VadeLab
DismissedCivil Resolution Tribunal (British Columbia) — Small Claims·

Unpaid Loan Claim Dismissed Due to Lack of Evidence

Case No.

⚖️ Legal holding

A claimant must provide clear and convincing evidence to prove the amount owed by the respondent.

Topics

small claimsunpaid loans

Provisions

Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, s. 118Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, s. 39Civil Resolution Tribunal Act, s. 42

📖 Technical summary

The claimant failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove the amount owed by the respondent.

📚 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 ↗

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The applicant did not provide the actual e-statement for the Visa transactions, which was no longer available.
  • The applicant could not provide a statement for the Mastercard transactions because she no longer had the card.
  • The applicant's handwritten ledgers showed a total amount that differed from the claimed amount, and she did not explain why.
  • The applicant failed to provide evidence of repayments from the respondent, despite stating she would send it later.
  • The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence beyond her handwritten notes to prove the specific amount owed.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The applicant's claim for $2,500 was not proven on a balance of probabilities.

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 respondent owed the claimant $2,500 for an unpaid loan.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided that the claimant had not proven the amount owed because she did not provide sufficient evidence, such as credit card statements.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Civil Resolution Tribunal Act sections 118, 39, and 42 were applied.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The argument that mattered most was the claimant's failure to provide clear and convincing evidence to prove the amount owed by the respondent.

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

The decision was against the claimant who brought the case.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Someone in a similar situation should ensure they have clear and convincing evidence to prove the amount owed before bringing a claim.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The evidence that mattered was the claimant's handwritten notes and the lack of credit card statements to support the claim.

Official source: Civil Resolution Tribunal (British Columbia) — Small Claims 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 Civil Resolution Tribunal (British Columbia) — Small Claims (© 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.
Claimant's Unpaid Loan Claim Dismissed - Civil Resolution | VadeLab