Landlord Wins Shared Accommodation Dispute: Solomon v Lichtel
LTB rules Residential Tenancies Act does not apply to rental unit where landlord and tenant share kitchen
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: September 12, 2024
Case Summary
8 McElroy Court, Caledon East, ON L7C3X2
Decision in favor of
landlord
Balance Owed
-
Dispute Categories
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Hearing Date
Sep 2023
Order Date
Sep 27, 2023
Dispute Summary
The Tenant applied for an order determining that the Landlord collected or retained money illegally.
Determinations
- Landlord and Tenant share a kitchen
- Tenant was aware of shared accommodation at tenancy commencement
- Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 does not apply
Case Study
The Landlord's Legal Representative asserted that the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 does not apply as the Landlord and the Tenant share a kitchen. The Tenant was aware at the time she entered the tenancy agreement that it was a shared accommodation with the Landlord and that she was required to share a kitchen with the Landlord. The Board found that it does not have jurisdiction to consider the Tenant's application because the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 does not apply to this rental unit.
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
The Landlord testified the residential complex consists of four bedrooms and three and a half bathrooms, and the Tenant's bedroom and sitting room were located on the upper floor. The Landlord further testified the Tenant had access to a powder room on the main floor as well as the kitchen on the main floor which was shared with the Landlord, and there is only one kitchen in the residential complex.
Tenant
Actions
The Tenant testified she was aware the Landlord resided at the rental unit at the commencement of her tenancy, and she has her own bathroom and is not required to share a bathroom with the Landlord. The Tenant also testified there was space in the basement where tenants could go to have their own space, with a mini fridge, coffee maker and cabinets for food storage.
Decision Summary
The Board found that the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 does not apply to this rental unit, and the Tenant's application is dismissed.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
788
Landlord Favorable
51.6%
Tenant Favorable
3.0%
Mutual Agreement
45.3%
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.