DRAKE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT v Mohan

The landlord representative submitted that the permits required to facilitate the work proposed as per the N13 Notice had been obtained, the tenant had been compensated according to the Act, and based on the evidence and testimony presented vacant possession was required due to the scope of work, length of time required and potential health risks to the tenant. The landlord representative requested that the adjudicator consider the rights of the landlord as well as those of the tenant as prescribed by the Residential Tenancies Act.

The tenant representative submitted that the landlord had failed to prove that vacant possession was a requirement, citing the testimony of the plumbing inspector that contradicted the landlord's witnesses regarding timelines. The tenant representative also alleged that the landlord's pattern of behavior, seeking vacant possession to renovate the rental unit so that they may rent it out at a higher rate, calls into question the necessity for the proposed renovations and real motivations behind the landlord's application.

Tenant Debbie Mohan testified that she and her family had been living in the rental unit since 2014 and were prepared to temporarily stay with friends but due to ongoing cancer treatment was resolute in her desire to remain in the rental unit due to her health and proximity to health care resources.