(by Newsdesk)
A landlord who does not return a damage deposit? Rental accommodation that is not well maintained, unsafe or filthy? A sudden, steep rent increase? Evicted because the landlord wants to use the rental for Air B&B? The Residential Tenancy Branch, the government body that’s supposed to help, will do very little.
The Residential Tenancy Branch does not have an office on the Sunshine Coast. The Government Agent in Sechelt does not answer questions about tenancy disputes but can scan paperwork and mail it to the Residential Tenancy Branch office in Burnaby. Photos cannot be scanned and must be mailed. There is a $100 fee for filing a complaint. The Government Agent staff in Sechelt forwards the money to the office in Burnaby.
A review hearing in Burnaby costs another $50. Low-income tenants can apply to have their fees waived. But according to information on the Residential Tenancy website, around 80 per cent of the applicants end up paying the fees.
A complaint against a landlord over a damage deposit can prove costly and can take many months.
If the Residential Tenancy Branch rules in the renter’s favour, it does not enforce its decision. If the landlord does not co-operate, the renter has to go to Small Claims Court to recover the deposit. That procedure can also cost hundreds of dollars and takes time.
The Residential Tenancy Branch office in Burnaby deals with all rental disputes from the Lower Mainland and surrounding area. Reaching the 29 arbitrators available for phone inquiries is challenging.
In 2016 the office received about 307,000 calls with 34 arbitrators answering the phones. Although the Ministry of Natural Gas Development and Minister Responsible for Housing, as the ministry is now called, anticipates more calls this year, the number of arbitrators was reduced to 29 in January this year.
On July 1, 2016, the ministry said that 23 per cent of all calls in the previous year were dropped: callers would hang up before they could speak to an arbitrator. The average wait time was 34 minutes. That is, if the caller managed to be put on hold. Often, people would not even get a busy signal; the line would simply be unavailable. It is unknown how many people encountered an unavailable line.
This January, the ministry said, the percentage of callers who abandoned their calls had dropped to 11.6 per cent. The average wait time had gone up to 39 minutes. It is uncertain how many people could not get connected.
In less than two years, the number of calls to the Residential Tenancy Branch has almost doubled. Between April 2014 and March 2015 the office received a total of 165,082 calls which resulted in 22,058 applications for dispute resolution and 17,595 hearings.
Meanwhile, the budget is being reduced. The Residential Tenancy Board will receive $8.4 million in the next fiscal year compared with $8.6 million this year. For the past seven years, the budget has been about $8 million per year.
Last year, 19,810 people physically went to the Burnaby office. It often takes a half-day wait to file a complaint. The office has no public washrooms. The nearest ones are four blocks away, at Metrotown mall. People going for a bathroom break lose their place in the line.
The ministry says that the building is not owned by the provincial government and that the owner has decided to close the washrooms to the public. The ministry has no plans to move from the current location.
There are other problems. The Residential Tenancy Board cannot issue injunctions against evictions.
Many of the arbitrators of the Residential Tenancy board are not trained lawyers. And unlike the rest of the legal system, they are not bound by precedent.
Dispute resolution is not public. The Residential Tenancy Branch website does not have a list of landlords who have been ruled against.
Since 2008 the Residential Tenancy Board has had the power to fine parties for repeated non-compliance with the law, but that power is very rarely used, says Kendra Milne, a lawyer and research associate with the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives B.C. office. “There are few or no consequences for landlords repeatedly and flagrantly breaking the law.”
The Residential Tenancy Branch does enforce possession orders to force out problem tenants, but it takes a long time.
The Residential Tenancy Branch has two other offices in Vancouver: one at 520 Richards Street and another one at 390 Main Street. They provide limited services. Staff are able to provide information or assist with completing application forms. They do not accept photos and other digital evidence such as USB sticks or DVDs. Submissions must be 20 pages or less.
Here is what the law in B.C. says about damage deposits:
• Damage or security deposit cannot be more than half the first month’s rent.
• A landlord can only ask for a deposit at the beginning of the tenancy.
• Only one deposit per rental unit is allowed, no matter how many tenants live in the unit.
• Unless the landlord has the written consent to keep all or a part of the deposit or has an outstanding dispute resolution officer’s order that can be applied against the deposit, the landlord must return the deposit within 15 days after the tenancy ends, or apply for dispute resolution with the Residential Tenancy Branch.
• If the tenant does not provide the landlord with a forwarding address, in writing, within one year after the end of the tenancy, the landlord may keep the security deposit.
While I would say that the info about lack of viability of the Residential Tenancy Board is pretty accurate, the situation is just as bad for landlords as it is for tenants. For example, there is no list kept of tenants who have trashed properties or been delinquent on their rents. This article is very slanted in that it suggests that all the problems are of tenants against landlords, when it just isn’t so. A little fairness is in order. Keep in mind that many of the rental properties in Gibsons are owned by someone renting a property in Vancouver themselves, someone who has bought their only property here because they can’t afford to get into the market in Vancouver.
With regard to the above comment: the article does acknowledge that the Residential Tenancy Board fails landlords too. The system needs an overhaul for everyone’s sake. I am disgusted by the description of the Residential Tenancy office lacking a washroom!
That said, I also can relate to what Ms. Burgoyne, above, is saying. For several years my partner and I rented part of our downstairs to housemates. We did this out of financial necessity, so that we could afford our own rent, not out of greed. In fact, we charged less than the welfare shelter allowance. We realized that it is uncomfortable for many people to have to share space–it’s not like it was so comfortable for us! Instead of seeing us as housemates, who were also poor, most of the people we rented to treated us as “landlords” who were out to exploit them, so they tried to scam us first. They bitched and complained about their lot (as if it were our fault they couldn’t afford their own space), withheld rent, and inflicted their substance abuse and mental health problems on us. Out of 14 people in 7 years only 2 were decent, considerate human beings.
Shared accommodation (where the room-mate has access to the primary tenant’s living space, as opposed to having a self-contained unit) is not covered under the Residential Tenancy Act. It is legal limbo with the primary tenant having all the power. Both primary tenants (or owners) and roommates need to know this but it seems it is a little-known fact. (It puts that roommate in a vulnerable position, but, god-damn it, if it’s your home, you need to be able to evict that person without notice if they are stealing from you or otherwise making life intolerable!)
Needless to say, as soon as we were in a more secure financial position my partner and I withdrew our room rental from the market. This was even though we’d have preferred to provide affordable housing to someone and would have liked the bit of extra money.
I am now a widow, living in a place that is too big for me. I feel bad because I know the housing situation is desperate for many people–but I refuse to make myself vulnerable again. As an elderly woman living on her own I don’t need to have to share with semi-criminals. And yes, all those bad housemates had references–some of them, I’m sure, from people who wanted them out of their own lives!