If the landlord is allowed to continue renting to the new tenants, and the old displaced tenants are forced to rent for higher sums elsewhere, with the costs of moving, this really isn't very much justice at all. It's not nothing, and it's better than 0, but it's cold comfort. This should have been 160,000, which might give the next landlord pause before doing this. 16k is just written off as the cost of doing business, and recouped in the first year of higher rents, 160k would sting.
British Columbia
News, highlights and more relating to this great province!
The best part is that most people can't absorb a $160k judgement, and the landlord would likely have to sell the home they were renting. The person who was evicted should be first in line to be able to buy the prior home.
While the judgement is good, getting your money is the hard part. We know somebody that was evicted alledgedly for family to move in, but on move out day a brand new tenant moved in. Court awarded renter $12000 about 5 years ago, renter has not received anything. Next step is placing a lien on property.
Dang. I can't help but think there was some discrimination involved there? Well I hope there's some way to get that back + interest.
We really just gotta start eating them…