By Don Urquhart, Times Chronicle

An Osoyoos couple travelling in Asia have found themselves caught in a bind after the Osoyoos house they were renting was recently sold, leaving their friends and family who were looking after it in their absence, locked out.

The Times Chronicle has confirmed that the Town of Osoyoos has purchased the property in question but it was not informed there were any renters by the seller/agent.

In a social media post late Monday which garnered numerous replies, with some helpful information along with the usual vitriol, Bailey Jaymes said she and her partner just learned that the house had been sold. 

“We are currently on holiday in Asia and found out from our landlord that while we were away, he sold the house we’ve been renting to the town of Osoyoos,” she said in her post.

She added that “they demanded the keys to the house and our friends/family who have been checking on the house for us are no longer able to enter the home.”

It’s not clear who “they” are – whether it’s the town, its agent, the landlord/seller or the seller’s agent – and the Times Chronicle has reached out to Jaymes for clarification.

“We have received zero contact information for our new ‘landlords’ though and we have received no written notice to vacate the property, nor is there any notice posted on our door. Because they have not given us notice yet, our tenancy agreement should legally continue and we should still have possession of the keys, which we do not.”

Responding to queries from the Times Chronicle, Rod Risling, Osoyoos CAO confirmed that the property had been purchased with the deal going through on Friday, Jan. 17. 

Risling notes that neither the property seller nor their agent made any disclosure of a renter in the house. 

The town purchased the property, Risling said, “to mitigate the cost of relocating an existing line and pump station along the foreshore.” The project cost stated in the 2024 budget document was estimated at $3.7 million, a figure that has likely increased since and by purchasing the property (for an unspecified amount) the town mitigated this cost. 

“The purchase also avoided the extremely high risk of moving all the hookups from the rear of the properties along the line to the front of the properties. Until now, the town doesn’t have sufficient easements to access this critical infrastructure,” he said.

Risling went on to say: “The property was purchased as vacant with no existing lease in place. The town was not aware of the person claiming to have a lease on the property and we have referred the matter to our solicitor.”

In her post Jaymes says they have a signed rental contract with the landlord who she declines to name. “I don’t want to disclose the previous landlords name at this time while we work through the legitimacy of what is going on,” she wrote.

According to BC’s Residential Tenancy Act, landlords, or their agents, must provide the current tenant with written notice about the sale of the property as soon as possible.

This written notice of sale should include details about the new buyers, their contact information, and any changes that may affect the tenants’ living arrangements or rights.

In BC tenants have the right to remain in the rental property, even after the property changes ownership, and pay rent until the end of their lease term. 

The couple has contacted the  BC Residential Tenancy Branch and is awaiting a response and while they want access within 24 hours they acknowledge the tenancy branch will not likely be able to provide such immediate assistance.

Ken Davreux, owner of Century 21 Premier Properties Osoyoos noted that there is an obligation on the part of the seller to inform the buyer if there is a tenancy agreement in place, “because part of the contract asks for vacant possession, and if not vacant possession you’re going to obviously assume the tenancy. If you’re not going to live in it you must assume the tenancy, that’s the legal obligation” he said.

It’s not known if this was a private sale or a sale involving real estate agents but Davreux says it creates a “perilous situation” if the fact of the tenancy was not disclosed. He adds that if the couple has a valid residential tenancy agreement then they have a “ton of rights” in this situation.

The seller and agent have not been identified and it’s currently not known who is in possession of the keys which were being held by the couple’s friends and family. 

The Times Chronicle will update as more information becomes available.