LTB's 'Pay to Stay' Orders Not Limited by Monetary Jurisdiction: Rosen v. Reed
Court affirms LTB can order full rent arrears payment, even above $35000, to void eviction
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Landlord
$50,000
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date (Estimate)
Dec 2022
Hearing Date
May 2023
Order Date
Nov 17, 2023
We estimate Application Date using rent arrears.
Dispute Summary
The Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) terminated the tenancy for non-payment of rent but ordered that the Tenant could void the termination order upon payment of the entire $50,000 in arrears plus accrued and accruing rent of $10,000 per month. The Tenant appealed, arguing that the LTB erred in ordering payment above its $35,000 monetary jurisdiction limit as a condition for voiding the termination order.
Determinations
- LTB's monetary jurisdiction limit does not apply to 'pay to stay' orders
- LTB can order payment of full rent arrears to void termination, even if over $35,000
- Interpreting the law otherwise would result in unfair windfalls to tenants
- Appeal dismissed
Case Study
The court affirmed that the LTB's monetary jurisdiction limit does not constrain its discretion to impose terms to void a termination order. The court reasoned that 'pay to stay' orders are not subject to the $35,000 limit, as they are conditions for voiding a termination order, not orders for payment of money. The court found this interpretation consistent with longstanding precedent and the purpose of the Residential Tenancies Act to protect tenants' security of tenure while ensuring landlords can recover rent owed.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued that the LTB's monetary jurisdiction limit does not apply to 'pay to stay' orders.
Actions
Landlord waived claim for payment of arrears over $35,000 to proceed before the LTB.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenant argued that the LTB's order for payment above $35,000 as a condition to void the termination order was beyond the Board's monetary jurisdiction.
Actions
Tenant failed to pay rent, accumulating $50,000 in arrears.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed the tenant's appeal, affirming that the Landlord and Tenant Board's monetary jurisdiction limit of $35,000 does not apply to 'pay to stay' orders. The court ruled that the LTB can require payment of the full rent arrears, even if exceeding $35,000, as a condition for voiding a termination order. This interpretation was found to be consistent with longstanding precedent and the purpose of the Residential Tenancies Act.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
19
Landlord Favorable
79.0%
Tenant Favorable
15.8%
Mutual Agreement
5.3%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Lawful Rent
$10,000
Rent Arrears
$50,000
Total Owing
$50,000 (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.