Court rules on 5-year fight over illegal suites on B.C. property

For rent sign (Getty Images stock photo)

A five-year fight between property owners and the City of Mission over multiple "unlawful and unsafe" suites recently ended up in B.C. Supreme Court.

Justice Simon Coval ruled on the dispute last month, saying he could see "no defence" for the "multiple serious and ongoing bylaw breaches" at the home and granting the city an injunction.

Belinda and John Obasohan's property is zoned for "urban residential" use, which means only one single-family dwelling is allowed. Secondary suites are prohibited but renting out two rooms to no more than two "boarders" is allowed, the decision explains.

The only building permits on record are from 1997 when a single-unit home with one kitchen and an unfinished basement was built and signed off on by city inspectors, the court heard.

THE INITIAL INSPECTION

In 2018, the city received its first complaint about the property and sent inspectors.

"Significant renovations were found to create multiple suites without approval or permits and contrary to the zoning," the decision says, noting that the city then wrote a letter to the Obasohans "confirming the zoning contravention and requesting that the secondary suites be vacated and the property be brought into compliance."

Over the next three years, the owners and the city engaged in a back-and-forth but the Obasohans "resisted" follow-up inspections saying they would be "an intrusion into their private lives," the court heard.

NUMEROUS SAFETY ISSUES AND A 'BUCKET OF URINE'

City officials ultimately has to get a warrant to enter the property, which they did in 2021.

They told the court there were three illegal suites on the property, two on the main floor and one in the basement.

"The city witnesses put into evidence many photographs taken during the April inspection, including egress windows in the basement that did not meet code, exits blocked entirely by furniture, an enclosed patio installed without permits, the basement kitchen installed without permits and with unsafe gas outlets and non-operational smoke detectors," the court heard.

Other issues included unapproved electrical work and plumbing and a lack of fire separation between the illegal suites and the primary dwelling and a stove in the front yard that had been, seemingly, hastily removed from one of the suites.

The inspection of the home's top floor found three bedrooms being rented out to students. In addition to running afoul of the limit on boarders, inspectors "observed a lack of proper sanitation for the boarding rooms on the top floor, including a bucket of urine in one of the rooms," the judge's decision said.

The city wrote to the owners after the inspection, detailing the rules they had broken, outlining what needed to be done to bring the property up to code as well as the permits they would need to apply for and obtain – complete with deadlines for action.

CITY TAKES LEGAL ACTION

In March of 2022 – four years after the original complaint – the city's lawyers drafted sent a letter to the couple about the illegal suites and unpermitted work on the property, warning that legal action may be taken.

"We are writing further to the extensive contact we have had with the city staff regarding these issues, including repeated phone calls, site visits, emails, letters, inspections of the property, issuance of six bylaw offence notices, tickets, and a meeting at City Hall," the letter said.

"The current use of the property is unlawful unless ceased."

Ten months after the letter was sent, in January of 2023, city officials posted an "unsafe to occupy" notice at the property.

The city served the property owners with court papers in July, but no response was filed ahead of the hearing which took place on Sept. 29 and Oct. 5.

OWNERS RESPOND

Cosan did allow John Obasohan to submit evidence, despite the lack of official reply in advance. The court heard that the couple's mortgage was $500,000 and that they needed the income from rentals to afford their home.

"He argued that it was in the public interest for a house as large as his to have numerous tenants who might otherwise pay higher rent elsewhere or even be unhoused, and that it was not the court's job to decide the appropriate number of occupants in such a large house," the decision says, adding that he disputed that there were any safety issues on the property.

Obasohan also told the court that other homes on the couple's street have rental suites, arguing legal action against them amounted to "selective prosecution" and a breach of their Charter rights.

'REFUSAL TO CO-OPERATE'

The judge rejected these arguments, granting the city an injunction that orders the owners to bring the property into compliance by, among other things, decommissioning the secondary suites or getting the property rezoned to allow them. They were also ordered to comply with the rules by getting permits for the work that had been done or certificated of compliance confirming it was up to code.

"I can see no basis in the evidence or submissions of Mr. Obasohan to decline the injunction sought and associated relief to address those breaches, particularly in circumstances where there has been such a long history of such breaches and a refusal to co-operate," Cosan concluded.