A B.C. roommate rental agreement was the subject of a BC Civil Tribunal Rental dispute, and it sounds like things got extremely violent after a heavy night of drinking.
According to a tribunal dispute posted July 17, 2026, the applicant, KB, claimed they moved out after a physical altercation between herself and the respondent, KJ.
KB claimed $4,300 in damages for rent she paid, the cost of lost food and belongings, and moving expenses.
KJ filed a counterclaim, claiming that it was KB who attacked her. KJ also claimed that KB later returned and stole and vandalized her belongings. She claimed $4,100 in her counterclaim for damaged personal property and stolen food.
According to the undisputed facts of the dispute, KJ rented a home from a landlord who was not involved in the dispute. The tribunal said that KJ is often not home because she works in a camp for two weeks at a time.
KB lived in the home for free for a few months in 2023. KB returned in spring under a verbal agreement in which she agreed to pay $800 per month, including utilities. KJ was paying $1,050. KJ did not tell her landlord that KB was living with her.
Everything changed on the night of Feb. 6, 2025. On a night out to celebrate the applicant’s birthday, the tribunal stated that KB had been drinking heavily that day. When they returned home, an argument ensued, and it turned physical.
KB called an ambulance and was transported to hospital.
A photo submitted to the tribunal showed deep purple bruising around both of KB’s eyes. KJ’s photos also showed multiple bruises and cuts. She also claimed her tooth was chipped.
After the altercation, KJ left some of KB’s belongings outside for KB’s partner to collect. She also removed the house key from KB’s purse before placing it outside.
When KB returned home and found it locked, KJ wasn’t home and was actually away for work. KB was able to gain access somehow and collect her belongings. She then moved to a new home in a new city.
While KB was the applicant, it was actually KJ with her counterclaim who ended up winning damages.
First, the tribunal sought to determine whether KJ breached the B.C. rental agreement or not.
KB claimed that KJ was the one who assaulted her and locked her out. KJ said KB was intoxicated and was the one who started it. KJ also alleged that KB tried to strangle her with a steel chain, which KB didn’t deny.
The tribunal accepted KJ’s evidence that KB initiated the physical contact, and in doing so, the tribunal said KB fundamentally breached the roommate agreement.
“At that point, [KJ] was relieved from her obligations under the roommate agreement, including the obligation to provide access to the home,” the tribunal said, adding that it dismissed KB’s claim for a rent refund.
The tribunal then sought to determine whether KB damaged KJ’s personal property.
While the tribunal said that KJ proved the tort of battery, it didn’t find that KB was solely responsible, nor were there enough details to find that KJ was acting entirely in self-defence.
KJ didn’t dispute that she hit KB with “a tray of some kind.”
“I find she was an active participant in the contact.
KJ claimed that a necklace and a dress were damaged. The tribunal found that KB was 70 per cent responsible and KJ was 30 per cent responsible.
The tribunal ordered KB to pay KJ $251.20, amounting to $189 in damages and $62.50 in tribunal fees.