Condos for sale scarborough . The rental apartment has a different name? Ontario has the tenant Protection Act (Residential Tenancies Act), which stipulates that landlords shall not drive tenants away without good reason.
The law clearly defines “tenants”, and some properties other than residential buildings, such as hotels, are not subject to the law. Recently, a Toronto landlord wanted to drive away some of the residents of the property industry on the grounds that his property belonged to “tourist homes” (commonly known as residential accommodation) and that its occupants were not “tenants”. Some city councillors and legal services have said that this is just an excuse to evade regulation.
According to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), Zoltan Torok, a 68-year-old male resident in a building at 320th Roncesvalles Street, near Haibai Park, received a notice from the property management office a few weeks ago requiring him to move out of his current flat by October 14. Dorook has been renting one of the units in the building at 180 yuan a week since May this year. He found the place in an advertisement for a taxi in the newspaper at that time.
The landlord claims that the property is a “sightseeing accommodation property” and therefore does not have to be regulated by the tenant Protection Act like rental apartments. The law stipulates that landlords are not allowed to drive away tenants without reason. However, clause 5 (a) stipulates that hotels, hotels, motels, bed plus breakfast hotels (bed plus breakfast hotels) and other sightseeing accommodation properties are classified as “temporary accommodation facilities” (temporary accommodations).
Dorook pointed out that the management office now asked him and other residents to move out. It is reported that residents share kitchens and bathrooms. He refused to move, saying that the owner “advertised that there was a house for rent, but did not mention that it was sightseeing accommodation.” I’m not leaving. ” He said he had never received a written notice from the management department. “if there is no written document, no signature, no seal, I will ignore it,” and threatened to take the matter to court.
CBC reported that the land registration showed that the owner of the property was a digital company, which was purchased in 1985. The company, on behalf of Samuel Lewkowicz, responded to CBC by email that the property is a sightseeing accommodation property, and the sightseeing house is operated like a hotel. Guests check in, just like staying in a hotel, sightseeing accommodation is inhabited by “guests” (guest), not “tenants” (tenant). In view of this, the property is not regulated by the tenant Protection Act.
Gord Perks, a community legal service and district councilman, said the landlords’ approach was not new, but to circumvent the law by driving out existing tenants and then renovating their apartments for higher rents. Perks said that to the best of his knowledge, the property involved was a residential building. He does not believe that the property belongs to any type of temporary residential property mentioned in the regulations. He wants the provincial government to tighten the law and give tenants more protection.
The Haibai Community legal Service Center (Parkdale Community Legal Services) tried to organize the residents of the building to protest against the eviction of the owners. Cole Webber, a staff member of the center, was warned of “trespassing” (trespass) by the building management office because he went to Dorook’s home to meet him, and was told that he was prohibited from entering the property. Weber believes that the warning is ineffective.