Landlord in hot water for refusing a renter housing because of his employer
A prospective landlord refused a renter from British Columbia accommodation because of the renter’s employer.
It’s an interesting case from the BC Human Rights Tribunal that illuminates how small the world truly is.
It’s also a prime example of knowing your rights as a renter to make sure you’re not being discriminated against.
This case has a few layers.
- You might also like:
- How far $1M goes for a home in Canada compared to the USA
- Why some BC residents are skipping meals, considering leaving
- BC renter moves out after two weeks, sues due to alleged knife incident
- Construction for Canada's new tallest building is about to break records in Toronto
Zachary Cameron and his family had been looking for a home to rent on Salt Spring Island for nearly a year when the respondent in the tribunal case, David Jones, refused to rent to them because of the identity of Cameron’s employer.
So Cameron filed a complaint with the BC Human Rights Tribunal. Jones applied to dismiss Cameron’s complaint, but the tribunal denied it.
Cameron alleged discrimination in tenancy based on a lawful source of income. While Jones denied discriminating, he admitted that Cameron’s employer was the “only reason” he refused to rent to him.
Here’s where things get interesting.
Jones told the tribunal that Cameron’s employer was actually his former tenant, and he characterized that former tenant as racist. Most of Jones’s submissions to the case have nothing to do with Cameron at all, but are instead about Cameron’s allegedly racist employer.
“I understand that Mr. Jones submits this evidence to explain why he did not want to rent to Mr. Cameron,” the tribunal said.
The tribunal said the explanation was insufficient to show that Jones was reasonably sure to establish a defence at a hearing.
It also suggested that there was no evidence linking Cameron to his employer’s supposedly racist ways, meaning there was no reason to refuse accommodation by association.
“Jones has submitted no evidence that would allow me to determine that he is likely to prove a rational connection between this standard and the operation of the tenancy. There is no evidence or argument before me that employees of Mr. Jones’s former tenant could not be suitable tenants themselves,” the tribunal concluded.
Cameron’s complaint will now go to a hearing.