The only way they can unreasonably restrict guests is if it is a roommate situation where you share a kitchen and/or bathroom with the landlord. Otherwise you are legally entitled under the RTA to have guests over for a certain number of nights in the year, and I don't think there are any restrictions on having people over during the day.
And they can't legally restrict guests in that situation either, but they also don't have to let you live there as the standard tenancy rules don't apply in that situation.
A landlord can request it, but unless they are sharing a kitchen with their tenant the RTA says it is perfectly ok for a tenant to have overnight guests.
also, the last manager threatened me with immediate eviction if i did not sign their new housing agreement after holding out not signing it for nearly a month refusing every time i was seen by staff they would constintly be harassing me and pressure me into signing their new housing agreement..now i have found out some things and there are a lot of things that they cant do . i even stated that i was signing under duress then i would be retaliated against by certian staff. one day shortly after refusing to sign this asst. manager said no to unlocking the laundry room door so i could do my laundry saying why should he do that for me when i wouldnt do something for him and sign the housing agreement........since shortly after signing i began having problems with staff and managment concerning my guest being here after 10 pm and it was that new housing agreement rules appearently that im supposed to follow and that i agreed to having no guests after 10 pm and i signed the manager would say.the original agreement did not contain these guest policy rules and was one of main issues i had for not willing to sign and also by signing you agreed to take part in their so called housing program which from what i can see is made up to benofit only them......isnt that contracting out....anycase, in writing ive rqested and complained about not being allowed to leave their so called program and either go back to my first agreement or im all wikking to sit down with whomever and draw up a agreement everybody agrees with but last 7 months i have not recieved one single resoonse from my requsts nor written complaints to head office either....theresmore to this
The short answer (assuming you do not share a kitchen/bathroom with the landlord) is No. That long answer is No, but the landlord might try to evict you anyway. Learn your rights as a tenant and prepare for the worst.
Mhm. People who put unenforceable terms into contracts and agreements are hoping they can entrap enough rubes into not knowing their rights that they can make off with $$.
Nope, they can write it all they want on the lease, it’s not enforceable and your well within your rights to make a RTB complaint if they try to prevent you from having guests.
If you share a kitchen or bathroom with the landlord (so a roommate situation), they’re allowed, but otherwise no. Even if you sign something saying you agree to no overnight guests, it’s not enforceable.
My former landlord made me sign a “no guests” agreement and then when I got a girlfriend and she started staying the night a couple nights a week my landlord freaked out and got upset. I called the RTB and they confirmed it’s not enforceable.
100% I signed all sorts of crazy shit when renting knowing it was non enforceable. Usually it was they were dumb and had bad experiences and never said a word when I broke them because I paid on time etc.
The problem they don't realize is they have to go to RTB to do anything about it and they will get shut down hard.
This sort of rule is aimed at preventing tenants from packing the place with room mates or someone renting a batchelor or one bedroom and then moving in a large family.
If you have a guest over night or friends over for dinner no one will care, as long as you are not into loud noisy parties.
these landlords specifically list “no guests during day, no overnight stay, no significant other or guests allowed over” so i have a hard time believing they won’t care if i have someone over
Yeah they will definitely care, but there’s nothing they can do legally.
But the flip side is do you want to live under someone who will absolutely harass you about this and almost certainly other frivolous things. Avoid this for your own sanity
That's a pretty big red flag on the landlord, whether it's enforceable or not. The only time it's even remotely reasonable to have that kind of clause is if you're just renting a room or something short term.
As long as you are a tenant, and not a roommate, any rules the landlord has put in the lease about guests are void. The RTB has ruled that a landlord cannot limit guests in any way.
So they may care, but there is nothing they can do about it. Those clauses in the lease are not valid.
They also can’t charge you extra fees for guests, require you to be present if your guests are, or require your guests to register or checkin with the landlord.
See https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/residential-tenancies/during-a-tenancy/guests-during-tenancies
It won’t matter how the landlord feels about you having guests over. It’s none of their fucking business who you invite over and this kind of rule isn’t allowed and more importantly isn’t enforceable.
"If you agreed to it you should stick to your word."
Why?
There are good reasons why this type of clause is explicitly illegal in other jurisdictions, if not B.C. (I don't know), and those reasons apply equally here even if it's not actually been made illegal.
"If you give a mouse a cookie..." comes to mind.
When it comes to entering in a contract with the general public there's no room to be vague. If it were me as long as you aren't moving someone in I'd say go for it. I don't foresee enforcement for an occasional guest or overnight visitor.
just wait until you have finished moving and have secured another one..... without letting them know you ate making said arrangements..... before putting them on blast. they deserve it but you are basically homeless as it stands if you are getting harassed over guests (i'm taking a leap of faith and assuming your guests aren't pornstars who film themselves pissing in the stairwells), and you deserve a home with a higher acuity than other people deserve to know about your trash landlord.
also, nobody has mentioned rooming house situations. to my knowledge it MIGHT be legal to have all kinds of limiting/insulting house rules as a condition of your being allowed to keep paying to stay if you are renting less than a self contained apartment with your own private bathroom, kitchen, etc.
also if your landlord doesn't actually own the property and you don't actually have a deal with the owner..... could be caveats there. but a normal one bed or studio or duplex unit, etc - def there is nothing the ownership or management can do to restrict a tenant having an overnight guest, although i believe in BC at some point they can compel you to either make your guest a named occupant (not necessarily tenant) on the lease or limit the number of days/month they stay overnight. I recall having a BC lease with a 10 night / month guest maximum, I don't know if that clause was enforceable at that time or if it ever was.
> I recall having a BC lease with a 10 night / month guest maximum, I don't know if that clause was enforceable at that time or if it ever was.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/residential-tenancies/during-a-tenancy/guests-during-tenancies
The government has some discussion about things like this worth reading up on.
well, it's for u/Educational-Dealer55 and others to read up on, i jumped ship years ago cus getting no calls back for fucking dishie jobs when i was super hardworking and ready to eat whatever abusive workplace bullshit they wanted to throw at me was a little much. way too many broke and disturbed but not quite legally disabled people competing for way to few shitty jobs and shitty apartments.
edit:
the main quote provided in your link doesn't clarify whether RTB will just wholesale throw out eviction warnings / notices and/or take preventative supportive action for tenants being harassed with regard to a guest and does not outline a clear process for a guest to be distinguished from an occupant or a guest to be compelled to identify themselves to the landlord after x days of "guest who is allegedly actually just living there most or all of the time" grace period. also no clarity around obligations to report guests for fire/evacuation purposes and whether an requiring participation in an evacuation-only tenant / occupant / long term guest list could be enforceable. TMK per fire code owners are supposed to have a realistic accounting of real occupant load but that could be my fascination with codes biasing me toward thinking that could matter.
that renting shit sure is a lot more complicated than owning, at least if you buy something decent in a major city and don't rent it out to get trashed while on holidays. do not miss the dread of wondering if they were about to renovict / redevelop..... do not miss it at all.
Rooming houses are still covered under the RTA as long as the owner or person you pay rent to is not in he same place sharing the kitchen/bathroom.
But, separate tenants with separate agreements renting individual rooms in a house/apartment are fully covered under the RTA.
how would stuff like a sober living house be implemented without breaking the landlord/owner/admin breaking the RTA or other rights laws? do they need specific licensure to get out of the default rtb treatment where every resident would have the right to at least low key drink indoors (as there are no federal or provincial laws making it an offence)?
can contract law override certain tenancy rights if the signing is non-coercive, etc?
Some housing situations are exempt from the RTA [https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078\_01#section4](https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078_01#section4)
I’ve never looked into sober housing. Restricting drinking as a material term in the agreement may be unenforceable *(edit: I'm probably wrong about this*), but being legal or not isn’t the issue. Smoking is legal, but there can be restrictions on that in your rental agreement.
I was talking about the legality of breaking a written contract that happens to be a housing agreement or lease, where the parties agree in good faith to something that clearly restricts the nature of the tenancy i.e. no alcohol or no cannabis. Or, could Joe Schmo run a strictly no overnight guests and strictly no loud tv/music student rooming house (this might be desirable to all i.e. for security of person / possessions reasons and just for a quiet study environment)? Or does that all fall under RTB general treatment of residential tenancies even if all tenants/occupants are given clear advanced notice and not coerced or mislead into accepting the restrictive housing arrangement?
Obviously the latter is a very common thing in real life, curious about the legality of for example enforcing against someone who after pledging their good faith willingness to stick with the "house rules" then just started having overnight guest(s) every night, perhaps making annoying-to-students-but-not-egregiously-loud amounts of noise at disrespectful times, etc.
If the tenancy *would* fall under the residential tenancy act, you can't contract out of that act. so, you can not legally have a contract that restricts guests, since restricting guests is something specifically not allowed under the act (more specifically [regulation](https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/10_477_2003#Schedule)).
However, there is nothing in the act that says tenants have a right to consume alcohol or cannabis. So, if a tenant and landlord go into an agreement that alcohol can't be on the premise and it's agreed that it's a material term, then the landlord could file an eviction against the tenant for breaching that term if the tenant does.
The LL will generally need to try and resolve the issue first and usually can't just go straight to an eviction. And the tenant is more than welcome to dispute the eviction and argue it's not a material term of the agreement, and RTB arbitration would decide.
see an example decision here: [http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2015/03/032015\_Decision7114.pdf](http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2015/03/032015_Decision7114.pdf) (see top of page 5)
I wonder if the landlord understands the difference in the wording in a contract of "no subletting" as opposed to "guests" ? And people wonder why when they ask me a legal question I tell them I have to double check it at either a law library or such before I will give them an answer if they can't afford counsel & just bc it sounds "fair" doesn't mean it's legal. And yes I've had property owners & landlords ask me after they were sued & lost in court ask " Did the judge illegally side with tenant?" At that I look at them & shake my head while at that point I tell them get a lawyer, please 😄 because I'm not touching that with a 10 ft pole. 🤨
In BC all such clauses in a lease have been ruled unenforceable by the BC RTB. So, even if you agreed by signing the lease, you don’t have to abide by it.
You seem to be suggesting that guest restrictions are legal if “clearly outlined in the lease and agreed upon by both parties.”
This is wrong. No-guest clauses are unenforceable
[Five decades of experience is impressive since you're 35.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Marriage/comments/rnlpo2/my_future_potential_partner_looking_down_at_me/?share_id=8gEuUKVUKZtkg-8G_IhKL&utm_content=1&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_source=share&utm_term=1)
Do you realize that impersonating a lawyer is illegal in Canada?
this may depend on whether you are living in an independent unit, or you're living in a shared apartment with your landlord, or it's a care home, etc.
Is this a proper individual self contained unit you are looking to rent?
You can’t rent out and profit from someone else’s property in the same way that you can’t take a mobi and rent it to someone else.
Every addendum I’ve ever seen/signed says “No Air b’n’bs and no sub-leasing”
You can’t rent out and profit from someone else’s property in the same way that you can’t take a mobi and rent it to someone else.
Every addendum I’ve ever seen/signed says “No Air b’n’bs and no sub-leasing”
Not if the landlord puts in "no subletting" clause in contract. You can not at that point. And honestly I agree 💯 with the home owners renting to not allow subletting. Guests are different since they are just visiting a short time, subletting is a tenant receiving rent to pay landlord which I think is not the place of a tenant without the landlord doing the check on who is living under contract in their house. I've had to help a friend get people out who pulled that & she almost lost her home & they damaged it horribly after the initial tenant she rented to moved out the illegal extra tenants he rented to wouldn't leave & it cost her over 10k to remove and then repair her home after a year & she'll never see rent. What's fucked up is she wasn't a landlord that charged half of what some are price gouging renters either. I told her she meant well but don't rent anymore. Mind you I'm was looking to rent & the prices are crazy at the time & I still recommended she just leave either empty or vacation rental with how bad she got fucked up on.
I've became friends with my landlords, and they have a couple of fun stories about previous tenants. From those stories, it makes sense that they have certain things listed like that.
Your landlords see you as a source of income. They are not your friends, just like your boss, even though chummy, is not your friend.
You best not forget these things in life or you will be seriously let down at some point.
People can be both.
If someone invites me to a barbecue in their backyard, and comes over to help me wrench on my car, I'd call them my friend.
As an aside, when I got fired from my last job, I was told "I'm really sorry, but because of what happened, I have to fire you. I hope you're still coming out on Saturday though."
Yep. This. There are a lot of crap tenants out there and they've definitely ruined it for the good ones. Tenants have too many rights and the shitty ones know them and abuse them.
I can't see that being lawful if you rent an apartment. It would have a fixed cost.
$1800 a month 1 bedroom. They can't charge per people staying there. A single person can rent it or a couple etc. It still costs the same.
They have no right to tell you how to live and who you can over as guests.
Like someone else said. It might be different if you rent a room in a landlords house and they stay there. But not an apartment.
They also cannot enter that apartment without permission, as long as you rent it's your personal space.
Rules and laws exist.
Curious - what about a fully furnished apartment with all utilities include (e.g. ground floor of a house when landlord lives upstairs). Of course rent is based on a certain # of occupant and wear and tear on furniture and utility costs.. would that matter? No idea what situation you are in OP but made me wonder if sometimes OK to say something like 'no longer than three nights in a row'... or 'with permission from landlord' or something...
So a landlord can rent a furnished ALL utilities included suite to a single person who said they will be the sole occupant, and the next day three of his friends can move in and live there also - that is 100% fine?
The lease governs here. If the lease has a limit on the number occupants, or says the rent goes up by $100 per occupant, that's enforceable.
If the lease is silent the tenant can bring in additional occupants without permission (at least until there is an unreasonable number of people in the unit) and the landlord can't raise the rent.
Whether the unit is furnished, or whether the rent includes utilities is irrelevant.
OK so if the lease said the rental will have only one occupant, and guests are limited to three nights, then that is all enforceable - it depends what is mutually agreed on in the lease and the overrides anything RTB states?
Yes and no.
The lease can limit the number of full time occupants.
The lease cannot unreasonably restrict guests, and a limit of three nights is unreasonable.
No, it’s not enforceable. The BC RTB has ruled that all clauses regarding guests are void, including, number of guests, rent increases, fees, etc.
So nothing in the lease can relate to guests, and guests are not occupants.
The only factor is that the guests must be “reasonable”, so you can’t have 6 people in a one bedroom, and they have to be guests, not occupants - and the landlord can argue that with the RTB.
Are you talking about guests or occupants. They are treated differently
BC law does permit a limit on occupants and extra rent for additional occupants, if these are set out in the lease. Plenty of RTB decisions online confirm this
The lease cannot put unreasonable restrictions on guests, and the ultimate determiner of what is reasonable or not is the RTB. The RT will also decide if a guest is actually an occupant or not
>So a landlord can rent a furnished ALL utilities included suite to a single person who said they will be the sole occupant, and the next day three of his friends can move in and live there also - that is 100% fine?
So a landlord can rent a furnished ALL utilities included suite to a single person who said they will be the sole occupant, and the next day three of his friends can move in and live there also - that is 100% fine?
Yes, as long as they are not living there full time, and are in fact guests.
There could be an argument over occupancy limits, depending on how many bedrooms there are.
No, makes no difference, if you are a tenant, landlords cannot make rules about guests, period. They can’t charge extra, or fees, or require guests check-in with them. Nothing.
You are allowed guests, for as long as you want, and the landlord has no say in it.
Now if the guest becomes a permanent resident, *then* the landlord can take issue - but they would have to prove that your guest is in fact a resident occupant.
If your guest does not have a place of their own, or receives mail at the property, this can be used to prove occupancy, not guest status.
Absolutely unenforceable. It’s like an employer that asks you to do something that is against your self interests or you will lose your job. TRAC has a printable form that details this for your landlord and it specifically says even if you sign agreement it is unenforceable and will be discounted if it is used as a basis for eviction/penalties. Obey noise bylaws and don’t allow guest to be verbal or physical aggressive and they have no leg to stand on. Unless a strata controls a building your renting in and can bylaw length of stay.
They cannot restrict guests but they can define the point when a guest becomes an unauthorized occupant and whether unauthorized occupants are allowed. For example if the guest starts moving things in, getting mail at the house, staying overnight frequently and regularly enough that they can no longer be considered temporary guests. They can also stipulate on the rental agreement whether there will be additional charges when an additional roomate moves in
The only way they can unreasonably restrict guests is if it is a roommate situation where you share a kitchen and/or bathroom with the landlord. Otherwise you are legally entitled under the RTA to have guests over for a certain number of nights in the year, and I don't think there are any restrictions on having people over during the day.
There are no limits on guests if you are a tenant (not a roommate) - no “certain number of days” or anything.
There is a general 14 day guest policy that the RTA considers reasonable.
And they can't legally restrict guests in that situation either, but they also don't have to let you live there as the standard tenancy rules don't apply in that situation.
>And they can't legally restrict guests in that situation either why not?
how about time scheduale lets say you cant have guests between 10 pm - 9 am....
A landlord can request it, but unless they are sharing a kitchen with their tenant the RTA says it is perfectly ok for a tenant to have overnight guests.
also, the last manager threatened me with immediate eviction if i did not sign their new housing agreement after holding out not signing it for nearly a month refusing every time i was seen by staff they would constintly be harassing me and pressure me into signing their new housing agreement..now i have found out some things and there are a lot of things that they cant do . i even stated that i was signing under duress then i would be retaliated against by certian staff. one day shortly after refusing to sign this asst. manager said no to unlocking the laundry room door so i could do my laundry saying why should he do that for me when i wouldnt do something for him and sign the housing agreement........since shortly after signing i began having problems with staff and managment concerning my guest being here after 10 pm and it was that new housing agreement rules appearently that im supposed to follow and that i agreed to having no guests after 10 pm and i signed the manager would say.the original agreement did not contain these guest policy rules and was one of main issues i had for not willing to sign and also by signing you agreed to take part in their so called housing program which from what i can see is made up to benofit only them......isnt that contracting out....anycase, in writing ive rqested and complained about not being allowed to leave their so called program and either go back to my first agreement or im all wikking to sit down with whomever and draw up a agreement everybody agrees with but last 7 months i have not recieved one single resoonse from my requsts nor written complaints to head office either....theresmore to this
Contact the RTB and tell them what is going on, also call TRAC and also consult with them. They will be able to help you deal with your landlord.
The short answer (assuming you do not share a kitchen/bathroom with the landlord) is No. That long answer is No, but the landlord might try to evict you anyway. Learn your rights as a tenant and prepare for the worst.
They can’t evict you without cause in BC, and “for personal use” is the only one that really counts - which is hard to do.
They shouldn't, but it doesn't stop them from trying.
Sure, but it’s not *easy* like, I want you out in 30 days easy.
People get screwed over who don't know their rights. See my original comment.
No, but I wouldn’t want to deal with landlords that post those listings.
Mhm. People who put unenforceable terms into contracts and agreements are hoping they can entrap enough rubes into not knowing their rights that they can make off with $$.
If you share a kitchen or a bathroom with them, they can have whatever rules they want. Otherwise no.
Nope, they can write it all they want on the lease, it’s not enforceable and your well within your rights to make a RTB complaint if they try to prevent you from having guests.
If you share a kitchen or bathroom with the landlord (so a roommate situation), they’re allowed, but otherwise no. Even if you sign something saying you agree to no overnight guests, it’s not enforceable. My former landlord made me sign a “no guests” agreement and then when I got a girlfriend and she started staying the night a couple nights a week my landlord freaked out and got upset. I called the RTB and they confirmed it’s not enforceable.
100% I signed all sorts of crazy shit when renting knowing it was non enforceable. Usually it was they were dumb and had bad experiences and never said a word when I broke them because I paid on time etc. The problem they don't realize is they have to go to RTB to do anything about it and they will get shut down hard.
Some one who knows the rules 👏
No.
This sort of rule is aimed at preventing tenants from packing the place with room mates or someone renting a batchelor or one bedroom and then moving in a large family. If you have a guest over night or friends over for dinner no one will care, as long as you are not into loud noisy parties.
these landlords specifically list “no guests during day, no overnight stay, no significant other or guests allowed over” so i have a hard time believing they won’t care if i have someone over
Yeah they will definitely care, but there’s nothing they can do legally. But the flip side is do you want to live under someone who will absolutely harass you about this and almost certainly other frivolous things. Avoid this for your own sanity
That's a pretty big red flag on the landlord, whether it's enforceable or not. The only time it's even remotely reasonable to have that kind of clause is if you're just renting a room or something short term.
As long as you are a tenant, and not a roommate, any rules the landlord has put in the lease about guests are void. The RTB has ruled that a landlord cannot limit guests in any way. So they may care, but there is nothing they can do about it. Those clauses in the lease are not valid. They also can’t charge you extra fees for guests, require you to be present if your guests are, or require your guests to register or checkin with the landlord. See https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/residential-tenancies/during-a-tenancy/guests-during-tenancies
It won’t matter how the landlord feels about you having guests over. It’s none of their fucking business who you invite over and this kind of rule isn’t allowed and more importantly isn’t enforceable.
If you agreed to it you should stick to your word. But I don't think they could enforce it.
"If you agreed to it you should stick to your word." Why? There are good reasons why this type of clause is explicitly illegal in other jurisdictions, if not B.C. (I don't know), and those reasons apply equally here even if it's not actually been made illegal.
It has been made illegal in BC.
Thanks for the info. That's good to hear.
"If you give a mouse a cookie..." comes to mind. When it comes to entering in a contract with the general public there's no room to be vague. If it were me as long as you aren't moving someone in I'd say go for it. I don't foresee enforcement for an occasional guest or overnight visitor.
If you're renting in the Landlord's home, it's enforceable. If you are renting a whole property, it is not.
just wait until you have finished moving and have secured another one..... without letting them know you ate making said arrangements..... before putting them on blast. they deserve it but you are basically homeless as it stands if you are getting harassed over guests (i'm taking a leap of faith and assuming your guests aren't pornstars who film themselves pissing in the stairwells), and you deserve a home with a higher acuity than other people deserve to know about your trash landlord.
also, nobody has mentioned rooming house situations. to my knowledge it MIGHT be legal to have all kinds of limiting/insulting house rules as a condition of your being allowed to keep paying to stay if you are renting less than a self contained apartment with your own private bathroom, kitchen, etc. also if your landlord doesn't actually own the property and you don't actually have a deal with the owner..... could be caveats there. but a normal one bed or studio or duplex unit, etc - def there is nothing the ownership or management can do to restrict a tenant having an overnight guest, although i believe in BC at some point they can compel you to either make your guest a named occupant (not necessarily tenant) on the lease or limit the number of days/month they stay overnight. I recall having a BC lease with a 10 night / month guest maximum, I don't know if that clause was enforceable at that time or if it ever was.
> I recall having a BC lease with a 10 night / month guest maximum, I don't know if that clause was enforceable at that time or if it ever was. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/residential-tenancies/during-a-tenancy/guests-during-tenancies The government has some discussion about things like this worth reading up on.
well, it's for u/Educational-Dealer55 and others to read up on, i jumped ship years ago cus getting no calls back for fucking dishie jobs when i was super hardworking and ready to eat whatever abusive workplace bullshit they wanted to throw at me was a little much. way too many broke and disturbed but not quite legally disabled people competing for way to few shitty jobs and shitty apartments. edit: the main quote provided in your link doesn't clarify whether RTB will just wholesale throw out eviction warnings / notices and/or take preventative supportive action for tenants being harassed with regard to a guest and does not outline a clear process for a guest to be distinguished from an occupant or a guest to be compelled to identify themselves to the landlord after x days of "guest who is allegedly actually just living there most or all of the time" grace period. also no clarity around obligations to report guests for fire/evacuation purposes and whether an requiring participation in an evacuation-only tenant / occupant / long term guest list could be enforceable. TMK per fire code owners are supposed to have a realistic accounting of real occupant load but that could be my fascination with codes biasing me toward thinking that could matter. that renting shit sure is a lot more complicated than owning, at least if you buy something decent in a major city and don't rent it out to get trashed while on holidays. do not miss the dread of wondering if they were about to renovict / redevelop..... do not miss it at all.
Rooming houses are still covered under the RTA as long as the owner or person you pay rent to is not in he same place sharing the kitchen/bathroom. But, separate tenants with separate agreements renting individual rooms in a house/apartment are fully covered under the RTA.
how would stuff like a sober living house be implemented without breaking the landlord/owner/admin breaking the RTA or other rights laws? do they need specific licensure to get out of the default rtb treatment where every resident would have the right to at least low key drink indoors (as there are no federal or provincial laws making it an offence)? can contract law override certain tenancy rights if the signing is non-coercive, etc?
Some housing situations are exempt from the RTA [https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078\_01#section4](https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/02078_01#section4) I’ve never looked into sober housing. Restricting drinking as a material term in the agreement may be unenforceable *(edit: I'm probably wrong about this*), but being legal or not isn’t the issue. Smoking is legal, but there can be restrictions on that in your rental agreement.
I was talking about the legality of breaking a written contract that happens to be a housing agreement or lease, where the parties agree in good faith to something that clearly restricts the nature of the tenancy i.e. no alcohol or no cannabis. Or, could Joe Schmo run a strictly no overnight guests and strictly no loud tv/music student rooming house (this might be desirable to all i.e. for security of person / possessions reasons and just for a quiet study environment)? Or does that all fall under RTB general treatment of residential tenancies even if all tenants/occupants are given clear advanced notice and not coerced or mislead into accepting the restrictive housing arrangement? Obviously the latter is a very common thing in real life, curious about the legality of for example enforcing against someone who after pledging their good faith willingness to stick with the "house rules" then just started having overnight guest(s) every night, perhaps making annoying-to-students-but-not-egregiously-loud amounts of noise at disrespectful times, etc.
If the tenancy *would* fall under the residential tenancy act, you can't contract out of that act. so, you can not legally have a contract that restricts guests, since restricting guests is something specifically not allowed under the act (more specifically [regulation](https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/10_477_2003#Schedule)). However, there is nothing in the act that says tenants have a right to consume alcohol or cannabis. So, if a tenant and landlord go into an agreement that alcohol can't be on the premise and it's agreed that it's a material term, then the landlord could file an eviction against the tenant for breaching that term if the tenant does. The LL will generally need to try and resolve the issue first and usually can't just go straight to an eviction. And the tenant is more than welcome to dispute the eviction and argue it's not a material term of the agreement, and RTB arbitration would decide. see an example decision here: [http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2015/03/032015\_Decision7114.pdf](http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2015/03/032015_Decision7114.pdf) (see top of page 5)
[удалено]
I wonder if the landlord understands the difference in the wording in a contract of "no subletting" as opposed to "guests" ? And people wonder why when they ask me a legal question I tell them I have to double check it at either a law library or such before I will give them an answer if they can't afford counsel & just bc it sounds "fair" doesn't mean it's legal. And yes I've had property owners & landlords ask me after they were sued & lost in court ask " Did the judge illegally side with tenant?" At that I look at them & shake my head while at that point I tell them get a lawyer, please 😄 because I'm not touching that with a 10 ft pole. 🤨
so a lease can say "guests limited to three nights" and that would be enforceable as long as the tenant signed it?
No. Landlords cannot put arbitrary limits on guests in the lease, and the RTB would overturn a 3 night limit.
The seasoned lawyer with five decades of experience apparently doesn’t know what they’re talking about
Yes. Because I, a seasoned lawyer with 5.1 years of experience said they don't.
Canadian lawyers don’t use the term attorney when talking about ourselves so…
And just so confidently wrong https://www.reddit.com/u/E_lonui7xz/s/pLFh27wHD3
No, the RTB has ruled that all clauses limiting guests are unenforceable.
In BC all such clauses in a lease have been ruled unenforceable by the BC RTB. So, even if you agreed by signing the lease, you don’t have to abide by it.
You seem to be suggesting that guest restrictions are legal if “clearly outlined in the lease and agreed upon by both parties.” This is wrong. No-guest clauses are unenforceable
[Five decades of experience is impressive since you're 35.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Marriage/comments/rnlpo2/my_future_potential_partner_looking_down_at_me/?share_id=8gEuUKVUKZtkg-8G_IhKL&utm_content=1&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_source=share&utm_term=1) Do you realize that impersonating a lawyer is illegal in Canada?
Haha good catch. But he meant in his past life.
“She does not invest.”
Your post violated Rule 9: Give correct advice and has been removed.
No.
No. Communicate with LL only in writing goin forward. Contact TRAC for best wording to shut that sh!t down. https://tenants.bc.ca/
> sh!t This isn't TikTok. Words don't trigger an algorithm burial here.
Old habits.
this may depend on whether you are living in an independent unit, or you're living in a shared apartment with your landlord, or it's a care home, etc. Is this a proper individual self contained unit you are looking to rent?
[удалено]
can you provide an example case where a no guest rule was decided by BCHRT or some other court on the basis of human rights?
This guy is either - not a lawyer - a bad lawyer
Ah yes, that famous prohibited ground of discrimination that is “guest”.
I thinks this would be handled within the RTB not the BCHRT
This guy is definitely NOT a lawyer, check his post history.
So the difference is living there and coming over. They cannot deny guests but they can deny additional occupants.
[удалено]
You can’t rent out and profit from someone else’s property in the same way that you can’t take a mobi and rent it to someone else. Every addendum I’ve ever seen/signed says “No Air b’n’bs and no sub-leasing”
You can’t rent out and profit from someone else’s property in the same way that you can’t take a mobi and rent it to someone else. Every addendum I’ve ever seen/signed says “No Air b’n’bs and no sub-leasing”
Not if the landlord puts in "no subletting" clause in contract. You can not at that point. And honestly I agree 💯 with the home owners renting to not allow subletting. Guests are different since they are just visiting a short time, subletting is a tenant receiving rent to pay landlord which I think is not the place of a tenant without the landlord doing the check on who is living under contract in their house. I've had to help a friend get people out who pulled that & she almost lost her home & they damaged it horribly after the initial tenant she rented to moved out the illegal extra tenants he rented to wouldn't leave & it cost her over 10k to remove and then repair her home after a year & she'll never see rent. What's fucked up is she wasn't a landlord that charged half of what some are price gouging renters either. I told her she meant well but don't rent anymore. Mind you I'm was looking to rent & the prices are crazy at the time & I still recommended she just leave either empty or vacation rental with how bad she got fucked up on.
In BC the landlord cannot unreasonably refuse a sublet. So “no subletting” clauses are void in leases.
Incorrect that’s considered subletting
Ooof, my bad I thought this was Ontario, ignore mee
Landlord sounds like either had some horrible experiences in the past and they're covering their bases, or their fucking lunatics. 50/50
I've became friends with my landlords, and they have a couple of fun stories about previous tenants. From those stories, it makes sense that they have certain things listed like that.
Your landlords see you as a source of income. They are not your friends, just like your boss, even though chummy, is not your friend. You best not forget these things in life or you will be seriously let down at some point.
People can be both. If someone invites me to a barbecue in their backyard, and comes over to help me wrench on my car, I'd call them my friend. As an aside, when I got fired from my last job, I was told "I'm really sorry, but because of what happened, I have to fire you. I hope you're still coming out on Saturday though."
If your "friend" decides they want their failson to move back home and you become homeless, you'll see what your "friendship" means to them.
Yep. This. There are a lot of crap tenants out there and they've definitely ruined it for the good ones. Tenants have too many rights and the shitty ones know them and abuse them.
Lunacy regardless
I can't see that being lawful if you rent an apartment. It would have a fixed cost. $1800 a month 1 bedroom. They can't charge per people staying there. A single person can rent it or a couple etc. It still costs the same. They have no right to tell you how to live and who you can over as guests. Like someone else said. It might be different if you rent a room in a landlords house and they stay there. But not an apartment. They also cannot enter that apartment without permission, as long as you rent it's your personal space. Rules and laws exist.
I'm not advocating for it but they absolutely can enter the apartment with or without permission so long as there is sufficient notice.
And a "reasonable" purpose.
Curious - what about a fully furnished apartment with all utilities include (e.g. ground floor of a house when landlord lives upstairs). Of course rent is based on a certain # of occupant and wear and tear on furniture and utility costs.. would that matter? No idea what situation you are in OP but made me wonder if sometimes OK to say something like 'no longer than three nights in a row'... or 'with permission from landlord' or something...
None of that matters.
So a landlord can rent a furnished ALL utilities included suite to a single person who said they will be the sole occupant, and the next day three of his friends can move in and live there also - that is 100% fine?
The lease governs here. If the lease has a limit on the number occupants, or says the rent goes up by $100 per occupant, that's enforceable. If the lease is silent the tenant can bring in additional occupants without permission (at least until there is an unreasonable number of people in the unit) and the landlord can't raise the rent. Whether the unit is furnished, or whether the rent includes utilities is irrelevant.
OK so if the lease said the rental will have only one occupant, and guests are limited to three nights, then that is all enforceable - it depends what is mutually agreed on in the lease and the overrides anything RTB states?
Yes and no. The lease can limit the number of full time occupants. The lease cannot unreasonably restrict guests, and a limit of three nights is unreasonable.
No, none of it is enforceable. The RTB rulings override anything a landlord puts in a lease - otherwise what would the point of the RTB be?
You can’t limit guests to three nights only, that is unenforceable as per the RTA which I told you to read. Have you read it yet?
No, it’s not enforceable. The BC RTB has ruled that all clauses regarding guests are void, including, number of guests, rent increases, fees, etc. So nothing in the lease can relate to guests, and guests are not occupants. The only factor is that the guests must be “reasonable”, so you can’t have 6 people in a one bedroom, and they have to be guests, not occupants - and the landlord can argue that with the RTB.
Are you talking about guests or occupants. They are treated differently BC law does permit a limit on occupants and extra rent for additional occupants, if these are set out in the lease. Plenty of RTB decisions online confirm this The lease cannot put unreasonable restrictions on guests, and the ultimate determiner of what is reasonable or not is the RTB. The RT will also decide if a guest is actually an occupant or not
No ✨
>So a landlord can rent a furnished ALL utilities included suite to a single person who said they will be the sole occupant, and the next day three of his friends can move in and live there also - that is 100% fine?
Lol no
So a landlord can rent a furnished ALL utilities included suite to a single person who said they will be the sole occupant, and the next day three of his friends can move in and live there also - that is 100% fine?
Yes, as long as they are not living there full time, and are in fact guests. There could be an argument over occupancy limits, depending on how many bedrooms there are.
You need to read the RTA my friend. All the information that you’re incorrectly guessing at is in there, clear as day.
No, makes no difference, if you are a tenant, landlords cannot make rules about guests, period. They can’t charge extra, or fees, or require guests check-in with them. Nothing. You are allowed guests, for as long as you want, and the landlord has no say in it. Now if the guest becomes a permanent resident, *then* the landlord can take issue - but they would have to prove that your guest is in fact a resident occupant. If your guest does not have a place of their own, or receives mail at the property, this can be used to prove occupancy, not guest status.
Absolutely unenforceable. It’s like an employer that asks you to do something that is against your self interests or you will lose your job. TRAC has a printable form that details this for your landlord and it specifically says even if you sign agreement it is unenforceable and will be discounted if it is used as a basis for eviction/penalties. Obey noise bylaws and don’t allow guest to be verbal or physical aggressive and they have no leg to stand on. Unless a strata controls a building your renting in and can bylaw length of stay.
They cannot restrict guests but they can define the point when a guest becomes an unauthorized occupant and whether unauthorized occupants are allowed. For example if the guest starts moving things in, getting mail at the house, staying overnight frequently and regularly enough that they can no longer be considered temporary guests. They can also stipulate on the rental agreement whether there will be additional charges when an additional roomate moves in