Skip to content

Landlord ordered to pay $2,300 for termination of tenancy

A former tenant of a Westfort apartment asked for the maximum allowable $15,000 in damages.
landlord-tenant-law

THUNDER BAY — Landlords who terminate tenancies under "no fault" provisions of Ontario legislation must take care to ensure they adhere strictly to those provisions, and that they complete the paperwork properly.

Otherwise, as a Thunder Bay homeowner learned this year, they could find themselves having to pay compensation.

She was exercising her legal rights when she asked a tenant to leave so she could occupy her home's basement apartment herself.

Because it was actually two of her family members who moved into the unit, the landlord ended up having to compensate the tenant to the tune of about $2,300, but this was well short of the $15,000 – the maximum permitted – the tenant was seeking.

Details of the ruling in the case by the province's Landlord and Tenant Board were just recently made public.

Under Ontario law, one of the situations where a no fault termination of tenancy is allowed is when landlords require the apartment because they, a member of their immediate family, or their caregiver wishes to move into the unit.

In the case of a basement apartment in Westfort, in September 2022 the owner of the property handed a tenant an N12 Notice of Termination  indicating she intended to occupy it herself as of December 1.

The landlord was already living upstairs on the main floor.

When the tenant moved out in November, and learned the landlord's sister and nephew were taking over the unit, she applied to the Landlord and Tenant Board for $15,000 in general damages.

Both parties attended the subsequent hearing.

The landlord did not deny that two family members had moved into the apartment, but said she had misunderstood the N12 form, did not serve it in bad faith, and simply made a mistake.

She testified her relationship with the tenant had always been good, and that she took steps to help the tenant find another place to stay, including providing a letter of reference that noted her sister and nephew were taking over the tenant's unit.

The landlord said the two family members act as her caregivers, and that she can't manage to use the stairs to get to the basement unit.

But the officer who conducted the hearing said he wasn't satisfied "as the landlord's testimony seems to suggest, that this arrangement is akin to her taking over the rental unit or turning the rental unit into one big family home."

He said she was aware at the time she served notice to her tenant that her sister and nephew would be moving in "to provide care services for her, and the form clearly allows her to select this as an option," yet she chose not to.

Since she had also testified that she rarely visits the basement and is restricted from doing so, the officer said he was satisfied "this was an application served in bad faith."

In determining an appropriate remedy, he took into account the additional $150/mo the tenant is paying for her new apartment, and ordered the landlord to reimburse her for one year of the additional cost, for a total of $1,800.

He rejected the tenant's application for a much higher award, adding that he was mindful of the fact the landlord has a limited income, and did not benefit from the tenant's eviction financially since her sister and nephew are paying the same rent she had charged the tenant.

But he did grant an additional award of $500 to underscore the importance of using the N12 form correctly, and to compensate the tenant for her stress and inconvenience.

He also ordered the landlord to pay the tenant a further $48 to cover the cost of filing for a hearing.




Gary Rinne

About the Author: Gary Rinne

Born and raised in Thunder Bay, Gary started part-time at Tbnewswatch in 2016 after retiring from the CBC
Read more


Comments 8

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks