BC roommate relationship falls apart and results in costly legal fight
Three roommates launched a legal fight against a former roommate over unpaid rent in a BC Civil Resolution Tribunal dispute.
In a publicly posted decision, the trio of roommates claimed that the roommate who left early owed them $2,100 in missed rent payments.
In defence, the respondent said they were released from the agreement and, therefore, didn’t have to pay.
The tribunal did not agree.
- You might also like:
- BC roommates claim thousands in fight over "unbearable" living conditions
- BC roommates end up in court after nasty dispute about eviction and deposit return
- BC roommates face off in legal fight over vacated room's rent
NS, EV, and AO were the applicants who brought their claim against IP.
Everyone involved in the case initially signed a rental agreement that was to end on July 31, 2023. IP’s share of the rent was $1,050.
While everyone involved disagreed on what specifically caused a rift, they agreed that a conflict developed between the three applicants and the respondent. On December 13, 2022, IP informed the other three that they would be moving out on February 1, 2023, months before the rental agreement was set to expire.
IP paid for rent in January and February but stopped after that.
The applicants had to pay IP’s share for March and April to avoid being evicted. Afterwards, they negotiated an early termination of the rental agreement with the landlord.
IP said that they didn’t need to owe for March and April because the landlord had released them from the rental agreement. The roommates attempted to find a new tenant but were unsuccessful.
“They say they met with the landlord and signed a document which said that the landlord would find a new tenant and the respondent would pay rent for January and February,” the tribunal decision states.
In response, the tribunal said, “I do not accept that the landlord released the respondent from the rental agreement. Though the landlord did return the respondent’s damage deposit, the landlord’s texts and emails all say that he expects the respondent to pay rent until the parties found a replacement tenant.”
Ultimately, IP was forced to pay more than the rent she owed.
The tribunal ordered IP to pay $2,100 plus an additional $277.37 in tribunal fees to the applicants.