Landlord Ordered to Reinstate Tenant's Fob Access - Edwards v Taitlbaum
Landlord Ordered to Restore Tenant's Fob Access in Edwards v Taitlbaum
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 22, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 197 Yonge St, Toronto, ON M5B0C1
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Tenant
$298
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Nov 2022
Order Date
Aug 31, 2023
Dispute Summary
Tenant applied for an order determining that the Landlord, superintendent, or agent of the Landlord has: entered the rental unit illegally, altered the locking system on a door giving entry to the rental unit or residential complex without providing replacement keys, and harassed, obstructed, coerced, threatened or interfered with the Tenant(s).
Determinations
- Landlord altered locking system by deactivating Tenant's fob, rendering his guests without access to the rental unit
- Landlord did not enter the rental unit illegally
- Landlord did not harass, obstruct, coerce, threaten or interfere with the Tenant
Case Study
The Tenant has proven on a balance of probabilities the allegations in part, as contained in the application. The Landlord must reinstate the fob to permit the Tenant or his guests to have access to the rental unit and pay the Tenant an abatement of rent. However, the Landlord did not enter the rental unit illegally and did not harass, obstruct, coerce, threaten or interfere with the Tenant.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued that the activated fob could only be provided to the Tenant if he were present to pick it up himself, as he did not have proper authorization from the Tenant to activate the fob for the guest's use.
Actions
Landlord attempted to change the locks of the rental unit, but was denied entry. Landlord felt their actions of deactivating the fob were warranted due to perceived safety issues.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that the Landlord should not have deactivated the fob, particularly since he was out of the country and the request for reactivation did not seem reasonable.
Actions
Tenant's guest was unable to access the condo complex due to the deactivated fob while Tenant was out of the country.
Decision Summary
The Tenant has proven that the Landlord altered the locking system by deactivating the Tenant's fob, rendering his guests without access to the rental unit. The Landlord is ordered to pay the Tenant $250 for the inconvenience and to immediately activate the fob. The Tenant's other claims were dismissed.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
270
Landlord Favorable
91.1%
Tenant Favorable
5.6%
Mutual Agreement
3.3%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Lawful Rent
$2,050
Application Fee
$48
Total Owing
$298 (Owed to Tenant)
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.