Landlord Wins Personal Use Case: Bruinsma v Fuller 2023
Landlord regains Oshawa rental unit for personal use, tenant evicted
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 22, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 220 Mary St N, Oshawa, ON L1G5C4
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Sep 2022
Order Date
Feb 9, 2023
Tenancy End Date
Feb 2023
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenant because the Landlord in good faith requires possession of the rental unit for the purpose of residential occupation for at least one year.
Determinations
- Landlord compensated Tenant one month's rent
- Landlord has proven on a balance of probabilities the grounds for termination of the tenancy
- Landlord served valid N12 notice
- No last month's rent deposit
Case Study
The courts have provided much guidance to the Board in interpreting the "good faith" requirement in the context of a landlord seeking possession of a rental unit for the purpose of residential occupation by the landlord. The test of good faith is a genuine intention to occupy the premises and not the reasonableness of the landlord's proposal. The Board can consider the conduct and the motives of the landlord in order to draw inferences as to whether the landlord desires, in good faith, to occupy the property.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
Landlord testified that the property was built in 1912 and had been converted into a duplex prior to him owning the property. He was served a notice by the City of Oshawa indicating that the property is currently operating as a single detached dwelling with two accessory units, for a total of three separate dwelling units. The lawful use of the is a single detached dwelling with on registered accessory unit. The Landlord submitted that rather than completing repairs needed to comply with the notice of violation he would rather move into the dwelling and use it for his own residential occupation.
Procedural Errors
Landlord omitted one of the N12 notices served on the Tenant in the last two years in the application.
Tenant
Actions
Tenant lives in the rental unit with her partner and testified that the housing market in Oshawa is particularly difficult.
Procedural Errors
Tenant's representative raised a preliminary issue with respect to the Landlord's application, stating that the Landlord failed to comply with section 71.1 (4) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 by not indicating all the N12 notices served on the Tenant in the last two years.
Decision Summary
The tenancy is terminated. The Tenant must move out of the rental unit on or before February 28, 2023. If the unit is not vacated by that date, the Landlord may file the order with the Court Enforcement Office (Sheriff) so that the eviction may be enforced starting March 1, 2023.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
376
Landlord Favorable
94.7%
Tenant Favorable
1.9%
Mutual Agreement
3.5%
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.