Housesitting in Canada

Canada's public health plans — Ontario's OHIP, Quebec's RAMQ, BC's MSP — cover RESIDENTS of that province only, never visitors. And here's the sting for a UK sitter: unlike Australia and New Zealand, the UK has NO reciprocal healthcare agreement with Canada (the UK's own list names Australia and NZ, but not Canada). A visitor is fully liable for medical costs, the ambulance isn't free, and even a dual British-Canadian citizen isn't covered without meeting provincial residency. 'It's like the NHS' is the most expensive thing a visiting sitter can assume — travel insurance with medical and repatriation cover is essential, not optional.

True for FEDERAL law — the Criminal Code, cannabis, the border — but most of what touches a sit is PROVINCIAL, and Quebec is the deep exception: it runs on its own Civil Code, not common law (Canada is formally 'bijural'). Tenancy is the worked example a sitter actually hits — in Quebec it's governed by the Civil Code and the Tribunal administratif du logement, not a 'tenancies act' and board, and Quebec even BARS the security deposit that's routine elsewhere. Dangerous-dog rules, small-claims limits, privacy and consumer law vary province to province too. 'Legal everywhere' holds only for the federal layer.

Feeding or attracting dangerous wildlife — bears, cougars, coyotes — is an offence in several provinces; British Columbia's Wildlife Act is explicit, and the government's line is blunt: 'It's against the law to feed dangerous wildlife.' A conservation officer can order you to remove attractants, and fines climb from hundreds of dollars into the thousands (one BC man was fined for backyard bear-feeding). The right move is to secure the attractants (bins, fruit, pet food, the barbecue) and call the provincial conservation line — never feed or confront it. As the saying goes, a fed bear is a dead bear.

Recreational cannabis IS legal nationwide under the 2018 Cannabis Act — adults may carry up to 30 grams in public — but the provinces set the legal age (18 in Alberta, 21 in Quebec, 19 in most others) and where you can buy and use it. The trap is the international border: the Canada Border Services Agency calls taking cannabis across the border 'a serious criminal offence,' illegal in BOTH directions 'regardless of whether you are travelling from an area with legalized cannabis.' It's the mirror image of the United States — there it's legal by state but a federal crime; here it's federally legal but border-barred.

Since 2015 the Civil Code of Québec, article 898.1, declares in terms: 'Animals are not things. They are sentient beings and have biological needs.' It came with Quebec's Animal Welfare and Safety Act, which puts positive duties of care on whoever has custody of an animal — a pet-sitter included — backed by real fines and possible jail for cruelty or neglect. Across Canada the duty bites anyway: the federal Criminal Code and provincial laws like Ontario's PAWS Act run to the 'owner or custodian,' so the moment you take charge of the pet, its welfare is your legal responsibility, not just a favour.

Both blanket versions are wrong — it's provincial, even municipal. Ontario has a province-wide pit-bull ban under the Dog Owners' Liability Act (owning, breeding or importing them is prohibited; grandfathered dogs must be muzzled and neutered). Montreal brought in a breed ban in 2016 and then REPEALED it in 2018, switching to breed-neutral dangerous-dog rules that Quebec now runs province-wide; most provinces have no breed ban at all. So whether a dog is even legal to mind can flip at a provincial line — and, separately, in Ontario a sitter who 'possesses' the dog counts as its owner and can be strictly liable if it bites. Ask which breed, which province, and check the muzzle rules before you say yes.

Many Canadian cities put the duty to clear the public sidewalk on whoever's in charge of the property, not just the owner. Toronto's bylaw names 'every owner or occupant' and gives them 12 hours after the snow stops — and a house-sitter is the occupant. Toronto now machine-clears most sidewalks once snow passes 2cm, so the duty bites mainly for lighter falls and for your own steps and path — but the slip-and-fall liability is the real exposure, and cities like Ottawa and Montreal keep the duty squarely on the occupant. Ask the owner who normally does it, and where the shovel and salt live.

Two things kill it. First, most provinces run a land-titles system that has abolished or sharply restricted adverse possession; Quebec keeps 'acquisitive prescription,' but it needs ten years of possession 'as owner.' Second, and fatally everywhere: the claim needs possession WITHOUT the owner's permission — and a house-sitter is there WITH permission, which in Quebec law makes them a mere 'precarious detentor' whose time never ripens into a claim. A sit measured in weeks or months can't come close. A clear, dated, rent-free arrangement keeps the sitter the welcome guest they are.

Quebec is the only province that MANDATES winter tyres: under its Highway Safety Code, from 1 December to 15 March every passenger car registered in Quebec must wear tyres marked with the three-peak-mountain-snowflake symbol, and driving without them is a fineable offence. (Other provinces only require them on certain mountain routes, or merely recommend them.) It's a small thing that catches a visiting sitter who assumes a borrowed car is road-legal year-round — worth a quick check of what's on the wheels before a winter sit in Quebec.

Money isn't the test. Across legal systems, what makes an arrangement binding is that two people genuinely agreed to it and meant it to count — not whether cash changed hands or anything was signed, and it can be spoken or shown by conduct rather than written down. (Some systems look for something given on each side — here, James's care for Sarah's keys and a roof; others ask only that the promise was seriously meant. A housesit clears either bar.) So 'no cash, nothing signed' is the wrong line everywhere. The subtler, equally universal catch: a purely social favour can fall short of an intended legal commitment, and even a binding deal is painful to prove once memories differ. Agreeing clear terms up front helps with both, which is the point of agreeing them.

In most systems an agreement can be oral or formed by conduct; a signature and a formal document aren't what make it binding. What's hard about an informal deal isn't its validity — it's proving what was actually agreed once memories differ. Writing the terms down doesn't create the obligation; it records it, so nobody has to argue about it later.