ML v TLP

Tenant wins · 2016-12-02

Dispute

Harassment, Substantial Interference

Landlord

M.L.M., E.L.E.

Tenant

T.L.P.T.

Landlord rep

A. H. (AH), B. H. (BH), A. F. (AF)

Tenant rep

L. T. (LT)

What happened

Landlord ML applied for an order to terminate the tenancy and evict Tenant TLP because Landlord ML claims to have entered into an agreement of purchase and sale of the rental unit and the purchaser requires possession of the rental unit for the purpose of residential occupation. Tenant TLP filed two applications alleging that Landlords ML and EL harassed, obstructed, coerced, threatened or interfered with the Tenant and substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment of the rental unit or residential complex by the Tenant.

The ruling

Landlord ML's L2 application is dismissed. Landlord ML is prohibited from communicating with the Tenant, her spouse or her children. The Landlords must pay the Tenant $4,368 as a rent abatement and pay a $5,000 administrative fine to the Board. Landlord ML's representatives, AH and BH, must also pay costs to the Board and the Tenant's lawyer.