Roommate Dispute Over Damage Deposit Resolved by Civil Resolution Tribunal
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to the return of a damage deposit if the landlord fails to provide evidence of damage beyond normal wear and tear.
📖 Technical summary
The tribunal ordered the respondent to return the damage deposit to the claimant.
📚 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.
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The burden of proof is on the landlord to show that the tenant caused damage beyond normal wear and tear.
- The tenant requested the return of the full damage deposit amount, which the court granted.
- The court awarded pre-judgment interest on the damage deposit amount since the tenant's occupancy ended.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord claimed the tenant left a mess without providing any supporting evidence like photos or cleaning receipts.
- The landlord asked for double the amount of the damage deposit but could not provide evidence that such a term existed in their agreement.
- The landlord did not provide any documentary evidence to support her allegations against the tenant.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the landlord could keep the damage deposit due to alleged damage by the tenant.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the landlord must return the damage deposit because the landlord did not provide sufficient evidence of damage beyond normal wear and tear.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancy Act (BC), s. 47 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the burden of proof on the landlord to show evidence of damage beyond normal wear and tear.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they have evidence of damage beyond normal wear and tear to support their claim to retain a damage deposit.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence or documents that mattered were the written submissions and the lack of photographic or other documentary evidence provided by the landlord.