LTB Order LTB-T-054251-22

O. under Subsection 30 & 135 Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 Citation: C. v H., 2023 ONLTB 64554 2023 ONLTB 64554 (CanLII) Date: 2023-09-25 File Number: LTB-T-054251-22 In the matter of: A-10 Crombie Street Cambridge ON N1S 1Y4 Between: D. C. T. A. L. H. L. D. C. (the 'T.') A. F. an O. D. T. L. H.(the 'L.') failed to meet the L.’s maintenance obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (the 'Act') or failed to comply with health, safety, housing or maintenance standards. Further, the T. A. F. an O. D. T. the L. collected or retained money illegally. This application was heard by videoconference on August 9, 2023. The L.’s widow Sherry H. (‘SH’) A. the T. attended the hearing. Determinations: Preliminary Issue 1. SH testified T. she is the former wife of the L., who passed away on July 4, 2022. T1 Application 2. As explained below, the T. proved the allegations contained in the application on a balance of probabilities. Therefore, the L. must compensate the T. one month’s rent in the amount of $1,200.00 as required under s. 48.1 of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006 (the ‘Act’). The T.’s remaining claims are dismissed. 3. The T. testified T. her A. her deceased husband had paid a last month’s deposit to the L. in October of 2014. The T. did not have any record of the transaction A. testified T. she gave her husband money A. watched him hand it over to the L. over a fence. The T. is also seeking the interest on the last month’s rent deposit. O. Page 1 of 4  File Number: LTB-T-054251-22 4. The T. testified further T. the L. had served upon the T. an N12 notice of termination with a termination date of August 31, 2021. The T. testified T. the L. never paid her compensation in the amount of one month’s rent as required under s. 48.1 of the Act. 2023 ONLTB 64554 (CanLII) 5. The T. alleges further T. when she A. her husband vacated the unit, the T. was unable to afford storage or to run a yard sale, so the T. had agreed with the L. to sell her items A. the proceeds to be put in a trust. The T. testified T. she believed the L. gave her items away. 6. Having reviewed the evidence of both parties, I am not satisfied T. the T. had paid a last month’s rent deposit to the L.. The T. had no records to reflect this payment A. her evidence T. she saw her husband hand the L. cash over a fence is insufficient to prove T. the money provided was F. a last month’s rent deposit. As such, this portion of the T.’s application is dismissed. Further, while I have found T. the T. did not pay a last month’s rent deposit to the L., interest on the deposit will also not be ordered. 7. With respect to the T.’s items T. were sold, under s. 41 of the Act a L. is permitted to sell or retain property from a unit T. was vacated by notice of termination, agreement, or O.. The L. is required to wait 72 hours after the enforcement of the eviction O. before selling or retaining any items. 8. The T. failed to provide a detailed list of precisely what items were left A. sold, A. the L. testified T. the items were disposed of as what was left was essentially garbage. As such, this part of the T.’s claim is also dismissed. 9. T. said, the L. agree T. an N12 notice of termination was provided to the T. in accordance with s. 48.1 of the Act A. the L. never did pay the required one month’s rent in compensation as required by the termination date as indicated on the notice, which was August 13, 2021. As such, the L. will be ordered to pay to the T. $1,200.00 F. the one month’s compensation. T6 Application 10. The T.’s application F. maintenance was filed on June 16, 2022. The T. in her own evidence agreed T. she had vacated the unit on July 17, 2021. 11. Section 29(1)(1) of the Act allows F. a T. to apply to the Board F. an O. D. T. the L. was in violation of their maintenance responsibilities as required under s. 20 of the Act. Section 29(2) states T. no application may be made more than one year after the day the alleged conduct giving rise to the application occurred. 12. As such, considering s. 29(2), the filing of the T.’s application A. the date in which she vacated the unit, the T. was only permitted to seek a remedy from June 17, 2021, until July 17, 2021. O. Page 2 of 4  File Number: LTB-T-054251-22 13. The T. alleges in her application various A. ongoing issues with the furnace in the unit. T. said, by June 17, 2021, the issues with the unit’s furnace had been resolved. 14. Further, the T.’s application alleges T. the L. failed to maintain the unit’s roof. The T. in her evidence admitted T. no requests with respect to the roof occurred at 2023 ONLTB 64554 (CanLII) any point after 2019. 15. The T. further raised issues regarding individuals viewing the unit while it was F. sale wearing perfume, which she is allergic to. Analysis & Findings 16. I am not satisfied T. the L. failed to meet their obligations under subsection 20(1) of the Act to repair or maintain the residential complex A. did not fail to comply with maintenance standards. 17. In Onyskiw v. CJM Property Management Ltd., 2016 ONCA 477, the Court of Appeal held T. the LTB should take a contextual approach A. consider the entirety of the factual situation in D. whether there was a breach of the L.'s maintenance obligations, including whether the L. responded to the maintenance issue reasonably in the circumstances. The court rejected the submission T. a L. is automatically in breach of its maintenance obligation as soon as an interruption in service occurs. 18. In this case, no evidence was led with respect to any maintenance issues T. were not resolved by June 17, 2021, until July 17, 2021. The T. admitted T. the furnace had been working at this point. T. said, by June 15, 2021, the L. was not required to provide heat to the unit again until September. As such, this part of the T.’s application is dismissed. 19. Further, the T. admitted in her evidence T. no maintenance requests were made to the L. since 2019. Section 30(2) of the Act outlines T. in D. a remedy T. Board shall consider whether a T. or former T. advised the L. of the alleged breaches before applying to the Board. In considering the limitation period as outlined above, I am not satisfied T. the L. was in violation of their maintenance obligations regarding the unit. 20. Further, the T.’s issue regarding individuals wearing perfume would not be a maintenance issue the L. is required to address under s. 20 of the Act A. this portion of the T.’s application is dismissed. 21. The T.’s application under s. 30 of the Act is dismissed. It is ordered T.: 1. The L. shall pay the T. is $1,253.00. This amount represents:  $1,200.00 F. compensation pursuant to s. 48.1 of the Act  $53.00 F. the cost of filing the application. O. Page 3 of 4  File Number: LTB-T-054251-22 5. The L. shall pay the T. the full amount owing by October 6, 2023. 6. If the L. does not pay the T. the full amount owing by October 6, 2023, the L. will owe interest. This will be simple interest calculated from October 7, 2023 at 6.00% annually on the balance outstanding. 2023 ONLTB 64554 (CanLII) 8. The T. has the right, at any time, to collect the full amount owing or any balance outstanding under this O.. September 25, 2023 Date Issued Jagger Benham Member, L. A. T. Board 15 Grosvenor Street, Ground Floor Toronto ON M7A 2G6 If you have any questions about this O., call 416-645-8080 or toll free at 1-888-332-3234. O. Page 4 of 4