Tenant wins thousands after belongings were thrown on the lawn in B.C. eviction case
A B.C. tenant claimed that her roommate threw her belongings on the front lawn in a wrongful eviction case.
According to a BC Civil Resolution Tribunal dispute decision, the applicant was subletting a room in a house that the respondent was renting. The applicant claims that the respondent unlawfully evicted her, threw her things on the lawn, and kept other items.
She claimed $3,963.21 in damages.
The respondent admitted that she put the applicant’s things outside but denied keeping anything. She also counterclaimed for $1,000 in lost rent.
In April 2023, the applicant, RK, began subletting a room in her house that was rented by the applicant, NA, and NA’s family. There was no written sublet or roommate agreement.
Sometime in summer 2024, the relationship broke down between the two parties. In late July or Early August, NA gave RK a document serving as a one-month notice to end the tenancy “for cause.”
The notice suggested that RK significantly interfered with or unreasonably disturbed another tenant and that RK had to move out by Aug. 21, 2024. RK disputed that, suggesting that the agreed-upon move-out date was actually Sept. 15.
NA didn’t dispute that.
RK said that on Sept. 6, she came home and found her belongings had been thrown on the front lawn of the house. She said many of her things were missing, so she called the cops. While waiting for the police to arrive, a neighbour helped her move her things to the garage. Upon arrival, the police weren’t able to help her find her missing items.
NA said that she put RK’s things on the lawn in view of the home’s surveillance system to ensure nothing went missing.
In a phone call between RK and NA’s brother, submitted to the tribunal, it was acknowledged that someone may have taken RK’s items after they were thrown outside.
RK retained a legal advocate who sent NA a letter about the missing belongings. They asked for the security camera footage, but NA did not provide the footage. The tribunal said that since NA didn’t provide the footage or explain why she didn’t, it inferred that someone did indeed take RK’s belongings.
On Jan. 22, 2025, RK’s legal advocate sent a letter to NA demanding $3,694.21, including a list of missing items. The items included:
- $100 for an orange suitcase
- $300 for an iPhone 12
- $2,839.21 for a 22-carat gold chain
- $350 for missing kitchen items
After analyzing the items and requested payment, the tribunal ordered NA to pay RK $3,694.21 in the B.C. eviction fight. With tribunal fees, NA was ordered to pay $3,894.21 within 30 days of the decision. The tribunal dismissed the counterclaim.