Date Issued: November 28, 2019

File: SC-2019-003069

Type: Small Claims

Civil Resolution Tribunal

Indexed as: Moffat Equine Services Ltd v. Barry, 2019 BCCRT 1336

Between:

MOFFAT EQUINE SERVICES LTD

Applicant

And:

ELAINE BARRY

Respondent

INTRODUCTION

1.      This dispute is about payment for veterinary services.

2.      The applicant, Moffat Equine Services Ltd (Moffat), says that it provided veterinary services for the respondent’s horses between November 23, 2017 and August 17, 2018. The applicant seeks $2,154.45 from the respondent, Elaine Barry.

3.      The respondent says her ex-husband, who is not a party to this dispute, is responsible for the veterinary bills.

4.      The applicant is represented by Denton Moffat, whom I infer is an owner or principal. The respondent is self-represented.

JURISDICTION AND PROCEDURE

5.      These are the formal written reasons of the Civil Resolution Tribunal (tribunal). The tribunal has jurisdiction over small claims brought under section 118 of the Civil Resolution Tribunal Act (CRTA). The tribunal’s mandate is to provide dispute resolution services accessibly, quickly, economically, informally, and flexibly. In resolving disputes, the tribunal must apply principles of law and fairness, and recognize any relationships between parties to a dispute that will likely continue after the dispute resolution process has ended.

6.      The tribunal has discretion to decide the format of the hearing, including by writing, telephone, videoconferencing, email, or a combination of these. I decided to hear this dispute through written submissions because I find that there are no significant issues of credibility or other reasons that might require an oral hearing.

7.      The tribunal may accept as evidence information that it considers relevant, necessary and appropriate, whether or not the information would be admissible in a court of law. The tribunal may also ask questions of the parties and witnesses and inform itself in any other way it considers appropriate.

8.      Under tribunal rule 9.3(2), in resolving this dispute the tribunal may make one or more of the following orders, where permitted under section 118 of the CRTA:

a.    order a party to do or stop doing something;

b.    order a party to pay money;

c.    order any other terms or conditions the tribunal considers appropriate.

ISSUE

9.      The issue in this dispute is whether the respondent is required to pay the applicant’s outstanding invoices for veterinary services.

EVIDENCE AND ANALYSIS

10.   In a civil claim such as this, the applicant must prove its claim on a balance of probabilities. I have considered all the parties’ evidence and submissions, but only refer to what is necessary to explain and give context to my decision.

11.   The respondent chose not to provide any evidence or submissions, despite having the opportunity to do so. In her Dispute Response filed at the outset of this proceeding, the respondent did not dispute the amount claimed. However, she said that the amount claimed largely relates to her ex-husband’s horses and that he is responsible for it. She also said that she has ‘mostly’ paid her portion of the bill. The respondent did not say when she and her ex-husband’s relationship ended, or which services related to her ex-husband’s horses, if they had separate ownership.

12.   The applicant says that it was the respondent, not her ex-husband, who called and requested veterinary services for each of the invoices. The respondent did not dispute this, and the invoices and subsequent correspondence are directed to her. I therefore find that the respondent agreed to pay the applicant for the services.

13.   The respondent’s ex-husband is not a party to this dispute, and the respondent did not seek to add him as a third party. Generally, debts incurred in marriage or common-law relationships are considered family debts, shared equally. However, the division of family debt is an issue to be sorted out between the respondent and her ex-husband. It may be that only the BC Supreme Court has jurisdiction over those issues, under the Family Law Act. In any event, it does not mean the respondent is not responsible to the applicant for the debt.

14.   Based on the invoices, the respondent owed $3,249.25 for services performed between November 24, 2017 and August 23, 2018. The respondent made partial payments as recently as March 18, 2019, totaling $900. By my calculation, this left a $2,349.25 balance owing. However, in its Dispute Notice and in its submissions, the applicant claimed only $2,154.45. Accordingly, I find that the respondent owes the applicant $2,154.45.

15.   The Court Order Interest Act (COIA) applies to the tribunal. Although the applicant’s invoices referred to 5% monthly interest on bills over 30 days, the applicant only claimed COIA interest in this dispute. Accordingly, I find that the applicant is entitled to COIA interest on the outstanding balance from 30 days after each invoice to the date of this decision. Since only $2,154.45 was claimed, COIA interest is only payable on that amount. This equals $55.67.

16.   Under section 49 of the CRTA and tribunal rules, the tribunal will generally order an unsuccessful party to reimburse a successful party for tribunal fees and reasonable dispute-related expenses. As the applicant was successful, I find that it is entitled to reimbursement of $125 in tribunal fees. I also find that it is entitled to reimbursement of $11.08 in dispute-related expenses, which I infer was for the bankruptcy search it submitted. I find that the bankruptcy search was reasonable given the respondent’s text messages referring to a possible bankruptcy proceeding. As the respondent was unsuccessful, I dismiss her application for reimbursement of $25 in tribunal fees.

ORDERS

17.   Within 14 days of the date of this order, I order the respondent to pay the applicant a total of $2,346.20, broken down as follows:

a.    $2,154.45 in debt,

b.    $55.67 in pre-judgment interest under the Court Order Interest Act, and

c.    $136.08, for $125 in tribunal fees and $11.08 for dispute-related expenses.

18.   The applicant is entitled to post-judgment interest, as applicable.

19.   Under section 48 of the CRTA, the tribunal will not provide the parties with the Order giving final effect to this decision until the time for making a notice of objection under section 56.1(2) has expired and no notice of objection has been made. The time for filing a notice of objection is 28 days after the party receives notice of the tribunal’s final decision.

20.   Under section 58.1 of the CRTA, a validated copy of the tribunal’s order can be enforced through the Provincial Court of British Columbia. A tribunal order can only be enforced if it is an approved consent resolution order, or, if no objection has been made and the time for filing a notice of objection has passed. Once filed, a tribunal order has the same force and effect as an order of the Provincial Court of British Columbia.