A B.C. tenant was ousted from their rental unit for feeding wild birds for over a year.
The tenant applied with The Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) to dispute their landlord's one-month notice to leave with cause.
The landlord's agent testified that the tenant was "consistently and constantly" feeding wild birds at the rental unit, which was a breach of a material term in the rental agreement. The tenant was warned "several times" to stop.
The rental contract supplied to the RTB stipulates that tenants may not have pets unless given special permission by the landlord and must not "encourage or feed wild birds or animals at or near the residential property."
On May 27, 2022, the landlord served the tenant a final written warning regarding the feeding issue. After some time passed, the feeding picked up again and the landlord issued a notice to vacate the rental unit on June 6, 2023.
The tenant claimed other renters also fed wild birds
The tenant testified under oath that he had been feeding the birds but argued that many other renters were doing the same, including some with "extensive and elaborate bird feeders, and one tenant on the ground level who constantly [fed] raccoons and other wildlife."
The tenant also claimed he wasn't aware of the material term forbidding feeding wildlife. Since the section it falls under is called "pets," he didn't read it because he didn't have any.
The landlord's agent argued that the tenant's claims were irrelevant because he was repeatedly warned about the issue.
The RTB sided with the landlord, noting in its ruling that the tenant was repeatedly made aware of the issue and given ample time to rectify it.
As an aside, the RTB noted that other tenants seemed to "appear to be engaged in the feeding of fauna" and these behaviours may cause further issues. It said each tenancy agreement must include the same material term for these tenants to be at fault.
"Indeed, it would be necessary for me to have a copy of every single tenancy agreement of all tenants in the property for me to determine whether and to what extent issues of estoppel might apply. But in respect of this tenancy, the tenant has regrettably breached a material term and ignored his landlord’s requests to stop," the board explained.
The tenant's application to cancel the notice was dismissed and the landlord was issued an order of possession effective Aug. 31, 2023.
