Judicial Review of RGI Rent Calculation: Miller v TCHC 2022
Court orders reconsideration of 7-year rent subsidy calculation for tenant with disabled child
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Mar 2022
Order Date
Apr 4, 2022
Dispute Summary
Tenant sought judicial review of two decisions by the Toronto Community Housing Corporation RGI Review Body regarding rent calculations and eligibility for rent-geared-to-income assistance dating back to 2010. The tenant argued that her rent should have been calculated based on her actual income rather than her employment letter, due to frequent absences from work to care for her disabled child.
Determinations
- Review Body's interpretation of its rules was unreasonable
- Review Body failed to properly consider exceptional circumstances
- Review Body provided insufficient reasons for its decisions
- Application for judicial review was not barred by delay or laches
Case Study
The court found that the Review Body's interpretation of its own rules regarding time limits for reviews was unreasonable. The Review Body failed to properly consider whether the tenant's circumstances qualified as exceptional, which could have allowed for a review beyond the standard 12-month limit. The court also determined that the Review Body's reasons for its decisions were insufficient, making the decisions unreasonable.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
The Review Body argued that there was a hard 12-month cap for reviews, even in exceptional circumstances, and that the tenant's request was beyond this deadline.
Actions
TCHC filed an application with the Landlord and Tenant Board in 2010 to terminate the tenancy for non-payment of rent, but the matter was resolved without eviction. Between 2012 and 2015, the tenant negotiated four mediated agreements with TCHC related to outstanding rent arrears.
Procedural Errors
The Review Body failed to properly consider whether the tenant's circumstances qualified as exceptional, which could have allowed for a review beyond the standard 12-month limit.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that her rent should be calculated based on her actual income as shown on Notices of Assessment, rather than her employment letter, due to frequent absences from work to care for her disabled child.
Actions
Tenant has been struggling to pay rent since her youngest child was born in 2010. The child has a disability that significantly impacts the tenant's availability for employment, causing her to miss work and have reduced income.
Procedural Errors
Tenant submitted late requests for review of rent calculations, citing her child's condition and her role as sole caretaker as reasons for the delay.
Decision Summary
The court granted the application for judicial review, set aside the Review Body's decisions from February 15, 2019 and April 12, 2019, and ordered that the tenant's request for review and recalculation of RGI subsidy from 2010 through 2017 be returned to the Respondents for reconsideration by a different decision maker.
Adjudicator Details
Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Divisional Court
Total Orders
2
Landlord Favorable
50.0%
Tenant Favorable
50.0%
Mutual Agreement
0.0%
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.