A B.C. landlord only received some compensation after they claimed a former tenant caused nearly $1,500 in damages to their rental unit.
In a July 2024 hearing at B.C.'s Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB), the renter and the landlord filed applications for dispute resolution.
The landlord requested $338 for unpaid rent, $1,492.72 for damage to the rental unit, and authorization to retain all or a portion of the tenant's security deposit. The tenant applied for a monetary order of $10,844 for compensation for monetary loss and the return of their security and pet damage deposits.
Both parties also reached an agreement on some claims regarding several items before the hearing. The landlord kept a portion of the security deposit ($307.18), which included the following items: $193.76 for the bi-fold door; $31.35 for the toilet seat; $67.07 for the front door latch; and $15 for a dump fee.
The tenancy commenced on Oct. 1, 2020, and ended on Feb. 29, 2024, with a monthly rent of $2,571.97. The tenant paid a security deposit of $1,200 and a pet security deposit of $1,200 at the onset of the tenancy. The two amounts were calculated at $2,460.44 with interest. However, the tenant vacated the rental unit on March 3, 2024.
The landlord completed a move-in inspection report on Oct. 1, 2020, and the move-out inspection was completed on March 3, 2024. On March 15, the landlord mailed a portion of the security deposits ($629.02) to the tenant. They continued to hold the remaining $1,831.42 of the deposits.
Landlord said the renter overstayed their tenancy
The landlord said the renter overstayed their tenancy by moving out on March 3, 2024, rather than the final day they paid rent (Feb. 29) and sought a monetary order of $338. They estimated the market rent of $3,900 but offered the tenant a monthly rent of $3,500 ($3,500 ÷ 31 = $112.90, x 3 days).
The tenant said they hadn't agreed to the increased monthly rent of $3,500 and had to move out quickly due to the "sudden" increase.
The landlord was requesting $121.45 to replace a refrigerator shelf trim. The tenant said the refrigerator was not working and had to be replaced but both parties negotiated a shared cost, and it was in good condition.
The landlord also requested $250 for patching holes in the walls, and they submitted photos as evidence. However, the tenant said they filled these in. The landlord also testified that they spent $400 in painting costs. The tenant said they had painted their room and their daughter's room.
The landlord said they also paid $280 for professional cleaning services. However, the tenant testified that they left the unit in "reasonably clean" condition. The landlord also requested $262.50 for carpet cleaning services, noting that the tenant was required to have them professionally cleaned. The tenant said they had the carpets professionally cleaned on Dec. 20, 2023, and supplied photos as documentary evidence.
The tenant testified they didn't agree with the move-out condition inspection report.
Was the Landlord entitled to a portion of unpaid rent and compensation for damage or loss?
The tenant did not serve the proceedings package to the landlord within the three days they are required to after receiving them from the RTB. The board noted that it was unfair to proceed with the tenant's application since the landlord did not receive it in the required time. The tenant's application was dismissed entirely with leave to reapply.
The RTB arbitrator found that the landlord established a claim for money owed or compensation for damage or loss under the Residential Tenancy Act for $248.90 for rent at the start of March 2024. However, they did not agree with the amount, noting that the $3,500 was well above the established rent. Instead, the landlord was granted $248.90 ($2,571.97 ÷ 31 days, X 3 days).
The landlord was also awarded $121.45 to replace the refrigerator shelf trim and $400 for repainting. They were unsuccessful in proving that the tenant did not fill in the holes in the walls nor that the renter left the unit unclean. They also failed to establish that the tenant didn't clean the carpets.
The landlord held two deposits totalling $1,831.42 during the time of the hearing. Under section 72 of the RTA, they were permitted to retain the tenant's deposits in the amount of $770.35. Further, the parties agreed the landlord should keep $307.18 as per the mutually settled agreement.
The landlord retained the $1,077.53 of the deposits and was ordered to return the balance of $753.89 to the tenant.
