Tenant Wins Right of First Refusal Case: Van der Meiden v Moniz 2024
Tenant awarded $11843 after landlord fails to allow move-back after renovations in Hamilton
Summarized by RentZenLast updated: October 13, 2024
Case Summary
309 Strathearn Avenue, Hamilton, ON L8H5K8
Decision in favor of
tenant
Balance Owed to Tenant
$11,843
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Agree with the ruling?
Timeline
Application Date
Jan 2023
Hearing Date
Nov 2023
Order Date
Feb 20, 2024
Dispute Summary
Tenant applied for an order determining that the Landlord was required to allow the Tenant to move back into the unit under section 53 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 and failed to do so. The Landlord had given the Tenant an N13 Notice of Termination to carry out major renovations, and the Tenant notified the Landlord of his intention to move back in once the renovations were complete, but the Landlord did not allow the Tenant to move back in.
Determinations
- Tenant proved allegations on a balance of probabilities
- Landlord gave Tenant N13 Notice to vacate for renovations
- Tenant notified Landlord of intent to move back in
- Landlord failed to allow Tenant to occupy unit after renovations
Arguments and Actions
Landlord
Actions
Landlord claimed he did not receive Tenant's written notice, but then sent email confirming Tenant's intent to move back in. Landlord later said unit would not be available due to financial constraints.
Tenant
Actions
Tenant notified Landlord in writing of intent to move back in after renovations, but Landlord did not allow Tenant to move back in.
Decision Summary
The Tenant proved the allegations in the application on a balance of probabilities. The Landlord was required to allow the Tenant to move back into the unit under section 53 of the Act, but failed to do so. The Tenant is awarded $6,790.08 for increased rent, $5,000 for general compensation, and the Landlord is ordered to pay a $1,000 administrative fine.
Adjudicator Details
LTB Member
Total Orders
470
Landlord Favorable
96.2%
Tenant Favorable
3.2%
Mutual Agreement
0.6%
Need assistance from an expert?
Sponsored
Financial Details
Lawful Rent
$705
Application Fee
$53
Administrative Fine Payable to LTB
$1,000
Total Owing
$11,843 (Owed to Tenant)
Fine Payable By: 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.