Tenant's Substantial Interference Claim Dismissed: Stosic v Grandview Tarrece 2024
Tenant's claim of substantial interference dismissed by LTB after landlord demonstrated reasonable actions
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: November 14, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 41 Sutherland St W, Caledonia, ON N3W1L1
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Subsections of RTA Quoted
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Aug 2024
Order Date
Sep 3, 2024
Dispute Summary
Tenant filed an application alleging substantial interference with reasonable enjoyment due to vehicles idling and a verbal altercation with another tenant, claiming the landlord did not address her complaints.
Determinations
- Tenant did not prove allegations of substantial interference
- Landlord responded reasonably to vehicle idling complaints
- Landlord addressed tenant conflict appropriately
- Tenant initiated confrontation with another tenant
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Took reasonable actions to address tenant's complaints
Actions
Offered to relocate tenant, contacted municipality about idling vehicles, spoke to Holly about the incident
Tenant
Arguments
Landlord substantially interfered with reasonable enjoyment by not addressing vehicle idling and tenant conflict
Actions
Tenant complained about vehicles idling and had a verbal altercation with another tenant, Holly, and tried to prevent her from using the elevator
Decision Summary
The application is dismissed as the Tenant did not prove substantial interference with reasonable enjoyment of the rental unit.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
938
Landlord Favorable
84.0%
Tenant Favorable
10.3%
Mutual Agreement
5.7%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
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.