B.C.’s Civil Resolution Tribunal has ordered a man to compensate his ex-girlfriend for a chameleon she claimed they bought for her children.
In a , tribunal member Nav Shukla said Jasmine Haskell and Eric Youd were in a relationship from May 2022 to December 2022 and living together.
Haskell said that months after the relationship ended, Youd took items that belonged to her and her children, including the chameleon.
She sought orders that Youd return the chameleon along with its enclosure and supplies and that he pay her $4,000 for the replacement cost of other items he took from her home. Those included smart lightbulbs, a sectional sofa, a 40- to 50-inch TV, an 80-inch TV, one tall dresser, one long dresser, a television stand, a surround sound system, a glass flat-top barbecue, two garage shelves, and an Xbox series X with games and a pass.
Haskell also asked for $1,000 for alleged damages to her home, funds she said he had agreed to pay.
The ruling noted Youd sold the chameleon in a private sale on July 6, 2023.
Haskell did not deny he had bought the lizard for her 10-year-old child.
“I find there is very little other evidence to support a finding that Mr. Youd had an ownership interest in the chameleon,” Shukla said in ordering compensation be paid.
“Ms. Haskell does not dispute that Mr. Youd paid for these items but says that he gifted them to her and her children when he left in December 2022,” Shukla said.
The tribunal found Haskell did not dispute the items belonging to Youd but provided no proof of the items being gifts and dismissed that part of the claim.
Shukla did find Youd had taken a game Haskell had bought when he took the Xbox and ordered him to pay for it.
Youd said he never agreed to pay Haskell $1,000 for alleged damage to the home. Shukla found there was no binding agreement for Youd to pay Haskell a specific amount for the damage. Shukla further said photos showed normal wear and tear on the residence.
“Given the nature of the damage, I find it is very possible that her landlord will not deduct any amounts from her damage deposit,” Shukla said.
In a separate claim, Youd asserted Haskell still has items that belong to him and that she still owes him for items he paid for that she purchased for her children.
He sought orders that Haskell return some of the items and pay half of the fair market value of other items. He also sought an order Haskell pay him $726.06 for the children’s items he paid for.
He asked that Haskell return his deep freezer, a television stand and a knife set. Receipts in evidence showed that Youd purchased the deep freezer and television stand well before he moved into Haskell’s home, which Haskell did not dispute.
“However, Ms. Haskell says she has kept these items because Mr. Youd gifted them to her and her children,” the tribunal member wrote.
Still, Shukla found there was no evidence they were gifts.
“I order Ms. Haskell to return the freezer and television stand to Mr. Youd.”
The tribunal said Youd failed to prove the knife set belonged to him and allowed Haskell to keep it.
He also sought compensation for a gazebo, SodaStream, and Xbox hard drives which “Haskell has undisputedly kept.”
Shukla awarded him 50 per cent of the value of the items.
Youd further said he paid $726 for sporting equipment and Apple AirPods for Haskell’s child, items for which she failed to repay him. Again, Haskell claimed they were gifts but Shukla found no proof of that and ordered Haskell to pay for those items.
In total, Haskell was ordered to pay $1,023.
