Trogele v Kang
Tenant wins · Oakville · 2025-10-31
- Adjudicator
- Nicole Pedron
- Dispute
- Maintenance
- Notice
- Maintenance (T6)
- Amount
- <$5K
- Landlord
- Q.K.
- Tenant
- J.T., A.J.
- Landlord rep
- Yun Tao Li
- Tenant rep
- Michelle Mont
What happened
The Tenants applied for an order determining that the Landlord failed to meet maintenance obligations regarding a swimming pool, a refrigerator, a decorative pond, and mold issues within the rental unit. The Tenants sought rent abatement and reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses. The Landlord contended that they acted reasonably in addressing repairs and that certain items, like the pond and pool salt cell generator, were not maintenance breaches under the Act.
The ruling
The Landlord is ordered to pay the Tenants $340.30, which includes a $292.30 rent abatement for mold issues and the $48.00 application filing fee. All other claims regarding the pool, fridge, and pond were dismissed as the Landlord was found to have acted reasonably or no breach of the Act was established.