Real Estate

Tenant problem

  • Last Updated:
  • Aug 22nd, 2021 6:01 pm
Tags:
Deal Addict
Mar 30, 2017
1214 posts
974 upvotes
GVA
zaino22 wrote: The one who said rents going up or less people willing to rent their place is because of this tilt towards tenants you are correct my wife said the same thing. My next tenants will have lots of screenings, if we decide to get tenants again.

Someone said try gay people they are better tenants.

As for drain, there is no dishwasher and they claim they are not draining grease. If they were not and this was new pit when they moved in then obviously they did put grease. If someone throws stuff that does not belong in drain (like toy, grease, Sanitary
Pads, diapers) isn’t it constitute negligence ? City warns residents not to drain grease and collect it outside. Since city cannot determine perhaps who did it they cannot come after them? This is my argument but I am not rigid if someone has better suggestion and think I am overboard on this claim and LTB May throw it out due to Grey area, I will reconsider.

After non payment of rent, tenants have many chances to pay even before sheriff shows up and N4 gets null and void. System need to differentiate abusers/violators. Once N4 is issued it should be registered whether tenant pays later. And after certain number of N4 issued for the same tenant there should be quick eviction, no lengthy process.

If I go to LTB and get judgment against tenant for non payment of rent and damages then if money not paid I should be able to put this on their credit, like any other non payment. If even small claims court cannot recover money and help me then where should Landlord turn to. That’s why Uncle Tony is so busy.
I would not call uncle Tony nor I would be unfair to my next tenants but after this experience we are not the same.
Premier said without thinking don’t pay rent. Landlord do not have endless money pit. I estimate my tenants would owe me 12-15K when they leave. I could have spent this money on anything but now I am forced to fork out.
nope, LTB will never side with you unless you have video tape that prove tenant pour grease in drain.
profit on 6/23/2021 = 117.61% since 11/10/2020 to be exact😎
Member
Mar 3, 2021
326 posts
194 upvotes
Just curious how did you even find them? And you should always deal with things like this through lawyers, there is no need to "save" or cheap out on that.

Some tips for the future:
- always ask for bank account breakdowns to ensure they have money and good money management skills
- always split utilities and water fees or charge extra to cover the worst case scenario
Member
Feb 2, 2011
254 posts
49 upvotes
Ndp and jagmeet once stated they want to make any type of eviction illegal. There is no empathy for people who genuinely work hard for a living and sacrifice for their family by using their savings on investments to build generational wealth....Hopefully kids understand that housing is an asset investment class like crypto...and there should be rules to protect investors...not just the abusers
[OP]
Newbie
Apr 30, 2009
21 posts
8 upvotes
Ajax
I was out of town and used a friend to find them. Account breakdown mean should I ask potential tenant bank statements or just “if you you claim to make $5K per month how do you spend it in a month” sort of? As far as lawyer is concerned, there is no lawyer but paralegals who do this and some told they used paralegal and wasn’t worth it but I think I know what you mean. They have been thru process and can put case in a way that has more chances of success. In the future I plan to look at credit score as well as professionals and probably max 2 years because from 2+years they start to act if they partially own the property.
Deal Expert
User avatar
Jan 27, 2004
50488 posts
14814 upvotes
ONTARIO
zaino22 wrote: The one who said rents going up or less people willing to rent their place is because of this tilt towards tenants you are correct my wife said the same thing. My next tenants will have lots of screenings, if we decide to get tenants again.

Someone said try gay people they are better tenants.

As for drain, there is no dishwasher and they claim they are not draining grease. If they were not and this was new pit when they moved in then obviously they did put grease. If someone throws stuff that does not belong in drain (like toy, grease, Sanitary
Pads, diapers) isn’t it constitute negligence ? City warns residents not to drain grease and collect it outside. Since city cannot determine perhaps who did it they cannot come after them? This is my argument but I am not rigid if someone has better suggestion and think I am overboard on this claim and LTB May throw it out due to Grey area, I will reconsider.

After non payment of rent, tenants have many chances to pay even before sheriff shows up and N4 gets null and void. System need to differentiate abusers/violators. Once N4 is issued it should be registered whether tenant pays later. And after certain number of N4 issued for the same tenant there should be quick eviction, no lengthy process.

If I go to LTB and get judgment against tenant for non payment of rent and damages then if money not paid I should be able to put this on their credit, like any other non payment. If even small claims court cannot recover money and help me then where should Landlord turn to. That’s why Uncle Tony is so busy.
I would not call uncle Tony nor I would be unfair to my next tenants but after this experience we are not the same.
Premier said without thinking don’t pay rent. Landlord do not have endless money pit. I estimate my tenants would owe me 12-15K when they leave. I could have spent this money on anything but now I am forced to fork out.
Hey that's discrimination against gays! You can't deny them tenancy for being gay.
No wait... now I'm confused.
[OP]
Newbie
Apr 30, 2009
21 posts
8 upvotes
Ajax
No discrimination against anyone. Someone probably had better experience with gay tenants. I personally don’t know either way. I don’t want to be taken advantage of that’s all.
Deal Expert
Feb 29, 2008
19378 posts
17848 upvotes
Tarrana & The Ri…
Don’t think sexual orientation matters. I’ve seen tenants from hell and nasty both gay and straight. You really can’t filter by sexual orientation, race or gender. For 1 it’s wrong but I guarantee you will regret it.

There are better ways to screen tenants. As prices go up...tenants better be ready because landlords will remember how they were treated during the pandemic. Better be A+
[OP]
Newbie
Apr 30, 2009
21 posts
8 upvotes
Ajax
@Jay you are right sexual orientation cannot determine good tenants much like color of skin or cultural background. I think as human being we look for quick solutions and if one person had good experience they insist it’s the “only” way.

You are right next tenant would have to do a lot more to win my trust. I have heard recently tenants were asked to pay 6 month or even 1 year rent in advance because there was much interest in properties. I won’t be unfair to next tenants but not easy target like I am for current tenants.

I am not surprised at how tenants taking advantage since laws are so much in their favour and they made landlord look people with endless money pit.
Also tells me why some people quit being Landlords because after bad experience they simply are done dealing with scum bags, which translates into less properties for potential tenants.
Sr. Member
Nov 13, 2016
861 posts
484 upvotes
zaino22 wrote: I was out of town and used a friend to find them. Account breakdown mean should I ask potential tenant bank statements or just “if you you claim to make $5K per month how do you spend it in a month” sort of? As far as lawyer is concerned, there is no lawyer but paralegals who do this and some told they used paralegal and wasn’t worth it but I think I know what you mean. They have been thru process and can put case in a way that has more chances of success. In the future I plan to look at credit score as well as professionals and probably max 2 years because from 2+years they start to act if they partially own the property.
I believe you are still not fully conversant with RTA and tenants rights. Please educate yourself properly before you entertain any future tenants. Your assumption of ending tenancy after 2 years is not in your control.

Take care, good luck.

CD
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jan 13, 2012
1121 posts
50 upvotes
Sudbury
Saniokca wrote: Don't get me wrong I am all for changing the system - there is a lot wrong with the current rules. But I disagree that as a taxpayer I should be subsidizing someone's investment. Are you ok with subsidizing corporations who pay me dividends?

The idea is personal responsibility, and far too many tenants lack it. No one is asking for a subsidy: But when a property owner says "get out", it shouldn't take months (or years).
Member
Sep 23, 2011
473 posts
752 upvotes
Vaughan
fuelmizer[u wrote:cowboy post_id=34544435 time=1622499204 user_id=513884]
The idea is personal responsibility, and far too many tenants lack it. No one is asking for a subsidy: But when a property owner says "get out", it shouldn't take months (or years).
I don't remember mentioning what I think about how quickly someone should "get out". If you read the previous posts, I was specifically responding to #19: "Covid response should have been rent support, not court closures."

In my opinion, if someone invested in real estate and is not getting a return on their investment, taxpayers should not be the ones subsidizing it. Personal responsibility also extends to investments - if you can't take the risk, don't invest. Not knowing the risks (including potential future risks) does not entitle you to a bailout from taxpayers.

For the record, I'm against bailouts for corporations as well.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
13006 posts
9963 upvotes
Edmonton
zaino22 wrote: @Jay you are right sexual orientation cannot determine good tenants much like color of skin or cultural background. I think as human being we look for quick solutions and if one person had good experience they insist it’s the “only” way.

You are right next tenant would have to do a lot more to win my trust. I have heard recently tenants were asked to pay 6 month or even 1 year rent in advance because there was much interest in properties. I won’t be unfair to next tenants but not easy target like I am for current tenants.

I am not surprised at how tenants taking advantage since laws are so much in their favour and they made landlord look people with endless money pit.
Also tells me why some people quit being Landlords because after bad experience they simply are done dealing with scum bags, which translates into less properties for potential tenants.
You have to look into what you’re legally allowed to ask for. Or you might end up getting a tenant who knows their rights, gives you what you ask for to get the keys to your place, and then runs to the LTB to get back your illegal “deposit”.

C
Deal Addict
May 12, 2014
3402 posts
3751 upvotes
Montreal
Saniokca wrote:
In my opinion, if someone invested in real estate and is not getting a return on their investment, taxpayers should not be the ones subsidizing it.
But don't you think that by closing courts and banning evictions, taxpayers are essentially seizing property?

What if they said: grocery stores aren't allowed to close, must continue to sell all food as usual, but there will be zero enforcement of shoplifting?
Member
Sep 23, 2011
473 posts
752 upvotes
Vaughan
FrancisBacon wrote: But don't you think that by closing courts and banning evictions, taxpayers are essentially seizing property?

What if they said: grocery stores aren't allowed to close, must continue to sell all food as usual, but there will be zero enforcement of shoplifting?
I think I asked you before - are you willing to subsidize my dividends from Riocan? Royalties from restaurant stocks? Etc.
Sr. Member
Jul 18, 2020
753 posts
1217 upvotes
Saniokca wrote: I think I asked you before - are you willing to subsidize my dividends from Riocan? Royalties from restaurant stocks? Etc.
Let say the stock market tanked 20%, you are allow to quit and sell right away. However as a landlord, when your have a tenant is not paying rent, don't even have the option to sell and cut your loss because at this moment no one is going to buy your property if it is tenanted. A more fair approach is when you decided to sell your property, it should be automatic eviction if the next owner doesn't want to assume the previous tenant.
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
13006 posts
9963 upvotes
Edmonton
Saniokca wrote: I think I asked you before - are you willing to subsidize my dividends from Riocan? Royalties from restaurant stocks? Etc.
It’s not really the same, though. The government as good as told tenants that they could stop paying their rent and there would be no ramifications to them.

If you want to use your examples, it would be the closer to the government telling the companies that there would be no consequences to them if they stopped paying their contractually obligated royalties.

C
Deal Addict
May 12, 2014
3402 posts
3751 upvotes
Montreal
Saniokca wrote: I think I asked you before - are you willing to subsidize my dividends from Riocan? Royalties from restaurant stocks? Etc.
And I said no, it's a different issue.

I don't think owners deserve a ball out if tenants can't pay due to recession. They should plan financially for recessions, even depressions.

But asking them to plan for government seizing their assets is entirely different.

I wouldn't be in favour of any support if courts remainded open (which they did in Quebec except for 3 months so this is mostly an academic argument in this province).


Ontario's government just outright expropriated people. If they can do it to some, they can do it to you tomorrow.
Member
Sep 23, 2011
473 posts
752 upvotes
Vaughan
lechan wrote:
Let say the stock market tanked 20%, you are allow to quit and sell right away. However as a landlord, when your have a tenant is not paying rent, don't even have the option to sell and cut your loss because at this moment no one is going to buy your property if it is tenanted. A more fair approach is when you decided to sell your property, it should be automatic eviction if the next owner doesn't want to assume the previous tenant.
You do have the option to sell though and, at the right price, someone would buy. If your property is worth 700k, I would imagine if you gave 20%-30 discount (i.e. 140k-210k) you would find a buyer who is willing to deal with the problematic tenant. It's the same as with stocks: at the right price there will always be a buyer (sometimes even after insolvency). But again, every asset class has its own risks, and as someone correctly pointed out one of the risks is governmental. By the way, look at the prices of income trusts right after Flaherty's 2006 announcement to tax them...
CNeufeld wrote:
It’s not really the same, though. The government as good as told tenants that they could stop paying their rent and there would be no ramifications to them.

If you want to use your examples, it would be the closer to the government telling the companies that there would be no consequences to them if they stopped paying their contractually obligated royalties.

C
He did walk it back and say to pay rent, if one can. Did he handle it well? No. My point about companies was that the restaurants were ordered to close so by the same logic that's also seizing property and investors who rely on the dividends should be compensated. As I said before, I think neither should be compensated.
FrancisBacon wrote: And I said no, it's a different issue.

I don't think owners deserve a ball out if tenants can't pay due to recession. They should plan financially for recessions, even depressions.

But asking them to plan for government seizing their assets is entirely different.

I wouldn't be in favour of any support if courts remainded open (which they did in Quebec except for 3 months so this is mostly an academic argument in this province).

Ontario's government just outright expropriated people. If they can do it to some, they can do it to you tomorrow.
Why are you against "seizing" property of landlords but ok with "seizing" properties of investors into restaurants?
Deal Guru
User avatar
Mar 23, 2008
13006 posts
9963 upvotes
Edmonton
Saniokca wrote: You do have the option to sell though and, at the right price, someone would buy. If your property is worth 700k, I would imagine if you gave 20%-30 discount (i.e. 140k-210k) you would find a buyer who is willing to deal with the problematic tenant. It's the same as with stocks: at the right price there will always be a buyer (sometimes even after insolvency). But again, every asset class has its own risks, and as someone correctly pointed out one of the risks is governmental. By the way, look at the prices of income trusts right after Flaherty's 2006 announcement to tax them...



He did walk it back and say to pay rent, if one can. Did he handle it well? No. My point about companies was that the restaurants were ordered to close so by the same logic that's also seizing property and investors who rely on the dividends should be compensated. As I said before, I think neither should be compensated.



Why are you against "seizing" property of landlords but ok with "seizing" properties of investors into restaurants?
But…. Restaurants and other businesses got subsidies to keep their businesses going. Tenants got CERB. What did the small landlords get?

I’m not a tenant or landlord, and I’m not even in Ontario. But I do think the Ontario landlords in particular got the shaft. But even before all this went down, I wouldn’t want to be a landlord in Ontario.

C
Member
Sep 23, 2011
473 posts
752 upvotes
Vaughan
CNeufeld wrote: But…. Restaurants and other businesses got subsidies to keep their businesses going. Tenants got CERB. What did the small landlords get?

I’m not a tenant or landlord, and I’m not even in Ontario. But I do think the Ontario landlords in particular got the shaft. But even before all this went down, I wouldn’t want to be a landlord in Ontario.

C
I agree with you - I don't think they should have... And I know that plenty of people took advantage of it when they shouldn't have.

Also, restaurants did get their subsidies to keep running, but what about the investors? Dividends were cut to zero in some cases and even if the restaurants survive somehow those dividends, and especially royalty payments will never be recovered (again because of government's order to shut them down). It's similar to investors in real estate - renters got CERB but there's no guarantee that it will make it's way down to pay rent...

I would not want to be a landlord either - especially in Ontario. Before, during, or after the pandemic. The math just doesn't work for me.

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)