Landlords Avoid Bad Faith Eviction Claim: Park and Cho v Wang and Wu
Landlords avoid bad faith eviction claim in Markham rental dispute
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 22, 2024
Case Summary
11 Carter Place, Markham, ON L6C2K4
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Jan 2021
Hearing Date
Feb 2022
Order Date
Feb 28, 2022
Dispute Summary
Tenants applied for an order determining that Landlords gave a notice of termination in bad faith. The Landlords served the Tenants with a notice of termination under section 48 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, and the Tenants vacated the rental unit. The Landlords then listed the rental unit for lease and re-rented it shortly after. The central issue was whether the Landlords genuinely intended to move into the rental unit when they served the notice of termination.
Determinations
- Landlords did not move into the rental unit
- Landlords listed the rental unit for lease and re-rented it within one year
- Landlords rebutted the presumption of bad faith
- Landlords' testimony was credible regarding their intentions when serving the notice
- Tenants moved out as a result of the Landlords' notice
- Tenants were served a notice of termination under section 48 of the Act
Case Study
The Landlords bore the burden of proving that the notice of termination was served in good faith, as they had listed the rental unit for rent and re-rented it within the one-year period. The Landlord's testimony, which was detailed, consistent, and supported by documentary evidence, was found to be credible regarding his intentions when serving the notice of termination. The Landlords were able to rebut the presumption of bad faith, and the Tenants' application was dismissed.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
Landlord's wife faced significant personal challenges in 2020, including the death of her mother, a house fire, and travel restrictions due to COVID-19. The Landlords intended to move into the rental unit after the Tenants vacated, but the Landlord's wife ultimately decided she could not handle another move due to the stress she had experienced.
Decision Summary
The Tenants' application was dismissed. The Landlords were able to rebut the presumption of bad faith in serving the notice of termination.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
313
Landlord Favorable
82.8%
Tenant Favorable
11.8%
Mutual Agreement
5.4%
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.