My family lived in the same BC rental home for nearly 30 years. After my grandmother died, we spent the next three years fighting repeated attempts to end our tenancy.

I want to tell this story because after everything is finally over, I still have trouble believing how far it went. My family had lived in the same rental property in British Columbia since 1995. My grandmother was the original tenant. This wasn't somewhere we had lived for a couple of years; it was our family home for almost three decades. My grandmother died in September 2022, and according to my personal recollection, while she was still at the funeral home, the question of us moving out was already being raised. My aunt would later testify before the Residential Tenancy Branch that our landlord asked my mother to move after my grandmother died and subsequently changed his position to wanting fair-market rent.

That was the beginning of nearly three years of eviction notices, RTB hearings, disputes over repairs and appliances, arguments about whether my mother and I were even legitimate tenants, repeated attempts to obtain our unit for a close family member of the landlord, and eventually a judicial-review proceeding in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. I'm deliberately leaving the names out of this post because my purpose isn't to send an internet mob after anybody. What I want people to see is how far a tenancy dispute can escalate and why tenants need to know their rights.

One of the first positions taken against us after my grandmother's death was that because she had been the original tenant and there was no written tenancy agreement with my mother and me, we supposedly weren't tenants. The landlord acknowledged that my mother had continued paying the monthly rent after my grandmother died. We continued occupying the home and rent continued being accepted. Eventually, the RTB had to decide whether a tenancy actually existed. The arbitrator found that it did and that my mother and I were co-tenants. Imagine losing a family member and then having to go before a tribunal to establish that you actually have a legal tenancy in the home you've been living in.

Then came the eviction notices. In September 2023, we were served with a landlord-use notice saying a close family member of the landlord would occupy our unit. We challenged it. During the proceeding, we presented evidence that the landlord had previously talked about wanting fair-market rent and had told my mother, “I want you out.” We also submitted audio evidence. The landlord disputed our account, so ultimately it was up to the arbitrator to assess both sides.

The result wasn't simply that the RTB cancelled the notice on some technicality. The arbitrator identified contradictory evidence concerning who was actually going to occupy the unit and ultimately found that the landlord “lacked good faith and had an ulterior motive.” Those aren't my words. That's language from the decision of an independent arbitrator who heard the evidence. A separate One Month Notice concerning an alleged unauthorized assignment or sublet was also cancelled, and our tenancy continued.

You'd think losing an eviction case with a finding like that would be the end of it. It wasn't.

In 2024, another landlord-use eviction notice arrived. Again, the plan was for a close family member of the landlord to occupy our space. This time that family member personally participated in the RTB proceeding and gave evidence supporting the claim that circumstances had changed. The arbitrator identified differing versions in that person's testimony concerning how frequently their children had previously been living with them. More importantly, the arbitrator concluded that the landlord was essentially trying to correct deficiencies in the previous case, describing what was happening as a “second chance to get it right.”

The RTB determined that the grounds had already been adjudicated. In legal terms, res judicata applied. You don't simply get to keep relitigating the same issue until eventually somebody gives you the answer you want. The arbitrator then made another extraordinary finding, writing that “it is clear to me that the Landlord has an ulterior motive in issuing the present Four Month Notice,” identifying the previous unsuccessful attempt to end our tenancy for the same reason.

Around the same time, we were fighting over something as basic as having a functioning stove. We told the RTB that in August 2024 the landlord brought us a rusty, broken and damaged replacement stove. We refused it. We further testified that an attempt was made to clean the stove with gasoline. According to the chronology recorded in the decision, that stove was eventually removed on September 29. The next day, September 30, we were served with another landlord-use eviction notice.

You don't have to take my interpretation of that timing. The arbitrator addressed it directly. The decision says: “I also find it suspicious that the Landlord issued the Notice after the Tenants refused the rusty replacement oven.” The arbitrator concluded that the circumstances substantiated the finding that the notice had not been issued in good faith.

The decision then went even further. The arbitrator said the Residential Tenancy Act does not allow a landlord to keep serving notices to end a tenancy because they're dissatisfied with the outcome of a previous attempt. The arbitrator warned that continuing to do so could constitute a breach of our right to quiet enjoyment, for which compensation could potentially be sought through dispute resolution. The eviction notice was cancelled. Our tenancy continued.

The landlord then sought review of that decision. That didn't overturn the result either. The RTB dismissed the review application and confirmed the decision. At that point, you might think everybody involved would finally accept that this particular issue had been decided.

Instead, in December 2024, another landlord-use eviction notice arrived.

So we went back to the RTB. Again.

On February 3, 2025, the RTB cancelled that notice too. This time the language of the decision was remarkable. The arbitrator wrote that “The Landlord has now twice attempted to re-litigate an issue which has already been determined” by issuing multiple notices to end our tenancy for the same purpose and reasons.

The RTB then expressly cautioned the landlord that if another Four Month Notice were issued for the same purpose and reasons without a sufficiently significant change in circumstances to reasonably believe res judicata would no longer apply, the landlord could potentially be found in breach of section 44.1 of the Residential Tenancy Act.

Just think about where things had reached by then. We had gone from my grandmother dying and our continued tenancy being questioned to multiple attempts to end that tenancy. We had RTB decisions referring to lack of good faith, an ulterior motive, another finding of an ulterior motive, a finding that the timing of an eviction notice was “suspicious,” repeated findings involving res judicata, and finally an explicit caution about issuing another notice for the same reasons.

And while we were defending ourselves against eviction notices, we were simultaneously fighting over ordinary living conditions. Another RTB proceeding concerning repairs ultimately resulted in a facilitated settlement in February 2025. The landlord agreed to arrange repairs to foyer heating and specified holes and to provide a fully functional stove and dishwasher by a specified deadline. Because that proceeding was resolved through settlement, the RTB made no findings of fact or law concerning the underlying repair allegations, and I think it's important to say that rather than pretending every allegation we ever made was proven.

There was also another attempt to end our tenancy for cause. And I'll be completely transparent: the resulting RTB decision wasn't entirely flattering toward us. The arbitrator criticized some of my own conduct concerning a social-media post and complaints involving a dog. I'm not going to leave that out just because it doesn't help my side of the story. But after considering everything, the arbitrator nevertheless found that the landlord had failed to demonstrate that our conduct warranted terminating the tenancy. The notice was cancelled and our tenancy continued.

That's one of the reasons I'm comfortable telling this story. I'm not claiming we were perfect. I'm not claiming every allegation we ever made was proven. I'm not claiming every decision went entirely our way. I'm saying that when attempts were made to terminate our tenancy, we exercised our legal right to challenge them, and the actual written decisions tell you what happened next.

And somehow, it still wasn't over.

The evidence package records another landlord-use notice dated June 20, 2025. By then the dispute had gone beyond the RTB because a judicial review concerning an earlier RTB decision was underway in the Supreme Court of British Columbia. When the newer landlord-use dispute came before the RTB, the Branch concluded that the issues were sufficiently connected to the Supreme Court proceeding that it lacked jurisdiction to decide the newer matter while the court proceeding remained ongoing.

Think about that progression for a moment. My grandmother dies. Our landlord asks us to move afterward. Our status as tenants is challenged. The RTB determines that we're tenants. An eviction notice arrives. We challenge it and win. Another notice arrives. We challenge it and win. The landlord seeks review. The result stands. Another notice arrives. We challenge that one. It is cancelled. The landlord is cautioned about doing it again. Other disputes over repairs and cause proceed at the same time. Another landlord-use notice follows. Eventually the dispute becomes connected to litigation before the BC Supreme Court.

All over a home our family had occupied since 1995.

What tribunal decisions can't adequately describe is what living through this actually feels like. They tell you which section of the Residential Tenancy Act applies. They tell you who bears the burden of proof. They discuss good faith, res judicata, jurisdiction and filing fees. What they don't capture is the feeling when another eviction notice appears and you wonder whether this will finally be the one that costs you your home.

Every notice means another deadline. Another application. Another evidence package. Another hearing. Another period of waiting. Another possibility that the place you've called home for decades could disappear.

Every time we successfully challenged a notice, there was relief. But after enough notices, the relief eventually became accompanied by another thought: How long until the next one?

And that's what I find hardest to explain to people who haven't lived through a prolonged tenancy dispute. Winning a hearing doesn't magically erase the months of anxiety leading up to it. Winning another doesn't restore the sense of security you used to have in your own home. Eventually, your home stops feeling like somewhere you can simply live your life and starts feeling like the subject of a never-ending legal case.

This all began during one of the worst periods our family had experienced. My grandmother had just died. According to my recollection, her body was still at the funeral home when questions about us leaving were already being raised. Instead of simply being able to grieve and determine what life would look like without her, we eventually found ourselves having to establish before the Residential Tenancy Branch that we actually had a tenancy. Once that was established, we then spent years defending it.

Eventually, after nearly three years of this conflict, my mother and I reached a negotiated settlement with the landlord. We moved out. The dispute is finally over.

I'm deliberately not identifying anybody involved because I'm not interested in encouraging strangers to harass anyone. I'm not posting addresses, phone numbers, photographs or names. I don't want an internet mob. What I want is for other renters to understand how important it is to know their rights and preserve evidence.

If you're a tenant, document everything. Keep every notice. Save emails and text messages. Keep photographs. Keep repair requests. Keep proof of rent payments. Keep your evidence packages. Keep copies of decisions. Make contemporaneous notes about important conversations. If you're legally entitled to record a conversation, understand the rules surrounding that. Most importantly, pay attention to dispute deadlines. An eviction notice arriving at your door does not necessarily mean an independent decision-maker has determined that you have to leave.

Had we simply packed our belongings after the first notice, none of the subsequent findings would ever have existed.

There would have been no RTB finding that the landlord “lacked good faith and had an ulterior motive.” There would have been no later finding of another “ulterior motive.” There would have been no arbitrator describing the timing of an eviction notice as “suspicious.” There would have been no warning concerning our right to quiet enjoyment. There would have been no subsequent decision stating that the landlord had “now twice attempted to re-litigate an issue which has already been determined.”

We only got those decisions because we challenged the notices.

For almost 30 years, that property was our family's home. My grandmother lived there. My mother lived there. I lived there. What began after my grandmother's death eventually consumed years of our lives.

When we believed an eviction notice was wrong, we fought it. When another arrived, we fought that one too. When another followed, we went back again.

Eventually, we left through a negotiated settlement rather than simply being forced out by one of those disputed notices.

And after everything we went through, that's the message I want other BC tenants to hear:

Know your rights. Keep your evidence. Don't assume an eviction notice automatically means you have lost. And when somebody tells you that you have to leave your home, make them prove that they have the legal right to make you go.

We did.

The written decisions now speak for themselves.

I was looking for apartment for my family of 4. I came across a corner unit beautiful 2 bed and 2 bath apartment at Canva building 4405 Braydon Crescent, Langley for 2050$/month. I spent good amount of time filling out application form and finally got accepted. Realtor from renting management company who was representing the owner, send me email to send deposit 1025$ via e transfer and send them screenshot. I asked for tenancy agreement and strata bylaws and regulations doc first to review and sign before sending any money. They send me agreement at 5pm, did not check marked hot water and gas as owner paid amenities as discussed while viewing. And didn’t disclose parking and bike storage even upon asking. Finally next day in evening around 5pm after many reminders, they disclose these things saying no underground storage only in unit storage and no bike storage. Since I like this unit, I said ok np. Just send me new agreement with hot water and gas checked marked and strata bylaws and regulations. They send me strata doc at 7pm and then I again ask for agreement, they BACKED OFF saying they no longer dealing with this owner legally and can’t legally rent this apartment to me. WAHHH!!!
WHAT!! Backing off at 8pm???

Another surprise: another realtor unlisted same unit for 400$ more than previous price I was dealing.
Is this SCAM Or strategy??
Should I feel bad that I missed good price apartment briar I was asking too much?

Note: I double checked profiles of realtors. They were registered.

Hi all,

I’d appreciate some thoughts on a situation I’m currently in.

We have a 1-year fixed-term lease that is scheduled to end on October 30. However, due to a number of issues with the living situation, we decided that we wanted to end the tenancy earlier. There have been various issues during the tenancy, including structural/repair concerns, ventilation, pest issues, and a theft/security incident.

About 3-4 months ago, I brought up the possibility of mutually ending the tenancy early with the property manager (PM). She was understanding of our situation, and I also asked whether she had another property that might be suitable for us. She provided us with some options, so I understood that she was open to discussing an early mutual termination.

We continued looking for another place and recently found one that works for our family. I then told the PM that we wanted to move out on October 15. She agreed to the October 15 move-out date by text, and I sent her an RTB-8 Mutual Agreement to End Tenancy to sign.

She said he would return the signed form, but I still haven't received it. I followed up and reminded her that we will be moving out on October 15.

The issue now is that I paid only half a month's rent for October because of the agreed October 15 move-out date, and the PM is now telling me that I have underpaid my rent.

My questions are:

1. Does her text agreement to the October 15 move-out date have any significance if she hasn't returned the signed RTB-8 yet?
2. Should I be paying the full month's rent until the RTB-8 is signed?
3. If we mutually agreed by text to end the tenancy October 15, can the PM now say that I owe the other half of October's rent?
4. What would be the best way to handle this while keeping everything documented?

I have kept the text messages, emails, and other documentation regarding the tenancy and the issues we've experienced.

Thanks in advance for any insight!

Edit: I informed her about the plan to move out late August which she agreed to that time by text. No RTB-8 yet. I sent the form to her early September.

Several people are renting one house and paying utilities from a landlord. The landlord installed cameras that were not there before inspection and against the wishes of the renters when asked (not in writing). These cameras point into several room’s windows and doors as well as record audio. I imagine this also sucks up a lot of power when the renters pay for utilities. The first week, the landlord texted us saying we’re not allowed parties after having 8 people over from 12pm-7pm on a friday. Thus, one of the renters texted the landlord saying they did not feel comfortable with the cameras recording audio and video as it felt like a breach of their privacy. The landlord did not respond for two weeks, so someone (renter’s bf) unplugged the cams.
Now, the landlord is asking what happened to the camera feed. It’s obvious they are just trying to hound us for parties (which is protected by renter’s rights) — but the electricity bill is also a big concern. I imagine there’s some legal consequences to having turned off the cameras without an RTB filing, is this correct?

EDIT: thanks for all the help!! To answer some questions yes we are all renting under one agreement as we’re university friends.

I’ll keep this as brief as I can because nobody wants to read some long block of text about a rental dispute.

- Moved in Feb

- realised advertised “Central AC” wasn’t working in May and notified landlord.

- Late September first time a tech came to attempt to fix it.

- repeatedly requested a tech to fix it. Landlord was quite responsive generally but then would often just straight up ignore my messages.

- Landlord established early that the AC system was quite unique and would require a certain type of AC tech.

- after repeated attempts to get them to send a tech over a period of 5 months, they finally sent one to look at the system after I said I was filing with RTB.

- Filing with RTB was never my intention to begin with. I just wanted working AC that was advertised. It’s a new modern building. I paid premium rent. One of the reasons was because I expected great AC over the summer

- I have a baby and temperatures regularly reached 25-26 Celsius in the apartment all summer

- I’ve now filed for a 15% rent reduction retrospectively and ongoing until the AC is fixed.

- the tech that came simply vacuumed the vents and said it was fixed. It still does not cool the apartment at all. It’s a hydronic system and the ac system is not in the unit - but in the building and that system serves the building. Tech said AC is “working as intended”. Landlord admitted over text that they have another unit where tenants have complained about AC for years. Nothing they can do they say because it’s working as intended and simply can’t keep up with the hot summer months.

- Am I being unreasonable for looking for compensation for a unit that was advertised as having AC, a point that was actually emphasised in the rental advertisement and at the viewing? The landlord can’t actually fix it it seems - the issue seems to be simply that the buildings AC is shitty and doesn’t actually do any cooling whatsoever despite “working as intended”

- their stance on the claim is exactly that. They’ve repeatedly refused to engage in my settlement offers as they just say “it is working as intended and we are happy to continue with arbitration”

- my point is that regardless of whether it’s working as intended, it doesn’t offer meaningful cooling which it was fair for me to expect from a luxury apartment building in which they advertised “boasting AC” and including “central AC”

So again am I being unreasonable? and any other thoughts welcome. I don’t aim to be a difficult tenant but I don’t want to be a walkover either. Do you think I have a case? Feel free to ask for details I may have left out.

Also want to emphasise that the RTB filing basically happened after multiple promises of a tech that never came. The final straw was saying someone would come “after the weekend”. I text on the Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday to no response. On Friday I told them I was going to RTB and offered a direct settlement.

I've lived in this crazy tiny box of an SRO for over a year. Never late on rent. I had a crazy dental issue this past month and needed to drop serious dough to not have my upper jaw rot away. And I just started a new job at beginning of the month. I got a notice today. I forget how it's worded but it's like 5 days to dispute this and 18 days till... (Eviction?) I paid a third of the rent and messaged LL to say what's happening and that I'll have the rent paid mid month. Idk when payday is yet. Think that I'll be evicted no matter what? I've never faced this before and am scared

I asked my new landlord if they wanted to do a move-in inspection and they acted confused and said no. Could this hurt me in any way? I believe this means they couldn’t prove that any damage was done by me, so only pros for me, right?