Landlord Wins Unauthorized Occupancy Case: Boufounos v Lam 2024
LTB rules Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to occupant in Oshawa rental dispute
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: September 12, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 326 Surrey Dr, Oshawa, ON L1G6H1
Decision in favor of
landlord
Previous Order
Upheld
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Dec 2023
Order Date
Jan 22, 2024
Dispute Summary
John Boufounos (the Occupant) applied for an order to determine whether the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 applies. CB was the tenant who terminated her tenancy pursuant to an N11 agreement, and the Landlord filed an L3 application. The Landlord and CB argued that the Act does not apply, while the Occupant argued that it does.
Determinations
- Occupant was not a tenant or subtenant as defined by the Act
- Occupant was a roommate of the tenant CB
- Tenancy between Landlord and CB was terminated pursuant to an N11 agreement
Case Study
The evidence establishes that the Occupant was not a tenant or subtenant as defined by the Act. The Occupant was a roommate of the tenant CB, and the tenancy was terminated pursuant to an N11 agreement between the Landlord and CB. The Act does not apply to the Occupant's situation.
Decision Summary
The Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 does not apply to the Occupant's situation. The request to review order LTB-L-084002-23 is withdrawn, and the order is confirmed. The interim order issued on November 10, 2023 is cancelled, and the stay of order LTB-L-084002-23 is lifted.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
71
Landlord Favorable
80.3%
Tenant Favorable
11.3%
Mutual Agreement
8.4%
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.