Motion to Void Eviction (Post Enforcement Date)

TSL-06312-VO (Re), 2007 CanLII 75978 (ON LTB)

6. The Landlord submitted that the Landlord was correct to return the Tenant’s $300.00 money order to her because unless the Tenant made a motion to the Board to void the order, the Landlord would not be able to say on a subsequent arrears application, that the Tenant had exhausted her one time only opportunity to void an eviction order after the enforcement date. This is because subsection 74(12) of the Act clearly states that a tenant only has one opportunity during the course of a single tenancy to void an eviction order by paying after the enforcement date, but prior to the order being executed by the Sheriff. As I stated at the hearing, this argument has some logic to it with respect to the Landlord’s actions in returning the $300.00 money order to the Tenant. However, to my knowledge the Board will accept and process motions to void like this one where all of the payments have been made to a landlord and none to the Board despite the clear wording of subsection 74(11). As a result it is not necessary for landlords to force tenants to make payments into the Board when a motion to void needs to be made.

7. However, if a landlord accepts a tenant’s payments after the enforcement date and the tenant does not file a motion to void, then the landlord has an order which has not been stayed or officially voided and which technically can be enforced. Without the tenant’s motion to void that order stays alive. If the landlord elects not to enforce it because the tenant did in fact pay all monies owing, then the landlord is deprived of its benefit of the one time only rule. In that scenario the only way a landlord has to force the tenant to make a motion to void is to file the order with the Sheriff for enforcement purposes. As a result, I do not believe the Landlord here did anything particularly wrong when it returned the Tenant’s payment to her. However, that does not settle the issue of liability for the Sheriff’s fees, which were incurred here after the Landlord knew or ought to have known the order was going to be voided.

TNL-28504-12-VO (Re), 2012 CanLII 98070 (ON LTB)

Determinations and Reasons on the Motion:

15. Accordingly, the total payment made by the Tenant to the Landlord $11,550.00 is $170.00 less than the amount of $11,720.00 required to void order TNL-28504-12.

16. At this stage in the proceedings, the oral determination was given, that the payment made by the Tenant was $170.00 less than the amount required, the Tenant requested a 15 minute recess so that she could review her records in the event that she had paid the $170.00 in costs ordered to the Landlord and had forgotten about that payment.