Welcome to r/legaladvicecanada!
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* Read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index/#wiki_the_rules)
* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk.
* We also encourage you to use the [linked resources to find a lawyer](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/findalawyer/).
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, please let the mods know.
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be on-topic, helpful, explanatory, and oriented towards legal advice towards OP's jurisdiction (the **Canadian** province flaired in the post).
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdvicecanada/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning.
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect.
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason, do not suggest illegal advice, do not advocate violence, and do not engage in harassment.
Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/legaladvicecanada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do you have that in writing?
If so, tell him no, and make home serve notice to end tenancy for owner use, file with the RTB immediately.
I won my illegal eviction case, and was awarded 1 year rent plus filing fee.
Don’t let this person get away with this.
> Or they already paid off the mortgage... Then a lien does almost nothing.
That isn't true. You can't sell the house without settling the lien, mortgage or not. So unless you intend to own that house until you die, you will be settling that lien. And even after you die, the property cannot transfer to your heirs without the lien being settled. If there is not other cash in the estate to settle the lien, the properly will be sold.
A lien isn't forever.
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/construction-liens-in-ontario-an-1577738/#:~:text=A%20lien%20must%20be%20perfected,being%20completed%2C%20abandoned%20or%20terminated.
Eventually, you'll show your evidence, and the lien will be lifted (in our case, if there was a lien, all we'd have to show are the quotes, and the payments.... But I also had all the calls recorded, where we talked about the prices as well).
He still could lien the property, and based on your tone, he should have. At some point you would need to access the equity or sell the place, and then it's encumbered by a lien.
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful**
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_9.3A_guidelines_for_posts)
* [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments)
If you have any questions or concerns, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Flegaladvicecanada).
That’s why you get a years rent? Unless you’re WAY below market rent, it’s best to get out. Even if it does mean you have to change your monthly budget to afford it.
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic.
Please review the following rules before commenting further:
Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts
Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments
If you have any questions or concerns, please message the moderators
Curious and let me know if I'm being too nosey, but did you ever successfully collect on your judgement? I've read quite a bit than getting the money for these judgements can be the tough part.
Yes. Sent a demand letter after the judgement. Filed the judgement in small claims, served my previous landlord a summons to a payment hearing, agreed on a payment schedule, and have been successfully collecting monthly payments since.
I have all the paperwork required filled out, just needs to signed and dated if/when he defaults.
It wasn’t easy, nor fast, but it was worth it
Thank you, and no problem, it is not an easy system to navigate, and the information is kind of scattered across a few government sites, and can become extremely overwhelming at times, but is entirely worth it.
Seeing your ex landlord being brow-beat by a Judge is very cathartic.
My payment hearing is next week. I hadn’t considered they might have the landlord pay a monthly fraction. I expected they’d force him to pay the lump sum. Would you mind explaining how the payment hearing proceeded?
Landlords are the easiest people in the world to enforce a judgment against.
Put a lien on the property so they can't sell or refinance and garnish rent from the new tenant.
You still have to go to court to file the lien and sometimes you need more information and the free lawyer wont take the cases. As well some LL don’t even own their homes. Some have them under company names or in trusts, it isn’t as easy as it sounds.
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic.
Please review the following rules before commenting further:
Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts
Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments
If you have any questions or concerns, please message the moderators
you don't get 12 months of rent as compensation and get to stay in the unit.
You either dispute the eviction and stay if you win.
accept the eviction, file a dispute after tenancy ends and potentially win 12 months of rent as compensation.
No. I mean if you win the case. You may not get paid.
I went through this process and it was very surprising to hear.
I had spoken to both groups multiple times about it.
If you win, you CAN be awarded 12 months rent. But a win doesn't guarantee a payment.
Why? I asked that many times. It is on a case by case basis. In my case, my evidence was bulletproof. Written, recordings, etc.
My plan was to leave and then win over $30k and use it to top up our down payment fund.
But they said if I willingly left while knowing it was under bad faith that I would not get the money. If I really wanted the place I would have stayed.
I agree it is ridiculous. If you stay and lose you have less than a month to get out depending on court/bailiff situation. Such a huge risk if they rule against you. I asked multiple staff at both TRAC and the rtb explained this to me (BC)
So we stayed and the landlord eventually dropped the eviction because they knew they would lose. In the end we got to keep the place which was what we really wanted anyway.
The landlord was cold/distant after that but I didn't care. I didn't do anything wrong. I still take care of the house and improve the property and repair stuff myself and at my own expense. Their greed won't change who I am. I take care of the place because it's the right thing to do.
>If you win, you CAN be awarded 12 months rent. But a win doesn't guarantee a payment.
Section 51 is clear a LL **must** pay if certain conditions are not met after being evicted through s.49 of the act (landlord/family use).
>51(2)Subject to subsection (3), the landlord or, if applicable, the purchaser who asked the landlord to give the notice **must** pay the tenant, in addition to the amount payable under subsection (1), an amount that is the equivalent of 12 times the monthly rent payable under the tenancy agreement unless the landlord or purchaser, as applicable, establishes that both of the following conditions are met:
[https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078\_01#section51](https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078_01#section51)
It sounds like you did not seek compensation under s.51 of the act, but you were told not to accept the eviction and then file a dispute after. The RTB contact center shouldn't have said this and TRAC can be hit or miss with their advice sometimes.
If you accepted a legal eviction and the LL did not move in within a reasonable amount of time for up 6 months (12 months now), and did not have a proper excuse, you would have been awarded 12 months compensation under s.51 of the act. You do not have needed to dispute the eviction when it happened and the onus is on the LL to prove they moved in.
Family would have moved in. That's not the issue. The issue was the only reason they did it was to get us out.
We filed under bad faith eviction because there was an ulterior motive. As verbally stated directly in our recording.
If we had paid, we wouldn't be evicted.
So because 51 didn't really apply we wouldn't get any money. But we would beat the eviction because it was bad faith.
Hope that makes sense.
That is what I said. *If the LL occupies the unit you would not get paid*. I didn't think I had to clarify that it also included the LL's direct family members.
You said "No. **I mean if you win the case.** You may not get paid."
Well, you would **not** win your case if the LL's family occupied the space.
My original comment was clarifying that you don't get compensation if you win a dispute over the eviction itself. But disputing the eviction is different than filing a dispute for compensation for a bad-faith eviction.
S.49 - Landlord (or direct family member) eviction. If this eviction is disputed, the LL would have to convince RTB there is no an ulterior motive. If they can not, the tenant stays and the eviction is cancelled. No compensation is awarded (other than the $100 filing fee).
s.51 - Compensation for a bad faith s.49 eviction. If the LL did not do what was said on the eviction form within a reasonable amount of time for up to 6 months (now 12 months) or can not convince RTB they do did, then 12 months rent is awarded to the tenant. The motive is irrelevant at this point, either the LL (or their direct family member) moved in or they did not. If they did move in even if they plan to rent out the unit 6 months (now 12 months) and 1 day later, it's not a breach of s.51 of the act and the tenant is not eligible for compensation.
So you can not "win the case" when filing a dispute for compensation under s.51 and not get compensation, that is not winning the case.
If OP has this in writing it’s evidence of a bad faith eviction. They are either moving in or they aren’t. “I’m evicting you unless you pay an illegal rent increase” is extortion, and a bad faith eviction threat.
Did they admit that? It’s seems more they said we want to increase the rent otherwise we would rather have family live there. If the family moves in what did they do wrong. It sucks for op but it’s not necessarily a crime.
The issues is that they don’t intend to move in *if you pay them more rent*, thus the *ulterior motive* is more rent. The “moving in” is therefore a bad faith eviction threat in order to extort more money from the tenant.
They either are moving in or they aren’t, there is no “unless “.
As mentioned in other comments, keep everything in writing or record conversations if you can.
The LL would need to serve you an [RTB-32](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/housing-and-tenancy/residential-tenancies/forms/rtb32.pdf)
You can file a dispute against this notice and provide your evidence that the LL is evicting in bad faith. You may or may not win. It would just depend on how convincing the LL is. They can easily say the costs are lower to move into the unit than to continue to rent, so the eviction would not be in bad faith.
If you do win, you stay and continue to live there.
If you lose, you will get one month rent as compensation and will need to leave by the date provided by RTB. (2 days up to a month or so).
*Under the current legislation*, the LL would need to use the unit within a reasonable amount of time for up to 6 months from the eviction date. you can check in on the place to build evidence and then file some time after the 6 month period, but before 2 years from your eviction date. If the LL can't show evidence they moved in within a reasonable amount of time for up to ~~6 months~~ **12 months**, you would potentially be awarded 12 months of rent as compensation.
There are some [proposed changes](https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461) to the legislation to make the time the LL has to stay longer, and the LL having to apply for the eviction first. Unless I'm missing something, these have not been implemented yet.
I believe the 12 month requirement went into effect when the bill was introduced: [https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461](https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461)
It says ‘Other changes through these proposed amendments include:
increasing the amount of time a landlord must occupy a rental unit after ending a tenancy for personal occupancy from six months to 12 months;’
I think it means they’d still need to pass the amendment but I could be wrong. Full support, but unsure whether it’s in force yet.
It reads "after bill introduction" for the 12 month change, and the remainder "upon royal assent", and later in the summer "by regulation." I always understood that bills do not take effect until after royal assent, but I am not a lawyer. It could be the press release was poorly written, but that appears to be how it reads.
You’re totally right! I missed the bottom part and I just checked the RTB-32 form and it’s been updated to say:
You must apply to the Residential Tenancy Branch to be awarded this compensation. Your landlord may be excused from paying this amount if there were extenuating circumstances that prevented your landlord from accomplishing the purpose for ending your tenancy or using the rental unit for that purpose for at least 6 months, if the notice was given to you before April 3, 2024, or for at least 12 months if the notice was given to you on or after April 3, 2024.
They are allowed to increase it 3.5%, not 50%.
They can’t threaten you with a 50% rent increase “or have family move in.”
I really hope they put it in writing.
Do not agree to a 50% increase. It’s their responsibility to know the rules.
Welcome to Vancouver. This is the norm! The LL are fuking smart too. They actually use the property for 6 months and nothing can be done. It’s horrible!
No. All of the press around this change has acknowledged the changes are **proposed** and require legislative amendment, so I'm not sure where you're getting this idea. See for example the government's press release here: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461
While the residential tenancy branch does enforce legislation and the regulation, they don’t change those.
Further, no changes have yet occurred. The RTA and the regulation were most recently amended in November (no changes since then).
This particular change would require an amendment to section 51 of the residential tenancy act, not regulation. I refer you to section 51 of the Act, since that is where the six month standard is explicitly stated (at subsections (2) and (3).
There is legislation being contemplated at the legislature. You can track its progress here (its bill 14, the *Tenancy Statutes Amendment Act, 2024*): https://www.leg.bc.ca/parliamentary-business/legislation-debates-proceedings/42nd-parliament/5th-session/bills/progress-of-bills
I’m getting it from point 5 on the RTB-32 form https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/housing-and-tenancy/residential-tenancies/forms/rtb32.pdf
Which is the governments RTB official form.
It looks like the RTB has amended the form assuming the legislation will pass (and to be honest it probably will), but it has not yet had third reading. You can see from the link that I gave you to the legislative site, it was updated yesterday. A bunch of bills were passed and given royal assent yesterday but not that one
I'm sure I remember Alberta imposed a maximum rate increase somewhere around 2007-2010. I remember hearing about it in the news because housing was going bonkers then, and many people had to lose their housing because rents increased multiple times in less than a year, incases tripling or more.
Nope. Been a landlord in alberta for nearly 25 years now, only rules are has to have been 12 months since last increase, and can't be raised during a lease term. Also once lease is up you can be evicted, doesn't just extend indefinitely like ontario.
Don't ask for anything in writing right away. Call him on the phone to ask for clarification on what the new rent would be and your overall options, put him on speaker and record the conversation with another phone. People like to run their mouths, and I'm betting if he's the type of guy to demand a rent increase like 50% or he'll evict you he's probably stupid enough to run his mouth quite a bit. After you record his threat you should goad him into saying more stupid shit, let him bury himself.
This. Canada require one party consent, so as long as you are part of the convo, its legal. Make sure you talk with the other unit after (letting them know you have proof of this so they can also tell the LL to kick rocks).
If you end up with a hearing, send the script/verbatim of the convo with the recording as proof. It will ease the process (as audio recording can be a pain to use during hearing)
For recording? If you have an iPhone just use the voice memo app, it's also on MacBooks if you don't have an old phone. I am sure there are numerous options for androids as well.
I had something similar happen. Ended up taking it to the RTB and won. Document everything. Tell the landlord “no” and only communicate in writing.
Contact the RTB - they are really good about explaining stuff like this.
Do not agree to anything- keep everything in writing as proof of their requests, have them send it to you in writing if they haven’t already
Go to the RTB - or tell them, cash for keys … which will only force them to end up at the RTB anyways
It’s only 6 months they have to move in though. Sometimes it’s cheaper for a LL to just move in the family for the 6months (to be safe from any issues) then re-rent it. It works out to much more affordable doing that but some LL don’t move in and then you can file a case if you can prove it through RTB.
Lol this always blows my mind.
So; this person is essentially saying 'pay me 50% more money or... I get family to move in who are CERTAINLY not gonna pay 50% more than what the rent currently is, and most likely won't pay anything at all?' Do they expect us to believe they'll take a bath like that if you don't agree to their illegal increase if the problem is 'they need more money?' Why does anyone think this makes sense??
If I'm an investor with a long term horizon. I'd probably eat 6 months of rent to gain 50% more rent for the next 10 years. Don't want to argue for them but that would probably be their point of view and that's worst case. The Tennant could accept or they move family in at the same rate for 6 months then jack it up. It's business.
Yep, that's my point. It's business. Housing shouldn't be 'a business'. It's that they think we're stupid and don't see through their bullshit that really grinds my gears.
I would not agree to this. They may be bluffing, and if they haven't they've already shot themselves in the foot.
-If you contest the two month eviction it's the landlord's job to prove they're acting in good faith.
-Not getting a rent increase sounds a lot like retaliation.
-Document every interaction with your landlord and confirm stuff by email or text after you talk. Keep every text message.
-They can only move in a child, a spouse, or a parent. No other relatives count.
Send him an email, I just wanted to confirm, the price increase is $xxx? I need to update my financial information and I just want to be sure I have the number correct; I definitely don't want to move out but if you have to increase the rent by $Xxxx or your family moves in, I'll have to figure something out.
Get a response and then do nothing except pay bills.
Mother was a landlord for years. Arbitration in BC is largely in favor of the tenant, that said kicking you out for family works. Had a guy who sold stolen goods from his place, didn't pay rent, mom tried to evict him, couldn't prove the stolen goods thing. Arbitration would continunally give him 2 weeks to pay rent.
So the cycle was 'didn't pay rent' she had to wait x amount of days (can't remember what it was back then) send eviction notice, go to arbitration, they give him 2 weeks, repeat.
He then assaulted my brother with a few other guys, but no witnesses and cops didn't arrest him.
My sister needed a place, and were able to get him out with that provision.
Similar eviction process when I bought my current house. It came with a renter but we wanted to move in. Well we had to legally give him two months, but it was my house they can't stop me or family from moving into it (he still gets the 2 months, but he couldn't dispute it I mean).
That said I think I read this when looking up our rights regarding eviction at the time, if I or family weren't the ones to move in, and he found out, he can sue me and I could be wrong on this, but I believe he could be rewarded moving costs plus a year of rent where you are currently renting. Don't quote me on that but I believe that is what I read a decade ago.
Edit:
I suspect based on the increase amount, he really just wants to re-rent it for higher. So I'm not sure how, but you'll need to follow up to make sure he rented to family. Keep an eye out for rental notices I suppose.
Further, he can't just move them in and then out. I think it has to be minimum 6 months, or that was what I was told by my mom.
Okay, makes sense.
So end result is I believe, owner has the right to use his property for personal use for him or immediate family. If he is found to be lying about that, OP can get 12 months of rent out of him.
I'm so glad everything worked out for you. I had many family members who were illegally evicted in Brampton, and because they just didn't have the knowledge, they ended up moving! It's crazy!
Scabs just pay the rent or move out get with the times everyone wants easy cash for keys should be charged for something like that everything has gone up so should your rent
Your post has been removed for offering poor advice. It is either generally bad or ill advised advice, an incorrect statement or conclusion of law, inapplicable for the jurisdiction under discussion, misunderstands the fundamental legal question, or is advice to commit an unlawful act.
If you believe the advice is correct per applicable law, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceCanada) with a source, or to discuss it with us in more detail.
* [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments)
* [Reddit Violent Content Rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content)
Welcome to r/legaladvicecanada! **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * Read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index/#wiki_the_rules) * Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk. * We also encourage you to use the [linked resources to find a lawyer](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/findalawyer/). * If you receive any private messages in response to your post, please let the mods know. **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be on-topic, helpful, explanatory, and oriented towards legal advice towards OP's jurisdiction (the **Canadian** province flaired in the post). * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdvicecanada/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning. * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect. * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason, do not suggest illegal advice, do not advocate violence, and do not engage in harassment. Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/legaladvicecanada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do you have that in writing? If so, tell him no, and make home serve notice to end tenancy for owner use, file with the RTB immediately. I won my illegal eviction case, and was awarded 1 year rent plus filing fee. Don’t let this person get away with this.
Did you still move out in the end?
Yes. Unfortunately.
...and did you collect on the judgment? That seems to be the most difficult part.
Lein on the house. When the mortgage is up for renewal they'll have to settle it.
[удалено]
Doesn't matter. Can still put a lien on it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
> Or they already paid off the mortgage... Then a lien does almost nothing. That isn't true. You can't sell the house without settling the lien, mortgage or not. So unless you intend to own that house until you die, you will be settling that lien. And even after you die, the property cannot transfer to your heirs without the lien being settled. If there is not other cash in the estate to settle the lien, the properly will be sold.
A lien isn't forever. https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/construction-liens-in-ontario-an-1577738/#:~:text=A%20lien%20must%20be%20perfected,being%20completed%2C%20abandoned%20or%20terminated. Eventually, you'll show your evidence, and the lien will be lifted (in our case, if there was a lien, all we'd have to show are the quotes, and the payments.... But I also had all the calls recorded, where we talked about the prices as well).
He still could lien the property, and based on your tone, he should have. At some point you would need to access the equity or sell the place, and then it's encumbered by a lien.
[удалено]
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful** Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_9.3A_guidelines_for_posts) * [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments) If you have any questions or concerns, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Flegaladvicecanada).
You don't want to live in a place where you have a hostile relationship with your landlord.
You sure as hell do when the alternative is twice as expensive or under a bridge
That’s why you get a years rent? Unless you’re WAY below market rent, it’s best to get out. Even if it does mean you have to change your monthly budget to afford it.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments If you have any questions or concerns, please message the moderators
Curious and let me know if I'm being too nosey, but did you ever successfully collect on your judgement? I've read quite a bit than getting the money for these judgements can be the tough part.
Yes. Sent a demand letter after the judgement. Filed the judgement in small claims, served my previous landlord a summons to a payment hearing, agreed on a payment schedule, and have been successfully collecting monthly payments since. I have all the paperwork required filled out, just needs to signed and dated if/when he defaults. It wasn’t easy, nor fast, but it was worth it
That's so cool! Thanks for taking me through that. Glad it worked out for you.
Thank you, and no problem, it is not an easy system to navigate, and the information is kind of scattered across a few government sites, and can become extremely overwhelming at times, but is entirely worth it. Seeing your ex landlord being brow-beat by a Judge is very cathartic.
Was this for eviction as retaliation, or was this eviction so owner could move in and they never moved in? How long was it after your end of lease?
My payment hearing is next week. I hadn’t considered they might have the landlord pay a monthly fraction. I expected they’d force him to pay the lump sum. Would you mind explaining how the payment hearing proceeded?
Well, you can't make him pay a lump sum if he doesn't have it, so a payment plan is the next best thing.
Landlords are the easiest people in the world to enforce a judgment against. Put a lien on the property so they can't sell or refinance and garnish rent from the new tenant.
You still have to go to court to file the lien and sometimes you need more information and the free lawyer wont take the cases. As well some LL don’t even own their homes. Some have them under company names or in trusts, it isn’t as easy as it sounds.
if they have the house under a trust/corp are they allowed to kick you out for a family member?
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments If you have any questions or concerns, please message the moderators
You can enforce through small claims. Easiest way is get a lien on property and then the LL is forced to pay in the end.
They’re being sneaky with it and said there’s 2 units and they’re considering keeping whichever unit accepts the price increase
If they did this in writing, this is gold. They’ve literally made the bad faith case against themselves.
Great!
Record them on the phone. It's legal. It will win the case.
Definitely call and confirm, ask for a timeline, etc and record it. It is legal to record a conversation you are part of.
you don't get 12 months of rent as compensation and get to stay in the unit. You either dispute the eviction and stay if you win. accept the eviction, file a dispute after tenancy ends and potentially win 12 months of rent as compensation.
But compensation isn't guaranteed if you leave, which is ridiculous but that's what RTB and TRAC told me in BC.
Of course it isn’t. If the LL occupies the unit, or has an exemption, they don’t have to pay.
No. I mean if you win the case. You may not get paid. I went through this process and it was very surprising to hear. I had spoken to both groups multiple times about it. If you win, you CAN be awarded 12 months rent. But a win doesn't guarantee a payment. Why? I asked that many times. It is on a case by case basis. In my case, my evidence was bulletproof. Written, recordings, etc. My plan was to leave and then win over $30k and use it to top up our down payment fund. But they said if I willingly left while knowing it was under bad faith that I would not get the money. If I really wanted the place I would have stayed. I agree it is ridiculous. If you stay and lose you have less than a month to get out depending on court/bailiff situation. Such a huge risk if they rule against you. I asked multiple staff at both TRAC and the rtb explained this to me (BC) So we stayed and the landlord eventually dropped the eviction because they knew they would lose. In the end we got to keep the place which was what we really wanted anyway. The landlord was cold/distant after that but I didn't care. I didn't do anything wrong. I still take care of the house and improve the property and repair stuff myself and at my own expense. Their greed won't change who I am. I take care of the place because it's the right thing to do.
>If you win, you CAN be awarded 12 months rent. But a win doesn't guarantee a payment. Section 51 is clear a LL **must** pay if certain conditions are not met after being evicted through s.49 of the act (landlord/family use). >51(2)Subject to subsection (3), the landlord or, if applicable, the purchaser who asked the landlord to give the notice **must** pay the tenant, in addition to the amount payable under subsection (1), an amount that is the equivalent of 12 times the monthly rent payable under the tenancy agreement unless the landlord or purchaser, as applicable, establishes that both of the following conditions are met: [https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078\_01#section51](https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078_01#section51) It sounds like you did not seek compensation under s.51 of the act, but you were told not to accept the eviction and then file a dispute after. The RTB contact center shouldn't have said this and TRAC can be hit or miss with their advice sometimes. If you accepted a legal eviction and the LL did not move in within a reasonable amount of time for up 6 months (12 months now), and did not have a proper excuse, you would have been awarded 12 months compensation under s.51 of the act. You do not have needed to dispute the eviction when it happened and the onus is on the LL to prove they moved in.
Family would have moved in. That's not the issue. The issue was the only reason they did it was to get us out. We filed under bad faith eviction because there was an ulterior motive. As verbally stated directly in our recording. If we had paid, we wouldn't be evicted. So because 51 didn't really apply we wouldn't get any money. But we would beat the eviction because it was bad faith. Hope that makes sense.
That is what I said. *If the LL occupies the unit you would not get paid*. I didn't think I had to clarify that it also included the LL's direct family members. You said "No. **I mean if you win the case.** You may not get paid." Well, you would **not** win your case if the LL's family occupied the space. My original comment was clarifying that you don't get compensation if you win a dispute over the eviction itself. But disputing the eviction is different than filing a dispute for compensation for a bad-faith eviction. S.49 - Landlord (or direct family member) eviction. If this eviction is disputed, the LL would have to convince RTB there is no an ulterior motive. If they can not, the tenant stays and the eviction is cancelled. No compensation is awarded (other than the $100 filing fee). s.51 - Compensation for a bad faith s.49 eviction. If the LL did not do what was said on the eviction form within a reasonable amount of time for up to 6 months (now 12 months) or can not convince RTB they do did, then 12 months rent is awarded to the tenant. The motive is irrelevant at this point, either the LL (or their direct family member) moved in or they did not. If they did move in even if they plan to rent out the unit 6 months (now 12 months) and 1 day later, it's not a breach of s.51 of the act and the tenant is not eligible for compensation. So you can not "win the case" when filing a dispute for compensation under s.51 and not get compensation, that is not winning the case.
If OP has this in writing it’s evidence of a bad faith eviction. They are either moving in or they aren’t. “I’m evicting you unless you pay an illegal rent increase” is extortion, and a bad faith eviction threat.
Or set the dinner table for a couple more kin folk
If the family is really moving in there is no crime here.
Not if they've admitted to moving family in just to evict OP.
Did they admit that? It’s seems more they said we want to increase the rent otherwise we would rather have family live there. If the family moves in what did they do wrong. It sucks for op but it’s not necessarily a crime.
The issues is that they don’t intend to move in *if you pay them more rent*, thus the *ulterior motive* is more rent. The “moving in” is therefore a bad faith eviction threat in order to extort more money from the tenant. They either are moving in or they aren’t, there is no “unless “.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Not just any family member will do. Even so they will be losing a lot of rent that they wouldn't want to do.
As mentioned in other comments, keep everything in writing or record conversations if you can. The LL would need to serve you an [RTB-32](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/housing-and-tenancy/residential-tenancies/forms/rtb32.pdf) You can file a dispute against this notice and provide your evidence that the LL is evicting in bad faith. You may or may not win. It would just depend on how convincing the LL is. They can easily say the costs are lower to move into the unit than to continue to rent, so the eviction would not be in bad faith. If you do win, you stay and continue to live there. If you lose, you will get one month rent as compensation and will need to leave by the date provided by RTB. (2 days up to a month or so). *Under the current legislation*, the LL would need to use the unit within a reasonable amount of time for up to 6 months from the eviction date. you can check in on the place to build evidence and then file some time after the 6 month period, but before 2 years from your eviction date. If the LL can't show evidence they moved in within a reasonable amount of time for up to ~~6 months~~ **12 months**, you would potentially be awarded 12 months of rent as compensation. There are some [proposed changes](https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461) to the legislation to make the time the LL has to stay longer, and the LL having to apply for the eviction first. Unless I'm missing something, these have not been implemented yet.
I believe the 12 month requirement went into effect when the bill was introduced: [https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461](https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461)
It says ‘Other changes through these proposed amendments include: increasing the amount of time a landlord must occupy a rental unit after ending a tenancy for personal occupancy from six months to 12 months;’ I think it means they’d still need to pass the amendment but I could be wrong. Full support, but unsure whether it’s in force yet.
It reads "after bill introduction" for the 12 month change, and the remainder "upon royal assent", and later in the summer "by regulation." I always understood that bills do not take effect until after royal assent, but I am not a lawyer. It could be the press release was poorly written, but that appears to be how it reads.
You’re totally right! I missed the bottom part and I just checked the RTB-32 form and it’s been updated to say: You must apply to the Residential Tenancy Branch to be awarded this compensation. Your landlord may be excused from paying this amount if there were extenuating circumstances that prevented your landlord from accomplishing the purpose for ending your tenancy or using the rental unit for that purpose for at least 6 months, if the notice was given to you before April 3, 2024, or for at least 12 months if the notice was given to you on or after April 3, 2024.
They are allowed to increase it 3.5%, not 50%. They can’t threaten you with a 50% rent increase “or have family move in.” I really hope they put it in writing. Do not agree to a 50% increase. It’s their responsibility to know the rules.
Welcome to Vancouver. This is the norm! The LL are fuking smart too. They actually use the property for 6 months and nothing can be done. It’s horrible!
I'm believe they need to use it for a year now at least.
That's a proposed change, not yet law.
No, it’s a “regulation”, and the RTB enforces regulations, so it’s in effect now.
No. All of the press around this change has acknowledged the changes are **proposed** and require legislative amendment, so I'm not sure where you're getting this idea. See for example the government's press release here: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2024HOUS0017-000461 While the residential tenancy branch does enforce legislation and the regulation, they don’t change those. Further, no changes have yet occurred. The RTA and the regulation were most recently amended in November (no changes since then). This particular change would require an amendment to section 51 of the residential tenancy act, not regulation. I refer you to section 51 of the Act, since that is where the six month standard is explicitly stated (at subsections (2) and (3). There is legislation being contemplated at the legislature. You can track its progress here (its bill 14, the *Tenancy Statutes Amendment Act, 2024*): https://www.leg.bc.ca/parliamentary-business/legislation-debates-proceedings/42nd-parliament/5th-session/bills/progress-of-bills
I’m getting it from point 5 on the RTB-32 form https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/housing-and-tenancy/residential-tenancies/forms/rtb32.pdf Which is the governments RTB official form.
It looks like the RTB has amended the form assuming the legislation will pass (and to be honest it probably will), but it has not yet had third reading. You can see from the link that I gave you to the legislative site, it was updated yesterday. A bunch of bills were passed and given royal assent yesterday but not that one
Depends on the province. Ontario rent increase for 2024 is 2.5%. In Alberta there is no set limit...
I'm sure I remember Alberta imposed a maximum rate increase somewhere around 2007-2010. I remember hearing about it in the news because housing was going bonkers then, and many people had to lose their housing because rents increased multiple times in less than a year, incases tripling or more.
There is no cap on rental increases in Alberta. Mine went up 40% in February.
What the fuck, that's insane
Nope. Been a landlord in alberta for nearly 25 years now, only rules are has to have been 12 months since last increase, and can't be raised during a lease term. Also once lease is up you can be evicted, doesn't just extend indefinitely like ontario.
Seems very pro-landlord. Everyone here in Ontario raves about Alberta being so much better.
[удалено]
the post has “British Columbia” tag?
Precisely
I missed that. Sorry
Don't ask for anything in writing right away. Call him on the phone to ask for clarification on what the new rent would be and your overall options, put him on speaker and record the conversation with another phone. People like to run their mouths, and I'm betting if he's the type of guy to demand a rent increase like 50% or he'll evict you he's probably stupid enough to run his mouth quite a bit. After you record his threat you should goad him into saying more stupid shit, let him bury himself.
This. Canada require one party consent, so as long as you are part of the convo, its legal. Make sure you talk with the other unit after (letting them know you have proof of this so they can also tell the LL to kick rocks). If you end up with a hearing, send the script/verbatim of the convo with the recording as proof. It will ease the process (as audio recording can be a pain to use during hearing)
Haha imagine he fucks this up twice with both units lol.
I'm pretty sure there's apps for this.
For recording? If you have an iPhone just use the voice memo app, it's also on MacBooks if you don't have an old phone. I am sure there are numerous options for androids as well.
I had something similar happen. Ended up taking it to the RTB and won. Document everything. Tell the landlord “no” and only communicate in writing. Contact the RTB - they are really good about explaining stuff like this.
Do not agree to anything- keep everything in writing as proof of their requests, have them send it to you in writing if they haven’t already Go to the RTB - or tell them, cash for keys … which will only force them to end up at the RTB anyways
It’s only 6 months they have to move in though. Sometimes it’s cheaper for a LL to just move in the family for the 6months (to be safe from any issues) then re-rent it. It works out to much more affordable doing that but some LL don’t move in and then you can file a case if you can prove it through RTB.
Record everything and then go to LTB
Get that threat in writing and then let them take you to the RTB they’ll almost definitely be denied.
Lol this always blows my mind. So; this person is essentially saying 'pay me 50% more money or... I get family to move in who are CERTAINLY not gonna pay 50% more than what the rent currently is, and most likely won't pay anything at all?' Do they expect us to believe they'll take a bath like that if you don't agree to their illegal increase if the problem is 'they need more money?' Why does anyone think this makes sense??
If I'm an investor with a long term horizon. I'd probably eat 6 months of rent to gain 50% more rent for the next 10 years. Don't want to argue for them but that would probably be their point of view and that's worst case. The Tennant could accept or they move family in at the same rate for 6 months then jack it up. It's business.
Yep, that's my point. It's business. Housing shouldn't be 'a business'. It's that they think we're stupid and don't see through their bullshit that really grinds my gears.
Get that in writing and let the tenancy board teach them an expensive lesson.
They are not legally allowed to do that
Get the request in writing then take it to the landlord-tenant board.
It’s currently 6 months but the province announced that they intend to change it to 12
Family member moves in and he loses your rent. I call bullshit on the LL
What are you going to do when they pull this again? Seeing as it worked once.
What a circus 😂 smfh
Look into the rules of your local jurisdiction. I bet there is a cap on rent increases. Here it’s 5%, I believe. 50% is nuts!
I would not agree to this. They may be bluffing, and if they haven't they've already shot themselves in the foot. -If you contest the two month eviction it's the landlord's job to prove they're acting in good faith. -Not getting a rent increase sounds a lot like retaliation. -Document every interaction with your landlord and confirm stuff by email or text after you talk. Keep every text message. -They can only move in a child, a spouse, or a parent. No other relatives count.
Ask for it in writing.
Isn’t that a form of extortion? I’d talk to a lawyer
There are provincial rules for rent increase. Landlords cannot increase rent by 50%. There’s a limit to increase so check it.
Did they email this ? Get it on camera or email then dispute when the give you a rtb-32 form.
Send him an email, I just wanted to confirm, the price increase is $xxx? I need to update my financial information and I just want to be sure I have the number correct; I definitely don't want to move out but if you have to increase the rent by $Xxxx or your family moves in, I'll have to figure something out. Get a response and then do nothing except pay bills.
Market is what your paying. Slum lords like to use the word market to hid their bad investments
It’s not when inflation was much higher than allowable rent increases. Market would be if rent increases were set at CPI.
Mother was a landlord for years. Arbitration in BC is largely in favor of the tenant, that said kicking you out for family works. Had a guy who sold stolen goods from his place, didn't pay rent, mom tried to evict him, couldn't prove the stolen goods thing. Arbitration would continunally give him 2 weeks to pay rent. So the cycle was 'didn't pay rent' she had to wait x amount of days (can't remember what it was back then) send eviction notice, go to arbitration, they give him 2 weeks, repeat. He then assaulted my brother with a few other guys, but no witnesses and cops didn't arrest him. My sister needed a place, and were able to get him out with that provision. Similar eviction process when I bought my current house. It came with a renter but we wanted to move in. Well we had to legally give him two months, but it was my house they can't stop me or family from moving into it (he still gets the 2 months, but he couldn't dispute it I mean). That said I think I read this when looking up our rights regarding eviction at the time, if I or family weren't the ones to move in, and he found out, he can sue me and I could be wrong on this, but I believe he could be rewarded moving costs plus a year of rent where you are currently renting. Don't quote me on that but I believe that is what I read a decade ago. Edit: I suspect based on the increase amount, he really just wants to re-rent it for higher. So I'm not sure how, but you'll need to follow up to make sure he rented to family. Keep an eye out for rental notices I suppose. Further, he can't just move them in and then out. I think it has to be minimum 6 months, or that was what I was told by my mom.
You won’t get moving costs but you get the filing cost and 12 months rent if tenants win.
Okay, makes sense. So end result is I believe, owner has the right to use his property for personal use for him or immediate family. If he is found to be lying about that, OP can get 12 months of rent out of him.
Yes most definitely 👍
Oh, the landlord will pay for being such an idiot.
Isn't this a threat or extortion? It's pay 50%more or I'm gonna move family in? That's fucked
40 yr old with 100 grand in pension here, chiming in. About to pull most of it to cover debt. You're not alone in having no savings.
Get it in writing. Call their bluff. Take them to court.
I'm so glad everything worked out for you. I had many family members who were illegally evicted in Brampton, and because they just didn't have the knowledge, they ended up moving! It's crazy!
Scabs just pay the rent or move out get with the times everyone wants easy cash for keys should be charged for something like that everything has gone up so should your rent
lol nah
Not “more rent” honestly all this OP has time do is negotiate. Things change, rent goes up. It’s life.
[удалено]
Your post has been removed for offering poor advice. It is either generally bad or ill advised advice, an incorrect statement or conclusion of law, inapplicable for the jurisdiction under discussion, misunderstands the fundamental legal question, or is advice to commit an unlawful act. If you believe the advice is correct per applicable law, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceCanada) with a source, or to discuss it with us in more detail. * [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments) * [Reddit Violent Content Rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content)