Family-use eviction allowed in controversial Vancouver rental battle

A Vancouver man who lives in a multi-unit rental building owned by a property management company thought he didn’t have to worry about a family-use eviction.

But Marpole resident Ron Martin is spending this week packing his things to move out of the one-bedroom apartment he’s called home for 11 years after the Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) upheld an eviction for the property manager’s son to move in.

“You know that sinking feeling in your stomach when things aren’t going right? I’ve had that for months,” Martin said.

You might also like:
• Longtime Vancouver tenant paying $1,060 per month questions family-occupancy eviction
• Family-use evictions force some Vancouver tenants to pay double rent
• Family-occupancy eviction disputes rise in BC as rents and mortgages skyrocket

Martin lives in a 35-unit Heather Street apartment called Crown Court, which land title documents confirm is owned by his landlord, Hardy Enterprises. Kathryn Hurwitz, who is listed as a property manager for the company on LinkedIn, is identified as the landlord on an eviction notice Martin got in the fall for her son to move in.

Martin, who pays $1,060 per month in rent, questioned the eviction from the start. BC’s rent controls mean landlords can only increase rent by a set amount every year for continuing tenancies. He believed his landlord simply wanted him out to charge market-value rent for the unit. He disputed the eviction and had his RTB hearing on January 4.

To Martin’s dismay, the arbitrator sided with his landlord — upholding the eviction.

Hurwitz’s son, Paul Hurwitz, intends to occupy the unit. In a letter to the arbitrator, Paul explained he’d been living in Europe for the past few years but lost his job in film animation due to the writer’s strike. He added his parents, both being over 80, also influenced his decision to return home.

But Martin questioned why the son would want to live in his “not very nice” unit.

Martin has to be out of his home by January 31. He’s searching for new accommodation as far away as Surrey but hasn’t had luck yet.

His new housing budget is $1,800 — nearly double what he’s paying now.

If he’s not able to sign a lease before February 1, he’ll have to move his things into storage and stay with friends. He’ll be homeless.

“The competition and the market, the places are either tiny or it’s not very clean, and it’s noisy — or it’s great, and there are a dozen other applicants,” he said.

BC’s Ministry of Housing explained corporate landlords can use the family-use eviction pathway as long as it’s a family corporation where the company is entirely owned by one individual and their immediate family members or siblings.

“The Province knows that many landlords need to legitimately reclaim their units. We also know that evictions initiated under false pretenses continue to happen,” it said.

Robert Patterson, lawyer and tenant advocate with the Tenant Resource and Advisory Centre (TRAC), which assisted Martin through the RTB process, said he’s disappointed to see what arbitrators will accept from landlords with little to no corroborating evidence.

In Martin’s case, neither Hurwitz nor her son attended the hearing in person. But an unsigned, undated letter from the son was entered into evidence.

“By uncritically relying on such evidence, Arbitrators deprive tenants of any meaningful way to challenge the stories their landlords put forward,” Patterson said.

Patterson also said he routinely sees landlords claim to be the sole owner without being required to show documentary evidence. He wants to see tenants get more of a fair chance to defend against the loss of their homes — and for landlords’ stated move-in intentions to actually make sense.

“We know that this kind of eviction for landlord’s use is driving BC’s high eviction rate – which is the highest in the country, almost twice the national average, with the highest proportion of these kinds of evictions,” Patterson said.

If Martin can prove his eviction was in bad faith — that the landlord’s child didn’t actually move into the unit — he’ll be eligible to receive 12 months’ rent as compensation. But it won’t mean he’ll be able to get his home back.

His only other option for recourse is a judicial review of the RTB’s decision, but he doesn’t feel he has the bandwidth to go through with it. The stress and financial strain of getting a lawyer would be too much, he thinks.

“Emotionally, I’m a mess,” he said. “I’m totally disgusted with the system. Any landlord that owns a building can do this at any time.”

Daily Hive has reached out to the Hurwitz family and BC’s Ministry of Housing for comment.