Real Estate

Bill 184 Your thoughts.

  • Last Updated:
  • Jul 8th, 2020 1:35 pm
Tags:
10 replies
Deal Addict
Jan 12, 2017
1637 posts
963 upvotes
I see all the cartoons floating around that explain equity, and they hit that on the head great, but then, like people who take all the credit, fail to tackle the real problem - how to create equitable situations that don't function as a permanent parasitic burden on the same groups. You might wonder how that relates to Bill 184...

IMO, Bill 184 makes it clear that universal income, one set at a level of minimum basic needs (housing/shelter, food and internet) in the municipality you live, is essential as a foundation to begin fixing society's equity issues. Rather than setting minimum basic housing cost at local rent, setting it at number that supports a sustainable but no frills landlord in an average part of town would go far in making sure units are available.
ilim wrote: Seems nothing drastically changed IMO, but of course those tenants who are enjoying free ride protesting that soon it may be over.

https://www.cp24.com/news/advocates-say ... -1.5009924
Deal Addict
Jan 12, 2017
1637 posts
963 upvotes
Someone should sell the protesters a reusable sign that allows them to change what they're protesting on any given day. LOL

Could be a good business opportunity. Just don't try to rent it or you might lose money.
joepipe wrote: more reason I will never live downtown, the protests are becoming a complete joke....
Deal Expert
Feb 29, 2008
19086 posts
17424 upvotes
Tarrana & The Ri…
How the he’ll are landlords getting an unfair advantage?
Sr. Member
Jul 7, 2019
768 posts
635 upvotes
JayLove06 wrote: How the he’ll are landlords getting an unfair advantage?
It mentions that Landlords can now propose unfair repayment terms and if the Tenant disagrees, the Landlord now has grounds to evict without a hearing?
Deal Expert
Feb 29, 2008
19086 posts
17424 upvotes
Tarrana & The Ri…
MotoCross817 wrote: It mentions that Landlords can now propose unfair repayment terms and if the Tenant disagrees, the Landlord now has grounds to evict without a hearing?
I don't see a problem with that. You're not paying rent...the terms to pay it back should be at the landlord's discretion. You hope the tenant and landlord can work something out but if the tenant doesn't like the terms, they should move. It's not like the landlord has a strong chance at recouping the lost rent.
Sr. Member
Nov 22, 2017
931 posts
683 upvotes
JayLove06 wrote: I don't see a problem with that. You're not paying rent...the terms to pay it back should be at the landlord's discretion. You hope the tenant and landlord can work something out but if the tenant doesn't like the terms, they should move. It's not like the landlord has a strong chance at recouping the lost rent.
For those that abused the system sure. But there's also good tenants who legitimately did lose their jobs for the past 4 months. Imagine someone that is locked into a good rent say $2000/month and the landlord asked for $8000 on day 1 of the Bill. Its a tough pill to swallow. The government should have just come up with a reasonable payment timeline like for example, pay 1000 extra per month until you are caught up. Now of course if you didn't find a job or get rehired back than its probably time to move in a low cost of living city or make other arrangements with friends/family.
Member
May 4, 2010
260 posts
253 upvotes
Ottawa
MotoCross817 wrote: It mentions that Landlords can now propose unfair repayment terms and if the Tenant disagrees, the Landlord now has grounds to evict without a hearing?
From the article:
If a tenant refuses the landlord's offer, they can still take their matter before the board
The landlord would have to offer terms significantly better than the LTB might, with the incentive of bypassing them for noncompliance.
Deal Expert
Feb 29, 2008
19086 posts
17424 upvotes
Tarrana & The Ri…
Extrahard wrote: For those that abused the system sure. But there's also good tenants who legitimately did lose their jobs for the past 4 months. Imagine someone that is locked into a good rent say $2000/month and the landlord asked for $8000 on day 1 of the Bill. Its a tough pill to swallow. The government should have just come up with a reasonable payment timeline like for example, pay 1000 extra per month until you are caught up. Now of course if you didn't find a job or get rehired back than its probably time to move in a low cost of living city or make other arrangements with friends/family.
The bad tenants ruin it for the good tenants just like the bad landlords ruin it for the good ones. Yea it sucks but the landlord can't be the only one taking the fall for it. This is why the govenment should have paid the landlord directly instead of helping out people that shouldn't have gotten CERB.

Lets be real, the landlord knows they're likely not getting paid so they ask for the money back, you can't pay then bye. You got 4 months of free rent. I don't know how the government thought someone who lost their job would have the money to pay back the landlord. Just not practical.

The tenant STILL wins in the end if they take the necessary steps.

Top