Landlord Wins Substantial Interference Case: Gosford Property Management Inc. v Ashman and Wray
Landlord wins substantial interference case, tenants ordered to keep backyard clean for one year
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 26, 2024
Case Summary
81 Gosford Boulevard, Toronto, ON M3N2G9
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Landlord
$186
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Apr 2021
Hearing Date
Aug 2021
Order Date
Nov 30, 2021
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenants due to substantial interference with the reasonable enjoyment or lawful right, privilege or interest of the Landlord or another tenant. The Landlord submitted photographic evidence showing the backyard of the rental unit was cluttered and the Tenants' dog was walking around without a leash in the residential complex.
Determinations
- Tenants were in possession of the rental unit as of the hearing date
- Parties had arrived at a consent to resolve the application prior to the hearing
- Photographic evidence confirmed the allegations in the N5 Notice
- Tenants agreed to keep the backyard clean and tidy for one year
- Landlord is entitled to the application filing fee from the Tenants
Case Study
The Tenants have substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment or lawful right, privilege or interest of the Landlord or another tenant by failing to keep their backyard in a state of ordinary cleanliness. However, the Landlord is granted relief from eviction subject to the conditions set out in the order.
Arguments and Actions
Tenant
Actions
Tenants failed to keep their backyard in a state of ordinary cleanliness.
Decision Summary
The Tenants shall ensure that their backyard remains clean and tidy for a period of one year following the date of this order. If the Tenants fail to comply, the Landlord may apply to the Board for an order terminating the tenancy and evicting the Tenants. The Tenants shall pay the Landlord $186.00 for the cost of filing the application. If the Tenants do not pay the full amount by December 31, 2021, they will start to owe simple interest at 2.00% annually on the outstanding balance.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
696
Landlord Favorable
92.5%
Tenant Favorable
1.9%
Mutual Agreement
5.6%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Application Fee
$186
Total Owing
$186 (Owed to Landlord)
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.