VadeLab
AllowedResidential Tenancy Branch (British Columbia)·

RTB Grants Landlord Order of Possession for Unpaid Rent in Victoria

Case No. AnonDec-301456

📌 In brief

A landlord successfully obtained an order of possession from the a person a person a person when a tenant did not pay overdue rent within the specified time frame. The decision also allowed the landlord to recover filing fees associated with the application.

⚖️ Legal holding

A landlord is entitled to an Order of Possession if a tenant fails to pay rent within the prescribed period after receiving a 10 Day Notice.

Topics

Unpaid RentOrder of Possession

Provisions

Residential Tenancy Act (BC), s. 46Residential Tenancy Act (BC), s. 55Residential Tenancy Act (BC), s. 72Residential Tenancy Act (BC), s. 89

📖 Technical summary

The claimant successfully obtained an order of possession and recovery of filing fees based on unpaid rent.

📚 Full judgment

The summary, holding and questions above are VadeLab’s own material. The official decision itself is published by the court, and we do not reproduce it on this page.

⚖️ View on the official court website ↗

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The tenant did not pay the rent they owed within the specific timeframe after receiving a 10 Day Notice.
  • The tenant did not dispute the 10 Day Notice within the specific timeframe.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The landlord failed to prove that the money they claimed was actually owed when they issued the 10 Day Notice.
  • The landlord failed to show that the tenant did not pay the outstanding rent within the required time.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The decision granted the landlord an Order of Possession based on a 10 Day Notice for unpaid rent of $1,975.00.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute was about the landlord's request for possession of the rental property due to the tenant's failure to pay $1,975.00 in rent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided in favour of the landlord because the tenant did not pay the rent or dispute the notice within five days, as required by the Residential Tenancy Act.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Sections 46, 55, and 72 of the Residential Tenancy Act were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The most critical argument was that the tenant failed to respond to the 10 Day Notice within the required timeframe, thus accepting the termination of the tenancy.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was for the landlord who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure they either pay overdue rent or dispute the notice within the specified timeframe to avoid losing possession of their rental property.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence included the rental agreement, the 10 Day Notice, and proof of service of the notice.

Official source: Residential Tenancy Branch (British Columbia) — this page does not reproduce the decision; it links to the court's own publication. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Residential Tenancy Branch (British Columbia) (© Province of British Columbia). VadeLab reproduces no part of the decision text; the summary above is VadeLab's own material. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.