BC landlord who used piece of plywood for wheelchair ramp on the hook for $30K

A BC landlord who guaranteed a rental unit would be wheelchair accessible, but instead used a piece of plywood for a ramp, is on the hook $31,500 after the Human Rights Tribunal found the landlord’s behaviour was discriminatory.

According to July 7 BC Human Rights Tribunal decision, landlord Aaron Schneider advertised the unit as wheelchair accessible, and promised tenant Jeremy Alexander that repairs to the driveway would be done within two weeks and the place would be suitable for a wheelchair.

Instead, Schneider took months to repair the driveway, never installed a ramp and instead propped a piece of plywood up for a ramp.

When the driveway was finally done, Schneider had installed a lock on a gate too high for anyone in a wheelchair to reach, and there still wasn’t a ramp.

“I find the nature of the discrimination, Mr. Alexander’s vulnerability and social context, and the effects on him of the discrimination favours an award for injury to dignity on the high end of the scale,” the Tribunal ruled.

Alexander argued Schneider had discriminated against him by failing to make the property accessible and had created additional barriers while he lived there.

The decision said Alexander rented the place with a few roommates in 2020.

The renovations were supposed to be done in two weeks, but instead took six months.

After that, Schneider started work on the rear of the property and dug up the driveway. During the next five months, Alexander couldn’t use it because it was full of construction debris.

“The evidence before me is that Mr. Alexander was unable to use the walkway when it was being renovated, was unable to open the front gate without assistance, and was unable to access the driveway during and after it was renovated,” the Tribunal said. “I accept that for Mr. Alexander a narrow plywood ramp, an unfinished walkway, a gravel driveway only accessible by stepping up over a retaining wall, and a gate with a lock placed at an inaccessible height are obstacles connected to his disability.”

The Tribunal ruled the conditions prevented Alexander from entering and leaving the property independently and safely, amounting to discrimination based on disability.

“The barriers to being able to access the rental unit freely, safely, and with dignity arose because of Mr. Alexander’s wheelchair use,” the Tribunal said.

Alexander testified that the inaccessible property left him dependent on his roommates simply to enter or leave his home. He had to get food delivered, couldn’t use the HandyDART bus and his disabilities were exacerbated by being unable to go outside regularly.

He testified he felt, “like a prisoner in his own home.”

“His roommates testified that they would receive text messages from Mr. Alexander asking for someone to come home so he could be let inside the property, or for someone to come out to open the gate and help him maneuver through the obstacles to enter the rental unit,” the decision read.

Medical evidence showed that he suffered physically from not being able to go outside, and his mental health also suffered.

His demeanour and mood changed, and he became frustrated and angry.

He felt embarrassed and unworthy, and said the experience instilled in him the belief that he cannot manage without the assistance of others.

Schneider didn’t respond to the suit, and presented no evidence in his defence.

“Discrimination in tenancy can be particularly egregious, marked by a power imbalance between the landlord and tenant,” the Tribunal said. “I find the nature of the discrimination in this case was severe, prolonged, and continuous.”

The Tribunal ordered Schneider to pay Alexander $30,000 for injury to his dignity, feelings and self-respect, along with $1,500 for out-of-pocket expenses, plus interest.

The decision said Alexander moved out when Schneider sold the property.