Toronto Community Housing Corporation v Bingelman - LTB Upholds Eviction Order
Toronto tenant loses bid to overturn eviction order for alleged illegal activity, despite claims of mail theft
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: November 3, 2024
Case Summary
815 Scadding Avenue, Toronto, ON M5A 4E9
Decision in favor of
landlord
Previous Order
Upheld
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Subsections of RTA Quoted
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Feb 2023
Hearing Date
Apr 2024
Order Date
Jun 3, 2024
Dispute Summary
The Landlord applied to terminate the tenancy and evict the Tenant due to the Tenant or another occupant committing an illegal act or carrying out an illegal trade, business or occupation in the rental unit or the residential complex. The Tenant requested a review of the previous order, which was granted and a hearing was held.
Determinations
- Tenant testified he did not receive the N6 notice
- Tenant alleged issues with mailbox security and mail theft
- Tenant was in the unit in February 2023 when notice was mailed
- Tenant was also in the unit in November 2023 when notice of hearing was served
- Tenant did not report mailbox issues to Landlord or police
- Tenant had access to legal counsel previously but did not respond to this notice
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
Landlord opposed the review request, suggesting the Tenant was the one stealing mail.
Tenant
Actions
Tenant testified he did not receive the N6 notice, had issues with mailbox security and mail theft, but did not report it to Landlord or police.
Decision Summary
The request to review the previous order LTB-L-015342-23 issued on February 26, 2024 is denied. The order is confirmed and remains unchanged.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
616
Landlord Favorable
90.9%
Tenant Favorable
5.0%
Mutual Agreement
4.1%
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.