Online Petition Proposing Section 210 of the Ontario Residential Tenancies Act be Amended

[qdsouza]

Hello All,



Let's balance the playing field and end the rent games. We need you to
support the lobby to amend the Residential Tenancies Act and change the
rules for filing appeals. Thank you if have already supported the
campaign.



Few landlords realize they could easily find themselves
involved in an appeal of a Landlord and Tenant Board order and facing
the financial hardship of six months lost rent and the cost of legal
fees. It begins with a tenant who can't pay the rent. You give them a
break; some time to get their finances in order, but after a string of
broken promises to pay you know this is going to be a problem. You make a
few calls and get some advice about your rights and learn that you have
to initiate action. A Form N4, Notice to End a Tenancy Early for
Nonpayment of Rent, is completed and delivered to the tenant and you
wait.



The law requires the tenant be given 14 days to pay. You
wait. No rent is paid so you complete more forms and file your
application with the Landlord and Tenant Board. The goal is to obtain an
order that will terminate the tenancy, order payment of the money owing
and evict the tenant but you'd be happy if they would just pay.



The
process will spans 8 weeks or more, requires time off work and creates a
lot of frustration. You must continue providing laundry facilities,
heat, water and electricity - all the services the tenant had before
they stopped paying the rent. You meticulously follow the process and
file all the necessary documents - the rent is now 3 months behind. The
hearing goes in your favour and in a few weeks you file with the Sheriff
and schedule the eviction.



You are calculating your losses,
thinking about the "for rent" ad you'll place when the process comes to a
grinding halt - the tenant has filed an appeal. Tenants have an
automatic right to appeal an order made by the
Landlord and Tenant Board. They do not have to hire lawyer or argue
their reasons for appeal before a judge - they simply pay the fees and
file the forms with the Divisional Court and the eviction process
stops.







By now you have used your savings and taken
cash advances on your credit card to keep up with mortgage payments and
utility costs. You've hired a lawyer and the fees are mounting. The
lawyer advises that a motion be filed to quash the appeal, and you wait
another month or two for a date. You worry because if you are
unsuccessful the appeal hearing will not be held for another 6 to 8
months. Finally, you attend the Divisional Court with your lawyer but
the tenant does not appear. The appeal is quashed and your Landlord and
Tenant Board order is reinstated. The tenant manipulated the law to live
rent free for at least six months.



Let's balance the playing field and end the rent games - support the campaign to amend
Section 210 of the Residential Tenancies Act. Sign the online petition at http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/residential-tenancies-act-s-210.html and for more information on this growing problem and other ways you can support the lobby for change visit http://www.landlordselfhelp.com/Law%20Reform/S210/section210.htm.



Take Care,



Quentin

 

[GaryMcGowan]

Great Post Quentin,

 

[invst4profit]

Good luck.

I have learned from experience that the entire RTA needs to be revamped not simply one section. If you were to take on the challenge of having the entire act restructured to be more equatable I would definitely be on board.

 

[Rickson9]

Good luck with that.

 

[qdsouza]

You can't climb a mountain without taking the first steps.

 

[Thomas Beyer]

[quote user=invst4profit]

I have learned from experience that the entire RTA needs to be revamped not simply one section. If you were to take on the challenge of having the entire act restructured to be more equatable I would definitely be on board.
That may happen with a new government .. but not the old one.



Thus, the petition is a good first step !

 

[invst4profit]

The Ontario RTA started out in the early 90s called the Tenant Protection Act. The government changed the name in the mid 90s to the Residential Tenancy Act to appear more equitable. None of the contents was changed. Governments, heavily lobbied by the welfare and poverty pimps, have only one goal and that is to protect the tenants at all cost. The existing language is not by accident and will not be changed as long as activists are making money off of the backs of the poor. There will be no changing the act by any government, the mountain has a very large No Trespassing sign clearly posted.



I am not pessimistic I am very much a realist.



If you have a option simply do not invest in Ontario otherwise find ways to operate your property without expecting support from the government. I personally never use N4s any more I simply file a L9 on the second of the month but I have the luxury of having enough doors to carry the inconvenience of criminal tenants.

 

[Thomas Beyer]

[quote user=invst4profit]N4s any more I simply file a L9


Enlighten us on the difference, please .. both legally and from a real world experience point of view.

 

[invst4profit]

Certainly



When a tenant does not pay on the first of the month a landlord will usually file a N4 which in essence allows the tenant to postpone paying rent for 14 days If the tenant pays all is well. If the tenant does not pay the landlord may then apply to the board on the 15 day for the eviction. This application costs the landlord $170. The hearing is usually within about a month. If the tenant has paid the rent owing prior to the hearing or at the hearing agrees to pay the rent owing the landlords application to "evict" is denied and the landlord is out $170. The board will make every effort possible to resolve the issue or at least get the tenant to agree to terms for payment. The sole purpose of the board is to deny the landlord the right to evict. In reality tenants do not want to get evicted and will agree to anything although they may have no intent of following through. Result is your N4 fails and you are out $170.



The process with the L9 is different in that the landlord does not provide the tenant with a 14 day rent vacation at the landlords expense. If a tenant does not pay on the 1st the landlord then on the 2nd immediately applies to the board for rent owing (L9). Again this costs the landlord $170. Immediately upon applying to the board the tenant automatically owes the landlord $170. This begins the process 2 weeks sooner than a N4. If the tenant pays the rent owing prior to the hearing they also must pay the landlord the $170. If nothing is paid prior to the hearing the Adjudicator will order the tenant to pay rent owing plus the $170 application fee 100% of the time. The order instructs the tenant to pay by a specified date at which point if not paid the tenant incurs interest.

If the tenant should ask to postpone the hearing the landlord requests the tenant pay the rent owing directly to the board. This prevents the tenant from stalling to avoid payment.



9 times out of 10 the L9 will resolve the issue and teach the tenant a lesson not soon forgotten - Paying late will cost $170.

If you do turn out having a criminal tenant you can then file to evict.



For those desiring to file a N4 then I advise that on the 15th day,when the L1 is applied for, file a L9 at the same time. There will only be one $170 fee for both but unlike the N4 (which will be denied) the L9 will be upheld and you will be awarded the $170. This does not guarantee you will be paid but any LTB order can be rolled into a Small Claims Court ruling to garnish wages assuming your tenant is not on OW or ODSP.



Assuming a landlord is thorough and only rents to those gainfully employed (having something to lose) then small claims court is the final recourse for landlords but justice will be served through garnish of wages if tenant selection was done properly.



Personally I would be much happier changing the system to guarantee an eviction in 30 days but Ontario is a nanny state controlled by welfare activists so that day will never come.



Sign the petition if you wish but if you want change throw money at a powerful lobbyist that can go toe to toe with the poverty pimps and NDP otherwise all you will achieve is that warm a fuzzy feeling that comes from signing ones name to a noble, but fruitless, cause..

 

[Thomas Beyer]

Why would landlords not file an L9 regardless ? Why do they chose to file N4 ?

 

[invst4profit]

When a tenant stops paying landlords file the N4 believing this is the process to collect rent owed by allowing the tenant 14 days to pay without penalty. If they are again late the landlord then believes the N4 will result in a eviction of a bad tenant but this will not be successful. The board will not evict unless the application is combined with other applications for inappropriate behaviour. A N4 by itself will not result in a eviction except in the case the tenant has actually decided to stop paying (professional tenant). Landlords lack the experiences to be tough from day one on dealing with bad tenants. They always give them the benefit of the doubt. What they fail to realise is they are teaching tenants that rent is no longer due on the first of the month as the N4 allows a 14 day grace period. Training the tenants to pay on time is far more important and as such the N9 should be filed on the second of the month in all cases. Never allow any tenant to pay late without a penalty. They can still pay the landlord but must include the $170 and the landlord then simply canceled the board hearing.



Until landlords experience the prejudice towards them at the board they have no concept of the reality if this business in Ontario. They are naive in trusting the process and therefor always chose the N4. In addition they believe that with the N4 if the tenant is ordered to pay rent or be evicted they will be awarded the application fee but without the eviction the landlords N4/L1 application is denied even though it appears the tenant has lost by being ordered to pay the rent.



When screening applicants if the landlord spells out their expectations and their process of dealing with late payments (L9) this is a deterrent to professional tenants. Professional tenants target the mom and pop/inexperienced landlords where they know they can get 6 months rent free before moving on. Professional tenants are generally not gainfully employed as they know their wages can be garnished. They are generally on welfare or self employed. Two groups to be avoided. Some will also make excuses to have only one tenants name on the lease, usually the one not employed, to further protect themselves from small claims court. Never allow any tenant to not be on the lease.

One of the primary reasons evictions are made so difficult is because the government is dumping the responsibility of the creation of affordable housing on the private sector. Evictions or tightening up of screening by landlords would most often place these tenants back in the responsibility of the government as most are welfare recipients. This is why the board will not evict - the board is the government. This is also why the board has created the L9- payment without eviction as a training lesson for tenants.



In all honesty this thread is about dealing with professional tenants, those that have decided to permanently stop paying. It is very difficult to evict and the appeals process is discouraging but the government has intentionally made it this way to protect "ALL" tenants both good and bad. Unfortunately the responsibility falls on landlords to screen out these bad tenants and has regularly pointed the finger of blame at the landlord for not doing so. The regulations will not change, the playing field is what it is, and the sooner landlords wake up to that reality and screen out all questionable applicants nothing will change. However if the government is pressured to change by poverty pimp activists because there clients are no longer being accepted as tenants then the regulations may change.



The underlying cause of this problem is the proliferation of mom and pop landlords dumped with the responsibility of providing affordable housing. They have no concept of the business regulations and never screen adequately.

Think about it, when have any of us heard about a Corporate landlord movement to change the regulations. You have not because they know how to professionally operate a business and work the process. They use lobbyists and as such it is corporate landlords that we need to be aligning with.

 

[TodorYordanov]

Greg,



You are dropping golden nuggets here! Thank you.



I've had my share of evictions that I had to deal with and it all started with an N4. However I like the idea of L9 as an alternative, perhaps better option.

"Fortunately" my board decisions were never appealed and I had the tenants out in less than 3 months with total loss of about 2 months rent in most cases. Yupee!



I would love for you to document your process of screening and dealing with tenants for all of our benefit. I recognize that everything you say comes from experience. Having been a landlord for many years, property manager and owner of a property management company for almost two years (got tired of it and quit), I believe you can offer a real roadmap to be followed by members of this board.



I hope you have the time and inclanation to do this.



Thanks Quentin for highlighting the process and the risks that everyone should be aware of before they start "playing nice" with tenants.

 

[Rickson9]

Greg is awesome!