THINKING ABOUT BEING A LANDLORD?
SPEAK TO YOUR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE FIRST TO GET ALL THE FACTS.
Condominium Owners Responsible For Their Tenants Actions
Image Source - Pixabay
The following article demonstrates how a condominium owner was held responsible for their tenants disruptive behaviour by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice.
According to the article written by James Cook in Real Estate Magazine, the decision demonstrates some of the potential perils of renting out a condominium unit and the consequences that may result. Due diligence on potential tenants should be thoroughly conducted by unit owners before entering into a lease, as eviction proceedings are slow and costly. A condominium will be looking to unit owners to cover the costs and any damages that are incurred before a tenant is eventually evicted.
To read the full article and further reason as to why the courts ruled in this favour, CLICK HERE
Carson Law can help with your Landlord and Tenant problems. Please contact our Paralegal at paralegal@carsonlaw.ca
Questions To Ask A Prospective Tenant
Bill 184 Is Now Official In Ontario
Author: Anika Helen - Paralegal
Edited By: Ryan Carson
Since mid-March, Ontario rental housing providers have been unable to evict tenants who were unable to pay rent due to the impact of Covid-19. Many people have lost their jobs and are still recovering from the impact, if at all. During the pandemic, the province had stopped evictions to protect tenants from being forced out of their home. As a result, landlords were not paid months of rent and many are still not receiving rent. Now, a bill has been passed to protect both landlords as well as tenants in times of hardship. The bill proposes a number of amendments to the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (RTA) and Housing Service Act, 2011. Following are the new updates to the legislations and details about what this new bill is about.
What Does This New Bill Entail?
Bill 184 is known as Protecting Tenants and Strengthening Community Housing Act. Bill 184 will require anyone with rent arrears to pay back their landlords in a structured repayment plan. The legislation before was structured to protect tenants from unfair eviction due to rent arrears, especially in the midst of Covid-19. However, as the health crisis eases and the suspension on evictions comes to an end, the legislation had to come up with a way to also protect landlords who have lost months of rent, and are still not being paid by many tenants. This bill provides options for landlords to make structured payments in order to pay back the amount of rent owed.
Changes In The legislation
Compensation from former tenants
At this point, landlords are permitted to apply for seeking rent arrears under Section 87 and 89 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006. Landlords can also seek compensation for over holding or damage to a rental unit where the tenant does not give up possession beyond the expiration of the lease. The legislation plans to permit landlords to use the sections to file an application even after a tenant has moved out of the rental unit. Landlords will have one year from the date their tenant has moved out to file an application with the Landlord and Tenant Board for compensation regarding any of the above situations.
This bill will allow landlords to seek compensation with respect to a tenant interfering with another tenant’s or another resident’s reasonable enjoyment of the premises. Landlords will be able seek compensation for the tenant’s failure to pay any utility bills for which they were responsible. Landlords have one year from the date the tenant moves out of the unit to file this application. Hence, the most important change to this part of the legislation is that landlords will be able to pursue an application for the above matters even after tenants have vacated the rental unit.
Increased fines for terminating a tenancy in bad faith
Before bill 184 passed, the Landlord and Tenant Board would take action when a landlord terminated a tenancy in bad faith. Landlords’ usual reasoning for ending a tenancy would be for personal use, demolition, conversion and substantial renovation. The board would order landlords to pay an equal amount of rent increase as a result of the tenant moving elsewhere, including moving expenses, storage costs or similar expenses. Landlords were also fined up to $35,000 in the case that they acted in bad faith.
What Bill 184 changes is that now, if a landlord ends a tenancy in bad faith, the board can order the landlord to compensate the former tenant in an amount equal to up to twelve months’ rent at the monthly rate last charged by the landlord.
Affidavits are required for applications to the Board to terminate a tenancy
Bill 184 requires landlords to swear an affidavit setting out the particulars of the reason for termination of tenancy. It can be any of the above-mentioned reasons, but the affidavit makes sure that any landlord who wants to terminate a tenancy in bad faith will be held accountable. In addition, landlords are now required to indicate whether or not it has been two years in between filing the present application and a previous one in case a termination notice was given before for similar reasons.
The Bill makes sure that a landlord does not act in bad faith considering the reasons for termination. It permits the Board to use a landlord’s previous use of notices of termination under Sections 48, 49 and 50 in determining whether or not they are acting in good faith in currently applying for termination of a tenancy under those same Sections. The important part of this is that the sworn affidavit will deter landlords from terminating tenancies in bad faith.
Penalties
Before Bill 184, Section 238(2) of the Residential Tenancies Unit provided that a corporation found liable for a breach of contract under the RTA are liable on conviction to a fine of not more than $100,000. Bill 184, however, increased this maximum to $250,000.
Position of Lawmakers
The government has stated that this bill will make it easier to resolve disputes while protecting tenants from unlawful evictions. The purpose of the bill is to simply protect both landlords as well as tenants. The changes being implemented will bring fairness to the system. Every eviction does not necessarily need a hearing at the Board, but a fair eviction in the case that a tenant does not pay back rent owed in bad faith, not because they cannot afford it. The changes to the legislation also protect tenants in the case that a landlord decides to terminate a tenancy in bad faith. Now, if a landlord acts in bad faith, the board will require them to compensate the tenant for hardship, in addition to receiving a large number of fines.
Position of Tenants
Tenants all over the province who currently rent are not happy with the bill. Many had lost their jobs when the pandemic started and many of them were not able to make rent payments. Activists and tenants all over the GTA are protesting this bill saying that it will lead to mass evictions, as not many people happen to have jobs right now. Tenants and activists are worried that once they arrear in rent payment, a structured payment plan will be implement for tenants to pay back the money to the landlord. Keeping in mind that when the pandemic started, none of the renters were forced to make rent payments as the board put a halt in filing applications for eviction. The idea was never that renters will not have to pay the rent ever again, but that once the economy started to get better, and people get their jobs back, tenants would have to come up with a payment plan for the months of rent they previously did not have to pay due to the pandemic.
Tenants are scared and they fear that they will be evicted and will not have a chance to present their case to the Board. According to tenants and activists, the bill puts renters and the working class in danger. People do not agree that landlords should be able to evict tenants in the case that tenants do not pay back the rent arrears that were incurred during the pandemic.
Comments
Though both sides have fair and justified concerns about the residential tenancy system, Bill 184 was not enacted to be unfair on any tenants going through hardship due to the pandemic. During the pandemic, landlords were simply not allowed to file any application for evictions related to rent arrears. That led to mortgage deferrals for a number of months before financial institutions decided to recently suspend that. Landlords will be forced to sell their homes, or pay mortgage out of pocket to keep tenants in the rental units. The bill is trying to support landlords in these hard times as well as trying to protect tenants. It is understandable that many might fear that it gives landlords the leverage to treat tenants unfairly. However, the bill makes sure that tenants are protected. As discussed above, landlords will not be allowed to evict tenants in bad faith, and if they do, they will be fined and will be forced to compensate. The bill does not open up disputes regarding unfair evictions. If a landlord takes any steps that treats a tenant unfairly, it is advisable that reach out to a legal representative for help. It is important to know what your rights are and options to make sure you are protected.
Articles written by Anika Helen:
When Are You Allowed To Evict A Tenant In Ontario? What Different Kinds of Damages are there in Litigation? Section 718.1 of the Criminal Code
Common Summary Conviction Offences Impact of COVID-19 on landlords and tenants Who is a litigation guardian and what are their duties?
Disclaimer
The content on this web site is provided for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal or other professional advice or an opinion of any kind. Users of this web site are advised to seek specific legal advice by contacting members of Carson Law, Carson IP, or their own legal counsel regarding any specific legal issues. Carson Law does not warrant or guarantee the quality, accuracy or completeness of any information on this web site. The articles published on this web site are current as of their original date of publication, but should not be relied upon as accurate, timely or fit for any particular purpose.