Landlord Wins Major Repairs Case: Brar v Iqbal 2022
LTB Allows Landlords to Evict for Renovations: Brar v Iqbal
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 22, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 46 Cordgrass Crescent, Brampton, ON L6R2A3
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Jan 2022
Order Date
Jan 17, 2022
Tenancy End Date
Mar 2022
Dispute Summary
Landlords applied to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenants in order to do major repairs or renovations to the rental unit. The Landlords served a valid N13 notice with a termination date of March 31, 2022.
Determinations
- Delaying the termination date would be unfair and highly prejudicial to the Landlords
- Landlords hired licensed contractor to handle the project and obtained necessary permits
- Landlords require the rental unit to be vacated in order to do major repairs or renovations
- Landlords served valid N13 notice with termination date of March 31, 2022
- Tenant received compensation of $1,150 under section 54 of the Act
Case Study
The Landlords have taken all necessary steps under the Residential Tenancies Act to terminate the tenancy for the purpose of doing major repairs or renovations. The Tenant did not dispute the reason for eviction and indicated he intends to exercise his right of first refusal to return to the unit once the work is completed. However, the Tenant requested a delay in the termination date to allow more time to find alternate accommodations, which the Landlord opposed due to the impact on the construction timeline and financial consequences.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord's legal representative argued that delaying the termination date could be catastrophic for the Landlords both financially and in terms of completing the repairs/renovations as scheduled.
Actions
Landlords testified that the construction company will begin bringing materials and equipment onto the property in the first week of April to start the project as scheduled, and that delaying the termination date would have significant financial consequences for them.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant requested a 2-3 month delay in the termination date to allow more time to find alternate accommodations, citing difficulty searching due to COVID-19 and the tight rental market.
Actions
Tenant indicated he intends to exercise his right of first refusal to return to the unit once the repairs/renovations are completed.
Decision Summary
The tenancy is terminated effective March 31, 2022. The Tenants must vacate the rental unit by that date. If the Tenants do not move out by March 31, 2022, they must pay the Landlords $37.81 per day in compensation for use of the unit until they move out. The Landlords may file this order with the Court Enforcement Office (Sheriff) to enforce the eviction if the unit is not vacated by March 31, 2022.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
687
Landlord Favorable
85.4%
Tenant Favorable
10.6%
Mutual Agreement
3.9%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Source
Similar Cases
Click to switch between case outcomes
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Sripathy v Chilvers
Waterdown landlords regain possession of rental unit for personal use, tenant must vacate by January 31, 2025.
Singh v Gray
LTB upholds consent order terminating tenancy for non-payment of rent in Toronto.
Yassin v Smith
Pickering tenant faces potential eviction after dispute over rent increase and arrears
Hazelview Property Services Inc. v Fatemi
Toronto tenant evicted for non-payment of rent, owes $8,938.24 to landlord.
Goklani v Cannata
Toronto tenants' maintenance dispute against landlord dismissed by LTB
Jeff v Ferguson
Woodstock landlords awarded $35,186 in rent arrears, tenants face eviction for non-payment.
Oxford Properties Group v Benjamin
Tenant ordered to pay $22,461.70 for flood damage with conditional tenancy preservation
Sufi Properties Ltd v Nieman
Tenants ordered to pay $16,866 in rent arrears to Former Landlord after complex dispute.