Illegal Lease Clauses (Ontario)

[Rickson9]

http://www.moneyville.ca/article/1254727--some-clauses-in-apartment-leases-aren-t-legal

 

[housingrental]

Hi Rickson

Are you having some problems with your landlord enforcing lease clauses you wanted to discuss?

 

[Rickson9]

No.

 

[kir]

I find this interesting and useful.



Still, I would put in some clauses and if the tenant agrees, then who is going to object?



IF two parties agree (landlord and tenant) to "no smoking"...then later the tenant smokes, does the landlord have to proof that smoking will cause harm and property damage?



I don't really know. I wonder how Judge Judy would react, if she was the presiding Judge.





Kir

 

[invst4profit]

In Ontario no clause in a rental lease is enforceable unless it is specifically referred to in the Ontario RTA.

Some clauses are actually refer to in the RTA indicating they are VOID such as a no pet clause. You may have a no pet rule to exclude applicants but can not prevent a tenant from acquiring a pet.

Tenants may move in as many friends as they wish providing they do not violate housing regulations. ETC, ETC, ETC.

Clauses that are not allowed are acceptable to have but regardless of whether a tenant agrees to the clauses at time of signing a lease they are not enforceable at the point of time a tenant decides not to abide by the clause.

In other words you can not evict or force a tenant to follow any rule in a lease not included in the RTA.

Our LTB otherwise known as the Tenant Protection Board rarely supports any landlord application.



Welcome to anti landlord Ontario.

 

[BrianPulis]

Although the LTB does not recognize the lease and therfore won't support any of the clauses, small claims court does. Depending on the issue such as tenant breaking the lease early, small claims court is an option.

 

[Anonymous]

I founded the all clauses. Do you also facing such kind of problems??

 

[NickfromGuelph]

If I may, I have a Illegal Lease Clause question, and since there's evidently so much knowledge on this thread I

won't make another one, here goes:

A friend of mine signed a 1year lease on an apartment in Toronto containing a clause that he could not assign or

sub lease the apartment, after a late payment (later paid) he suggests to his landlord he could sublease, and gets an

email from the landlord's agent saying that is against the agreement and he could get sued.

Later I heard about the situation during my due diligence reading of the entire Landlord Tenant Act, (prior to my first investment), I realized something was not right here.

I called the LTB and confirmed the Act supersedes any lease agreements, and that he should submit an A2, but when he called, they just told him he could give 30 days and be on his merry way.

This where I am confused, does he not need to submit an application to the board ? The landlord did not object to

the 30 days, but maybe he is applying to the board on his end as we speak?

I greatly appreciate any input

Thanks

 

[REQRentals]

Hi,

If the tenant is looking to give up the entirety of the lease (ie leave and not come back) technically it is a request to assign under sec 95

Subletting is only where the tenant intends to return during the term of the original lease.

If the tenant requests permission to assign and the landlord refuses or does not answer the tenant can give notice under sec 96

So depends on the working of the letter / emails and if the constitute a request to assign and a refusal

If they do the tenant can give the 30 days notice.

 

[NickfromGuelph]

Thanks REQRentals for clearing that up, I was aware that giving up the lease was to assign it, although the wording was sub-lease in the emails, I'm just grateful I'm learning this proactively, and not as a reaction to being in a similar situation myself