Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 7

TENANT'S APPLICATION - ADDITIONAL PAGES page 1 of 8

FACTS:

1. On 17 December 2018, the landlord reduced my hot water supply (volume) to a


trickle, to an extent that the showerhead no longer functions. I emailed the
landlord a demand that my hot water be restored. He did not comply; instead,
the landlord demanded that I comply with his demands. (see attached.)

2. As a consequence of the landlord's denial of my services, I suffered the


following consequences:

a) I am unable to shower with warm water as I always do.


b) It takes much more time to wash clothing.
c) I am unable to wash in the sink with hot/warm water as required for hygiene.
d) I suffer a loss of enjoyment.

3. By his act, contrary to the RTA and its regulations, this landlord gained an
unearned, unlawful, financial benefit from his lowered hydro bills.

4. This landlord has a pattern of retailiation whenever an RTB decision or hearing


happens. He is attempting to prevent me from accessing the Residential
Tenancy Act to obtain justice, in contravention of the RTA.

5. Probably by no coincidence, on 16 December 2018, Larsen replied to my email


regarding a request for a correction of Arbitrator Morrison's #31029549 decision
of a 11 December hearing. Larsen usually retaliates after an RTB matter.
Larsen was defeated in Arbitrator Morrison's decision, despite his costly use of a
law firm specializing in residential law.

6. In a recent RTB decision, #31027213 pg.4-5, the arbitrator stated that this
landlord committed egregious, retaliatory acts, in breach of the RTA. In the last
paragraph of pg. 4, the arbitrator noted this landlord's continued termination of
services, as there was a prior denial of services decision in another file.

7. This landlord threatened, by email, that he would unleash a “shitstorm” if I didn't


move out.

8. This landlord threatened me by email stating that “Zalik, your days in deep cove
are numbered”. I understand this as an implied threat to harm or demise me.
This landlord was captured in a 2017 video, threatening a male, a stranger on
the sidewalk, with a baseball bat. Furthermore, this landlord once sent a text
message suggesting that I shoot strangers on the street corner with a gun.

Zalik vs Larsen, 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver


TENANT'S APPLICATION - ADDITIONAL PAGES page 2 of 8

(However, I do not own any firearms.) I submitted hard-evidence of these


incidents to the RTB in previous proceedings.

9. The Arbitrator's decision in 31027213, pg.5, warned this landlord: “As a note,
the Landlord is now on notice that continued non-compliance with the Act may
result in Administrative Penalties being recommended.”

10. In the RTB's decision in #31021367, the arbitrator criticizes the LL's thinking in
his threat of using a baseball bat. This is the infamous “baseball ball threat” in
which the Arbitrator wrote as a very questionable act by the LL.

11. RTB 31022471 decision states: pg. 4, para. 2: I find it more likely that the 2
Month Notice was issued as part of the landlord’s ongoing campaign to end this
tenancy rather than an honest intention to use the rental unit as indicated.

12. The RTB issued decisions and reviews against the landlord approximately 12
times, from July to October 2018. Below is a list of previous proceedings
between myself and this LL:

INCIDENTS, FILINGS, PROCEEDINGS, OUTCOMES


in reverse date-order, per Date of Initiating Document
Re: 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver
Incident Date of RTB # or Decision or Main Cause Outcome
Date Initiating Source Review or Subject Matter
Doc. Doc. Date
10/12/18 11/06/18 31030917 12/14/18 Denial of storage services Rent reduced further, fee
and damage to chattels awarded to TN
11/30/18 12/04/18 31032925 n.a. LL shut off stove (an n.a.
essential service per LL)
for fraudulent purpose
10/04/18 10/16/18 31029549 12/13/18 2-month notice for LL defeated, fee
alleged family use awarded to TN
10/04/18 10/12/18 LL's n.a. Says: “My client has TN did not accept LL's
lawyer informed me that he and offer
Haddock his daughter require more
email space than they currently
attachmen have”
t 10/4/18
09/14/18 09/17/18 31027213 10/29/18 Denial of service, Rent now $800.00 per
egregious, retaliatory act month instead of

Zalik vs Larsen, 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver


TENANT'S APPLICATION - ADDITIONAL PAGES page 3 of 8

Incident Date of RTB # or Decision or Main Cause Outcome


Date Initiating Source Review or Subject Matter
Doc. Doc. Date
$1,257. The Tenant is
also allowed to withhold
$1,257.00 + $100.00
from future month’s
rent.
09/14/18 09/28/18 31022471 10/04/18 LL requested review Decision confirmed
07/16/18 07/16/18 31022471 09/14/18 2-month notice for LL notice cancelled; LL
alleged family use; restore admitted same reason as
fridge; harassment due to in 866984
multple eviction notices
various 09/05/18 31026187 harassment
various 09/05/18 31026185 stove vent repair, threats
protection order - leave
granted TN in #31021367
07/04/18 07/10/18 31021691 08/21/18 s. 56 Early end to tenancy LL's notice dismissed
for faked fire without leave to reapply.
No such fire happened.

07/05/18 07/06/18 866987 08/31/18 LL denies wifi, dryer Rent reduced


services $105/month + $210 (1-
time)
07/05/18 07/06/18 866984 07/18/18 LL requested review Decision confirmed
07/04/18 07/05/18 31021367 08/30/18 1-month notice, faked Notice cancelled, leave
fire, LL wielding baseball granted for balance to
bat to TN's property TN's appl.; arbitrator
questions LL's thinking
in the use of a baseball
bat
05/01/18 05/01/18 866984 07/05/18 2-month notice for LL notice cancelled;
alleged family use evidence LL tried to
obtain rents higher than
allowed, rents in area
1.5X+ higher than TN
paying.

Zalik vs Larsen, 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver


TENANT'S APPLICATION - ADDITIONAL PAGES page 4 of 8

THE TENANT SEEKS THE FOLLOWING RELIEF:

13. Pursuant to the (the “RTA”) Residential Tenancy Act, SBC 2002, c 78, s. 27; and
per RESIDENTIAL TENANCY POLICY GUIDELINES #22, and #16, a cash
payment, to me, that is large enough to dissuade this scofflaw landlord from
continuing to thumb his nose at the Residential Tenancy Act. Furthermore, the
landlord did not provide the required statutory notice in ss. 2(a), nor reduced the
rent, as required under ss.2(b). The tenant seeks a one-time payment for $3,500
in aggravated damages for Larsen cutting off services, in defiance of previous
RTB rulings. An earlier RTB decision in file #31027213 costing this landlord
approximately $7,300 for the next 12 months has not dissuaded him from his
acts complained within this application.

See
http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2009/01/Decision1379_012009.pdf
where another tenant was awarded $4,684.
http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2009/06/Decision1320_062009.pdf
where another tenant was awarded $1,650

14. Further, and in the alternative, in all of my relief sought herein throughout my
Dispute Application, I seek damages in Tort pursuant to Guideline #16.

See the following SC and RTB decisions as authorities:

“[53] In my view, acting with reckless disregard to welfare of the tenants


could be described as high-handed conduct. Accordingly, the DRO’s conclusion
that the petitioners’ conduct could found an award in aggravated damages
cannot be said to be either unreasonable or patently unreasonable.”
Sahota v. Director of the Residential Tenancy Branch, 2010 BCSC 750

http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2018/02/022018_Decision6955.pdf

http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2015/01/012015_Decision6480.pdf

15. Because of this landlord's act of attempting to force me out of my tenancy --- by
denial of essential services, a one-time cash payment, and/or rent-reduction, of
$3,250 in compensatory and aggravated damages and loss of quiet enjoyment.

16. The tenant seeks compensation, to be calculated at the time of the hearing, for
losses, for both ongoing and future loss of health, and inconvenience, in respect
to purchase of appliances, and so on, up to the amount of $3,500 Reference:
http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2009/12/Decision1493_122009.pdf

Zalik vs Larsen, 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver


TENANT'S APPLICATION - ADDITIONAL PAGES page 5 of 8

where a tenant was awarded a monetary order for $2,800.

17. Because I can no longer use my shower, a permanent rent-reduction, of $10/day


for his retailiation, my loss of enjoyment, and, the devaluation of the tenancy.

18. Any other Order that the arbitrator considers necessary to deter this landlord
against intended or ongoing breach of laws or regulations. See
http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2015/10/102015_Decision6116.pdf

19. The landlord to pay the Filing Fee on this application.

THE TENANT RESPECTFULLY SUBMITS / RELIES ON:

1. s.27, s.28, s. 65(f), s. 67, s.95(2); s.95(4); of the RTA

2. Policy Guidelines #22, #16

3. Section 7 of the Act provides that where a landlord does not comply with the Act,
regulation or tenancy agreement, the landlord must compensate the tenant for
damage or loss that results. “Fear of retaliation” in the DRO's decision in
092017_Decision6036.

4. A 2018 Ontario Residential Tenancies Act decision whereby all of the rents paid
during a time period in question was refunded to the tenant for repeated
harassment of a tenant, denial of services, as well as an administrative fine.
Ontario is a common-law jurisdiction and judgments in Ontario are viable in
British Columbia, in my lawman's understanding of law.
TET-88502-18 (Re), 2018 CanLII 113777 (ON LTB)
5.
6. The DRO's decision in 022018_Decision6955
wherein $1,000 in aggravated damages, and at least $1,500 in expenses, were
awarded to the tenant; and, the arbitrator stated that expenses can be awarded
in a case of aggravated damages.

7. The DRO's decision in Decision1065_092012


wherein $500/month was awarded to the tenant for loss of quiet enjoyment.

Zalik vs Larsen, 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver


TENANT'S APPLICATION - ADDITIONAL PAGES page 6 of 8

8. The DRO's decision in 052014_decision5040


wherein $1,280 in aggravated damages was awarded to the tenant for stress,
anxiety, discomfort, egregious violation of the RTA, Also, the arbitrator issued
aggravated damages for the landlord's issuance of three eviction notices.

9. The DRO's decision in


http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2017/01/012017_Decision6533.pdf
wherein a $500/month rent-reduction was issued to the tenant for partial denial
of services.

10. The DRO's decision in


http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2014/08/082014_Decision2101.pdf
wherein a $500 award was issued to the tenant for “devaluation of the tenancy”.

11. The DRO's decision in


http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2014/10/102014_Decision6262.pdf
wherein a $2,850 award was issued to the tenant

12. The DRO's decision in


http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2011/02/Decision1852_022011.pdf
wherein $2,023 for aggravated damages was given to the tenant

13. The DRO's decision in Decision2429_052012


wherein a $400/month award was issued to the tenant for “devaluation of the
tenancy”

14. The DRO's decision in


http://www.housing.gov.bc.ca/rtb/decisions/2018/05/052018_Decision7122.pdf
wherein a $3,276 award was issued to the tenant for loss of use, quiet enjoy.

15. The DRO's decision in 052018_Decision6852


wherein one month's rent was awarded to the tenant for “landlord' breach of the
Tenant's right to quiet enjoyment”

16. Section 7 of the Act provides that where a landlord does not comply with the Act,
regulation or tenancy agreement, the landlord must compensate the tenant for
damage or loss that results. “Fear of retaliation”, as stated in the DRO's decision
in 092017_Decision6036.

Zalik vs Larsen, 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver


TENANT'S APPLICATION - ADDITIONAL PAGES page 7 of 8

PRESERVING EVIDENCE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN, TENANT'S AGE

1. The tenant is compelled to take measures to defend himself, and to “preserve


the evidence” in the public domain, because of the personal threats and
landlord's self-proclaimed ability to kill people without being detected. The
tenant was compelled to call the RCMP at least ten times because of the
landlord's threats and actions.

2. Preserving the evidence in the public domain protects the tenant additionally, in
the event that the landlord illegally locks the tenant out of his premises during a
future hearing.

3. The tenant is 67 years old, and has heard elderly-abuse 'horror stories', by
landlords, in the RTB's waiting room. The tenant's vulnerability due to his age is
addressed in the RTA.

RELEVANT TEXT MESSAGES ARE NOT PRIVATE

A Court of Appeal ruled that text messages are not private; and, furthermore,
that where public interest (i.e. neighbordhood safety from a bat-wielding
landlord) is at stake, then there is no privacy breach. In fact, the famous Jane
Doe vs Toronto Police Dept. Supreme Court of Canada caselaw requires
publication of possible threats to the public. The tenant has made public this
landlord's threats, which included this landlord's baseball-bat-threat to one or
more persons he didn't know. The tenant is defending himself from future
attacks by this bat-wielding landlord. The tenant has been assisted, many
times, by the RCMP in preventing unlawful acts by this landlord.

Zalik vs Larsen, 4386 Strathcona Road, North Vancouver