A man who claims a hotel improperly evicted him turned to the B.C. Civil Resolution Tribunal in pursuit of justice, seeking monetary compensation.
According to the tribunal decision, the man was staying as a guest at Sandman Hotels, Inns, & Suites. He claims that Sandman improperly evicted him and claimed $2,067 for the return of unused prepaid bookings, $2,500 for lost income, and $133 for car share charges.
In defence, Sandman said it asked the visitor to leave because he wasn’t up-to-date on payments. The hotel told the tribunal that when the guest was asked to pay, he turned disruptive and abusive toward staff, and police had to remove him. It also denied owing the guest any money.
In the tribunal hearing, the guest represented himself while a lawyer represented Sandman.
- You might also like:
- West Vancouver home listed for $23.8M AFTER big price drop
- B.C. landlord ordered to pay evicted tenant who frightened her
- B.C. man says roommate evicted him after one day in civil case
According to the facts of the case, the guest stayed in a room at the Sandman for almost three months. He checked in on Nov 24. 2023, and was removed by police on Feb. 21, 2024. The specific hotel location was not mentioned, but Sandman operates various locations around the province, including on Vancouver Island.
The decision states that a factor contributing to the confusion was that the guest didn’t pay Sandman directly, but instead through a third-party travel website.
Sandman accused the guest of overstaying without paying, then booking through a third-party website again when issues related to payment arose.
According to the decision, “animosity escalated” between the two parties the day before he was evicted. On Feb. 20, Sandman deactivated the guest’s room key. After the hotel called the police, the guest was permitted to stay one additional night before being removed on Feb. 21. While the guest claimed he wasn’t fully refunded, Sandman claimed he still owed over $2,000.
In its decision, the tribunal said it did its best to sift through the “voluminous” and “confusing” evidence submitted by both parties.
One of the first points of consideration for the tribunal was whether or not the guest was entitled to his damage deposit. When he first checked in, he paid a $300 cash deposit. While Sandman claimed that the deposit was applied to his unpaid fees, mainly in the form of parking fees, the tribunal wasn’t satisfied with the evidence supporting that claim and did order the hotel to pay the guest $300.
The guest’s claim that he was double-booked on two occasions, valued at $2,067, also lacked substantial evidence to support it. The tribunal did find one instance of double-booking that it could verify, which occurred on December 26.
There were some other claims from the guest, like the allegation that Sandman improperly withheld his belongings after locking him out of the room. He also says the hotel caused him undue emotional suffering and financial strain. He didn’t claim any damages for these claims, so the tribunal made no findings about them.
He claimed an additional $2,500 in damages because he lost a client due to being locked out of his room. The tribunal dismissed that claim, saying, “Even if I accepted Sandman improperly locked him out, he has not proven his claimed damages.”
The BC Civil Resolution Tribunal dismissed any additional claims that the guest made, but ultimately ordered the Sandman hotel to pay him $467.51 (for the deposit and the double booking on December 26) in damages within 30 days of the decision.