Landlord Loses Rent Increase Dispute: Wilson Property Holdings Inc v Anthony
Toronto tenant wins rent increase dispute after landlord's invalid N1 notice
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 26, 2024
Case Summary
1770 Wilson Avenue, Toronto, ON M3L1A9
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed
$0
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Dec 2020
Order Date
Feb 8, 2021
Dispute Summary
Landlord applied for an order requiring Tenant to pay rent arrears. The parties disagreed on the effect of an invalid notice of rent increase.
Determinations
- N1 notice of rent increase in 2019 was invalid as it exceeded the guideline increase
- Tenant's rent did not change as a result of the invalid 2019 N1 notice
- N1 notice issued in 2020 was also invalid as it was based on the improper pre-increase amount
- Tenant's lawful monthly rent remains at $1,060.98
Case Study
The N1 notice of rent increase served by the Landlord in 2019 was invalid as it exceeded the guideline increase. The consequence of this is that the Tenant's rent did not change at all. The N1 notice issued in 2020 was also invalid as it was based on the improper pre-increase amount. Therefore, the Tenant's lawful monthly rent remains at $1,060.98, as it was before the purported increases.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
When an N1 notice is invalid because it fails to comply with s. 120 of the Act, the N1 notice should be interpreted to increase the rent to the maximum permitted by the Act.
Tenant
Arguments
The consequence of a landlord serving an N1 notice that fails to comply with s. 120 of the Act should be that the lawful rent remains as the pre-increase rent; the increase claimed is illegal and so the landlord is not entitled to any increase.
Decision Summary
The Landlord's application is dismissed. The Tenant's lawful monthly rent remains at $1,060.98, as it was before the purported increases. The Tenant was not in arrears at the time the application was filed, so the Landlord is not entitled to an order that the Tenant pay the cost of the filing fee.
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
Lawful Rent
$1,061
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.