Sewell v Medallion Corporation: Unauthorized Subtenancy Case in Toronto
Toronto tenant determined to be unauthorized occupant, not subtenant, eviction upheld
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 22, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 6 Vena Way, Toronto, ON M9M0G2
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Dec 2021
Order Date
Feb 14, 2022
Dispute Summary
Tenant filed applications to determine if the Residential Tenancies Act applies and to claim illegal charges by the Landlords. The dispute arose from an unauthorized subtenancy agreement between Tenant and one of the Landlords, without the consent of the primary Landlord.
Determinations
- Landlord did not consent to subletting
- No deemed assignment of tenancy occurred
- Tenant has no standing before the Board
- Tenant was an unauthorized occupant
- Tenant was not a tenant or subtenant as defined by the Act
Case Study
The Tenant's application was dismissed because the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply in this case. The Tenant was determined to be an unauthorized occupant rather than a subtenant as defined by the Act. The Landlord discovered the unauthorized occupancy and filed an application to evict within the 60-day limitation period, preventing a deemed assignment of tenancy. As an unauthorized occupant, the Tenant has no standing to bring an application before the Landlord and Tenant Board.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlords argued that the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply and the Board does not have jurisdiction over the matter.
Actions
Landlord 1 discovered the unauthorized occupancy on August 5, 2020, and filed an A2 application to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenant on October 1, 2020.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that the Residential Tenancies Act applies to her situation and that she was charged more than the lawful monthly rent.
Actions
Tenant entered into a subtenancy agreement with Landlord 2 without the consent of Landlord 1. Tenant moved into the rental unit on or around January 15, 2020.
Procedural Errors
Tenant entered into an unauthorized subtenancy agreement without the consent of the primary Landlord.
Decision Summary
The Tenant's T1 application is dismissed. The Residential Tenancies Act does not apply in this case as the Tenant was determined to be an unauthorized occupant, not a subtenant. The Landlord and Tenant Board does not have jurisdiction over the matter.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
891
Landlord Favorable
92.1%
Tenant Favorable
5.4%
Mutual Agreement
2.4%
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.