Skip to content

Mission woman sues couple over ‘lewd’ insults, dog poop planted in car

Civil Resolution Tribunals rules on if people should be compensated for insults
31038717_web1_221125-MCR-lewd-argument_1
This photo illustration highlights people arguing. (Pexels photo)

Many disputes lead to people yelling insults at each other, but should one party be financially compensated over these words?

Yes, according to a decision by the B.C. Civil Resolution Tribunal case after a war of words erupted between Mission residents.

The case involved a couple who lived in the same neighbourhood as a woman who had rescued a dog from a house on the same block during the summer heat wave.

This incident triggered fighting between the couple and the woman, leading her to sue for $5,000 in compensation for nuisance and harassment.

The couple felt the woman had exaggerated the need to rescue the dog from the hot home, which lead to animosity between the two parties.

The woman sued, saying the couple lobbed repeated “lewd insults” at her and planted a bag of dog poop in her car.

“(She) alleges that over the summer … the respondents repeatedly yelled insults at her whenever they passed by her home,” reads the tribunal report. “She also alleges that they put a bag of dog feces in her car. She claims that these actions were harassment and a nuisance. For their part, the respondents allege that (the woman) engaged in a persistent campaign to turn the small mobile home community against them. They also say that (the woman) regularly insulted them back.”

Both parties sought $5,000 from each other.

For the nuisance claim, the report says “nuisance occurs when one person substantially and unreasonably interferes with another person’s quiet use and enjoyment of their land.”

Things unravelled when the couple confronted the woman while she was out walking her own dog and that dog bit one of the couple – although the dog owner alleges the couple “fabricated” a dog bite.

That led to the couple yelling every time they passed by the woman’s home. the woman even kept a log of all of the dates.

The couple admitted that they had tried to “shame” the woman, but downplayed how many times they yelled and what was said.

READ MORE: Mission strata sues owners over a measly $40

The tribunal adjudicator, however, found the log and the couple’s admission enough to find in favour of a nuisance claim.

The woman detailed that she ended up seeking help for anxiety due to the insults. In the end, however, she only ended up receiving $500 for her claim because the stress was only for a short-term period.

The adjudicator also denied the claim about the dog poop, saying there wasn’t enough evidence.

The woman’s claim of harassment was also dismissed.

“I have no doubt that the parties in this dispute view the other side’s behaviour as being flagrant and outrageous as the court defined these terms,” said the ruling report. “However, from the perspective of a reasonable bystander, I find that none of the alleged behaviour meets this high bar (of harassment). I find that a reasonable person would consider the exchange of insults to be rude, insensitive, obnoxious, or mean-spirited, but not shocking or excessive. I do not find either party liable for intentional infliction of mental distress.”


 

@shinebox44
chris.campbell@missioncityrecord.com

Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.



Chris Campbell

About the Author: Chris Campbell

I joined the Victoria News hub as an editor in 2023, bringing with me over 30 years of experience from community newspapers in Metro Vancouver and the Fraser Valley
Read more