Vancouver tenants fight evictions and alleged harassment by landlord
Tenants living in a Vancouver West End apartment claim they’ve faced “bad-faith evictions,” harassment, intimidation, and privacy concerns since a new property management company took over the building.
Marie Weeks said she’s lived in Park Beach Manor for over a decade which is “the best location in Vancouver.” While she said the home “isn’t anything fancy,” it’s close to the water, Stanley Park, and she has plenty of neighbours she can rely on and build community with.
However, after tenants at 1925 Nelson Street received their notice that Plan A acquired their building in April, Weeks said living there started to become difficult.
“It’s been very stressful because [the landlord’s] tactics are quite subtly manipulative,” she said.
Weeks has since taken on the role of a spokesperson for the tenant collective and explains that the change in ownership eventually resulted in all tenants being served cease and desist letters from Plan A’s lawyers.
Anoop Majithia, the executive director of Vancouver’s Plan A Real Estate Services, says this prompted tenants to post posters of him with illustrations and captions that read, for example, “Beware of West End slumlords.”
Posters shared around Vancouver. (Submitted by Anoop Majithia)
A QR code on the poster directs people to the Vancouver Tenants Union site, which details the demands the Park Beach Tenants Collective (PBTC) is calling on Plan to act on.
However, Weeks denies PBTC has anything to do with the posters.
Posters shared around Vancouver. (Submitted by Anoop Majithia)
However, Majithia told Daily Hive he does not believe the tenants are justified in saying “Plan A is notorious for causing issues for tenants.” He added that tenants have “totally crossed a line here,” by “executing a poster campaign.” He also said the protest that took place at his office earlier this week and their acts since the company took over the building are “disappointing.”
View this post on Instagram
“My interpretation of their actions is they’re trying to intimidate the landlord into letting them self govern the building,” he said.
This week, when PBTC confronted their landlord, it delivered a collective letter of demands.
Park Beach Tenants Collective and VTU members heading into Plan A Real Estate offices Tuesday, June 11, 2024. (@vancouvertenantsunion/Instagram)
According to Majithia, “The reality is they’re concealing facts.”
Tenants want an end to evictions
One of the seven demands is to urge Plan A to “retract the illegal eviction notice” sent to one tenant, which Majithia explains is up to the BC Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) during an upcoming hearing. In her case, Majithia said there was reason to believe there was a material breach, as a second person (who is not on the lease) lives there.
“This person parks there, he does laundry there, he lives there, and she’s denying it. And well, she’s left it up to us to prove at the RTB… and we’ll have to see what the RTB decides,” he said.
Majithia said the tenant denies the allegations.
Photo of Park Beach Manor at 1925 Nelson Street. (www.plana.pro)
PBTC is also calling on Plan A to”retract the eviction threat” that another tenant is facing and allow her to continue living with her dog.
However, Majithia said that considering the building is not pet-friendly, Plan A “by chance” found out the tenant had a dog. He said that while the tenant said she had permission from the previous landlord, “[the prior landlord] responded very clearly that we have never allowed any dogs in the building.”
Due to the alleged material breach, Plan A sent a letter and told the tenant they had 45 days to correct the breach, Majithia said. If not, the tenant could face a 30-day notice to end the tenancy, which they can dispute with the RTB.
Weeks claims that many of the tenants have pets due to verbal agreements with the previous landlord.
One of PBTC’s demands directly impacts Weeks: It demands that her status as a tenant be recognized. She explained to Daily Hive that despite living in her apartment with her husband for more than a decade, Plan A said she is not an authorized occupant.
“[It is] shocking and terrifying,” she said. “My husband first signed the agreement, it was just his name, and we added mine… and it was an approved application by our previous landlord.”
Weeks said she was also added to the payment platform, but when Plan A took over the building, it removed her from it.
In response, Majithia said he has reason to believe the Weeks’ husband signed the lease, but she “never asked to be a tenant. She just said, ‘I’m applying to be a roommate.'”
“RTB is a broken tool”
Weeks added that, while fighting for tenancy rights, she contacted the RTB, but its response was lacklustre.
“As a tenants collective, our main concern is the RTB is a broken tool that… is only there to benefit landlords, and there’s no mechanism for renters… where a landlord is notoriously behaving in bad faith,” she said.
Privacy concerns
PBTC added after Plan A took over the building it placed security cameras on each floor of the building, “and the camera is directed into people’s apartments on each floor,” Weeks said.
While she admits it is “understandable” to have cameras at the entrances to the building, tenants were concerned about the cameras and the lack of information they had about the footage it was capturing. Tenets eventually sent an email to the landlords to express the concerns, and Plan A provided a security policy that laid out what the cameras were used for but “never addressed our main concern that we just did not give consent,” another spokesperson, Johnathan Petrov, added.
According to Majithia, the security cameras are installed for tenant safety and are all located in common areas. He added a privacy policy was formulated in compliance with legislation.
“But they hate the cameras,” he said.
Additionally, the security camera policy does state that “cameras are not intended to track or monitor tenants in general.”
“As a general guideline, the security camera recordings will not be viewed unless law enforcement requests to see the recordings,” the policy reads.
West End further gentrified: tenants
Amid the uptick in evictions for landlord use of property, PBTC spokespersons say Plan A is removing affordable units from the market, which “further gentrifies the West End.”
“Their main goal really is profit,” Weeks said. “For many of these smaller buildings in the West End, they housed people for decades, a lot of elderly folks, [and] folks on lower income. And so [the landlord’s] goal really is to empty those of us who are paying less rent. And he has so far filled up the additional four units that have been emptied.”
Park Beach Tenants Collective protesting Tuesday, June 11, 2024. (@vancouvertenantsunion/Instagram)
Weeks added that Plan A has “doubled and tripled the rent” and claims that one-bedroom units are being turned into flex units.
Weeks, who’s lived in the building for about 13 years, said she is paying about $1,300 a month for a one-bedroom apartment. Petrov, who moved in a year ago, is paying $1,700 for a studio. According to a listing on the Plan A site, a two-bedroom apartment is on the market for $2,990 a month.
In response to the different rental rates, Majithia said, “That’s just the reality of the tenancies we inherited.”
“Some of them are closer to market, some further away from market… if a tenant is paying less than what the market is, then that’s fine. We have to accept that until that tenancy is over,” he said.
Majithia says the rates new tenants are paying are according to the current market rate.
Petrov said the newly listed units have since been filled with mostly migrant workers and added that he’s had the worried impression that “they’re not very well aware of their tenants’ rights in British Columbia.”
However, Majithia said, “There is no truth to it.”
“It so happens that all of these [new] tenants are East Indian, I believe that subject to some racism.”
“Stretching the truth”: landlord
Weeks said tenants had reservations about the company before the building was sold, as Plan A has been involved in controversy before. Two years ago, the RTB penalized the company $10,000, and last year, CBC reported that the RTB found that when the company tried to evict a tenant, it acted in bad faith.
Regarding the RTB’s decision last year, Majithia said, “We do not agree with that decision, but we accept that decision.” In response to the RTB’s penalty, he said, “That pertains to a debate that we were having with the residential tenancy branch over the form and content of our leases. There were no tenant complaints.”
“That was something initiated… as an administrative manner, and they found that we needed to change our leases, and we fully complied,” he said.
Since taking over the building, Majithia said that the tenets have been “bad-mouthing people and stretching the truth.”
“If you want more autonomy over these kinds of things, then you should go buy a house,” he added. “These are not reasonable requests from tenants.”
Follow Channels and Categories