1

I lived in a rental home where my landlord lived in the same building. The landlord had this notion he could "immediate evict" anyone. He told me if I wasn't out he would replace the locks and remove my belongings. Moving homes is a big task and I needed more than 24 hours. I purchased a surveillance camera because I knew the landlord had a key to my suite. One day my surveillance camera recorded the landlord entering my suite. He never gave me notice. I asked my landlord why he entered my suite without notice, he replied "actually no. The contractor entered your suite to see where a water pipe was. He was in there for less than two minutes". This is al lie in the sense the landlord was in there and for more than two minutes. How should I bring this up in court? The dispute is through the Civil Resolution Tribunal. Is my evidence enough or should I try to get him to repeat his lie in front of the tribunal? For example should I question him "did you enter my suite" and then present the video? Right now we're in the "facilitation phase" so I'm guessing it's best to keep the evidence hidden for as long as possible.

closed as off-topic by Nij, Trish, StephanS, A. K., Pat W. Aug 29 at 10:05

This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

  • Suppose he ends up admitting that he did enter your property (e.g. "to check a water pipe"). Then what would you do? – Brandin Aug 7 at 11:05
  • What outcome are you trying to achieve? – Nate Eldredge Aug 8 at 2:32
4

I don't know Canadian rental law, but as a general rule in civil cases you don't get to play Perry Mason and bring in evidence at the last minute. If you have evidence that the landlord broke the law then disclose it immediately and use it to pressure him into settling. His later lies to you are less important than the fact that he broke the law in the first place. However you can certainly testify about what he said as evidence that he has acted in bad faith.

  • out of interest, is there anything preventing one from entering evidence at a later time? Is there a penalty attached? Or is it simply 'not done' – bukwyrm Aug 7 at 9:43
  • 5
    The objective in civil cases is to get the other side to settle on your terms without having to go to court. The best way to do this is to put all your cards on the table and thereby show that your hand is the stronger one. The other side will do the same for the same reason. Hopefully both sides will come to the same conclusion about the likely outcome and act accordingly. If you delay revealing evidence this process just takes longer. If you try springing a surprise reveal at the trial you will merely annoy the judge, which is never a good idea. – Paul Johnson Aug 7 at 9:48
  • 1
    "you will merely annoy the judge, which is never a good idea": that seems like a significant understatement. – phoog Aug 7 at 11:20
  • @phoog That's because I'm English. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_understatement – Paul Johnson Aug 7 at 12:20
  • To my understanding it's no illegal to lie in general, but to lie in court is illegal. That is why I thought it may be useful to have him repeat his lie in court. – dutyanalysing Aug 8 at 22:34

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.