and swearing. She also said the tenant made false statements about the landlord.
Tenant claims they never had four cats in the unit
N.B. testified that they never had four cats in the unit. He said he had two cats and a small dog, but he had not been given a limit on how many pets he could have.
Additionally, he said the Canadian flag had been displayed in that window since June 15, 2015, but it had never been an issue for the landlord until about a year and a half ago.
The tenant, N.B., said he wasn't given notice for the unit inspection, and when he objected, K.T. pushed him (not the other way around). He added that K.T. began going through personal items, grabbing things, and then asked about various things.
The RTB arbitrator ruled that the landlord did not "provide witnesses at the hearing to testify to the claims made against the tenants." While the tenant may have raised his voice or used strong language during the inspection, they did not threaten or assault any staff. The staff logs also do not support the finding that the tenant threatened or assaulted the landlord's staff.
Landlord did not enforce terms of tenancy
The landlord also said the tenant breached a material term of the tenancy. While the tenant did breach the associated addendum regarding the number of pets allowed in the unit, and the type of material that may be hung in the window, the breaches do not "constitute breaches of a material term as they do not affect the basic terms of the tenancy agreement as, for example, would be the case for nonpayment of rent," said the arbitrator.
"I find that the landlord’s lack of enforcement of these terms over the course of the tenancy, aside from the recent issuance of cautionary notices, further supports this finding," they wrote.
The landlord may not have waived their right to enforce these terms but their lack of enforcement for them over such an extended time could reasonably be interpreted by the tenants "as acceptance of additional pets and noncompliant window displays." Therefore, they may have felt they were not in breach of the tenancy agreement.
The tenant's application was granted for cancellation of the notice to end the tenancy for cause on March 25, 2024. However, the arbitrator cautioned the tenants not to break more material terms moving forward.
