B.C. man says roommate evicted him after one day in civil case | Daily Hive

Meteoritka/Shutterstock

A renter brought a case to the BC Civil Resolution Tribunal, claiming that he was evicted by his roommate after just one day and lost nearly $2,000 as a result.

According to the tribunal’s decision, the applicant in the case, MB, rented a room where the respondent, RA, lived. MB told the tribunal that he was evicted one day after he moved in and that RA agreed to refund him $1,100 for the month’s rent and $600 for the security deposit.

RA denied evicting MB and told the tribunal that he voluntarily moved out.

You might also like:

According to the facts of the case, MB paid $1,700 to RA to rent a room for the month of April 2024. That included $1,100 for rent and a $600 deposit.

Both parties proceeded informally with no written agreement in place. They also disagreed about when MB moved in.

“The parties’ relationship deteriorated, and the applicant left the apartment in early April 2024,” the decision states.

MB told the tribunal that RA agreed to fully refund his rent and deposit after MB removed his belongings from the apartment. In responding to this claim, the tribunal stated that for a binding settlement to exist, there must be an offer and acceptance of that offer. It adds that the agreement doesn’t have to be signed or written to be enforceable.

Therefore, it was up to MB to prove that an agreement existed. To do so, MB offered a witness statement from a friend named GTD, who had helped MB move his belongings. RA did not dispute the fact that GTD was present. GTD also stated that the parties had an agreement regarding the rent and deposit money.

RA had his own version of events, stating that he first offered to refund MB’s security deposit and to pay for a hotel room that MB could stay in for the remainder of that April. He told the tribunal that MB refused the offer, instead requesting the “full amount.”

RA said he asked MB to return to the apartment, but after MB refused, he went to an ATM to get the money. He said he was waiting for a transfer from his parents so that he could give the money to MB, but that MB left while RA was waiting at the ATM.

“The respondent now refuses to refund the applicant,” the tribunal decision noted.

Based on all the evidence before it, the tribunal found it more likely than not that RA agreed to fully refund MB.

RA had some other claims. RA claimed that MB committed to staying for six months but left in the first. He said that MB should pay $6,100 for lost rent. MB denied these claims, and RA was not able to prove them.

Ultimately, RA had to pay MB $1,917.71, which included the month’s rent, deposit, and tribunal fees.

Want to stay on top of all things Vancouver? Follow us on X