There are two questions members ask me that pop up with some regularity. So, I’m weighing in. Not with a legal opinion, obviously, since I’m not a lawyer. And not as your managing broker since I’m not one of those, either. (Always check with your managing broker about anything you’re unsure of.) Nope, I’m weighing in with what I’ve said to the members who recently asked the following questions, in the hope my thoughts will give you a jumping-off place for further research.

This question opens a can of worms. Ask members to define “bedroom,”, and they will often say, “The room must have a closet and window.” With national, provincial, and local building codes, bylaws, rules, and all the variations between them, “bedroom” is open to interpretation, and that introduces risk to you.  

Over the years, I’ve heard variations on the “window and closet” definition. One that stands out is that the window must be “a window one can climb out of,” which is not something to overlook. But not, perhaps, if the room is on the 23rd floor of a Yaletown condo. I can’t imagine anyone wanting to climb out of it. As for “must have a closet” condition, this is a bit of a myth, in my opinion. And besides, what about armoires? 

As I have said, this isn’t legal advice on what constitutes a bedroom—it’s risk management advice. Since the bedroom question could result in someone claiming you misrepresented property information, it’s not something to gloss over. Ask yourself, “How can I manage the risk of a misrepresentation complaint or lawsuit?” Discuss the subject with your client, talk to your broker, and document in your client file what you’ve done, said, and heard. 

Determining whether a room is a bedroom or not becomes important when the buyer decides to sell. The question to ask is how many bedrooms there are, not, how many rooms have beds in them. We’ve had complaints from sellers saying, for example, “I was told this was a two-bedroom unit when I bought it. Now, you’re telling me it’s a one bedroom and den.” This is a problem with a long fuse; meaning, it may not blow up for some years. But that doesn’t make it less of a problem. 

Another relevant scenario is when newly moved-in strata buyers are told later they must leave because of a bylaw limiting the number of residents in relation to the bedrooms. In one sad situation, the buyers bought when there were just two of them. Then they became pregnant and brought their bundle of joy home to their condo. Now there were three occupants. According to the strata, this was one person too many because the unit they owned was not a two-bedroom unit, it was a one-bedroom and den unit.

To avoid this problem, I suggest checking the strata plan and the developer’s marketing materials handed out when the place was new for clues to confirm whether a room is a bedroom or not. 

Another scenario is where a developer refers to a room as a “media room.” I doubt anyone would care if the new owners put a bed in it, but when it comes time to sell, what are they going to call the space? I’d stick with “media room” so it’s clear the parties don’t think the space is a bedroom. If you want to puff up the place, you could say, for example, “the media room is big enough for a bed if you need more room to sleep,” or something similar. You just don’t want to hear the words, “You told me this is a two bedroom. I made my offer based on that.” 

REALTOR® Remarks can also be helpful in managing the risk of an unintentional misrepresentation. For example, you could include in the remarks, “Note: media room is big enough to be used as an informal bedroom.”

This is a question for BCFSA and a lawyer. If there were a lawsuit or consumer complaint, each would have a role to play.  

To learn more, I suggest first looking at the BCFSA Knowledge Base, and then contacting a BCFSA professional standards advisor. An advisor won’t give you anything in writing and probably will decline to give what they consider to be “advice.” (It’s not that they don’t want to—they’ve been instructed not to. That’s regulator risk management, by the way.) For direct advice, ask one of the lawyers you run things by.

Sure, a seller’s agent could say, “Listen, those subject clauses were inserted for the sole benefit of the buyer. So, my client doesn’t have to sign them.” They’re right; their client doesn’t. But would it be a bad idea? When I was a broker, I always pushed to have all the parties sign a subject removal, even if it wasn’t necessary for one side to sign. Why? Because life’s too short. If we got a refusal, we’d let it go. But we’d put a note in our file that we’d asked.  

If you’re a managing broker, this is a risk management measure you’re entitled to set as brokerage policy and to inflict on your licensees. If the other side won’t sign, keep the written record of your (or your client’s) request and leave it at that. Getting your way at the potential cost of a deal is your client’s decision to make, not yours.