Vehicle - Re: Violation of City By-Laws

TEL-77147-17 (Re), 2017 CanLII 48891 (ON LTB)

7. At the hearing, the Tenant raised issues pursuant to subsection 82(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 20016 (the ‘Act’). The Tenant says he has withheld the rent for march 2017 because the Landlord wrongfully had his car towed and he had to pay $235.00 to retrieve the car.

8. For the reasons that follow, I am satisfied that the Tenant’s s.82 issues must be dismissed.

10. In addition, the Tenant admits that the car in question does not have license plates and was not parked in the Landlord’s regular parking lot. The Tenant also admits that he did not have a parking agreement with the Landlord for this car, and he admits that received the notice that Landlord placed on his car advising him that the car would be towed if the Tenant failed to register the vehicle and obtain a parking agreement.

11. Based on the evidence before me, I am satisfied that the Landlord had a positive obligation to remove the unlicensed vehicle from the property, the Landlord properly notified the Tenant of the situation, and then was fully justified in having the vehicle removed when the Tenant failed to respond accordingly. The Landlord should not be held financially responsible for the Tenant’s failure to resolve the situation. As a result, the Tenant’s section 82 issues are dismissed.

TNT-05958-10 (Re), 2011 CanLII 26961 (ON LTB)

7. On or about September 9, 2009 one of the cars in the Tenants’ parking spots was towed away. This car was towed away after the Landlord gave the Tenants notice, some four months before, that they had to either fix the car, have it properly insured, licensed and tagged, it would be towed. At the time, the car had four flat tires, and not been driven in some time. The Notice also demanded that the Tenants sign a parking lease. Regardless of the fact that the Tenants did not sign a parking lease, they were not paying rent for their spots for quite some time, and their car was not roadworthy.

14. And even if the Landlord technically did not require a separate parking agreement to be signed, this agreement had nothing to do with imposing additional charges, and appears to be more of an administrative endeavour to assist the new property management company with its record keeping, rather than a contractual one. Be that as it may, the Tenants were never forced to sign this contract and I am stating for the record that they are not required to do so. Furthermore, their car was not towed away because they would not sign this parking contract or agreement. It was towed away because it was not roadworthy, and because this was a violation of municipal standards.

15. Insofar as the towing away of their car, the Tenants were given ample warnings about the impending towing, some four months, and they should have made better use of that time. Had the Tenants acted more reasonably, they would not have had their car towed away in the first place.

16. Insofar as the replacement cost of their car, it was the Tenants’ decision to sign away ownership of the car, and this responsibility simply cannot rest with the Landlord.

17. Overall, I cannot justify any finding of substantial interference with reasonable enjoyment, much less harassment.