N8 Active Ontario Eviction

[InvestagainInc]

Hi, I have an active N8 for eviction of one of my tenants for non payment of rent. the LTB ruled that the tenant has to pay rent on time for 12 months. If he does not abide by this ruling I can evict him.

The tenant paid some rent but not all the last two months. I tried to evict but the LTB said that the tenant just has to pay something in order to comply. I would think compliance means that the tenant pays all of their rent not just whatever they feel.

Has anyone else had this issue?

 

[REQRentals]

did you make an L4 application ?

 

[3canctheayr]

[quote user="InvestagainInc"] Hi, I have an active N8 for eviction of one of my tenants for non payment of rent. the LTB ruled that the tenant has to pay rent on time for 12 months. If he does not abide by this ruling I can evict him.

The tenant paid some rent but not all the last two months. I tried to evict but the LTB said that the tenant just has to pay something in order to comply. I would think compliance means that the tenant pays all of their rent not just whatever they feel.

Has anyone else had this issue?

[/quote] One of the problems with the LTB system is that they give the 'adjudicators' some leeway in how to settle cases, but they don't post those guidelines publicly and many of the 'adjudicators' are not very good at interpreting and implementing those guidelines, so they screw up all the time. Ultimately they have to honor the RTA.
Based on what you have described, it appears to be a case where the adjudicator has screwed up. They can't order the tenant to ' just pay something'. The tenant has to get themselves in full compliance.
When this happens, landlords need to be sending emails describing the problem to their MPPs and copy the Minister of housing as well the local press. If this started happening enough times, legislators would have no choice but to finally fix the RTA and the LTB.

 

[InvestagainInc]

We were told we can't make another application by the board as we already have an existing ruling for non payment of rent. I don't understand what the boards definition of non payment of rent is. To me if they don't pay the full amount then that is non payment.

If I do another L4 then they will just pay the difference at the hearing and move on. So I am not sure this will help.

 

[InvestagainInc]

Good Point. I think I will file again. Late payment is late payment not "partial" late payment.

On the second point, I will send a letter to the MPP but this whole system needs an overhaul.

 

[Seeley]

Every time a tenant does not pay on time, or pays only partial, you need to immediately file a L9 with the board. No notification to the tenant is required. This will always lead to the tenant being forced to pay the $170 filing fee. If they pay the rent before the hearing they are still responsible for the $170. Although this is a nuisance for landlords it almost always guarantees the tenant will never pay late again.

Also it is not the obligation of the landlord to accept partial payments. If the tenant does not have the full amount refuse to accept payment and file the L9.

 

[REQRentals]

[quote user="3canctheayr"][quote user="InvestagainInc"] Hi, I have an active N8 for eviction of one of my tenants for non payment of rent. the LTB ruled that the tenant has to pay rent on time for 12 months. If he does not abide by this ruling I can evict him.

The tenant paid some rent but not all the last two months. I tried to evict but the LTB said that the tenant just has to pay something in order to comply. I would think compliance means that the tenant pays all of their rent not just whatever they feel.

Has anyone else had this issue?

[/quote] One of the problems with the LTB system is that they give the 'adjudicators' some leeway in how to settle cases, but they don't post those guidelines publicly and many of the 'adjudicators' are not very good at interpreting and implementing those guidelines, so they screw up all the time. Ultimately they have to honor the RTA.
Based on what you have described, it appears to be a case where the adjudicator has screwed up. They can't order the tenant to ' just pay something'. The tenant has to get themselves in full compliance.
When this happens, landlords need to be sending emails describing the problem to their MPPs and copy the Minister of housing as well the local press. If this started happening enough times, legislators would have no choice but to finally fix the RTA and the LTB. [/quote]

The guidelines are available on the LTB website and are posted here:

http://www.ltb.gov.on.ca/en/Law/STEL02_111691.html

[quote user="InvestagainInc"] We were told we can't make another application by the board as we already have an existing ruling for non payment of rent. I don't understand what the boards definition of non payment of rent is. To me if they don't pay the full amount then that is non payment.

If I do another L4 then they will just pay the difference at the hearing and move on. So I am not sure this will help. [/quote]

Usually if you have an Order and make an L4 application it does not matter if the tenant pays but sometimes the LTB has discretion to refuse eviction.

If that is what happened then you need someone to go there and make a good argument as to allow tenants to escape the consequences of a previous Order does violence to the system.

[quote user="Seeley"]

Every time a tenant does not pay on time, or pays only partial, you need to immediately file a L9 with the board. No notification to the tenant is required. This will always lead to the tenant being forced to pay the $170 filing fee. If they pay the rent before the hearing they are still responsible for the $170. Although this is a nuisance for landlords it almost always guarantees the tenant will never pay late again.

Also it is not the obligation of the landlord to accept partial payments. If the tenant does not have the full amount refuse to accept payment and file the L9.

[/quote]

If you file an L9 with the board and get a judgment for the February rent for example you will never be allowed to evict for that rent or serve another notice for non payment. You will only have a Judgment for February rent.

If the tenant does not pay in March you have to serve a notice for March only and evict based on that notice.

Also if the tenant pays March and April etc they can stay there even if February is not paid.

Does not seem a good strategy.

 

[InvestagainInc]

I recently found out that even though in the order it says if he doesnt pay within 12 months i can file with the board to evict, the judicator FORGOT to write under section 78. So since it doesnt say section 78 on the order they denied my l4.

Now i have to file to ammend the order and for a time extension. Then re file the l4.

 

[Seeley]

Does not seem a good strategy.

The strategy is to make this tenants life miserable by costing them as much time and money as possible..

REQ keep in mind from your position you are restricted to a legal interpretation of and enforcement of the RTA where as landlords must operate in the real world of this business. It is not the same playing field and landlords must be far more creative in dealing with the business while realising the RTA is working against their best interests. We must avoid having to rely on the support of the LTB which we all know is pro tenant. In other words cover your a** and bend the rules almost to the point of breaking. If a landlord believes they must operate strictly by the rules at all times they will be at the mercy of their tenants because the RTA and LTB are not there to help them they exist to protect tenants and restrict the rights of property owners.

Filing a L9 does not prevent a landlord from filing other applications at the same time. The point of filing a L9 is to teach tenants that their landlord is not a bank. Every time they think of paying late or partial it will cost them $170. They learn very quickly. Additionally a landlord can evict for repeated late payments and the best documentation for that application is numerous L9 applications.

The real value of the L9 is in teaching new tenants that late payments will not be tolerated. In doing so a landlord does not want to lose $170 every time. Most landlords when first dealing with a late or non paying tenant is to file a N4. A N4 is a waste of $170 with a new tenant as it will always be denied costing the landlord $170. It is far better to build a case for eviction by beginning with L9s.

My preference with bad tenants is to always make their lives as miserable as possible since they all generally believe that is what their actions are doing to me. Admittedly I do enjoy breaking them down over time. I figure if you are stuck with an ahole tenant you might as well get some enjoyment out of playing their game. In playing their game I have had more than one legal aid troll accuse me of using their own system to take advantage of tenants. To me that is a compliment because in each case the tenant was the worst of the worst when it came to taking advantage of the system.

The value of filing a L9 in this situation is that the landlord has already lost the eviction advantage due to the stupidity of the adjudicator. It is therefor best for the landlord to punish the tenant as much as possible to either teach them a lesson and correct their bad habits or encourage them to leave. The alternative is to give up and allow the tenant to do as they please.