Housing minister aims to curb ‘renovictions’

Pledge follows Star story of five tenants from 795 College St., who were forced to move out during renovations, then replaced with new people -- paying three times the rent.

Thestar.com
March 27, 2018
Emily Mathieu

Ontario’s housing minister is pledging to examine rental rules that could result in “renovictions.”

The promise follows a Toronto Star story of five tenants from 795 College St., who were forced to move out during renovations, then effectively displaced from their affordable homes because new people were installed in their place -- paying three times the rent.

Those new tenants are entitled to protection under the law and cannot be evicted, based on a recent ruling at the Landlord and Tenant Board.

“I am disturbed any time I hear of renovations being used as pretense for removing a tenant,” said Minister Peter Milczyn, who promised to direct staff to examine situations where two tenants have competing claims on the same unit “to see if changes need to be made” to the Residential Tenancies Act.

Milczyn, in the written statement sent to the Star Tuesday, said the law is clear in that tenants are allowed to return when renovations are completed. He said he could not comment on the case involving the College St. building, because the ministry’s Rental Housing Enforcement Unit is investigating and the tenants’ case is still being heard before the board.

The term “renovictions” is used to describe when a landlord uses rental housing law to push people out for renovations and counts on them not coming back so they can rent out the apartments at a much higher price. But tenants have the right to return -- without a substantial increase in rent.

The former College St. tenants told the Star they had informed the building owner and property manager they intended to pursue the “right of first refusal,” and would move back in once work was done. They say the owner ignored their rights and then found new tenants, knowing the law would make it hard to get them out.

The property owner has declined to comment on the tenants’ complaints, because board hearings are ongoing, but had told the Star that at the time of purchase there were 46 outstanding work orders against the building.

“Despite the scope of the work and resources required to return the building to good standing, we committed to the process, and remain convinced that preserving the building and preserving rental housing in the urban core were the right things to do,” wrote spokesperson Danny Roth, with Brandon Communications Inc., in a previous statement.

City council had called on the province on Tuesday to tighten the rules.

“When we pass a law there is an expectation that they are enforceable,” said councillor Mike Layton, who put forward a motion asking the ministry to strengthen the language of the Residential Tenancies Act.

"In this case it is quite clearly a violation of those tenants' rights and there is absolutely no remedy," Layton told the Star. The motion was seconded by councillor Ana Bailao, the city's affordable housing advocate.

This lowrise at 795 College St. has undergone extensive renovations and its units have been rented out to new tenants, even though some of the former residents had hoped to move back in.

The building was purchased by 795 College Inc. for just over $1.5 million, in 2014. It was home to a community of artists, where the three-bedroom units went for about $1,240 a month. The renovated apartments cost at least $4,000, based on an advertisement submitted to the board.

The tenants were sent notices about the renovations in 2016. Five tenants told the Star they not only followed the law, but prior to their eviction tried on multiple occasions to convince the Landlord and Tenant Board that the owner was acting in bad faith, or intended to keep them out, but their concerns were effectively dismissed, they said.

“The loss of our homes was never treated with any urgency,” said former tenant Carolyn Taylor, 45.

Council also called for stronger tools for the board so adjudicators can get tenants back into their units if there is evidence a landlord has acted in “bad faith” or if there is proof they intended to keep them out. Aurora Browne, who lived in the building for 10 years, said what happened in their case was that laws designed to protect tenants ultimately resulted in the loss of their homes. It also opens a door for landlords looking to take advantage of both tenants and board rules, she said.

“At the moment the only thing the landlord has to prove is their intent to do the renovations,” said Browne.

Violations of the Residential Tenancies Act can result in fines for individuals of up to $25,000 per count and for corporations of up to $100,000 per count.