Lock on Thermostat (RTA)

SWT-46858-13 (Re), 2013 CanLII 40015 (ON LTB)

8. After the new sauna was installed in May 2013, the Tenant complained that the temperature was too low. However, the Tenant’s photograph of the thermostat was not clear enough to discern the temperature units and determine whether the temperature was adequate. The Landlord’s building manager, J.K., acknowledged that there was an adjustment period to get the sauna up to temperature but he gave evidence that as of the hearing date, the sauna was hot. The Tenant did not establish that the new sauna is in disrepair.

9. The Tenant also complained that the tenants are not permitted to adjust the sauna temperature. The Landlord keeps the temperature control for the sauna under a locked box to prevent vandalism, and the sauna temperature control has always been locked since 2004, when the building manager, J.K., started working at the complex. Furthermore, J.K. gave evidence that he has received no complaints about the sauna temperature from anyone but the Tenant, and he is willing to adjust the temperature upon request. The Landlord’s conduct, in restricting access to the sauna thermostat, is reasonable for heath and safety reasons and does not contravene the Act.

10. I find that the Landlord took reasonable steps, within a reasonable time, to replace the broken sauna, given the recreational nature of the facility. The fact that the sauna was unavailable for approximately two months, while it was being repaired and replaced, was an inconvenience too minor to justify an abatement of rent or other relief.

CET-63266-16 (Re), 2017 CanLII 28532 (ON LTB)

17. The thermostat is located in the Tenants unit. The Tenants pay 60% of utilities.

18. The Tenants testified that the thermostat is set at 22-23 degrees Celsius while the Landlord testified that the temperature is set at 20 degrees Celsius.

19. It is undisputed that the Landlord installed a lock on the thermostat on or about August 29th/30th. The Landlord testified that she did so because she lives in the basement with a young child who was frequently becoming ill and then she discovered that the Tenants had set the temperature to 10 degrees Celsius.

20. The Tenants testified that since they pay for 60% of the utilities, the inability to control the temperature in the rental unit substantially interferes with their reasonable enjoyment.

21. The Tenants have not established that the Landlord withheld or deliberately interfered with a vital service, specifically insufficient heat. The evidence demonstrates that the minimum temperature in the rental unit is set to 20 degrees Celsius as required by the Act. It is reasonable for a Landlord to secure a thermostat given these living arrangements. Both parties are sharing a house with a single source of heat and adjustments to the thermostat affect all occupants. Securing a thermostat is not representative of substantial interference. This claim is dismissed.

SOT-69247-16 (Re), 2016 CanLII 44358 (ON LTB)

10. The Tenant testified that at the commencement of the tenancy, in March 2016, the temperature inside the residential complex was set at 11.11 degrees Celsius (52 degrees F) for about 8 to 9 days. There was a cover on the digital thermostat and he could not reach the Landlord. He repeatedly phoned the Landlord but she would not answer the phone and there was no room to leave messages. He was so cold, that he got sick, his back ached so much and he believed he had pneumonia. He shivered in bed. He ended up smashing the cover on the thermostat to be able to adjust the heat.

11. The Landlord admitted that she locked the thermostat cover because it was being manipulated to 32.22 degrees Celsius (90 degrees F). She stated that the Tenant broke it. She stated that she made sure the temperature was at 23.33 degrees Celsius (74 degrees F) because her 96 year old mother lived in the property. She stated that her mother never got sick.

12. I accept the Tenant’s evidence that there was inadequate heat in the residential complex for approximately eight (8) to nine (9) days. I accept the Tenant’s evidence that the temperature inside the residential complex was 11.11 degrees Celsius (52 degrees F) for about 8 to 9 days, which is below the minimum temperature required under the regulations. The Landlord’s testimony that her own mother was in the house, that it was a comfortable 23.33 degrees Celsius (74 degrees F) and in fact her mother did not get sick, flies in the face of her own evidence that she moved her mother out of the house on March 1, 2016. The Landlord’s own admission that she “locked” the thermostat, supports the Tenant’s allegation that the Landlord deliberately interfered with the reasonable supply of heat. The Tenant could not adjust the thermostat for his own comfort. Further, the fact that the Tenant had to smash the locked cover of the thermostat, supports the Tenant’s evidence that it was extremely cold, and the Landlord inaccessible, necessitating drastic measures.

...

14. Considering the vital importance of heat, and the impact of the Landlord’s deliberate locking of the thermostat on the Tenant, there will be 50% rent abatement for the eight (8) days of inadequate heating, in the sum of $65.75 ($500.0 per month X 12 months divided by 365 days = $16.43 per day X 50% = $8.21 X 8 = $65.75).

TET-59931-15-RV (Re), 2016 CanLII 38298 (ON LTB)

55. Section 21 says a landlord shall not interfere with or withhold “the reasonable supply of any vital service”. Here the Landlords interfered with the heat which is a vital service, but it is not clear they interfered with the “reasonable supply”. I say this because the Landlords’ uncontroverted evidence is that the thermostat was set at the minimum temperature required by law and the Tenant led no evidence to indicate the temperature ever fell below the minimum required.

56. With respect to s. 23 the evidence is simply insufficient to support a finding that it is more likely than not that the Landlords knew or ought to have known that a reasonable tenant would find the lockbox around the thermostat to be a form of harassment.

...

60. Again, the request for a cease and desist order is reasonable. An order will issue directing the Landlords to remove the lock box on the thermostat if they have not already done so or alternatively, provide the key to the Tenant.