Dong v Tara - LTB Ruling on Substantial Interference Dispute
LTB preserves North York tenancy with conditions after landlords allege substantial interference by tenant
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: October 13, 2024
Case Summary
Unit ****, 35 Deevale Rd, North York, ON M3M1Z2
Dispute resolved in
agreement
Balance Owed to Landlord
$186
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Dec 2023
Hearing Date
Mar 2024
Order Date
Mar 25, 2024
Dispute Summary
Landlords applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict the Tenant due to the Tenant substantially interfering with the Landlords' and other tenants' reasonable enjoyment of the residential complex. The Landlords alleged the Tenant changed the lock, disabled the security system, illegally accessed a vacant room, installed blinds without permission, played loud music, and threatened other tenants.
Determinations
- Landlords partially successful in proving grounds for termination
- Tenant in possession on application date
- Rental unit is a single bedroom in a house with 8 other rooms
- Lawful monthly rent is $800
- Tenant voided some issues in N5 notice but continued disruptive behavior
- Landlords' evidence on harassment allegations was vague and inconclusive
- Termination of tenancy is a remedy of last resort
- Tenant shall compensate Landlords for application filing fee
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlords sought immediate termination of tenancy due to Tenant's continued disruptive behavior and noise complaints from other tenants.
Actions
Landlords alleged Tenant changed lock, disabled security system, illegally accessed vacant room, installed blinds without permission, played loud music, and threatened other tenants.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued most of the allegations in N5 notice were remedied promptly and Landlords did not provide sufficient evidence to support the claims.
Actions
Tenant acknowledged disabling security camera in kitchen due to privacy concerns, but said cameras were enabled after police intervention. Tenant also installed removable blinds on main door for shade and privacy.
Decision Summary
The tenancy shall be preserved on the condition that the Tenant comply with the terms of this order, which include not playing loud music or causing excessive noise that disrupts the peaceful enjoyment of others. If the Tenant fails to comply, the Landlord may apply for an order terminating the tenancy and evicting the Tenant. The Tenant shall pay the Landlords $186 for the cost of filing the application.
Reason for Eviction Relief
Termination of tenancy is a remedy of last resort and the Landlords did not fully meet the burden of proof
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
338
Landlord Favorable
84.6%
Tenant Favorable
9.8%
Mutual Agreement
5.6%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Lawful Rent
$800
Application Fee
$186
Total Owing
$186 (Owed to Landlord)
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.