Residential Tenancy Laws.
The BC Provincial government has announced plans to amend the Residential Tenancy Act to help protect tenants. We wanted to try to explain why they are making these suggested changes.
These changes include amendments restricting rent increase when a minor is added to the home, providing tenants a longer period to dispute an eviction notice and increasing the time an owner must occupy the rental property after an eviction for personal use.
These changes are “targeted” to protect tenants from bad landlords. Governments have in the past and will in the future change laws when the general public has concerns over how they are being treated. Many government changes are reactionary to actions landlords are doing at that time and how they are perceived to be manipulating current legislation.
The proposed change of restricting landlords from increasing the rent simply due to a child being born is due to many landlords seeking options to increase the rent outside of the tenancy agreement. Why are landlords adding an increase in the rent when a newborn child is born”. The landlord’s argument is that more people creates more wear and tear on the property. A new born child is not going to add very much wear and tear, so is this really necessary. This is being brought forward due to some landlords increasing the rent by a significant amount. If the increase was reasonable, tenants may not care about it. Cartref Properties advises landlords not to increase the rent based on a child entering the property.
Why has the government proposed a change of increasing the length of time from six months to one year for personal use occupancy?. Many landlords have evicted tenants for personal use with the full intention of re-renting the property after six months or sooner if they can find a reasonable reason. An eviction for personal use is intended to remove the rental unit off the market. This change is a reaction to many landlords trying to manipulate the tenancy laws and re-rent their property at an increased price while the economy is pushing rents higher. Currently there is an over supply of products and I am sure we will see less of these evictions in the next two years. Cartref Properties won’t work with a landlord who wants to evict a tenant under three conditions and re-rent the property in the less than required time frame.
Providing a tenant a longer time to challenge an eviction slows the process down as some landlords try to use the quick times to evict a tenant. It appears this increase is going to be related specifically to the personal use evictions or two month notice as that is the eviction that currently has a 15 day requirement to dispute the notice. There may be a time when a landlord tries intentionally to send a tenant a notice knowing they are not going to be able to dispute this notice due to being on vacation or some other reason. If the eviction is legitimate it should not be an issue for a landlord if they dispute in 15 or 30 days. For these evictions the government needs to speed up the hearing as it impacts many people outside of the tenancy including purchasers and or family members who are expecting to move into the property. A better solution here would have been to extend it to a three month notice for personal use, still with one month’s free rent. That would give the tenant longer to find a place and time to dispute the notice and have a hearing.
What are other areas the government could target in the future. Cartref Properties has experienced many landlords removing parking stalls and storage lockers from the tenancy agreement and renting these for an additional cost to the tenants. This provides the landlord the option of increasing the cost of these to any amount as they are outside the agreement. Although this provides landlords with potentially more revenue in good times when tenants have less choice of rental properties, it creates a dilemma during the tenancy. The parking stall and locker are not part of the agreement and the tenants may do things to the stall and locker which you have no right to evict them for as it is not part of the tenancy agreement. This potentially means more headaches and a need to pursue correcting these actions through other legal means including the Civil Resolution Tribunal. Creating an agreement that creates animosity between a landlord and a tenant often leads to a negative experience for both parties. It also leads to tenants leaving when the market changes and they are able to find lower rent that includes these amenities with their tenancy.
If the tenant chooses not to rent the locker or parking now the landlord needs to put more effort into renting that stall or locker to another person. In a stata corporation that must be someone residing at the building and this creates another relationship for the landlord to manage. This relationship would also be outside the tenancy agreement and require other forms of legal recourse if there was a dispute between the two parties.
As a landlord it is important to understand the laws, and that they can change at any time during your tenancy agreements. Cartref Properties have found that when landlords and tenants both follow the laws, the experience is a positive one for both parties.
Cartref Properties can assist you, call today to discuss your needs. You can find more information about us at: www.cartrefproperties.com
