By Daniel Gorelov and Ty Bradford
There is a growing concern in British Columbia about “predatory” marriages and other exploitative relationships, wherein a vulnerable victim with cognitive impairments is preyed upon for financial gain. The British Columbia Supreme Court identified such a predatory relationship in the recent decision of King v. Vimhel, 2024 BCSC 1745.
Background
Ms. King met Mr. Vimhel in 2013. At the time, Ms. King was 77 years old who lived alone in a North Vancouver strata unit worth $1,200,000 (the “Property”), owned a vacation home in Parksville, and had savings of approximately $465,000. Ms. King had a son, a daughter, and a broad community of family and friends. Mr. Vimhel was 15 years younger than Ms. King, described himself as a self-employed “artist”, and lived out of his vehicle.
Ms. King and Mr. Vimhel’s relationship began as a friendship before quickly taking a romantic turn. Mr. Vimhel moved into the Property and started to take advantage of Ms. King’s vulnerability. He began exerting undue influence and taking control over her relationships and finances. In 2017, Mr. Vimhel moved Ms. King from the Property into a motel in Surrey and made sure that none of her loved ones knew of her location. Eventually, Mr. Vimhel’s abuse became so consistent and severe that Ms. King came to believe that he would kill her if she did not do what he wanted.
Mr. Vimhel employed a variety of tactics to isolate Ms. King from her family and friends by:
- preventing her from contacting her friends and family, including by blocking their phone numbers;
- frequently criticizing her family members;
- writing cruel emails from her account to her family, directing them not to contact her;
- changing the locks on the Property and locking her in the Property when he left;
- prohibiting her from leaving the Property without him;
- reporting her family to the police for harassment; and
- instructing counsel on her behalf to author letters to her children directing them not to contact her.
In a similar vein, Mr. Vimhel took control of Ms. King’s finances by:
- having her revoke the power of attorney that she had granted to a trusted friend, and causing her to grant a new power of attorney to him;
- taking money from her without her knowledge or consent;
- signing documents using her name and signature;
- having her sell the Parksville vacation home and place the $515,000 of proceeds in a joint account with him (the account was emptied by 2020);and
- forcing her to register him as a joint-tenant to the Property.
Ms. King’s daughter hired a private investigator who was able to locate the whereabouts of Ms. King in November 2018. Ms. King’s children were horrified by the conditions she was living in and reported the situation to the police on multiple occasions to no avail. In September 2020, Ms. King’s daughter was finally able to rescue her mother by enlisting the help of Ms. King’s adult grandson and several police officers.
Ms. King revoked Mr. Vimhel’s power of attorney and appointed her son and daughter in his place. Ms. King’s children were appalled to find that Mr. Vimhel had drained all her accounts, leaving her completely financially dependent on others. Ms. King’s last remaining asset was the Property, which was registered in the joint names of herself and Mr. Vimhel.
Outcome
The British Columbia Supreme Court found that Mr. Vimhel held his share of Ms. King’s Property in a resulting trust, in favour of Ms. King. The Court set aside Ms. King’s transfer of the Property and returned the Property solely to her name. Justice Donegan reasoned that (i) Mr. Vimhel did not give Ms. King any value in exchange for receiving a joint interest in the Property, and (ii) Ms. King did not willingly intend to gift Mr. Vimhel all the rights of a joint owner. In addition, the Court found that Ms. King’s transfer of the Property was a result of Mr. Vimhel’s undue influence over her.
The Court also awarded Ms. King with punitive damages in the amount of $50,000. Justice Donegan explained that Mr. Vimhel and Ms. King’s relationship was a predatory relationship of an “extreme nature” and that Mr. Vimhel systematically manipulated his vulnerable victim for the purpose of financial gain. The Court labelled Mr. Vimhel as a “predator” who transformed a happy, vibrant and financially secure woman into a frightened, lonely, and powerless shell of her former self.
Takeaway
The unfortunate circumstances of this case underscore the importance of legal protections for vulnerable individuals against exploitation, elder abuse, and predatory relationships. Justice Donegan’s decision to return the Property to Ms. King, declare a resulting trust, and award punitive damages sends a clear message that courts will act decisively to rectify egregious misconduct.
If you are looking for more information regarding these topics, please contact any member of our Elder Law or Estates & Trusts groups.