What’s a ‘thumper’? B.C. RCMP describe devices in an unneighbourly noise case

An RCMP epaulette is seen in Edmonton, Wednesday, Feb. 5, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson

When two RCMP officers responded to a call about screams coming from a Burnaby, B.C., condo in late October last year, they forcibly entered the unit believing someone might be in trouble.

Instead, they discovered “unusual” devices set up in three different rooms.

Each consisted of metal poles extended from the floor to the ceiling, topped with an “electronic apparatus similar to a speaker,” intended for what police believed was the “sole purpose” of transmitting noise into the unit above.

Court records show that the day after police returned to seize the noisemakers on Nov. 3, the man allegedly using them was charged with mischief and is due back in court on Feb. 24.

The devices found by police are described as “thumpers” in the B.C. court document to support the warrant to search and seize.

The document features a photograph of one of the devices in the unit, and a printout of an Amazon listing for a similar product, which enigmatically describes it as a “Reduce/Decrease/Cut Down Neighbour Upstairs Machine Noise Deadener/Sound Eliminator/Silencer/Muffler Strike Back”.

The officer said in the warrant application that he believes “the Amazon listing is deliberately inaccurate when the item is described as a noise ‘eliminator/silencer/muffler.’”

“I believe that the purpose of this device is to transmit noise and vibration into neighbouring units within a residential building,” the officer wrote.

Such devices are also available on Chinese sales platforms, and are described in Chinese media reports as “zhenlouqi,” which roughly translates as “floor shaker” or “floor-shaking machine.”

Google searches for the machines — some of which feature vibration mechanisms — began to proliferate around 2017.

Vancouver lawyer Alex Chang, who practices strata, tenancy, construction and property law, said in an interview that he’d never heard of such devices.

He said neighbourly noise disputes aren’t uncommon, and the person causing the noise was not always doing so deliberately.

But the idea of someone setting up a device to deliberately interfere with a neighbour’s legally protected right to “quiet enjoyment” of their unit or suite is “unusual.”

“You do hear, very occasionally, of cases where a person is accused of blasting their stereo deliberately for malicious reasons. Not just that they like to listen to the music loud, but they’re doing it with the intent to annoy. I guess this can be an escalated version of that,” he said. “But if you’re just kind of using your stereo, then at least there’s some plausible deniability that you’re doing it deliberately.”

To set up a device whose only function is to make noise to a neighbour’s detriment is a different story, Chang said.

“You know, there’s no reason for having a device like that,” Chang said.

He said neighbourly noise disputes are usually civil matters dealt with by landlords, strata councils, the Residential Tenancy Branch, or sometimes the courts.

In the Burnaby case, the warrant document says that the suspect was in the shower when police entered his home, and he was “unco-operative and mute” under questioning. After the officers left the Lane Street property on Oct. 25, two more noise complaints about the unit followed in the next few days.

The complainant upstairs, who couldn’t be reached for comment, told police of “rhythmic thumping and banging,” as well as audio clips of dogs barking, apparently on a recorded loop. He said the noise was so bad that his partner left and went to stay with family.

The warrant document says the man in the downstairs unit had been taken to hospital in February 2025, after telling an urgent care clinic of “rage taking control of him and causing him to harm others,” specifically mentioning his upstairs neighbour.

Police attended the clinic and “seized a large hunting knife” from the man, the warrant application says, before he was taken to hospital.

The complainant told officers he didn’t know why the conflict “erupted” in January 2025, after years of living as neighbours without issue.

RCMP declined to comment as the case is before the courts.

This report by Darryl Greer, The Canadian Press, was first published Feb. 4, 2026.