False Information (Set Aside)

Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved:	2024-04-29
CLNP Page ID:	2226
Page Categories:	Set Aside
Citation:	False Information (Set Aside), CLNP 2226, <https://rvt.link/6p>, retrieved on 2024-04-29
Editor:	MKent
Last Updated:	2023/06/29

Regan v Middaugh, 2021 CanLII 70501 (ON LTB)

14. In these circumstances, the Landlord could, and should have, served the Tenant with a notice of termination pursuant to subsection 50(1)(c) of the Act. This notice of termination would then trigger the Landlord’s obligation to file an application with the Board and the parties would have had an opportunity to appear at a hearing. It would then have been up to the Board to decide whether to terminate the tenancy after hearing evidence and submissions for and against each side.

15. More importantly, a tenant is entitled as of right to move back into a renovated rental unit at the same rent once extensive renovations are complete. (See s. 50(3) of the Act).) Further, landlords and tenants cannot agree to waive their rights and obligations under the Act. (See: sections 3 and 4.)

16. In short, when the Landlord informed the Tenant that she had to move out because of the planned renovations and would not be able to move back in when they were completed, he gave false information to the Tenant about his own legal obligations and the Tenant’s legal rights. The Landlord gave the Tenant this false information before the agreement was signed and these statements are what induced the Tenant to sign the agreement.

(...)

19. Based on the evidence before me, I find that the Landlord provided false information to the Tenant and the Tenant signed the agreement based on the statements the Landlord made to her. The parties cannot agree to waive their rights and obligations under the Act. I also find that the Tenant is willing and able to pay the monthly rent, and therefore gains nothing from agreeing to terminate the tenancy. Finally, I find that the Landlord knew or ought to have known that he was providing false information to the Tenant. After considering all of these circumstances, I find that it would not be unfair to set aside the eviction order. The Tenant’s motion should be granted.

TEL-87359-18-SA (Re), 2018 CanLII 111792 (ON LTB)

31. What appears to have happened here is that the Landlords acted out of ignorance. They believed the police when they said to give the tenants 30 days to leave. They found out the easiest way to do that was to get the tenants to sign agreements to terminate, and they then pressured the Tenant into agreeing to terminate his tenancy. The other tenants knew that they did not have to sign the agreements to terminate but this Tenant did not. He quite reasonably felt afraid because of the involvement of the police and signed the agreement falsely believing he had to. Given his behaviour it is clear that if he had known he did not have to sign the agreement he would not have done so.

32. When the Landlords found out they were operating an illegal rooming house, what they should have done is serve the appropriate notice to terminate. In circumstances such as these most landlords serve an N5 alleging the illegal rooming house is substantially interfering with a lawful interest of the landlord because the municipality is threatening prosecution for the zoning infraction. Some landlords serve an N6 alleging the tenants are committing an illegal act by occupying an illegal rooming house.

(...)

34. Their letter of November 5, 2017 says the Tenant has to move out by December 5, 2017 because the police gave them 30 days to clear the basement. In other words, the Landlords falsely informed the Tenant he had to sign the N11 form. As the Tenant clearly did not realise that was untrue, he did not give informed or voluntary consent to terminate his tenancy. To refuse to set aside the eviction order in that situation would be fundamentally unfair.