'The damage deposit was paid to cover damage': B.C. tribunal orders woman to return roommate's money

A "room available" sign is seen in this undated image. (Shutterstock)

A B.C. woman who refused to return the bulk of her roommate's damage deposit because he used "more electricity" than expected has been ordered to pay up.

The province's Civil Resolution Tribunal ruled on the case last week, describing the events that led to the dispute. In July of 2021, the decision reads, it is "undisputed" that Alexander Podrebersek paid $437.50 to Lauren Spouse when he began renting a room in her suite. However, when he moved out in January of 2022, only $87.50 was returned to him.

Spouse argued she withheld the $350 because of unexpectedly high utility bills, arguing in part that in the last month of his tenancy, Podrebersek missed a lot of work and spent most of his time at home and as a result "used more electricity. Further, she said that her roommate "is not entitled to the return of his whole damage deposit because he was responsible for a significant increase in the electricity bills while he lived with her," according to the decision.

It was also "undisputed," according to the decision, that Podrebersek did not cause damage to his room, the bathroom, or any common areas in the suite. He told the tribunal he left everything in "excellent shape" and Spouse did not disagree.

Tribunal member Kristin Gardner noted that there was no formal rental agreement between the two, but that Podrebersek's monthly rent of $875 included both internet and utilities. Finding no evidence to the contrary, the tribunal accepted this as more likely than not.

With no documentation proving that Podrebersek agreed to pay more than his monthly rent to cover utilities, the tribunal found it was not reasonable for the amount to be withheld for any reason related to the use of electricity.

"Even if Mr. Podrebersek used more electricity or other utilities than Ms. Spouse expected, I find she was not entitled to charge Mr. Podrebersek more unless the parties agreed to it," Gardiner wrote.

"The damage deposit was paid to cover damage and not increased utility charges."

Because there was no evidence presented that Podrebersek caused any damage beyond normal wear and tear, Spouse was ordered to return the $350 within 14 days of the judgment.