Hemmati v Kahbarian

Tenant wins · North York · 2025-05-21

Adjudicator

Amanda Kovats

Dispute

Harassment, Substantial Interference, Tenant Rights

Amount

<$5K

Landlord

M.K.

Tenant

K.H.

Landlord rep

Zeeshan Rahman

Tenant rep

Giuseppe Rizzuto

What happened

A Tenant filed for review after her application was dismissed. The review was granted on the limited issue of whether a 'no guest' clause in the lease constituted substantial interference. The lease, signed during the COVID-19 pandemic, contained a blanket prohibition on visitors. The Tenant argued this made her feel lonely and isolated. The Landlord, represented by her daughter, argued the clause was for safety due to the pandemic and another tenant's discomfort with male visitors. The Board found the blanket prohibition unreasonable and that it substantially interfered with the Tenant's reasonable enjoyment, even if not implemented with bad intent.

The ruling

The Landlord is ordered to pay the Tenant $1,377.03 by June 20, 2025. This amount includes a 20% rent abatement ($990.00) for substantial interference caused by a 'no guest' clause, a portion of the increased rent the Tenant paid after moving ($300.00), a portion of her moving costs ($39.03), and the application filing fee ($48.00). The Board found that a blanket prohibition on guests is unreasonable and interfered with the Tenant's enjoyment, even if implemented for reasons like COVID-19 safety.