A BC court ruling shows how a single compliance error can cost landlords 12 months' rent
A British Columbia Supreme Court justice has upheld a $41,380 compensation award against a landlord who evicted his tenants of more than a decade under the province's family-use provisions but could not prove his children occupied the entire rental property.
In a decision dated August 26, Justice Julianne K. Lamb dismissed the judicial review application filed by landlord Masood Aslam. The ruling, cited as Aslam v. Morneau, 2026 BCSC 1605, confirmed that the Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) had reached a reasonable conclusion in the matter.
The RTB had awarded Richard and Patricia Morneau — tenants since July 2012 — $41,280 in compensation equivalent to 12 months of rent, plus a $100 filing fee.
The case began on March 2, 2024, when Aslam served a handwritten notice asking the Morneaus to vacate a house divided into three suites by June 30, 2024. The notice cited a planned "big renovation" and intended use by his children.
The Morneaus vacated early, on May 1, 2024, paying $3,440 per month in rent at the time. They subsequently applied to the RTB for compensation, alleging the landlord had not carried out the eviction's stated purpose.
The RTB found that while Aslam's son and daughter had moved into the lower suite after the tenancy ended, the landlord failed to establish they occupied the upper suite.
A written statement from a third-party occupant, accepted as evidence at the RTB hearing, described what the arbitrator found to be two independent households, not the shared occupancy the landlord claimed.
What the court confirmed
Justice Lamb rejected all three grounds raised in Aslam's petition. The court confirmed that BC's Residential Tenancy Act (RTA) governs how tenancies end, regardless of the terms in any private agreement.
A clause in the parties' original 2012 tenancy agreement allowing either party to terminate on two months' notice was found unenforceable because it did not comply with Section 44 of the RTA, which prescribes the lawful ways a tenancy can end.
The court further confirmed that the informality of the eviction notice offered no protection. Whether a landlord uses the prescribed RTB form or a handwritten note, the RTA requirements apply equally.
BC has revised its notice period requirements for personal-use evictions in recent years, a process that prompted formal objections from the BC Real Estate Association (BCREA) and the Canadian Mortgage Brokers Association – British Columbia (CMBA-BC), who argued the changes created unintended hurdles for buyers financing tenanted properties.
The RTB's Policy Guideline 2A requires the entirety of a reclaimed rental unit to be occupied by the landlord or a close family member for at least 12 months.
Paying roommates are permissible only where they genuinely share bathroom or kitchen facilities, a standard the arbitrator found Aslam's evidence did not meet.
What brokers advising investor clients need to know
One in four homes in BC is now purchased by investors, according to a December 2024 report, a figure that reflects how broadly a ruling of this nature could reverberate through the broker channel.
Multi-suite investment properties in BC carry RTA compliance obligations that extend well beyond the terms of any mortgage or ownership agreement.
Those obligations are not a formality. Concerns raised by industry groups including BCREA and CMBA-BC about the RTA's evolving requirements illustrate how these regulatory layers intersect with the financing decisions brokers support daily, particularly for high-ratio buyers and first-time purchasers of tenanted properties.
Make sure to get all the latest news to your inbox on Canada’s mortgage and housing markets by signing up for our free daily newsletter here.
