Vancouver landlord loses appeal, must pay former tenants $21K for wrongful eviction
Posted October 15, 2023 6:14 pm.
Last Updated October 15, 2023 6:18 pm.
A Vancouver landlord has lost her appeal to overturn a ruling that said she must pay former tenants $21,600 for wrongful eviction, according to a BC Supreme Court decision Friday.
Tejinder Sidhoo had evicted her former tenants from a property she owns on West 3rd in April 2020, telling them she needed the unit so her daughter could move in, the decision says. Landlords are permitted to evict tenants to allow for family members to move in.
“The tenants moved out of the rental unit by the April 1, 2020, deadline set in the notice to end tenancy,” reads the decision. “However, they later learned that the daughter did not move into the rental unit after they left so they filed a dispute notice with the Residential Tenancy Branch claiming entitlement to a payment of one year’s rent.
“The Arbitrator found that the daughter did not occupy the rental unit as of April 2, 2020, or for a period of six months after the end of the tenancy and awarded the tenants the full amount of their claim, being $21,600.”
Sidhoo said her daughter had not moved in right away due to extenuating circumstances, citing pandemic lockdowns, However, the original decision said the landlord didn’t provide enough evidence of this.
The landlord’s latest appeal was based on her claim that she had not been given adequate opportunity to prove her extenuating circumstances. The judge disagreed.
“I have found the landlord’s affidavit evidence lacking credibility as to what was argued or sought to be argued at the hearing,” the decision said. “I am not persuaded that extenuating circumstances were advanced as a serious issue. Consequently, I am not persuaded the arbitrator’s decision was patently unreasonable for failing to address that issue in the reasons.
“However, even if extenuating circumstances had been asserted as part of the Landlord’s response, I find the result would not have been any different. Thus, even if the reasons inadequately address the extenuating circumstances issue, I would nevertheless decline to set the decision aside.”
