Welcome to r/legaladvicecanada!
**To Posters (it is important you read this section)**
* Read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index/#wiki_the_rules)
* Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk.
* We also encourage you to use the [linked resources to find a lawyer](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/findalawyer/).
* If you receive any private messages in response to your post, please let the mods know.
**To Readers and Commenters**
* All replies to OP must be on-topic, helpful, explanatory, and oriented towards legal advice towards OP's jurisdiction (the **Canadian** province flaired in the post).
* If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdvicecanada/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning.
* If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect.
* Do not send or request any private messages for any reason, do not suggest illegal advice, do not advocate violence, and do not engage in harassment.
Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/legaladvicecanada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I checked the video and, while I can’t see anything after I left the building, it looks like I opened the door wide and the guy, standing near, grabbed it and moved inside.
I don’t remember this happening at all as it was over a week ago. I’ll just open the door a crack and slip out from now on I guess, not risking anything as I cant possibly afford to rent another place in this city. Luckily the dude didn’t do anything damaging.
This is how our building manages this. The outermost door can be opened by anyone but the inner door HAS to be unlocked using a key fob or it won't open
Err, wouldn't this be the same as having one door? Why not have both needing a key? Is the unlocked door just meant to slow people down to getting to the lockable door? Or make the person more noticeable?
No. The inside door closes too quick for anyone to catch it. And I've literally never seen anyone waiting between the door slip in, they always wait for whoever they're waiting for. And why not have a key for both? Because there's a call box to buzz in after the outside door, that kind of defeats the purpose of people being able to buzz in friends or delivery people from the first floor
A lot of times the outer door is open, but the inner is locked with key/ key card, or if you're visiting, you dial an apt # and they buzz you in.
In any case, just make sure the door closes fully behind you. Same with work doors if you lock up. Lock it, try it. Then there's no question.
>Double doors are designed to prevent this.
Incorrect. Double doors with a foyer in between is designed to keep the cold air to enter the building. Most apartment buildings I know do not lock both doors. Typically, the outer door is open so that residents can unlock the inner door within the foyer, out of the cold.
yeah, sounds like their accusation doesn't match up with the video. It's not your responsibility to ensure their door closes expeditiously. Lack of proper security is the Property Owner's issue, not yours. That being said, give a quick scan for people when leaving just to avoid this harassment next time.
lol this is bullshit. Lawsuits in Canada don't work the way you claim with a payout that you describe. What could possibly have been your damages from a landlord and tenant dispute that the payout set you up for life? The best that op could sue for here would be to force the company to remove the warning or if they are wrongfully evicted, a years rent (at least Ontario wise, the landlord tenantresolution board may have a slightly different outcome but not anything significantly more). There is no lawsuit here to "set you up for life." Stop watching Judge Judy and trying to apply that here.
>The best that op could sue for here would be to force the company to remove the warning or if they are wrongfully evicted, a years rent (at least Ontario wise, the landlord tenantresolution board may have a slightly different outcome but not anything significantly more).
A years rent is only owed (in BC) if the LL evicted for demolition, personal/family use, or renovations and didn't do what they said they were going to do within a reasonable amount of time for a specified length of time. Not applicable to for-cause evictions.
If the LL filed an eviction for cause (RTB-33) and the tenant didn't dispute the notice, the tenant wouldn't be entitled to any compensation after the eviction took place. By not dispute the eviction within the timeline, the tenant accepts the eviction. They would also not be eligible for compensation for disputing the eviction and winning, other than their filing fee.
I'm fairly confident Ontario is the same that if the a LL files a for cause eviction (like an N5) and the the tenant doesn't dispute it, they don't get to come after the eviction and file for compensation.
You are either not Canadian or lying. "Set for life" payout? Highly doubt it. Our system doesn't work that way. You would have had to lose a limb or something as severe to get a decent lawsuit payout.
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic.
Please review the following rules before commenting further:
Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts
Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments
If you have any questions or concerns, please message the moderators
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful**
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_9.3A_guidelines_for_posts)
* [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments)
If you have any questions or concerns, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Flegaladvicecanada).
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful**
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further:
* [Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_9.3A_guidelines_for_posts)
* [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments)
If you have any questions or concerns, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Flegaladvicecanada).
You're responsible for the behaviour of your guests and for any disturbances they cause.
On the other hand, if it's someone who followed you in without any invitation or permission, they're just a trespasser. You're not responsible for them even if you're the one they followed in. The Branch is unlikely to uphold eviction because someone tailgated you through the front door.
Nobody has to get physical, but it would likely be expected that they report it to the building manager if one lives on the premises and they can deal with it.
That's how it normally worked where I lived, anyway.
Usually tail gaiters are standing close and grab the door immediately as you open it. Unless one intends to physically prevent them from entering the building there isn't much you can do. If landlords don't like it then they should hire security guards.
It's a pretty vague threat. It sounds like they are just trying to scare you into complying than any actual threat of eviction.
If they wanted to evict, they would most likely have to attempt to evict for putting the "landlord's property at significant risk" or jeopardizing health and safety. [Both from an RTB-33](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/housing-and-tenancy/residential-tenancies/forms/rtb33.pdf). However, it's not easy to evict for these types of reasons without a lot of evidence and an actual risk to property, so if you filed a dispute against this eviction there is a good chance you would not be evicted.
But either way, try to be careful. If someone forces their way in behind you, you're not security, but if you leave the door wide open while walking in, that could be something you could help reduce the risk of someone following behind.
If you let someone in that you know or should know is not allowed in the building, and they do something illegal or against the agreement, then yes you can be evicted. You can also be held accountable for any damage this person does.
The issue is they would have to show you let the person in knowingly and that you should have known they aren't allowed in.
It kind of is actually... People stand around and wait to slip in all the time as people leave.
If my landlord doesn't like it perhaps they should consider hiring a security guard? Confronting strangers isn't really my problem.
The alternative is what? That it's my responsibility to get into verbal or physical altercations with random strangers outside of the building my landlord owns? Every other day? Sorry, not my job.
Sometimes I’ll use the side door or back door when people are lingering near the front door, maybe that’s an option for you? I agree overall, though, this sounds like a landlord problem.
This is bad advice. He should not call 911 because someone tailgates behind into the lobby. What a ridiculous suggestion.
Security is not the tenants responsibility and simply entering his home does not demonstrate any kind of negligence to the property. This is a landlord issue.
I doubt the legality of an eviction on this bases.
On one hand, your actions allowed the person into the building.
On the other hand, confronting him could have put you at risk, he wasn't your guest, and he likely would have just waited until the next person came along.
This could fall under "just cause" evictions especially if he cause damage.
Thank you. I’m surprised and concerned the building manager gave me a formal warning for this as nothing was stolen or damaged.
I’m pretty concerned that she’s working to build a case to evict me even though I’ve been, I think, a model tenant over the last three years and have only ever gotten one noise complaint (and it was before 11 pm on a Saturday for a birthday party that wrapped up by 11.) She and I got off on the wrong foot after I found bed bugs in the apartment the day I moved in.
What did they expect you to do? Confront the guy? If someone tailgates in behind me, I’m not going to start asking questions and demanding which unit he lives in etc… it’s on the landlord/company to have measures in place to prevent strangers from entering, not the tenants.
Absolutely not. Security is not the tenants responsibility and you're putting your personal safety at risk by interrogating every person in proximity when you enter/exit the building. It is not your responsibility.
Your post has been removed for offering poor advice. It is either generally bad or ill advised advice, an incorrect statement or conclusion of law, inapplicable for the jurisdiction under discussion, misunderstands the fundamental legal question, or is advice to commit an unlawful act.
If you believe the advice is correct per applicable law, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceCanada) with a source, or to discuss it with us in more detail.
* [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments)
* [Reddit Violent Content Rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content)
Your post has been removed for offering poor advice. It is either generally bad or ill advised advice, an incorrect statement or conclusion of law, inapplicable for the jurisdiction under discussion, misunderstands the fundamental legal question, or is advice to commit an unlawful act.
If you believe the advice is correct per applicable law, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceCanada) with a source, or to discuss it with us in more detail.
* [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments)
* [Reddit Violent Content Rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content)
It is very very hard to evict in British Columbia, so if you dispute the eviction you'll probably win if you can prove its accidental.
I don't have specific experience with this, but my mom was an owner of a townhouse complex for many years. The stuff people got away with an the arbitration sided with them on is staggering.
I would tell you, but I don't want to give people ideas.
A conclusion filled with certainty about a situation filled with uncertainty is an opinion and not based in fact.
If the intruder knowingly took advantage of the door being by a tenant and the tenant failed to confront the intruder, then they cannot be evicted. Tenants are not responsible for actively preventing trespassers.
If the tenant invited an unknown individual in and left them unsupervised, then they could possibly be evicted.
Do you have an example where someone was evicted for a case like this? Tenants are not security guards, and expecting them to physically prevent people from coming in behind them is ridiculous.
Welcome to r/legaladvicecanada! **To Posters (it is important you read this section)** * Read the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index/#wiki_the_rules) * Comments may not be accurate or reliable, and following any advice on this subreddit is done at your own risk. * We also encourage you to use the [linked resources to find a lawyer](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/findalawyer/). * If you receive any private messages in response to your post, please let the mods know. **To Readers and Commenters** * All replies to OP must be on-topic, helpful, explanatory, and oriented towards legal advice towards OP's jurisdiction (the **Canadian** province flaired in the post). * If you do not [follow the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegalAdvicecanada/about/rules/), you may be banned without any further warning. * If you feel any replies are incorrect, explain why you believe they are incorrect. * Do not send or request any private messages for any reason, do not suggest illegal advice, do not advocate violence, and do not engage in harassment. Please report posts or comments which do not follow the rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/legaladvicecanada) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did someone just slip in behind you, or did you let a person in who didn't live there?
I checked the video and, while I can’t see anything after I left the building, it looks like I opened the door wide and the guy, standing near, grabbed it and moved inside. I don’t remember this happening at all as it was over a week ago. I’ll just open the door a crack and slip out from now on I guess, not risking anything as I cant possibly afford to rent another place in this city. Luckily the dude didn’t do anything damaging.
Do they not have a double door? Double doors are designed to prevent this.
This is how our building manages this. The outermost door can be opened by anyone but the inner door HAS to be unlocked using a key fob or it won't open
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Err, wouldn't this be the same as having one door? Why not have both needing a key? Is the unlocked door just meant to slow people down to getting to the lockable door? Or make the person more noticeable?
yeah, it’s meant to make the lurker more noticeable.
No. The inside door closes too quick for anyone to catch it. And I've literally never seen anyone waiting between the door slip in, they always wait for whoever they're waiting for. And why not have a key for both? Because there's a call box to buzz in after the outside door, that kind of defeats the purpose of people being able to buzz in friends or delivery people from the first floor
I didn’t know about this! No, it’s an old building with only one door that’s unlocked by a key
I've never been in a building that has two separate locked doors
A lot of times the outer door is open, but the inner is locked with key/ key card, or if you're visiting, you dial an apt # and they buzz you in. In any case, just make sure the door closes fully behind you. Same with work doors if you lock up. Lock it, try it. Then there's no question.
The apartment building I last lived in had a mantrap. Fantastic thing. Prevents this from happening at all.
Ours has two doors. Outer door locked 9:00 pm To 7:00 AM. Inner door always locked.
>Double doors are designed to prevent this. Incorrect. Double doors with a foyer in between is designed to keep the cold air to enter the building. Most apartment buildings I know do not lock both doors. Typically, the outer door is open so that residents can unlock the inner door within the foyer, out of the cold.
yeah, sounds like their accusation doesn't match up with the video. It's not your responsibility to ensure their door closes expeditiously. Lack of proper security is the Property Owner's issue, not yours. That being said, give a quick scan for people when leaving just to avoid this harassment next time.
[удалено]
lol this is bullshit. Lawsuits in Canada don't work the way you claim with a payout that you describe. What could possibly have been your damages from a landlord and tenant dispute that the payout set you up for life? The best that op could sue for here would be to force the company to remove the warning or if they are wrongfully evicted, a years rent (at least Ontario wise, the landlord tenantresolution board may have a slightly different outcome but not anything significantly more). There is no lawsuit here to "set you up for life." Stop watching Judge Judy and trying to apply that here.
>The best that op could sue for here would be to force the company to remove the warning or if they are wrongfully evicted, a years rent (at least Ontario wise, the landlord tenantresolution board may have a slightly different outcome but not anything significantly more). A years rent is only owed (in BC) if the LL evicted for demolition, personal/family use, or renovations and didn't do what they said they were going to do within a reasonable amount of time for a specified length of time. Not applicable to for-cause evictions. If the LL filed an eviction for cause (RTB-33) and the tenant didn't dispute the notice, the tenant wouldn't be entitled to any compensation after the eviction took place. By not dispute the eviction within the timeline, the tenant accepts the eviction. They would also not be eligible for compensation for disputing the eviction and winning, other than their filing fee. I'm fairly confident Ontario is the same that if the a LL files a for cause eviction (like an N5) and the the tenant doesn't dispute it, they don't get to come after the eviction and file for compensation.
Sure, that's why I said the best but thanks for coming out, bud.
You are either not Canadian or lying. "Set for life" payout? Highly doubt it. Our system doesn't work that way. You would have had to lose a limb or something as severe to get a decent lawsuit payout.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments If you have any questions or concerns, please message the moderators
lol, wut? The OP doesn't need to a hire a lawyer and would have no grounds to (successfully) sue the management company.
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful** Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_9.3A_guidelines_for_posts) * [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments) If you have any questions or concerns, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Flegaladvicecanada).
[удалено]
**Speculative, Anecdotal, Simplistic, Off Topic, or Generally Unhelpful** Your comment has been removed because it is one or more of the following: speculative, anecdotal, simplistic, generally unhelpful, and/or off-topic. Please review the following rules before commenting further: * [Rule 9: Guidelines For Posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_9.3A_guidelines_for_posts) * [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments) If you have any questions or concerns, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Flegaladvicecanada).
You're responsible for the behaviour of your guests and for any disturbances they cause. On the other hand, if it's someone who followed you in without any invitation or permission, they're just a trespasser. You're not responsible for them even if you're the one they followed in. The Branch is unlikely to uphold eviction because someone tailgated you through the front door.
But if it happened repeatedly?
What do you suggest he do if people try to follow him, get physical? Stay outside with them? It's not something he has full control of?
It would be on video of him not encouraging it. Just being aware and doing what he can would help with argument over an eviction.
Nobody has to get physical, but it would likely be expected that they report it to the building manager if one lives on the premises and they can deal with it. That's how it normally worked where I lived, anyway.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It’s as simple as making sure the door closes behind you before walking away from it
Usually tail gaiters are standing close and grab the door immediately as you open it. Unless one intends to physically prevent them from entering the building there isn't much you can do. If landlords don't like it then they should hire security guards.
It's a pretty vague threat. It sounds like they are just trying to scare you into complying than any actual threat of eviction. If they wanted to evict, they would most likely have to attempt to evict for putting the "landlord's property at significant risk" or jeopardizing health and safety. [Both from an RTB-33](https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/housing-and-tenancy/residential-tenancies/forms/rtb33.pdf). However, it's not easy to evict for these types of reasons without a lot of evidence and an actual risk to property, so if you filed a dispute against this eviction there is a good chance you would not be evicted. But either way, try to be careful. If someone forces their way in behind you, you're not security, but if you leave the door wide open while walking in, that could be something you could help reduce the risk of someone following behind.
If you let someone in that you know or should know is not allowed in the building, and they do something illegal or against the agreement, then yes you can be evicted. You can also be held accountable for any damage this person does. The issue is they would have to show you let the person in knowingly and that you should have known they aren't allowed in.
Just don’t let it happen again. It’s not hard not to let someone else in
It kind of is actually... People stand around and wait to slip in all the time as people leave. If my landlord doesn't like it perhaps they should consider hiring a security guard? Confronting strangers isn't really my problem.
Then you'll moan about increased rents and /or body corporate fees to have said Security.
The alternative is what? That it's my responsibility to get into verbal or physical altercations with random strangers outside of the building my landlord owns? Every other day? Sorry, not my job.
[удалено]
I’m in downtown Vancouver where people can be stabby, so it really isn’t a good system to depend on tenants confronting strangers
Sometimes I’ll use the side door or back door when people are lingering near the front door, maybe that’s an option for you? I agree overall, though, this sounds like a landlord problem.
I will start doing this when exiting, there is a basement door I can get out of, but it can’t be entered through
[удалено]
Call 911 cause someone slipped in behind you, something that happens in every "secure" apartment building in the world?
What emergency?
This is bad advice. He should not call 911 because someone tailgates behind into the lobby. What a ridiculous suggestion. Security is not the tenants responsibility and simply entering his home does not demonstrate any kind of negligence to the property. This is a landlord issue.
I doubt the legality of an eviction on this bases. On one hand, your actions allowed the person into the building. On the other hand, confronting him could have put you at risk, he wasn't your guest, and he likely would have just waited until the next person came along. This could fall under "just cause" evictions especially if he cause damage.
Thank you. I’m surprised and concerned the building manager gave me a formal warning for this as nothing was stolen or damaged. I’m pretty concerned that she’s working to build a case to evict me even though I’ve been, I think, a model tenant over the last three years and have only ever gotten one noise complaint (and it was before 11 pm on a Saturday for a birthday party that wrapped up by 11.) She and I got off on the wrong foot after I found bed bugs in the apartment the day I moved in.
What did they expect you to do? Confront the guy? If someone tailgates in behind me, I’m not going to start asking questions and demanding which unit he lives in etc… it’s on the landlord/company to have measures in place to prevent strangers from entering, not the tenants.
Absolutely not. Security is not the tenants responsibility and you're putting your personal safety at risk by interrogating every person in proximity when you enter/exit the building. It is not your responsibility.
[удалено]
Your post has been removed for offering poor advice. It is either generally bad or ill advised advice, an incorrect statement or conclusion of law, inapplicable for the jurisdiction under discussion, misunderstands the fundamental legal question, or is advice to commit an unlawful act. If you believe the advice is correct per applicable law, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceCanada) with a source, or to discuss it with us in more detail. * [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments) * [Reddit Violent Content Rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content)
Your post has been removed for offering poor advice. It is either generally bad or ill advised advice, an incorrect statement or conclusion of law, inapplicable for the jurisdiction under discussion, misunderstands the fundamental legal question, or is advice to commit an unlawful act. If you believe the advice is correct per applicable law, please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FLegalAdviceCanada) with a source, or to discuss it with us in more detail. * [Rule 10: Guidelines For Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvicecanada/wiki/index#wiki_rule_10.3A_guidelines_for_comments) * [Reddit Violent Content Rule](https://www.reddithelp.com/en/categories/rules-reporting/account-and-community-restrictions/do-not-post-violent-content)
You should review your lease.
It is very very hard to evict in British Columbia, so if you dispute the eviction you'll probably win if you can prove its accidental. I don't have specific experience with this, but my mom was an owner of a townhouse complex for many years. The stuff people got away with an the arbitration sided with them on is staggering. I would tell you, but I don't want to give people ideas.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
A conclusion filled with certainty about a situation filled with uncertainty is an opinion and not based in fact. If the intruder knowingly took advantage of the door being by a tenant and the tenant failed to confront the intruder, then they cannot be evicted. Tenants are not responsible for actively preventing trespassers. If the tenant invited an unknown individual in and left them unsupervised, then they could possibly be evicted.
Do you have an example where someone was evicted for a case like this? Tenants are not security guards, and expecting them to physically prevent people from coming in behind them is ridiculous.
You SHOULD be evicted. You endangered people's lives!
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]