Reliance is Ripping Us OFF!

Reliance you make me cry

Item 5 of our 5 point agreement with Reliance is that we have the first right of refusal to move back to 1188 Bidwell, for the same rent as we were paying at 1170 bidwell, for a unit of equal size. Sounds lovely doesn’t it……?

It would be truly great if only it were true. Only two points of that part of our agreement is being held to. We have the first right of refusal. They are offering us units and they are of equal size. However the most important part is being ignored and in-fact thrown out.

Reliance is not only trying to force us to sign a new lease that would see us receive a 90% rent increase, they are inflating the cost of that lease by $200. Every other Vancouverite can rent the same unit for $200 less! We have proof of this and with your help we can get even more. Please SHARE this post and help us.

Here is a picture of the offer sheet we got for a unit in the new building. As you can see they are offering us unit 805 for $2350/month.

Here is a picture of the offer sheet we got for a unit in the new building. As you can see they are offering us unit 805 for $2350/month.

Now here is an offer sheet that a friend of our got when she went for a viewing. She was offered 1206 for $2150. Thats the same layout as our offered apartment but 4 floors higher.

Offered to our friend unit 1206 for $200 less than us. Funny world where 4 floors higher is worth $200 less.

This is clear evidence that Reliance Properties is trying to rip is off! They are not only trying to force us into an illegal rent increase of $1100 they are also trying to rip us off to the tune of $200 per month. You (the reader), your friends, anyone else in Vancouver can rent at 1188 Bidwell for less money than myself a loyal 20 tenant of Reliance Properties. Reliance: you can rely on them to over charge.

If you have gone for a viewing of 1188 Bidwell and you got an offer sheet from them please send me a photo. There is no identifying there and we will never tell anyone where the information came from. You can send it anonymously or in anyway you feel safe. We need your help to stop Reliance from ripping us off.

We are fighting to stay

I was reading an interesting article on the website. Basically it spelled out that it is too late for me to get into the Vancouver housing market. The article states that in Vancouver it takes 9.1 times the average income to buy a home. Making it the most expensive place in Canada to do so. I would have to be making 100,000 a year just to attempt to own here. I assure you I don’t.

‘Metro Vancouver has the highest rate of “forced” moves – that is, evictions and foreclosures.’ Data from Stats Canada. That is a scary excerpt from the article. This is exactly what we are facing from Reliance as they move to forcibly evict us from our home or raise our rents by 90%. It would add $1100/month to our housing costs and become nearly the same housing payment people I know are making on a mortgage.

After 20 years of loyal tenancy in a Reliance building once located at 1170 Bidwell we have paid our landlord almost $300,000. Had my husband and I bought into Vancouver back then we would be most of the way to having purchased a home. Instead we gave them money to Reliance Properties Vancouver and in doing so helped make them into the billion dollar real estate corporation they are today. Our reward for that loyalty is the slap in the face Jon Stovell is giving us now, the “forced” moves/eviction noted above.

As property developers move to snap up all the available land in Vancouver to make outrageously expensive condos or rentals it is little wonder that Vancouver is getting hollowed out. Vancouver for the 4 times in as many years has been ranked as one of the least affordable cities in the world, #2 in fact. That is not something we should be proud of or find sustainable.

You Hurt My Heart! Actually, not so much.

Reliance you make me cry

Please sign and SHARE our petition. We are in desperate need of your support to save our home.

Not everyone supports us or even wishes us well. Some would label us “irresponsible and self-serving.”, Reliance.

While the vast majority of Vancovuerites support us in our desire to see Reliance honour the agreement they made with us. And on the back of secured construction permits. Some people, namely Globe & Mail readers (some not all), and of course Vancouver property developers do not. They would mark us “illogical” “completely unrealistic”.

As I am not a Globe & Mail subscriber I can not reply to the comments on their site. So I will endeavour to do that here. I feel it is vital that we have this conversation. Often people are not as far apart as they seem to be. Even if they are at the least they can come to respectful understanding of each-others side.

Here again is the article: Globe & Mail: Vancouver landlord, tenants disagree on terms of relocation provision in unusual rental arrangement found on our media page. As well as my Facebook Live Replying to a Globe & Mail Story.

The Globe comments:

5 days ago:

For Mr Stovell to accuse tenants of being irresponsible and self-serving is a bit rich; notably the self-serving part.


Thank you BSimmons1, It does seem that he has forgotten the millions of dollars in his bank account came from tenants like my husband and I. We have lived with Reliance Properties as a landlord for 20 years and paid roughly $300,000 in rent. We saw them time and again repair plumbing issues at 1170 Bidwell with duct-tape. We saw the black mold in the walls that was kept company by the asbestos. One time they ripped out bathroom down to just wall studs. No toilet/shower/sink/nothing and then walked away for a month. They didn’t care we had no bathroom for a month! That is what Reliance is. They are 1%ers that have forgotten we are actually people down here.

6 days ago

This tenant’s desperation of wanting to stay in Vancouver apartment is logical due to his established ties here in Vancouver and his job, however, the expectation of indefinite subsidies is illogical as developers are not ATM machines. 3 Years at the developer provided temporary place below market rent + 2 years at the same rent before reconstruction sound fair to me. That’s literally 5 years of tenancy with no incremental rent fee. 


Thank you Hong_B. You would be correct but for a couple of points. First they have violated the agreement at every turn. The only times the agreement has been adhered to us by us and when forced by the City of Vancouver Reliance has complied.

“developers are not ATM machines” True. However the agreement is the agreement and they wrote it. They need to honour what we all agreed to.

“3 Years at the developer provided temporary place below market rent + 2 years at the same rent before reconstruction sound fair to me. That’s literally 5 years of tenancy with no incremental rent fee. ” They have violated the agreement for the last 3 years charging us rent increases the agreement says we would not pay. They now intend to jack up our rent by $1100 and continue to charge increases on that. All against the agreement.

6 days ago


The tenants are completely unrealistic if they think they will get subsidized rental into perpetuity.  Do they think the landlord built a new building for free ?  What planet are they living on ?

6 days ago

MyOwnAccount: Planet NDP.

We are not being unrealistic. We simply want Reliance to honour an agreement they made with us and that got them permits from the City of Vancouver. We are loyal tenants of 20 years and we have never caused troubles. We have paid our rent and enriched Reliance. The reward for that should not be a slap in face by them or you. I was a small business owner. I lived up to every agreement I ever signed and I always will. That is just the type of person I am. I had hoped I had a like minded dance partner. Apparently not. FYI, I live on Earth specifically Vancouver and I would like to remain here.

6 days ago

TVR Developments

Something for the courts. But if the contract says 2 yrs its 2 yrs. Do the tenants actually believe that they would get their old rental rate in a brand new building for the life of their tenancy, even if that tenancy is greater than 2 yrs? No business person would develope a new building without an increase in revenue. All that is ever written is how bad landlords are. There are certainly some very evil tenants out their that take full advantage of landlords. Such biased reporting and commentary. 

Thank you TVR, First you are correct there are bad tenants out there. I also believe in business right to conduct profitable business. After-all where would the economy and all of us be without it? I owned a small business I fully understand.

However they have violated the agreement and have done so on several occasions. This may well be headed for the courts. We are dug-in on our position and we will fight for the agreement and our rights in it. We do not feel that our rents would never increase. However in the agreement and by the RTO we have the right to what we were paying for a term of 2 years in the new building and from that point forward we are to pay regular rent increases.

We simply want what was promised. If my rent is not at current market rates that is simply a reflection of my 20 years of loyal tenancy in Reliance Properties building. Had I moved around from one developer to the next I would have received the current market rate on all those moves.

But I didn’t I stayed in my home and paid my rent. $300,000 to a developer that would now slap my face and call me “irresponsible and self-serving”. Giving them $300,000 was defiantly irresponsible given the greed they now show and how they treated us during those years.

1 week ago


Mr. Stovell sounds very generous for the 2-year subsidy. Still, because of the dispute, is there anything in writing which would clear things up?

6 days ago

M. Kalus: Maybe I am wrong, but I am pretty sure the only way he could get this building up was by offering a lure for the current tenants to agree to leave their current apartment.

By default the rental agreement would have just renewed with the legal rent increase year over year. If the tenants would have refused to move the project would have stalled as they could not have torn down the old building.

So no, it’s not really generous. For all the whining by the developer, the building had, I think, less than 10 units, considering the size of the new building “subsidizing” the former renters isn’t really that big of a deal.

app_67184287, “Mr. Stovell sounds very generous” that is what we also thought. I honestly believed he was acting in a manor that should be highlighted as the best a Vancouver developer had ever done. I thought he should be held up as a model of how to proceed with increasing density in Vancouver. But the second they got the construction permit they already started breaking the agreement. Since that time they have violated it monthly. He is exactly what he appears to be: untrustworthy.

M. Kalus You are correct. And with this agreement signed back in 2016 I actually went to Vancouver City Hall and spoke on behalf of Reliance Properties and the new building. I highlighted how we had this agreement and how we were to be treated fairly by Reliance. I said that they should be used as a model. Basically I was made a fool and I feel it!

It’s official: Vancouver is second-least affordable place to make a home, Again!

Not a great day for Vancouver! Today and not for the first time Vancouver has been ranked as the second-least affordable city in the world to buy a home. Leaving only rentals as an option and those are also skyrocketing. That is if you can find a rental and if its a Reliance Properties Vancouver building you must hope and pray you don’t get renovicted!

What this means is that for the fourth time consecutively Vancouver has a median house price that is almost 12 times more than the average household income. This has fluctuated over those 4 years but all 4 years the news is bad to worse. The rental market isn’t much better.

Property developers like Reliance Properties Vancouver are doing their level best to increase rental rates to the highest in the Canada. While prices go up apartment sizes go down. Reliance has a real desire to move people into very expensive micro units that are reminiscent of Manhattan New York or New York in general size and relative cost.

Vancouver needs to tackle this issue. We need to make housing affordability in both ownership and rentals more affordable and sustainable. If we fail in this what will become of Vancouver? I fear it will become a ghost city. One that is culturally dead and empty of all but people. That is except those that are too stressed out and under housing pressure to enjoy their lives.

Facebook Live Replying to a Globe & Mail Story

Please sign & SHARE our petition: Save our homes & 20 Years of being a loyal trouble free tenant of Reliance

I know I ramble in this video…. Forgive me I’m passionate! Here is the text of what I was trying to impart:

“Reliance Properties CEO Jon Stovell says that was never the agreement. He says tenants were promised extended subsidies and two years in the new building – which could add up to $60,000 over five years and nothing more.”

  • Jon throwing out numbers that are based on his extremely high rental rates. He also neglects to mention that we are in one of their fancy Gastown buildings because back in 2017 when it was time to move out of 1170 bidwell ahead of the wreaking-ball they tried to violate the agreement and sent us Craigslist ads in place of units in one of their buildings as per our agreement. The city held up their permit and magically units showed up. Not our fault that they were in this building and at these high rents. That is the fault of Reliance and as a result of them already breaking the agreement.

“When the province changed the rules on fixed tenancies in 2017, the company dealt with the issue legally by deciding the rents would be set at $2,350”

  • Seems that’s not actually correct. They are only wanting to charge those of us from the Baycrest. The general public is being offered those very same units for $2150. Reliance is setting our rent $200 higher than the general public so the Jon is quoted “Mr. Stovell had offered a special incentive because, he said, it was the right thing to do.” it seems the right thing to do is over charge loyal longterm tenants $200 higher rent than everyone else. That is an extremely perverted idea of what the “right thing to do.”

“Mr. Stovell said it would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars a unit to subsidize the new units for those tenants indefinitely.”

  • So with that he is dismissing that we pay a lower rate because we have been loyal tenants for 20 years! He is arguing against long term tenancy and clearly expressing with that he would prefer short term tenancy and higher rents. Making for an unliveable and unaffordable city.

“Both sides in the dispute claim city officials have said, at points, their interpretation of the agreement is correct, although tenant Kian Gray acknowledged staff have more recently told him the company has found a legal way to do what it is doing. The city’s communications department said only that staff are “monitoring” the agreement.”

  • True. The city is dropping the ball here BIG TIME! They are talking out of both sides of their mouth. I have called to talk to Mayor Kennedy Stewart. He is yet to even try and reach out to us. He has offered no public support. We have no idea of his position of this. The city could end this immediately but has yet to show full support for long term Vancouver tenancy and protection.

“Mr. Stovell said he’s disappointed that the tenants, handed what he says is the best relocation offer anyone in the city has had, are complaining.
“There’s no requirement to insulate tenants against market rates in perpetuity. This is very irresponsible and self-serving.”

  • First, I’ve never been so happy to be considered “very irresponsible and self-serving.”
  • He is violating the agreement and not even for the first time. The first time was back in 2017 with Craigslist ads.
  • It is rich for a 1%er like Jon to look down from his lofty tower and say that we are irresponsible and self-serving when his riches came from US! The money in his bank account came from $300,000 my husband and I paid in rent over 20 years. Jon you are “very irresponsible and self-serving.”
error: Content is protected please purchase