Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Tenant of fire-hit View Towers asks: Why was I on evacuee list?

A View Towers resident said she was displaced from her third-floor suite — first because of asbestos contamination, then because of water damage — only to be told a week later her unit was completely fine.
VKA-WhelanApt02600.jpg
E.S. Whelan's apartment at View Towers shows no visible signs of smoke or water damage.

A View Towers resident said she was displaced from her third-floor suite — first because of asbestos contamination, then because of water damage — only to be told a week later her unit was completely fine.

“There was no damage, no water, no nothing,” E.S. Whelan said Friday as she provided a tour of her suite in the 356-unit building. Whelan wants to know why she was put on an evacuee list when there’s no apparent damage to her suite, which is not in the boarded-off east wing.

“I want to know who put me on that list,” said the 54-year-old grandmother, who has lived in the building for 21Ú2 years. “If you’re telling me I shouldn’t have been evacuated, I want to know why I have gone through all of this trauma for nothing.”

It’s just one example of the frustrating miscommunication and lack of answers displaced residents have faced since the May 15 fire that left 70 people locked out of their homes.

Whelan said the evening of the fire, she went back to the office to see if she could return to her suite. “They said, ‘No, you can’t go back in.’ ”

Whelan stayed in two hotels and at the University of Victoria while she was waiting for answers. On May 22, Whelan went to take a look at her suite and the building manager told her: “We never changed your locks. We didn’t evacuate you.” Whelan was stunned.

She asked if it was safe for her to go up to the suite. The manager gave her a vague “yes and no” answer that left her even more confused.

Whelan said she’s decided to move out because she doesn’t want to aggravate existing health issues. She signed a mutual agreement to end tenancy in order to get her damage deposit and half month’s rent back, which she was told will come in seven to 10 business days.

But Sarah Khan, a lawyer with the B.C. Public Interest Advocacy Centre, said tenants are not legally required to sign that agreement to get their money back.

Some residents are being forced to end their tenancy instead of being offered one of the dozens of vacant, undamaged suites in the building. There are 100 vacant suites in the building, 23 of which suffered smoke and water damage. Another 63 occupied units were damaged.

Herb Volker, a resident for the last 17 years, was told his suite was damaged and he needs to find another place to live, according to his son-in-law Chris Rogerson, who is advocating on his behalf. Rogerson said he asked management if Volker could have one of the other vacant suites in the building and was told his father-in-law would have to re-apply as a new tenant.

Rogerson said he fears the company is trying to force long-term tenants out of low-rent suites that will be renovated and then offered at higher rates.

Together Against Poverty is advocating on behalf of displaced tenants. They’ve asked View Towers for an individual report for each suite that details the type of damage. The response from View Towers management was that residents would have to apply to the Residential Tenancy Branch to get that information. View Towers would not provide residents with the name of the company who did the damage assessment.

The building landlord is listed as Westsea Construction Ltd. based in Vancouver. When asked about View Towers on Thursday, the company refused to comment. However, another owner is listed as Capital Management Ltd. in Edmonton, which also refused to comment.

Russ Godfrey, a legal advocate for the Tenant Resource and Advisory Centre, said while View Towers might not have a legal obligation to offer tenants another unit in the building, they have a moral one, especially given that most tenants are low-income and marginalized.

“There’s an ethical and moral issue here,” Godfrey said. “The optics of it just don't look good. I’m so disgusted by it.”

Whelan, who is on a disability pension, was paying $580 a month and is currently trying to find a bachelor suite at a comparable rent, which is very difficult. She will also have to replace most of her possessions. She was told any “soft items,” such as bedding, carpets, clothes and papers, could be contaminated by asbestos. “Hard items,” such as computers, kitchen appliances and furniture, could be retrieved and used, if cleaned professionally at the renters’ expense.

Tenants have been given until June 15 to collect their belongings.

Whelan said she hopes the issues will attract enough attention so that displaced tenants aren’t taken advantage of.

“We need professional people. We needs lawyers, government, to stand up and say, ‘This is wrong,’ ” Whelan said. “This is not just a tenancy act [issue] anymore, this is people’s lives.”

kderosa@timescolonist.com