BC's Human Rights Code and housing
I got an email invite to a virtual workshop on BC's Human Rights Code, as it applies to housing, employment, and services, given by BC's Office of the Human Rights Commissioner. It's Thursday September 25, from 2 to 3:30.
I figured it'd be faster to just look up and read the material on housing provided by the BC Human Rights Tribunal. The specific areas covered:
Renting.
Strata.
Co-ops.
Buying a property.
Reasonable accommodation
Landlords have a duty not to discriminate, and to take reasonable steps to accommodate a tenant (to avoid a negative impact). For example:
Refusing to rent a space that is advertised for rent (or that is represented as being available for rent in some other way)
Terms or conditions of a tenancy that have a negative effect
Harassment based on a personal characteristic is discrimination if it interferes with a tenant’s right to the quiet enjoyment of their space
Eviction
This doesn't apply if you're renting a room in your own home, where you would want to have more control over who you're sharing your home with. The exact dividing line:
It is a defence to discrimination if the person renting the space shares sleeping, bathroom or cooking facilities with the tenant.
So a basement suite with its own kitchen and bathroom is considered to be a separate home.
What about negative impacts of a tenant on another tenant?
Note: Another tenant can be a respondent [i.e. the subject of a complaint] if they have negatively affected a term or condition of the complainant’s tenancy, including the right to quiet enjoyment of the space.
For example: Another tenant harasses a person based on their race in a way that interferes with the person’s ability to live in their space.
Note: A landlord is responsible for the discriminatory conduct of their agents and employees. The landlord would not be responsible for the actions of other tenants, but may have a duty to take action, within the landlord’s power, to address the situation.
Financial cost
All of the above seems reasonable to me. One thing I did find a little surprising:
If a respondent relies on excessive cost, it must prove both the costs of the requested accommodation, and how this cost would result in undue hardship to it given its financial situation. It is not enough to rely on the high cost of accommodation without showing the respondent cannot reasonably afford it.
Factors a respondent may rely on to establish undue hardship include financial cost and the size of the respondent’s organization.
It looks like what this means is that a larger landlord is expected to take more extensive steps to accommodate than an individual. For a detailed example, see Borutski and others v. Crescent Housing Society and another (No. 3), 2014 BCHRT 124, regarding a complaint about second-hand smoke. The tribunal found that the landlord had taken reasonable steps to accommodate the negative impact, and dismissed the complaint. In particular, they considered that deciding not to proceed with a large capital expense was reasonable:
[356] I accept that the Respondents took the following measures to reasonably accommodate the Complainants:
… e) Inspected, cleaned and reasonably maintained the ventilation system;
f) Obtained quotes about the installation of a new ventilation system. Given the cost of the system and the necessity of a roof replacement, I find it was reasonable that a new system was not installed, particularly since the current system was in good working condition; …
More
TRAC - information on human rights and housing from the Tenant Resource and Advisory Centre
BC Office of the Human Rights Commissioner: responsibilities as a landlord, rights as a renter. I found that the information provided by the Human Rights Tribunal was clearer. The Office of the Human Rights Commissioner seems more like a legislative watchdog, focusing on advocacy rather than adjudicating conflicts.