Stoley v Richcraft Rental Limited Partnership
Last updated: August 9, 2026
Order
Dispute resolved in
Agreement
Dispute Categories
Subsections of RTA Quoted
Agree with the ruling?
Citation: Stoley v Richcraft Rental Limited Partnership, LTB-T-085651-25
File Number: LTB-T-085651-25
Timeline
Hearing Date
Mar 2026
Order Date
Mar 23, 2026
Decision
The parties consented to an order where the Landlord shall pay the Tenant $4,800.00 via rent ledger credit to resolve all issues.
Dispute
Tenant applied for determination of illegal entry and unauthorized alteration of locks by Landlord.
Determinations
- The parties reached a settlement on the issues of illegal entry and altered locks.
Landlord's Arguments
Actions and Evidence
The Landlord agreed to provide compensation to the Tenant to resolve the dispute.
Considerations
Tenant's Arguments
Actions and Evidence
The Tenant alleged that the Landlord entered the rental unit illegally and altered locking systems without providing replacement keys.
Considerations
Need assistance from an expert?
Similar Cases
Click to switch between order outcomes
Marcocchio v Livyy
The LTB terminated the tenancy for non-payment of rent and determined the lawful rent after a dispute over rent increases.
The Tenant's request for a review of an order was denied as the Adjudicator found that the failure to attend the initial hearing was due to a lack of due diligence rather than a reasonable inability to participate.
The Tenant's application claiming illegal rent increases was dismissed because they had paid the increased rent for over 12 months, validating the increases under the RTA.
Marcocchio v Livyy
The tenancy was terminated for non-payment of rent, and the rent amount was adjusted due to an invalid rent increase notice.
Marcocchio v Livyy
The LTB terminated the tenancy for non-payment of rent and determined the lawful rent after a dispute over rent increases.
The Tenant's request for a review of an order was denied as the Adjudicator found that the failure to attend the initial hearing was due to a lack of due diligence rather than a reasonable inability to participate.
The Tenant's application claiming illegal rent increases was dismissed because they had paid the increased rent for over 12 months, validating the increases under the RTA.
Marcocchio v Livyy
The tenancy was terminated for non-payment of rent, and the rent amount was adjusted due to an invalid rent increase notice.
Marcocchio v Livyy
The LTB terminated the tenancy for non-payment of rent and determined the lawful rent after a dispute over rent increases.
The Tenant's request for a review of an order was denied as the Adjudicator found that the failure to attend the initial hearing was due to a lack of due diligence rather than a reasonable inability to participate.
The Tenant's application claiming illegal rent increases was dismissed because they had paid the increased rent for over 12 months, validating the increases under the RTA.
Marcocchio v Livyy
The tenancy was terminated for non-payment of rent, and the rent amount was adjusted due to an invalid rent increase notice.
Marcocchio v Livyy
The LTB terminated the tenancy for non-payment of rent and determined the lawful rent after a dispute over rent increases.
The Tenant's request for a review of an order was denied as the Adjudicator found that the failure to attend the initial hearing was due to a lack of due diligence rather than a reasonable inability to participate.
The Tenant's application claiming illegal rent increases was dismissed because they had paid the increased rent for over 12 months, validating the increases under the RTA.
Marcocchio v Livyy
The tenancy was terminated for non-payment of rent, and the rent amount was adjusted due to an invalid rent increase notice.
Giglia v DMS Property Management
The Tenant's application concerning alleged lock changes and harassment was withdrawn by request.
Sorge v Bedard
The Tenant's application for illegal entry and substantial interference was dismissed because it was filed beyond the one-year limitation period.
The Tenant's application for the return of a rent deposit was dismissed because the Tenant failed to provide required notice to terminate the tenancy.
The Landlord and Tenant Board dismissed the tenants' application for a rent reduction regarding the temporary unavailability of recreational facilities and storage lockers.
Latest Insights from Our Blog
Stay informed with expert analysis on rental law, tenant rights, and LTB decisions
The Rent Increase Rulebook: Understanding Above-Guideline Increases and Capital Expenditure Claims in Ontario
A comprehensive guide to above-guideline rent increases in Ontario, exploring how landlords justify capital expenditure claims, common pitfalls that lead to dismissed applications, and what tenants need to know about challenging these increases.
LTB Maximum Claim Amount in Ontario: What the $50,000 Cap Means for Landlords and Tenants (2025)
Ontario raised the Landlord and Tenant Board monetary limit to $50,000 on October 1, 2025. Learn how RTA section 207 works, what landlords and tenants can claim, and when to stay at the LTB vs. go to court.
Bad Faith N12 Evictions: When Landlords Abuse Personal Use Notices in Ontario
An analysis of bad faith N12 eviction cases reveals how landlords exploit personal use notices to circumvent rent control, the warning signs tenants should watch for, and the substantial financial penalties that follow.
Need Legal Help? We've Got You Covered
Whether you need to find qualified legal professionals or post your specific legal needs to get competitive quotes, our platform connects you with the right help.
Find Legal Professionals
Browse our directory of verified paralegals and lawyers specializing in Ontario rental law and LTB matters.
Browse ProfessionalsPost Your Legal Needs
Describe your legal situation and receive competitive quotes from qualified professionals in our marketplace.
Post a BountyJoin thousands of Ontarians who have found legal help through our platform