In November 2023, RCMP officers were called to a condo in Burnaby, B.C., due to reports of screams. Upon entering the unit, the officers discovered an unusual setup involving devices designed to transmit noise into the unit above. These devices, identified as "thumpers" in court documents, were constructed with metal poles reaching from the floor to the ceiling, each topped with electronic apparatus similar to speakers. The police believed these devices were specifically intended to disturb the resident living above.
On November 3, following the initial discovery, the owner of the unit was charged with mischief; he is scheduled to appear in court on February 24, 2024. The investigation revealed that the devices had been used intentionally to create disruptive noise for the upstairs neighbor. This behavior is deemed quite unusual by legal professionals, as neighborly noise complaints are typically civil matters handled by landlords or relevant authorities.
The police warrant application stated that the devices were misleadingly marketed online. A printout from Amazon described the product as a noise "eliminator/silencer/muffler," a term which the officer deemed inaccurately represented the item’s true function. In reality, the devices were designed to generate noise, thus infringing upon the upstairs neighbor's right to "quiet enjoyment" of their living space.
According to the officer's observations, similar devices are available on various e-commerce platforms, including Chinese marketplaces, where they are referred to as "zhenlouqi," translating to "floor shaker." Interest in such devices reportedly surged since 2017, with their designs often including vibration mechanisms.
Vancouver lawyer Alex Chang commented on the case, expressing that he had never previously encountered such devices in disputes. While conflicts over noise among neighbors are not uncommon, the intentional creation of disruptive noise using a specific device is what sets this situation apart. Chang explained that while one might hear of instances involving loud music being played purposefully to annoy others, the deliberate use of a noise-transmitting device is a more pronounced violation of neighborly respect.
In the case of the Burnaby resident, the police entered the property while the suspect was showering and described him as "unco-operative and mute" during questioning. Following the officers' visit, additional noise complaints were lodged, indicating that the disruptions persisted even after police intervention. The upstairs neighbor reported hearing rhythmic thumps and various audio clips, including dogs barking on a continuous loop, causing discomfort to a degree that his partner chose to stay with family instead.
The background information provided in the warrant application highlighted concerning behavior from the downstairs resident, who had previously been hospitalized in February 2025 after verbalizing feelings of rage directed towards his upstairs neighbor. Police involvement at that time led to the seizure of a hunting knife from the man, indicative of escalating tensions. Despite years of peaceful coexistence, the complainant indicated uncertainty about what triggered this sudden and aggressive conflict.
As the legal proceedings continue, the RCMP have chosen not to comment on the ongoing case, further complicating the situation for both parties involved. The implications of intentionally crafted noise devices raise questions regarding civil liberties and the boundaries of neighborly conduct in residential living environments.
