Landlord Fails to Exempt Rooming House Tenancies from Residential Tenancies Act: Wong v Sik
LTB rules Residential Tenancies Act applies to rooming house tenancies, despite Landlord's claim of exemption
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: July 26, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 423 Ossington Avenue, Toronto, ON M6J3A6
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Jan 2020
Hearing Date
May 2021
Order Date
Oct 13, 2021
Dispute Summary
The Landlord applied for an order to determine whether the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 applies to the tenancies in the rooming house. The Landlord claimed the tenancies are exempt under section 5(i) of the Act because the Tenants are required to share a kitchen with the Landlord.
Determinations
- The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 applies to the tenancies.
- The Landlord did not establish that the exemption in section 5(i) of the Act applies.
Case Study
The Landlord, as the person claiming the exemption, has the burden of proof to establish all elements of the exemption. The issue is whether the Landlord lived in the building at the relevant time. The Landlord only lived in the building 2 days a week as a convenience, not as a principal residence. The purpose of the exemption is to recognize when the owner shares essential, daily-use facilities with tenants, but that was not the case here. Following the Cowie v. Bindlish decision, the nature of the tenancy is established at the outset, and the Landlord cannot unilaterally render the tenancy exempt by moving in later.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
The Landlord testified that from when the Tenants moved in until March 2020 she lived in the residential complex two days a week and would use the kitchen not only when she stayed overnight but also to make lunch on other days. The Landlord testified that she would tell new tenants she would be staying in the house.
Tenant
Actions
Tenant CT testified that there was no arrangement at the outset of the tenancy that the Landlord would live in the house; one day CT discovered the Landlord staying in the basement late at night.
Decision Summary
The Landlord's application is dismissed. The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 applies to the tenancies in the rooming house.
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
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.