Do you think the RTB is dumb? Do you think they're not putting more focus on renovictions because they know people are exploiting them?
You don't think they'd ask WHY you'd need to rip out a kitchen or bathroom if the tenant is happy with using what's there? If it's a safety/structural concern, do you not think you'd need demonstrable proof of that issue?
This RTB guideline even speaks directly to your "bathroom or kitchen" reno scenario:
Quote:
Renovations or repairs that result in temporary or intermittent loss of an essential service or facility or disruption of quiet enjoyment do not usually require the rental unit to be vacant. For example, re-piping an apartment building can usually be done by shutting off the water to each rental unit for a short period of time and carrying out the renovations or repairs one rental unit at a time.
Cosmetic renovations or repairs that are primarily intended to update the decor or increase the desirability or prestige of a rental unit are rarely extensive enough to require a rental unit to be vacant. Some examples of cosmetic renovations or repairs include:
• replacing light fixtures, switches, receptacles, or baseboard heaters;
• painting walls, replacing doors, or replacing baseboards;
• replacing carpets and flooring;
• replacing taps, faucets, sinks, toilets, or bathtubs;
• replacing backsplashes, cabinets, or vanities.
|
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/ho...lines/gl2b.pdf
It's not happening as much as you think it is, and it's likely in most cases where it does it's because the tenants themselves don't know any better to dispute the notice to end tenancy. But they are getting wiser to it because the stakes are getting greater. Good on them.