Landlord Fails to Compensate Tenant, Application Dismissed - Ianni v McMullen
Landlord's application to evict tenants dismissed due to failure to properly compensate as required by law
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 26, 2024
Case Summary
168 Stevenson Road South, Oshawa, ON L1J5M2
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed to Landlord
$1,250
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Aug 2021
Order Date
Sep 22, 2021
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenants because the Landlord requires possession of the rental unit for the purpose of residential occupation. The Landlord also claimed compensation for each day the Tenants remained in the unit after the termination date.
Determinations
- Landlord failed to compensate Tenant by termination date as required by section 55.1 of the Act
- Tenant's testimony that she did not receive compensation cheque was credible
- Landlord's attempt to compensate by placing cheque in mailbox 3 days before termination date was insufficient
- Landlord had other options available to ensure Tenant was compensated
Case Study
The Landlord failed to comply with the strict requirements of section 55.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 to compensate the Tenant by the termination date. The Landlord's attempt to compensate the Tenant by placing a cheque in the mailbox 3 days before the termination date was not sufficient, and the Tenant credibly testified that she did not receive the compensation. The Landlord had other options available to ensure the Tenant was compensated, such as asking the Tenant not to pay rent for April or hand delivering the cheque. As a result, the application must be dismissed.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
The Landlord argued that the cheque must have been received because the Tenant has previously received documents placed in her mailbox.
Actions
The Landlord's son testified that he placed a compensation cheque in the Tenant's mailbox on April 27, 2021, but did not inform the Tenant or verify if the cheque was received.
Procedural Errors
The Landlord failed to comply with the strict requirements of section 55.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 to compensate the Tenant by the termination date.
Tenant
Arguments
The Tenant raised a preliminary issue based on section 55.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, which requires the landlord to compensate the tenant no later than the termination date.
Decision Summary
The Landlord's application is dismissed because the Landlord failed to comply with the strict requirements of section 55.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 to compensate the Tenant by the termination date. The Tenant must return the $1,250 compensation paid by the Landlord.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
513
Landlord Favorable
92.2%
Tenant Favorable
4.3%
Mutual Agreement
3.5%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Other Owed Amount
$1,250
Compensation paid to Tenant that must be returned
Total Owing
$1,250 (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.