Landlord Wins Eviction Case for Illegal Smoke Detector Removal: RPM Advantage Windsor v Meyers 2021
Windsor landlord wins eviction case after tenants removed smoke detectors from rental unit
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 26, 2024
Case Summary
783 Hall Avenue, Windsor, ON N9A2L9
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Landlord
$186
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Sep 2020
Hearing Date
Mar 2021
Order Date
Apr 8, 2021
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenants due to their removal of smoke detectors from the rental unit, which is an illegal act.
Determinations
- Landlord served valid N6 notice alleging illegal act
- Landlord's witness testified about smoke detector removal
- Tenant's testimony about smoke detector removal not credible
- Removal of smoke detectors is an illegal act
- Tenants' conduct can be easily corrected
Case Study
The Landlord proved that the Tenants removed smoke detectors from the rental unit, which is an illegal act. However, the Tenants' personal circumstances, including disabilities and financial hardship, warrant relief from eviction, subject to conditions.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued the Tenants' conduct of removing smoke detectors was an illegal act.
Actions
Landlord's witness testified about finding missing and tampered smoke detectors during inspections.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant claimed property manager instructed them to remove a smoke detector.
Actions
Tenants removed smoke detectors from the rental unit.
Decision Summary
The Tenants are ordered to pay the Landlord $186 for the application fee. If the Tenants fail to comply with the order to not remove or tamper with life safety equipment, the Landlord may apply to terminate the tenancy without further notice. The Tenants' personal circumstances warrant relief from eviction, subject to the conditions in the order.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
366
Landlord Favorable
77.9%
Tenant Favorable
13.7%
Mutual Agreement
8.5%
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.