Real Estate

Condo short term rental implication

  • Last Updated:
  • Aug 12th, 2021 6:50 pm
[OP]
Deal Addict
Jun 18, 2018
1509 posts
951 upvotes
Toronto

Condo short term rental implication

Basically, I had rented out my unit for 9 months to a group under one lease (min required from condo corporation to prevent short term rentals).. and a few months in they decided they want to move-out and provided N9 and 60 days notice (as per the rules)

The tenants were nice enough to find others who are acceptable to me to take it for 1 year.

Will my condo corporation make a fuss about it/can they do anything about it since technically their stay wasn't 9 months?
10 replies
Deal Expert
Feb 29, 2008
19071 posts
17397 upvotes
Tarrana & The Ri…
Electrah wrote: Basically, I had rented out my unit for 9 months to a group under one lease (min required from condo corporation to prevent short term rentals).. and a few months in they decided they want to move-out and provided N9 and 60 days notice (as per the rules)

The tenants were nice enough to find others who are acceptable to me to take it for 1 year.

Will my condo corporation make a fuss about it/can they do anything about it since technically their stay wasn't 9 months?
Why would they? People break leases all the time.
Deal Addict
Feb 19, 2019
1773 posts
2715 upvotes
Stouffville ON
Electrah wrote:

Will my condo corporation make a fuss about it/can they do anything about it since technically their stay wasn't 9 months?
You have nothing to worry about.
Full Time and Full Service Realtor
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 2, 2012
4392 posts
2562 upvotes
Toronto
Electrah wrote: Basically, I had rented out my unit for 9 months to a group under one lease (min required from condo corporation to prevent short term rentals).. and a few months in they decided they want to move-out and provided N9 and 60 days notice (as per the rules)

The tenants were nice enough to find others who are acceptable to me to take it for 1 year.

Will my condo corporation make a fuss about it/can they do anything about it since technically their stay wasn't 9 months?
Sounds fine since the original lease was for the required 9 months. You can't control if a tenant's situation changes and they need to move for whatever reason.
[OP]
Deal Addict
Jun 18, 2018
1509 posts
951 upvotes
Toronto
rob444 wrote: Sounds fine since the original lease was for the required 9 months. You can't control if a tenant's situation changes and they need to move for whatever reason.
On the N9, I noticed it says "If the tenancy is for a fixed term (for example, a lease for one year), the termination date cannot be earlier than the last date of the fixed term."

I perceive that as it can't be earlier then the 9 months? Seems more like a formality form that they won't be renting month to month after the lease and not ending the lease early unless I am missing something.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
13006 posts
9961 upvotes
Edmonton
Electrah wrote: On the N9, I noticed it says "If the tenancy is for a fixed term (for example, a lease for one year), the termination date cannot be earlier than the last date of the fixed term."

I perceive that as it can't be earlier then the 9 months? Seems more like a formality form that they won't be renting month to month after the lease and not ending the lease early unless I am missing something.
The correct form was likely the N11 (mutual agreement to end lease). The N9 should have been used at the end of the 9 month term (the fixed term) if they didn’t want to go to a monthly lease.

There’s a reason why the N11 is signed by both landlord and tenant, and the N9 is only signed by the tenant. One is an agreement between the two parties of the lease, the other is a notice from one party to the other.

C
Deal Fanatic
Jul 3, 2011
6517 posts
3788 upvotes
Thornhill
Wrong form but because you accepted it, it's fine.

The condo corp shouldn't have an issue, but if you do it again, they'll probably come after you for circumventing the by-laws. Just make sure your lease agreement doesn;t have any terminology in it that allows a tenant to terminate the agreement ahead of the expiry date.
Deal Fanatic
Mar 21, 2010
6575 posts
3726 upvotes
Toronto
Even if they don't like it, what are they going to do? At the most they would tell you that no short-term rentals are allowed, and if you kept having short-term rentals that they would fine you or something. That's not going to happen because you now have a lease for one year.

You know you don't have to agree to terminate the lease, right? You can always force the tenant to find someone to sublease if they want to move out ahead of time. They're not "nice enough" to find someone else to take over; that's the minimum they can do. They signed up for 9 months (or a year) and are bound to that; unless you allowed them to put an exceptional term in the lease (don't), they can't unilaterally decide to leave after a few months and stop paying.
Deal Fanatic
Jul 3, 2011
6517 posts
3788 upvotes
Thornhill
Manatus wrote: Even if they don't like it, what are they going to do? At the most they would tell you that no short-term rentals are allowed, and if you kept having short-term rentals that they would fine you or something. That's not going to happen because you now have a lease for one year.
The corporation has the remedy of fines - large fines and if the owner continues to break the rules they can seek a court enforcement - tenant eviction and owner compliance. An owner would not want to defy a court order. Not only would it eventually become costly for the owner but it can ultimately lead to a forced sale depending on how often it happens and any consequences to the other residents of the continued breach.

To presume nothing would come of it flies in the face of the fact that a condo corp is alllowed to create and enforce by-laws and rules a condo corporation for the benefit of community ownership/living of allowners and residents.
Deal Fanatic
Mar 21, 2010
6575 posts
3726 upvotes
Toronto
licenced wrote: The corporation has the remedy of fines - large fines and if the owner continues to break the rules they can seek a court enforcement - tenant eviction and owner compliance. An owner would not want to defy a court order. Not only would it eventually become costly for the owner but it can ultimately lead to a forced sale depending on how often it happens and any consequences to the other residents of the continued breach.

To presume nothing would come of it flies in the face of the fact that a condo corp is alllowed to create and enforce by-laws and rules a condo corporation for the benefit of community ownership/living of allowners and residents.
I know, I mean in OP's situation, he/she had a lease that met the rules, it was cut short, and he/she now has another lease that meets the rules. Definitely don't ignore the bylaws, all I'm saying is the breach (arguably not OP's fault) has already been remedied. There is no longer an ongoing short term rental situation and therefore nothing for anyone to get excited about unless OP chooses to engage in short term rentals in the future. That's all I'm saying - even if for whatever reason one of the board members had it out for OP, there is no relevant action to take right now because it has already been resolved.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 2, 2012
4392 posts
2562 upvotes
Toronto
Manatus wrote: You know you don't have to agree to terminate the lease, right? You can always force the tenant to find someone to sublease if they want to move out ahead of time. They're not "nice enough" to find someone else to take over; that's the minimum they can do. They signed up for 9 months (or a year) and are bound to that; unless you allowed them to put an exceptional term in the lease (don't), they can't unilaterally decide to leave after a few months and stop paying.
Sometimes a landlord wont want the person the tenant finds to assign the lease to. Landlords often want to find their own tenants.

Also a tenant is not bound to the fixed term lease in most cases. If a tenant simply ups and leaves mid-lease, the landlord has a legal obligation to minimize their damages by finding a new tenant as quick as possible. The previous tenant would only be responsible for landlords actual financial losses up to the point they find a new tenant. So they would only be on the hook for the entire lease term, if the landlord was simply unable to find a new tenant for that entire time.

And even when a tenant breaks lease and leaves, it's then up to the landlord to sue them in small claims court to recover any damages. Often times it's less hassle for them to simply find a new tenant and move on.

Top