OUR LEAD STORY

/

INSIDE THE CLASH BETWEEN WEST END TENANTS AND A NEW BUILDING OWNER

By Nate Lewis 
(Click on images to enlarge. See “Related Links” below for cited documents, websites, and articles.)

Paula Payot has lived in a West End apartment building for four years. In December of last year, Payot learned from the previous owners that the building was up for sale. In late March 2024, it was sold. 

Paula Payot (Nate Lewis photo)

Before the sale was completed Payot and others received a letter from a fellow resident, Marie Weeks, explaining the building was on the market, and expressing a desire to have residents feel supported and connected with one another. With support from the Vancouver Tenants Union (VTU), this effort to build solidarity amongst tenants in the building ultimately led to the creation of the Park Beach Tenants Collective (PBTC).

What’s emerged is a clash between current tenants and the new owner and manager, Anoop Majithia. Majithia is the founder and managing director of Plan A Real Estate Services, which manages the building. 

Weeks and Payot say Majithia and Plan A are “subtly harassing” the building’s tenants, including themselves, in different ways. For his part, Majithia characterizes the tenants as “aggressive,” and denies allegations of harassment. 

It’s a clash with an unequal power dynamic. For Majithia and Plan A it’s a business, and a matter of what’s legally allowed. But for Payot, Weeks, and other tenants it’s their homes and their community that are at stake.

IN THE BEGINNING …

Three months ago, Majithia, through one of his companies, purchased the 21-unit apartment building for $8.1 million. Plan A’s mission statement, posted on their website, is “to be the market leader in maximizing real estate investment returns for investors in the downtown Vancouver residential real estate market.”

The steps tenants took to protect themselves were just a precaution in the beginning, Payot said, because she “naively” didn’t think her living situation would necessarily change based on new ownership.

Weeks said she’d heard of other situations where “landlords use opportunities like purchasing a new building to isolate and target vulnerable folks in a building, especially people who've been in long term units, so [they’ve] been paying less rent.”

This was part of the reason Weeks sent the initial letter, she said. Weeks and her partner have lived in the building for 13 years. 

LETTER TO OTHER PLAN A TENANTS

A letter – sent in late April, a month after Plan A took over the building on Nelson – was allegedly sent to tenants in other West End buildings owned by Plan A. 

“As of March of this year, our building was sold, now under the management of Plan A Real Estate… We want to connect with you on any changes or challenges that have occurred at your residency… We believe it is crucial to foster a supportive environment where each member of our community feels informed and empowered. Plan A Real Estate is notorious for creating issues for its tenants, and we wanted to reach out to see if you had any concerns you would like to address as well,” the letter reads in part. 

The letter is signed “Your West End Neighbours,” and includes a VTU contact email. However, there is no clear evidence as to exactly who wrote or sent the letter. 

Plan A responded by having their lawyer send a cease and desist letter to all tenants at the Park Beach property, threatening legal action if they did not retract the letter and avoid future correspondence about Plan A. 

TENANTS AND ADVOCATES RALLY OUTSIDE PLAN A OFFICE

The Park Beach Tenants Collective and the Vancouver Tenants Union held a rally outside the Plan A offices on June 11. Joined by West End neighbours and other supporters at the hour-long event, tenants delivered a list of demands to Plan A, according to the VTU. 

Park Beach Tenant Collective rally on June 11 (Vancouver Tenants Union photo)

The demands included ending evictions, harassment, and surveillance of tenants, retracting legal threats made against tenants, and respect for tenants’ privacy and personal information. 

Majithia, and the B.C. government, does not acknowledge collective bargaining rights among renters.

POOR COMMUNICATION CITED

Weeks, Payot, and Majithia all say there has been a lack of clear communication between building tenants and Plan A, with all parties expressing frustration that their messages are not being answered or requests not being followed up on. 

Majithia said the majority of communications with tenants are professional, but “sometimes these conversations can go sideways.” 

One example of this was a confrontation between tenants and Majithia in the hallway of the Nelson building. 

Majithia was at the building visiting vacant units, he said, when he was approached by a tenant asking about an email sent by the Park Beach Tenants Collective. Majithia recalls telling the tenant that Plan A doesn’t respond to emails from the collective and tenants can reach out individually. After further conversation, three other tenants from that floor came out to the hallway and engaged Majithia in what he described as a “confrontational manner,” asking Majithia about various issues related to their leases, Plan A, and the management of the building. 

“The situation was slowly escalating a little bit in terms of the tone of voice that was being used by all parties, including myself. And so I just decided to disengage,” Majithia recalled.

It was at this point Majithia went into the unoccupied unit behind him and called the police, he said. According to Majithia, after he described the situation and answered questions, the 911 dispatcher decided there was no need to engage the police. 

Majithia said he then continued the conversation with the tenants, who were still in the hallway, and said he told the tenants they could email their concerns to Plan A, or file an action with the Residential Tenancy Branch. 

Payot, who was not involved in the encounter, said Majithia had been knocking on tenants’ doors, which started the confrontation. Majithia denies this. There was a recording of the encounter taken by one of the tenants who was present, according to Payot. However, tenants declined to share the recording with The West End Journal, citing privacy.

Another example of the communication breakdown is that Majithia and his staff at Plan A won’t necessarily use their real names when communicating with tenants. 

“I don't feel like my name is relevant to the issue at hand. The landlord is Plan A Real Estate Services, right… Nobody in the [Plan A] office really feels comfortable giving [Park Beach tenants] their personal names, and there's no obligation to do so,” Majithia said. 

Majithia goes by various aliases when speaking with tenants, including Andrew and Mike. 

“The lack of transparency, like not introducing yourself as [the] landlord, doesn't make for a very safe encounter,” Payot said. 

TAKING IT TO THE RESIDENTIAL TENANCY BRANCH

The Residential Tenancy Branch (RTB) is a department of the provincial government responsible for upholding residential tenancy laws. They offer “dispute resolution” services, where an arbitrator can issue orders to tenants and/or landlords, including the power to cancel eviction notices. However, in many circumstances, getting an order from the RTB is a prerequisite for litigation to have the order enforced – either in Small Claims or the B.C. Supreme Court.  

The unequal power dynamic between landlords and tenants exists here too. Generally, landlords have more staff, specialized resources, and experience navigating the system, while tenants are typically less experienced with these systems and work on their case themselves, get the help of volunteer groups such as the VTU, or hire a legal representative. 

The RTB website notes landlord and tenants should try to “talk things out” when they have a dispute to save time and stress. 

Research shows that B.C. had the highest rates of eviction in Canada between 2016 and 2021. You can read more about the study and causes of eviction in an article from The Tyee (link below).

Regarding the RTB hearing process generally, one tenants’ rights group highlighted that “unlike judges, arbitrators are not bound by precedent, which makes decision-making inconsistent and outcomes difficult to predict.” 

“[Majithia] makes people fear for the safety of their home, and he makes accusations so that we're now feeling stressed. We're now feeling forced to use the RTB because he won't communicate clearly with us,” Weeks said. 

In Payot’s case, Plan A alleges that Payot’s partner lives with her as an “unauthorized tenant,” which is the basis of her alleged material breach and attempted eviction by Plan A, pending an RTB hearing in early July.

“I didn't expect to be at the forefront of this, with a few other people being targeted,” Payot told TWEJ. 

Payot denies that her partner lives in the building, and said she’s presented evidence to Plan A that her partner has an apartment elsewhere. Payot lives with a disability, and has had times where she needs a caretaker present – something which her doctors support. It was under these circumstances she applied for and was denied a lease amendment with the previous owners, Cap J Properties, due to the planned sale of the building. 

Payot said Plan A told her that Cap J had informed Plan A of her denied request, and at that point she formally requested to Plan A that her partner be added to the lease. 

When Payot enquired about getting a parking space in the building for her partner, Majithia called her, identifying himself as Andrew, and began asking questions about her partner and their living arrangement. 

“I still feel so shaken about [the call],” Payot said, “because it was the subtleties in how they interact with us. It's really condescending, and really putting you in a place where you feel like you're doing something wrong, when all I'm trying to do is communicate where I'm at,” she shared. 

Payot recalls telling Majithia “m​y partner is staying with me, the last landlord knows about this.” 

Majithia remembers the call slightly differently, alleging Payot said her partner lives with her and she had permission from the previous landlord. 

These are the delicate legal intricacies that an RTB arbitrator will need to rule on, but Weeks and Payot both expressed how challenging it is to fully convey the emotional impact of these strained interpersonal dynamics. 

“[Plan A] finds legal loopholes, these grey areas, to push us out and make us feel really uncomfortable in where we live,” Payot said, describing her situation as an either-or choice, where she can “continue with the RTB [hearing process] or move. I'm at a place where it's like, does this feel like a safe home?”

Both parties feel confident in their evidence. However, again, there is an unequal power dynamic at play, in that Payot could potentially lose her home and be forced to move if the case doesn’t go her way, while there would be no corresponding consequence for Majithia or Plan A if the RTB cancels Payot’s eviction notice. 

DISPARAGING POSTERS

In the lead-up to the June 11 rally, Majithia alleges there were over 100 posters circulated throughout downtown Vancouver that “disparaged” his image and were “complete defamation,” he said. 

The Posters in question, allegedly in downtown Vancouver (Anoop Majithia photos) 

The posters include references to Plan A, and pictures of Majithia’s face, portrayed as a devil and a bug, referring to him as “landlord scum,” a “slumlord,” and a “pest.”

The posters include a QR code that links to information about the Tenants Collective, hosted on Vancouver Tenants Union’s website. 

Majithia said he plans to take legal action over the content of the posters. 

At the time of publication, the VTU had not responded to TWEJ’s request for comment about the posters’ origins. 

PLAN A’S PREVIOUS “BAD FAITH” WITH TENANTS

This isn’t the first time established and prospective tenants at Plan A buildings have come forward with concerns about how the company has treated them. 

Plan A Real Estate owns a number of apartment buildings in the West End. Tenants in a different building purchased by Plan A faced attempted evictions, or the threat of evictions, under “bad-faith” of building caretaker policies, the RTB found. In 2022, Plan A was fined $10,000 by the RTB’s Enforcement and Compliance Unit (ECU) for contravening the Residential Tenancy Act in at least 152 tenancy agreements. Other former tenants allege they were misled by Plan A, and placed in different units than advertised. 

“We respect the decision of the RTB. We don't agree with it… you can't like every decision that impacts you, and that's kind of what it is,” Majithia said. 

RELATED LINKS