What qualifies as a party?
That’s what the Residential Tenancy Branch was trying to find out after a Burnaby landlord filed a complaint about a tenant who moved out abruptly.
The landlord rented out a duplex in which he lived on one side and a woman rented the other – along with the landlord’s daughter as a roommate.
The complaint was trying to retain a security deposit and a monetary order for the tenancy being cut short. The landlord said he had trouble renting out the unit and wanted compensation for that time after the tenant moved out.
But the real debate was over why the tenant felt compelled to move out. She left following an incident in which one person testified that a “ruckus” broke out during a “party” involving the tenant and three friends. The landlord was not present, but the daughter – the roommate – was, as well as the landlord’s wife.
The tenant said she didn’t feel “safe” after what happened and the testimony offered different interpretations about what constituted a “party” at the rental unit.
The landlord claimed that the tenant brought three guests to the property.
“He alleged that she decided to host a party on the day she was warned that her roommate (the landlord’s daughter) would be recuperating from surgery,” according to the RTB dispute resolution document. The landlord claimed that he “received numerous complaints of noise and disturbances that you are your guests were causing.”
The landlord also alleged the four people were playing “drinking games” and being disruptive.
“You and your guests stocked the fridge with beer, the freezer with vodka,” the landlord said.
The tenant denied there were “drinking games” going on and that the four were simply talking in her room. She also denied that she stocked the fridge with alcohol.
“The tenant said her guests were present in her room for not more than 10 minutes before she was yelled at and threatened by her roommate, ‘A’, who threatened to punch the tenant and had to be restrained by her mother, who was present,” the RTB said. “The tenant said she was fearful for her safety.”
The tenant also said that the landlord’s wife told her she was “not entitled” to have friends over without advance notice.
The landlord’s wife said she received a call about a “ruckus” next door.
The RTB ruling said one issue is that the landlord wasn’t at the unit at the time and only heard hearsay about what happened.
“He adopted without reservation the version of events given by his daughter,” the decision said.
“I do not accept the hearsay evidence that the tenant was hosting a drinking party and I find that the tenant was justified in her decision to move from the rental unit on short notice due to the hostile living conditions that she face and out of concern for her own safety,” said the RTB ruling, which dismissed the landlord’s application.
Follow Chris Campbell on Twitter @shinebox44.
