Skip to content

New West tenants aren't on the hook for elevator costs, RTB rules

Tenants can't be charged extra rent to fund a million-dollar elevator upgrade, an arbitrator has found.
skylinetowersnewwestminster
Tenants of the Skyline Towers rental complex at 102 and 120 Agnes St. in downtown New Westminster won't have to pay extra rent to cover the costs of an elevator upgrade, a Residential Tenancy Branch arbitrator has ruled.

Residents of a downtown New Westminster highrise rental complex won’t need to pay extra rent to cover the cost of new elevators, the Residential Tenancy Branch has ruled.

An April 7 dispute resolution from the branch sided with the tenants in an application that was originally filed back in September 2021.

The landlord had filed the application looking for permission to impose an additional rent increase for new elevators, under a section of the Residential Tenancy Act that allows landlords to charge rent above and beyond allowable increases to help cover the cost of certain capital expenditures.

Residents of Skyline Towers, a 161-unit rental complex at 102 and 120 Agnes St., had been asked to pony up an additional $52.15 per unit to cover the costs — which, according to RTB documents, amounted to slightly more than $1 million for consulting costs and replacement of the complex’s four elevators.

The RTB decision acknowledged the elevator modernization project fell under the scope of work that could be allowed as an eligible capital expenditure.

However, it ruled against the landlord on the strength of tenants’ rebuttals — which, in essence, argued that the new elevators were only necessary because the landlord hadn’t adequately maintained and repaired them.

“The tenants argue, and submit, that had the proper legally required maintenance been performed on the elevators, then the cost of the elevator work would have been significantly less or not needed at all,” said the ruling from arbitrator Adrian Denegar.

“Based on a careful review of the evidence and submissions before me, it is my finding, on a balance of probabilities, that the tenants have established that the capital expenditures were incurred for a replacement required due, in part if not in its entirety, because of inadequate maintenance on the part of the landlord.”

A preliminary hearing in the case was held on May 31, 2022, and then adjourned to a participatory hearing, set for Nov. 3, 2022. It was then adjourned again to a written-submission-only hearing on April 4, 2023.

Tenants are now waiting to hear whether the landlord will appeal the decision, a resident told the Record.

More to come.

Follow Julie MacLellan on Twitter @juliemaclellan.
Email Julie, 
[email protected]