In the fall of 2016, an ad for a farmhouse in Surrey advertised for a two-bedroom apartment.
The house was decorated in vintage style, with a rustic farmhouse style roof and a white front porch with a wooden porch gate.
The listing description called the house “a home in a quiet, family-friendly environment.”
The listing didn’t specify a monthly rent.
Instead, the listing said the property was “perfect for a family or small group.”
On the front porch, the seller wrote, “The house has a big yard that you can walk to and back.
You will not regret the decision to buy.”
In December 2017, the same ad for the house listed the property for $1,800 a month.
The property was listed as being two bedrooms, two bathrooms and a kitchenette with a wood stove and a fireplace.
The price tag was $1.7 million.
When the property listing went live, the property manager for the property, a realtor, contacted the City of Surrey.
He also contacted the B.C. Landlord and Tenant Board, a local board that enforces tenancy and land-lord laws in British Columbia.
Landlord and tenant board staff reviewed the listing and determined that the listing was in breach of the tenancy agreements.
The board did not take any action against the realtor.
In a statement to The Globe and Mail, the realtors attorney said that the property did not breach any of the landlord and tenant laws.
But the real estate agent for the landlord was shocked when he read about the breach of their tenancy agreements and said he had no idea how they would have known about it.
“I thought, ‘Wow, that’s weird.
This is something that I should have told them about before they even contacted me,” he said.
He said the realty agent who was approached by the city was “extremely shocked” when he heard about the property.
This is one of those cases where I had no knowledge, he said, that the real property was under a lease and the real owner was the landlord and tenant.
We didn’t think that was going to happen.
I’m not even sure how they were going to come to the conclusion that they were actually breaking the law.
However, in a letter to the real-estate agent, the board said it is in the best interest of the landlord to have a landlord-tenant investigation of the case.
After reviewing the case, the landlord concluded that he and the landlord had “committed a serious breach of landlord-servant and tenancy relations by failing to disclose a breach of a rental agreement,” the board wrote.
To that end, it ordered the realm to repay the real Estate Investment Trust, a B.T.L. trust, the $1 million.
The board found that the landlord, who is the property’s realtor and has been with the property since March 2017, did not disclose the breach to the landlord’s real-tor.
The landlord had told the landlord the breach was “not something he should have done.”
As a result, the lease was broken and the property “was in breach,” the statement said.
The real estate broker who was involved in the transaction said he did not know the breach had occurred and that the rental agreement he signed was the same one he had signed with the landlord.
It is possible the real landlord was unaware that the breach would occur, the letter said.
“In this case, however, the breach is due to the nature of the agreement.”
Landlords can be held liable for breaches of the lease, and it is important to contact the B in T.S.O. if they have been negligent, said David Oakes, the lawyer who represented the real tenant, who did not want to be identified for fear of retribution.
“It’s always a concern for landlords when their tenants are in a vulnerable position,” he added.
The realtor has to be aware of the risks and make sure they’re doing everything they can to ensure that they are doing everything possible to keep the tenant safe.”