A rental dispute between former roommates went to a BC Civil Resolution Tribunal hearing, with one side suggesting rent was unpaid and the other saying their deposit wasn’t returned.
Zhang rented a room from Liu, and in a publicly posted decision, Min Liu filed a claim against Junwei Zhang, who filed a counterclaim against Liu.
Despite living in the rented apartment, Liu said Zhang refused to pay the final month’s rent ($1,000).
Zhang claimed that Liu didn’t return his $500 security deposit and $100 key deposit, claiming double those amounts for $1,200.
- You might also like:
- Unlikely BC city becoming rental hotspot with jump in average rates
- Moving to BC? Here's how to avoid being duped when finding a place to rent
- Crackdown coming for illegal Airbnb short-term rentals in BC
The tribunal waded through the evidence, and this is what it found.
Both parties entered into a rental agreement on March 8, 2022. A standard residential tenancy branch agreement was signed. Zhang agreed to rent a bedroom with a private bathroom from Liu. The apartment belonged to Liu’s landlord, referred to as TL.
The initial agreement would last six months, from May 1, 2022, to October 31, 2022. After that, it would be a month-to-month term. On February 12, 2023, TL notified Liu that they’d need the apartment back on June 1, 2023, agreeing to waive Liu’s payment for May 2023.
Because of TL’s request, Zhang emailed Liu on February 22 to say they were ending the tenancy on March 31. Zhang told Liu that he would not be paying rent for March, as Liu wasn’t paying rent for May. Liu disagreed, demanding March’s rent, but Zhang refused.
Zhang moved out on March 31, 2023. On April 17, Zhang emailed Liu, including his address, so that Liu could return their key and security deposit. Liu said they were entitled to keep it due to the alleged damage Zhang caused. Liu also claimed they didn’t properly clean the apartment before leaving.
The tribunal didn’t agree with Zhang’s claims, finding that Zhang indeed owed Liu $1,000 for unpaid rent. However, Zhang ended up walking away with damages in this decision.
Firstly, Zhang returned his key, entitling him to the $100 key deposit.
A part of the BC rental agreement suggested that Liu had to repay the security deposit unless two conditions were met. One condition was that Zhang could agree in writing to let Liu keep the deposit as payment for unpaid rent or damage. That didn’t happen. Second, Liu could apply for dispute resolution under the RTA, claiming some or all of the deposit “within 15 days from the later of the tenancy’s end or when Mr. Zhang provided a forwarding address.”
If Liu did not comply, they would not be able to claim the security deposit “and must pay Mr. Zhang double the amount of the deposit.”
“In conclusion, I find Min Liu is entitled to $1,000 for March’s unpaid rent, and Mr. Zhang is entitled to $1,100 in damages for the unreturned deposits. After deducting Min Liu’s $1,000 award from Mr. Zhang’s $1,100 award, I order Min Liu to pay Mr. Zhang $100 in damages,” the tribunal decided.
Liu was ordered to pay Zhang $105.28 within 14 days of the decision.
Follow Channels and Categories