Renters rally to protect rights against unfair evictions

Renters rally to protect rights against unfair evictions

By Kelly Sinoski, Vancouver Sun May 7, 2011

NDP MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert joins Vancouver tenants to stand up to landlords trying to evict long-term renters from a Kitsilano-Point Grey apartment complex and to call for stronger eviction protection laws in Vancouver, BC., May 7, 2011. Daved Eby (l) with Tim and Amy Bratton on the right. David Eby, NDP candidate in the provincial byelection in the Point Grey constituency, is in the background to the left of Chandra Herbert.  Photograph by: Nick Procaylo, PNG

VANCOUVER – For five years, Amy Bratton never had any trouble with the landlords of her Kitsilano suite. They even knocked money off her rent when she took care and maintained the seven-unit building.

But that all changed eight months ago when the landlords decided to sell the stucco-covered house-turned-apartment building at the corner of Balsam and 3rd Avenue to new owners.

Now Bratton and her husband Tim say they are facing a so-called “renoviction” — a tactic in which landlords attempt to kick out renters under the guise of renovating the suites before substantially raising the rents.

The trend, which began in the West End 2007, is spreading across the region as landlords use tactics such as not replacing lights and increasing laundry costs, to force long-term tenants out.

Within days of taking ownership last December, the new landlords in the Bratton’s building renovated an empty suite and raised the rent from $750 to $1,075 — the same amount the Brattons pay for their one-bedroom suite. “It’s been a real source of frustration,” Tim Bratton said. “This is a place we have made our first home in … we feel powerless to do anything about it. The current law does not provide enough protection for us as tenants.”

The Brattons were among about 30 people — including NDP MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert and Vancouver-Point Grey byelection candidate David Eby — who rallied in the rain outside their apartment building Saturday to raise awareness of their plight and call for the Liberal government to impose stronger eviction protection laws to balance the rights of both landlords and tenants.

Many carried placards reading: Eviction: Are you next? and No tenant in B.C. safe from renoviction.

“I’ve seen this story play out again and again across B.C.,” said Herbert, who has introduced new legislation aimed at prohibiting landlords from using the tactics. “The vast majority of landlords are good. They work with residents. They don’t attempt to kick people out so they can jack up the rents.”

Herbert noted in some cases, the renovation only involves a fresh coat of paint and new cabinets yet the rent is inflated by 73 per cent.

The renoviction situation first arose in Vancouver’s West End, where residents continue to fight against what they say is a legal loophole in the Residential Tenancy Act that allows for such evictions.

Many of the people at Saturday’s rally were survivors of other apartments where renovation notices had been served.

The residents want changes to Section 49 (6) (b), of the act. It says a landlord may end a tenancy if the landlord has all the necessary permits and intends in good faith, to renovate or repair the rental unit in a manner that requires the rental unit to be vacant.

More than 50 buildings have been tracked for renovictions in the past few years, according to Sharon Isaak, of Renters at Risk, who is still at her West End apartment after fighting her own eviction notice in the courts.

But Isaak noted that many tenants tend to give in because they don’t have the time, money or energy to fight the eviction notices, especially once the landlord starts withholding services or ripping up carpets, making their home seem uninhabitable.

“Tenants don’t want to go public about it; it’s too stressful,” she said. “It wasn’t that widespread before but now more people are doing it.”

Eby, who is running against Premier Christy Clark for the Vancouver-Point Grey seat in a byelection Wednesday, promised to work with tenants and stand up for renters.

Bratton, who has lived in the suite for five years — and the last eight months with Tim after they got married — said the landlords have given them a smaller storage space with no electrical lighting and have not replaced the light bulbs at the front and back of the building.

“It’s been stressful,” she said.

Added Tim: “This has shown us how vulnerable we are as renters. You don’t know when a landlord can come in and push you around. We have the resources to move and relocate but we know a lot of people who can’t.”

Hollyburn vs gay man, round two

Hollyburn vs gay man, round two: After winning last year, Simmons gets new eviction notice

By Shauna Lewis / X-Tra West/ Vancouver / Monday, May 10, 2010

A gay man and an elderly woman with ovarian cancer are the latest targets in a wave of evictions still affecting Vancouver’s West End.

The tenants have filed for arbitration against Hollyburn Properties but say they’re concerned about the area’s diversity and history if these evictions continue.

“Young gay people gravitate toward the West End because they see it as their community,” says recently evicted Emerald Terrace resident Andrew Simmons.

Simmons, who is gay and has lived at 2045 Nelson St for eight years, says he has been given notice to vacate his apartment because the landlords want to rent it to an on-site manager.

Simmons alleges there are at least seven other vacant suites that can be used for that purpose.

This is the second time Simmons has been targeted for eviction. Last year, Hollyburn attempted to turf him and several other tenants in the building for owning pets. The tenants sought arbitration and won.

Simmons is not surprised he is being targeted again.

“I’m being targeted because I was the ringleader fighting the pet eviction last time,” he alleges.

Simmons says he and his neighbours recently received word that Hollyburn was planning to renovate their building.

When he sought more information, he says Hollyburn was not forthcoming. So he filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau on April 29.

He received his eviction notice later that day.

“It looks like retaliation,” Simmons says.

“This is ruining our lives,” says 82-year-old Lynn Stevens. “I just got the eviction notice and I’ve just been in shock.”

Stevens was told she must leave her home of 41 years because Hollyburn plans to rent her apartment to a building manager as well.

That’s just an excuse, she alleges. “Really [the eviction] is because I’m paying the lowest rent.”

Stevens says she was presented with a notice to evict April 27 and now has until the end of June to leave her home.

“It makes absolutely no sense to evict someone for the use of their suite when there are suites available,” says Christine Ackerman of the West End Renters Association. “It’s a pure and simple money grab.”

Hollyburn’s website is currently advertising one-bedroom suites for $1,200 and two bedrooms for $2,200.

Xtra‘s calls to Hollyburn were not returned prior to pres time.

But Hollyburn’s general manager, Allan Wasel, told the Vancouver Sun it was “purely a business decision.”

“It made the most sense to put our new resident manager and resident managers in training in the suites that rent for the lowest price,” he said.

According to the Sun, Wasel also said the tenants had requested “on-site management support” and that other units were unavailable because they’re being upgraded.

NDP MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert says the latest evictions solidify the need for Liberal legislative reform.

“This [newest fight] ensures that we continue the fight for change in the Residential Tenancy Act,” says Chandra Herbert, who represents Vancouver-West End.

He says he plans to look at legislation to see if there are private members’ bills that could counteract evicting a tenant from a specific suite when there are other available suites in the building.

The West End is in jeopardy if the laws remain unbalanced, he adds.

“It’s the people that make it [the West End] so great, and it’s the history – specifically a queer history – which continues to make it such a fabulous place for the GLBT community to live,” he says. “So we want to keep it that way.”

The Residential Tenancy Branch has scheduled an arbitration hearing for the Emerald Terrace tenants on June 23.

When does an RTO office become an “office”?

The new RTO. The March Arch hotel?

Back in October 2008,  during the  run up to the  West End  Provincial By-election,  BC’s Housing Minister Rich Coleman met with Renters At Risk, along with BC Liberal candidate Arthur Griffiths and several tenants about to be evicted for renovations.

In that meeting, a promise was made to improve access to the appeal system  by immediately opening  another RTO office in Downtown Vancouver.  This would mean that tenants in Vancouver would not have to head out to  Burnaby to one of only three  RTO office in the province.   (the Liberals closed all the other Residential Tenancy Offices in the province a few years ago, including one on Thurlow Street that was accessible for thousands of tenants in the  downtown core.  Approximately 85% of West End’s 40,000 citizens were renters at the time the Thurlow office got closed.)

Fast forward to May 2009.  Six months later, is the new Residential Tenancy Office open yet?   Well, yes and no.   Depends on your definition of open.  The news release  from the Government over a month ago says yes.   But  the listed address at 518 Richards Street  is actually the old Marble Arch Hotel, which is now under construction– with no RTO office in sight under the scaffolding.    However, now there is small BC Housing office on the side.  It is very hard to know this  because there is no signage indicating this location as  a BC Housing office.

The front door is unmarked and locked.   You must ring a buzzer and wait for someone to come to the door to let you in.

The RTO behind locked doors.

Up until about a month ago, there was no RTO office at this location.    However,  after a recent story by Jackie Wong in the Westender  (03/26/2009) highlighted the delays in the new RTO launch, there now is a representative from the RTO in the BC Housing office at 520 Richards  to answer rental questions.  It is not  a fully functioning office, as a tenant who went yesterday to file documents  found out the hard way.   This  RTO  “office”  cannot process financial transactions.   Yes, you heard that right, a so-called pro business government office that cannot take money.  The tenant was instructed to head out to Burnaby to file his notice to dispute an eviction. This  exercise  took  a full day off from work  for two people file paperwork about fighting an eviction.  The whole point of opening a downtown office is to provide better access,  not create an extra layer of bureaucracy to wade through.

So, the real question is, will this office become a fully functioning RTO where tenants can file paperwork and go for dispute resolutions,  or is it going to remain a shell office that the BC Liberals can hide behind, using it as a shining example of  “improved”  services for Vancouver renters?

You decide.

On May 12th.

Renters with pets win at RTO, evictions set aside

Andrew, Pat & Rodrigo, Photo: WE Newspaper

Sometimes the underdog wins. In undoubtedly the most publicly anticipated Decision to ever come from the Residential Tenancy Office, two and four-legged residents at the Emerald Terrace Apartments  beat Hollyburn Properties’ eviction notices and won the right to stay in their homes.

In the Decision, the Dispute Resolution Officer (DRO) extensively reviews the evidence provided by the tenants outlining the lengthy history of the existence of pets in their units, and reviews the landlords’ claims that they were not aware of the pets until well over a year after purchasing the building. The DRO also notes that the landlords’ agents must have been willfully blind to the presence of pets in the tenant’s apartments during suite inspections. The DRO concludes that based on the actions of the previous and current landlord, the pet clause in the tenants’ tenancy agreements are not considered a material term. Therefore, as the tenants did not breach a material term, the notices to end tenancy are set aside.

In other words, the landlord knew about the existence of pets, and did not find them a problem, until the tenants refused to get rid of them.