Air BnB (LTB): Difference between revisions

From Riverview Legal Group
Access restrictions were established for this page. If you see this message, you have no access to this page.
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:
{{Citation:  
{{Citation:  
| categories = [Interference of Reasonable Enjoyment (LTB)‎], [Illegal Act & Impairment of Safety (LTB)]
| categories = [Interference of Reasonable Enjoyment (LTB)‎], [Illegal Act & Impairment of Safety (LTB)]
| shortlink = 5F
| shortlink = https://rvt.link/c8
}}
}}
==Resources==
* [https://www.toronto.ca/community-people/housing-shelter/short-term-rentals/ City of Toronto Short-Term Rental By-Law]


==TSL-01536-18 (Re), 2019 CanLII 87095 (ON LTB)<ref name="TSL-01536-18"/>==
==TSL-01536-18 (Re), 2019 CanLII 87095 (ON LTB)<ref name="TSL-01536-18"/>==
Line 31: Line 34:


<ref name="Thadani">Thadani v Roozbahani, 2021 CanLII 106394 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jk136>, retrieved on 2021-12-17</ref>
<ref name="Thadani">Thadani v Roozbahani, 2021 CanLII 106394 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jk136>, retrieved on 2021-12-17</ref>
==Shum v Nambakhsh, 2022 CanLII 138725 (ON LTB)<ref name="Shum"/>==
3. On December 13, 2021, the Landlord gave the Tenant an N6 notice of termination deemed served on December 18, 2021. <b><u>The notice of termination alleges that the Tenant was renting the rental unit out for short-term rentals and that this constituted an illegal act under the City of Toronto By-Laws, the Residential Tenancies Act, and the condominium corporation’s rules, by-laws, and declarations.</b></u>
4. <b><u>The Landlord and ES testified that they found a person using the rental unit as a short term rental on November 28, 2021. They brought this person to the security desk and obtained details with respect to her short-term rental.</b></u> While there is a discrepancy between the information in the Landlord’s application and the testimony regarding whether it was the Landlord or ES who first went to the rental unit that day and with respect to the length of the short-term rental, I did not find this to be material or to detract from the credibility of the Landlord or ES.
5. SS’s testimony corroborated the testimony of the Landlord and ES. SS also testified to the several other incidences outlined in the notice of termination when he engaged with individuals using the rental unit as a short-term rental.
6. The Tenant denied using the rental unit for short-term rentals. The Tenant alleged that the Landlord staged the incident on November 28, 2021. The Tenant claimed that the Landlord was conspiring with other individuals to evict him from the rental unit so that the unit could be used for short-term rentals. He said that he was paying a low rent and the Landlord was trying to evict him so she could make more money.
7. I find the Tenant’s assertion that the November 28, 2021 incident was staged to be fantastical and highly unlikely.
8. I find the evidence of the Landlord, ES, and SS to be straightforward and credible and I prefer it to the Tenant’s testimony.
<b><u>9. I also find use of the rental unit as a short-term rental to be an illegal act as it is contrary to Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 547.</b></u>
10. As a result, <b><u>I am satisfied, based on the evidence before me on a balance of probabilities, that the Tenant has committed an illegal act in the rental unit by renting the rental unit out as a short-term rental. Not every illegal act automatically gives rise to termination of the tenancy and eviction. The illegal act must have the potential to affect the character of the premises or disturb the reasonable enjoyment of the Landlord or other tenants in the residential complex.</b></u> In this case, use of the rental unit for short-term rentals has the potential to affect the character of the residential complex by giving a transient or travelling population access to both the rental unit and the complex. As a result, I find that termination of the tenancy is warranted in the circumstances of this case.
<ref name="Shum">Shum v Nambakhsh, 2022 CanLII 138725 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jzxvr>, retrieved on 2024-07-05</ref>


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 16:11, 5 July 2024


Caselaw.Ninja, Riverview Group Publishing 2021 ©
Date Retrieved: 2024-07-08
CLNP Page ID: 381
Page Categories: [Interference of Reasonable Enjoyment (LTB)‎], [Illegal Act & Impairment of Safety (LTB)]
Citation: Air BnB (LTB), CLNP 381, <https://rvt.link/c8>, retrieved on 2024-07-08
Editor: Sharvey
Last Updated: 2024/07/05


Resources

TSL-01536-18 (Re), 2019 CanLII 87095 (ON LTB)[1]

11. With respect to the First N6 Notice, it alleges the Tenants or another occupant of the rental unit have committed an illegal act or have carried out, or permitted someone to carry out an illegal trade, business or occupation in the rental unit or the residential complex, details of which are:

September 18, 2018 – Tenant has been renting out a room and a bed on Airbnb, which is not currently permitted under the City of Toronto’s Zoning Bylaws. On September 18, 2018 an Airbnb guest was intentionally locked out without her luggage. The guest complained to the second floor tenant who contacted the property manager. The police were called as a result of the incident. The property manager advised the tenant she was not permitted to sublet on Airbnb or other short-term rental websites.
September 21- October 3, 2018 – The tenant continued to rent out the property on Airbnb. On September 21, 2018, the landlord’s lawyer, Tannis Waugh, wrote to the tenant enclosing a N5 Notice to End Tenancy Early along with a letter advising that short-term rentals were not permitted. On October 3, 2018, Ms. Waugh sent a further N5 to the tenant as the unit was still listed as available for short-term rentals on the Airbnb website.
November 5, 2018 – The Airbnb website continues to show that the premises are available for short-term rentals on Airbnb contrary to the landlord’s request as relayed by the property manager, the landlord’s lawyer and in contravention of the City of Toronto’s current Zoning Bylaws.

12. The Landlord also indicated that because of these illegal activities by the Tenants, her insurance carrier would not respond to any third party claims arising out of the operations of the Airbnb, including any property damage as a result of that operation and, indeed, as of November 14, 2018 no longer remain on the risk.

13. The Landlord presented a statement posted on the City of Toronto website that was accessed on December 14, 2018 in which the heading states: “Currently, short-term rentals are not permitted in Toronto”. In the body of the notice it is explained that the City’s amendments to the zoning bylaw to permit short-term rentals under regulated conditions are not in effect because they have been appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal which is scheduled to hear the appeal in August 2019. Without the relevant zoning bylaw excluding short-term rentals, I am not satisfied the Tenants’ activity as complained about in the First N6 Notice is illegal as contravening the City of Toronto zoning bylaw applicable to the rental unit.

It is ordered that:

1. The application is dismissed.

[1]

Thadani v Roozbahani, 2021 CanLII 106394 (ON LTB)[2]

18. It was uncontested that the Tenant listed the unit on Airbnb in 2019. I am satisfied that by advertising and renting out the rental unit through Airbnb, the Tenant has substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment or a lawful right, privilege or interest of the Landlords by contravening the terms of the tenancy agreement that state that the Tenant agrees not to have any business operation from the leased premises. As it was uncontested that the Tenant continued to have the unit on the website until early 2021, I am also satisfied the Tenant continued this conduct within seven days after receiving the notice.

[2]

Shum v Nambakhsh, 2022 CanLII 138725 (ON LTB)[3]

3. On December 13, 2021, the Landlord gave the Tenant an N6 notice of termination deemed served on December 18, 2021. The notice of termination alleges that the Tenant was renting the rental unit out for short-term rentals and that this constituted an illegal act under the City of Toronto By-Laws, the Residential Tenancies Act, and the condominium corporation’s rules, by-laws, and declarations.

4. The Landlord and ES testified that they found a person using the rental unit as a short term rental on November 28, 2021. They brought this person to the security desk and obtained details with respect to her short-term rental. While there is a discrepancy between the information in the Landlord’s application and the testimony regarding whether it was the Landlord or ES who first went to the rental unit that day and with respect to the length of the short-term rental, I did not find this to be material or to detract from the credibility of the Landlord or ES.

5. SS’s testimony corroborated the testimony of the Landlord and ES. SS also testified to the several other incidences outlined in the notice of termination when he engaged with individuals using the rental unit as a short-term rental.

6. The Tenant denied using the rental unit for short-term rentals. The Tenant alleged that the Landlord staged the incident on November 28, 2021. The Tenant claimed that the Landlord was conspiring with other individuals to evict him from the rental unit so that the unit could be used for short-term rentals. He said that he was paying a low rent and the Landlord was trying to evict him so she could make more money.

7. I find the Tenant’s assertion that the November 28, 2021 incident was staged to be fantastical and highly unlikely.

8. I find the evidence of the Landlord, ES, and SS to be straightforward and credible and I prefer it to the Tenant’s testimony.

9. I also find use of the rental unit as a short-term rental to be an illegal act as it is contrary to Toronto Municipal Code Chapter 547.

10. As a result, I am satisfied, based on the evidence before me on a balance of probabilities, that the Tenant has committed an illegal act in the rental unit by renting the rental unit out as a short-term rental. Not every illegal act automatically gives rise to termination of the tenancy and eviction. The illegal act must have the potential to affect the character of the premises or disturb the reasonable enjoyment of the Landlord or other tenants in the residential complex. In this case, use of the rental unit for short-term rentals has the potential to affect the character of the residential complex by giving a transient or travelling population access to both the rental unit and the complex. As a result, I find that termination of the tenancy is warranted in the circumstances of this case.


[3]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 TSL-01536-18 (Re), 2019 CanLII 87095 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/j2gpb>, retrieved on 2021-12-17
  2. 2.0 2.1 Thadani v Roozbahani, 2021 CanLII 106394 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jk136>, retrieved on 2021-12-17
  3. 3.0 3.1 Shum v Nambakhsh, 2022 CanLII 138725 (ON LTB), <https://canlii.ca/t/jzxvr>, retrieved on 2024-07-05