Sarangan v. Morguard: Tenants' Appeal Dismissed in Mould Damage Case
Tenants' appeal dismissed, ordered to pay $24352 for mould damage caused by maintaining excessive humidity in rental unit
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: August 16, 2024
Case Summary
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed to Landlord
$26,852
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
May 2018
Order Date
May 7, 2018
Dispute Summary
The landlord applied to terminate the tenancy and sought compensation for mould removal allegedly caused by tenants' willful or negligent conduct. The Landlord and Tenant Board granted the application, terminating the tenancy and ordering tenants to pay $24,351.50 for repair costs. Tenants appealed the decision to the Divisional Court.
Determinations
- Tenants kept hot and humid conditions in the unit
- Landlord's representative warned tenants about hot and humid conditions
- Tenants persisted in maintaining unsuitable conditions
- Damage was reasonably foreseeable to tenants
- Damage was not due to lack of repair or maintenance by landlord
Case Study
The court found no error of law in the LTB Member's decision. The Member had evidence to support the conclusion that the tenants negligently caused mould damage and that it was reasonably foreseeable to them. The Member's reasons were found to be specific, detailed, and adequate.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Arguments
Landlord argued that tenants' negligence caused mould damage and sought termination of tenancy and compensation.
Actions
Landlord's Assistant Property Manager inspected the unit in February 2013 and found it unusually hot and humid, like a 'tropical forest'.
Tenant
Arguments
Tenants argued that the LTB Member found negligence without evidence and provided inadequate reasons.
Actions
Tenants kept hot and humid conditions in the unit because they thought it would create a better environment for their family.
Aggravating Factors
Tenants persisted in maintaining hot and humid conditions in the unit despite being warned by the landlord's representative.
Decision Summary
The Divisional Court dismissed the tenants' appeal of the LTB decision. The court found no error of law in the LTB's ruling that terminated the tenancy and ordered the tenants to pay $24,351.50 for mould damage repair costs. The court also ordered the tenants to pay $2,500 in legal costs to the landlord.
Adjudicator Details
Divisional Court
Total Orders
6
Landlord Favorable
66.7%
Tenant Favorable
33.3%
Mutual Agreement
0.0%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Damages
$24,352
Other Owed Amount
$2,500
Legal costs awarded to landlord
Total Owing
$26,852 (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.