Landlord Licensing

One of the topics being discussed in the Ontario Landlord Association forums right now is licensing landlords.... some of the so-called tenant activists in the forum are celebrating their "big victory" in Mississauga this week.

I haven't really had to deal with licensing at all - at least not yet - neither of our properties are in places that require it ... but did wander off through Google to have a look at what's involved.

I'm not clear, from my reading, and from what I know about affordable housing in Ontario and landlording in general - who actually benefits from the whole licensing thing.

Tenants?  
Tenants in Ontario already have the Legalized Theft Board, Sheriff's Office, free legal services, by-law officers, and police firmly on their side.

If there are problems, tenants seem to have no end of ways to force landlords to solve them - and it costs them a LOT less money than it does the landlords. Plus, bad tenants get to steal hand over fist with the full support of every government agency for months or even years ...and once they finally lose, they can go on to the next place and do the exact same thing all over again because there are no mechanisms for finding out about them.... Good tenants, on the other hand, are already feeling the impacts of this and finding it hard to find affordable places to rent ... but that's another post.

What tenants don't have, or so it seems to me, in most areas, is enough affordable housing options. So I'm not quite sure how cutting the number of units by up to 30% as projected in Hamilton, for example, is going to help.  It seems pretty clear, from looking at  proposed licensing requirements such as these for the Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge area, that there is no possible way that licensing is going to create an increase in units available for rent.

And look at the potential costs associated with all of those licensing requirements!
Licensing fees themselves (annual of course)... annual criminal record check for landlords (ridiculous! Based, no doubt, on the never ending but eternally aggravating notion that tenants are all vulnerable, incapable & incompetent infants - I SO do not understand why people don't object to this depiction; I most certainly would). .... compliance certificates from every by-law, building, licensing department in the area, and from a HVAC company as well.... parking for every unit ....etc etc etc...

Contrary to popular belief, many landlords are not making huge profits on their units...  so all of these added costs are going to add to the cost of your rent.... if not immediately, then soon. I know, I know.... you all think that we all are independently wealthy and should provide you with low cost housing, all necessary accommodations for whatever you need, and pay your bills besides.... oh, and loan you money whenever you're short, too... love that one. 

But the reality is that even those of us who do manage to make a profit on landlording are not going to keep doing it if/when we can no longer do so, or if/when it becomes too annoying to bother jumping through ridiculous hoops.  And hey ... less available units, more need ... guess what that does to prices? It ain't good. At least not for tenants. 

So ... tenants aren't likely to benefit from licensing.

Landlords?
Not bluddy likely....  increased aggravation, increased costs, increased idiots uh people to deal with, The only group of landlords that are going to benefit from this scheme are the ones in buildings with more than 6 units (or however many they decide the cut-off should be) who do not have to do the licensing thing. Hmmm....  big landlords using government to put little landlords out of business? Naw... they would never do that, right?  Neoliberalism ...gotta love it.

Government?
None of the schemes I've seen have been revenue neutral - not even close, actually. To implement this licensing thing costs more than they are going to recoup from fees. So no financial benefit.... although there will be some people who get jobs out of the whole thing... 17 in Hamilton, apparently.

So why are they doing it then? Beats the hell out of me... my guess would be that somewhere along the line, the only people who stand to benefit from the whole thing are pushing some buttons... manipulating some tenant-activist-wanna-be-types  into thinking this would be a good plan, maybe?  And or convincing politicians to go along with it?

It strikes me as very, very odd that a tenant activist group like Acorn would be advocating for something that is so clearly NOT going to benefit tenants.

It sickens me that one of the images that was posted in the forum showed Andrea Horvath there apparently supporting the whole thing.  Seriously?

How/why would the NDP want to do something that so clearly is going to result in higher housing costs for renters and less affordable units? I do not understand what the hell is going on with housing in Ontario. I really, really don't.  And I most certainly do not understand what the NDP are doing re: housing. I am NDP .... and can't conceive of voting any other way - but I am becoming increasingly concerned about their (lack of?) handle on the entire issue of affordable housing in Ontario. Anyway ... that's another blog post too...  perhaps someday either Ms. Horwath or Ms. Forster will respond to my emails about the topic and I'll be better able to explain it - to myself, if not to you.

In any case, I am more than a little baffled, you may note, by the whole licensing landlords thing... your thoughts would be most welcome. Am I missing something? What am I missing? I must be missing something right?

Homeless in the GTA: Finding affordable housing especially tough for women

Another article about the lack of "affordable housing" in the Toronto Star today.

Geez, I wish people would WAKE UP and LISTEN!!!!

A big part of the problem is NOT affordability. As several commenters on the article have noted, there are plenty of places listed for rent in Oshawa in the less than $700/ month range.

As I have explained many, many times, both here and in the many letters and emails I have sent to reporters and to politicians -  only one of whom has deigned to even respond (and that was a I'll look into it and get back to you later) - while affordability is ONE issue, it is far FAR from the only one....

for small landlords in Ontario, it makes no sense whatsoever to rent to tenants like the woman described in the article.

Even if she could afford a considerably higher priced apartment, landlords still wouldn't rent to her.

“Most landlords don’t want to rent to people from shelters. Bad credit is another problem; many people have been evicted in the past. It makes it very hard to find places for these women. It’s a long process (to get into affordable housing). If they are not abused, just homeless, they have to wait years and years, with no other option than rental properties.”

Bad credit, evictions, children.... and a "fair & balanced system" that does not and will not support landlords if/when there are problems...

oh yeah... and your only income source is one that we can't garnishee. Uh yeah.... will get RIGHT on that.

As long as the LTB and the Sheriff's Offices think it's just hunky dory fine to take months to do their jobs (if they even bother) so that when there is a problem, it doesn't get resolved until it's cost us THOUSANDS ... and as long as they slow down even moreso the instant there is a child involved....

As long as the entire system demands that we continue to provide these people with all amenities to which they would be entitled if they were paying rent when they are not...

As long as OW/ODSP continues to pay shelter allowances to people who don't pay shelter COSTS (your tax dollars at work) and therefore add to the motivation to screw landlords over...

HOW could you possibly expect me to rent to these people?

I am a left wing, card carrying member of the NDP. I have worked for years and years in social services. I have housed single moms and women with serious mental illnesses in my own home, even.  And I have rented to people with disabilities, mental illnesses, and yes, single moms...

I would love to be able to continue to do so.

It sickens me that I cannot.

But I can't afford to take the risk as long as the situation remains as it is in Ontario.

I am not unique....  well, aside from the fact that I am a leftie  - definitely a minority among the landlords I know....

when it gets so bad that even I could not/would not do a dang thing for women like the one featured in the article, you know it's bad.

The Liberal government can tell us all they want that the system is "fair & balanced" ... it is most assuredly not.....   and I am so very sorry that this means that children are sleeping in parks and shelters .... but hey ...I have been trying to get someone to listen. I have offered low/no cost solutions....  things that would make it possible for me to rent to people on assistance again...

but no one listens. So hey....what can I do?

Discriminate, or sell. Got any other ideas?

If I make a bad choice in who to rent to....

Thought I would unpack that statement - "if I make a bad choice in who to rent to..." which I used in yesterday's blog post - a little bit more...

There's a lot that can be said about it, actually.

First of all, given the Ontario Liberal's messed up notion of "fair & balanced" which results in lengthy and expensive delays in evicting tenants who fail to pay rent, and the fact that OW and ODSP are totally non-coverable, clearly, renting to anyone in receipt of assistance is a huge risk that most small landlords cannot possibly justify.

Which sucks - my preference, actually, tends to be people that really need a break - and especially, single moms. I was there...raised my kids on my own from before the youngest was born until they were more or less growed up.

We have a 3 bedroom and a 4 bedroom - and both of them were rented to single moms on OW and I - stupidly - was fine with that; in fact, I gave them preference because they needed it more than other applicants. If you've read my blog, you'll know how well that turned out..... NOT.  Won't be doing that again!

So ... bad choice #1 is clearly anyone on any sort of government assistance that can't be garnisheed.

But there is more to the issue.

We landlords talk a lot about credit checks also - no credit check, no rental agreement. But what concerns me about that is the fact that in the case of deadbeats like my oh so charming dirt squirrel, even if someone actually does a credit check on her, her debt to me will not show up. At all.

I have yet to find a way to ensure that the orders against her get to her credit report. I've been told, actually, that the credit reporting agencies won't even take LTB orders! Don't know if that's so ... a collections agency that called here wanting to chase after any deadbeat customers we might have told me that they could get it onto her credit report ... and harass her some... but honestly ... if I'm already out >$9000 ... now you want me to pay MORE money I'll never get back for the privilege of harassing them?  If I won the lottery, I probably would make that one of my first purchases, just cuz ... but since I haven't won the lottery, I think not. Better things to do with my money that throw it down that particular toilet.

And did y'know that there is no way to search for people's eviction/LTB history? Landlords names are posted all over the damn place cuz we are money sucking evil and have no right to privacy - tenants' names are, however, totally confidential.

So unless a case becomes SO notorious that it garners the interest from someone at the Toronto Star....I'm thinking Nina Willis, of course....  it's all a great big secret.

Now, I'm not suggesting that every individual that gets evicted or has orders against them at the LTB should have their name published all over the damn place ....  I actually think that even deadbeats and squatters should have some rights to privacy (or at least their poor kids should - they have enough to deal with already).

But seriously.... how is it fair that landlords are given no reasonable, legal way to check whether an individual is a serial offender/professional deadbeat/dirt squirrel?

I pay taxes which support the Government of Ontario's services - including the LTB, Sheriff's Office, and OW/ODSP. I pay more taxes to support my municipalities' enforcement people (which the ds used to harass us).

When things go bad, none of these agencies to whom I am required to support BOTH through my taxes and user fees help within any sort of reasonable time frame. My 5 month experience is, from all of my research, average at best... if anything, it's probably toward the lower end! OW/ODSP don't help at ALL - in fact, they create part of the problem by continuing to provide the tenant with a winfall for every month they are not paying shelter....  extra money to spend on whatever we want ...WOO HOO!!!

So if you're going to take my money and then not help me ... how 'bout you at LEAST give me a way to know what kind of nightmare I'm about to get myself into?

By refusing landlords any access to such information, you are enabling the deadbeats to STEAL from us.....  and the people you are hurting the most are not the landlords, actually ... but marginalized people who do pay their rent and do need a break... .but who increasingly can't get it because the system is so freaking ~fair & balanced~

And I'm sorry, but telling me that there are laws against discrimination so I can't discriminate against people on OW/ODSP? That is SO not a solution.... but it's way past my bedtime, so that's a post that will have to wait for another day.

Back to my original point... it is pretty damn easy to make a bad choice re: who to rent to...we're not allowed to have the information we need in order to making informed choices. We're also pretty limited in that we can't tell our tenants who they're allowed to hook up with ...so even if we take a chance on a single mom, for example... if she eventually gets into a relationship with someone who has no qualms about bragging that it took his last landlord a year to get him out... nothing I can do about that.

It does not seem fair to me to punish landlords for making bad choices about who to rent to when the agencies we pay (both through taxes and user fees) withhold information, restrict our ability to deal with issues, and hold our properties hostage for months/years while they generate that oh so special useless order that is supposed to solve everything.

Gotta love landlording in Ontario, eh?

Ontario's Affordable Housing Crisis Deepens

Ontario's Affordable Housing Crisis Deepens according to Laurie Monsebraaten Social justice reporter, in today's Toronto Star.

I've already left a couple of comments on the article, for all the good that will do ... but hey, why not a blog post as well?

It irks me that so much of what is written about the 'housing crisis' focuses so firmly on affordability ...and few seem at all inclined to look beyond that one issue. Of course, affordability IS an issue - but not simply in the way that it is presented here.

It is an issue for me that I cannot afford to offer people affordable housing because the systems in Ontario are so severely idiotic.

If I make a bad choice in who to rent to - or even, as in our most recent nightmare, a reasonable choice who then hooks up with a jerk (she, on her own, was a reasonable tenant - always late, but rent was paid, place was clean and well maintained ... it wasn't until he showed up that things got ugly...but unfortunately, landlords can neither predict nor prevent such things)- I can be on the hook for thousands of dollars.

That's not thousands of dollars in lost rental income, boys and girls... that's actual money out of my pocket.

That's thousands of dollars that I have to actually pay - to agencies like the LTB and Sheriff's Office and so on to do nothing useful.... to the hydro and gas and water and insurance and mortgage companies who all expect to be paid no matter what.... and to fix the damages angry deadbeats cause.  The lost rental income, that's extra and not included in the thousands of dollars my nightmare cost me.

And to add insult to injury, I still have to support these people through my taxes, even though I knew damn well that they were paying NOTHING for shelter (but still receiving their full shelter allowance) and he was working full time, as well.

My squatters cost me ONE THIRD of my GROSS income for last year. Not net income. Gross. And yeah, that is gross.  If I happen to wind up with more than 1 bad tenant in a year, I'm going to be working my butt off to pay their bills and my taxes (which they also benefit from)... and have not one red cent to pay my own bills.  How is that reasonable?

Our case is not unique.... drop by the Ontario Landlords Association forums and read for a bit and you'll see that these sorts of messes are happening in every part of the province. It's not just MY LTB office and Sheriff's Office that are filled with incompetent and uncaring people - it's everywhere.

Read some of the tenant activist sites too - they're a laugh riot. So many people so convinced that every single landlord is rolling in cash, and should be required to not only pay taxes to support them, but also pay through the nose to accommodate people's disabilities, bad financial choices, etc.... oh, and if we don't keep them in the style in which they like to live, they can go to the LTB and ask for rent abatements even for damages and issues THEY CAUSE and don't bother to let us know about.... lots of how-to's about that as well.  

Sure, we need more affordable housing in Ontario - but to expect landlords to provide it and then not provide landlords with any reasonable recourse to deal with problem tenants is utterly ridiculous. We support low income Ontarians through our taxes....  and now you want the rest of my income too? Seriously?

As I've posted before, there are things that could be done to immediately improve the situation without spending any additional money. But do you know what? I have written to housing critics, MPPs, party leaders, and reporters - and I can not get a single one of them to bother to respond, never mind to DO anything.

I've tried to engage some of those tenant activist types in meaningful discussions as well .... clearly ain't happening... they can't seem to wrap their heads around the concept of moving beyond making demands and name-calling.

It is all incredibly frustrating.

Ways to address problems that don't cost taxpayers more money?! What a totally ridiculous concept! That's not what we need!!! We need a housing bonus... increased shelter allowances.... more human rights laws to force landlords not to discriminate.... more public housing.... more more more always more money!!!

Yeah right.... Ontario must be like the landlords, eh.... rolling in cash with nothing better to do with it than throw it around.

Personally, I think that not one more red cent should go to solving the housing crisis - and homelessness crisis as well - until we have actually implemented the low/no-cost possibilities.

FIRST you do the (relatively) quick and easy fixes ... then if they don't work, you start throwing money at problems.

Ontario has not done that first step.

WHY is it so hard to implement solutions that don't cost money (at ALL levels of government)? Neoliberalism, my friends... if no one is going to make bunches of money off of something, what good is it? None, of course.

Neoliberal societies focus on money... the economy.... money, money, money. Not people, and certainly not solving problems. It's all about making money.

Implement my solutions, no one gets rich....  so why bother?

Sad, innit?


Oh here...decided to save you the hassle of going to look for my proposed low/no cost approaches to solve the issue of landlords discriminating (because we have to!) against people on government assistance:

1. notification to OW/ODSP workers re: rent not being paid = STOP paying shelter allowance pending resolution (so that at least that can be recovered once LTB gives order, and to reduce motivation to mess up, misuse the rent $$)
2. when rent paid directly to landlord by arrangement, landlord must be notified when that is going to stop (currently, tenants make one phone call to worker, and surprise, no more rent). Include consent for notification in the initial intent to rent.
3. retraining at LTB - specifically attitudinal adjustment re: justifying delays and other assorted nonsense because "you'll get an order" - they need to understand that an order is often meaningless. Also need to understand that by protecting the deadbeats, they are harming the majority of low income tenants who do pay their rent.
4. Sheriff's office needs retraining, as well - and either enough resources to carry out evictions in reasonable time frame, or end their monopoly - allow landlords to pay baliffs, off duty police officers, whatever.

Landlord Ordered to Pay Tenant $800K Over Bedbug Infestation

Landlord Ordered to Pay Tenant $800K Over Bedbug Infestation .... ouch!

Am very glad that things are not quite as litigious here in Ontario - being a landlord is plenty challenging enough without having to worry about this sort of thing...

We're fortunate in that we have never had a tenant with bed bugs. Nor are we likely to, since we do a pre-emptive spray each time there is a turnover. I don't understand why more landlords don't do that - especially in rooming homes... so much cheaper and so much less aggravation than waiting until there is a problem. 

Anyway .... hubby does treat bed bugs - usually on behalf of landlords, who are required to pay even when this is actually a totally ludicrous requirement.

It makes some sense, I guess, in multi-unit properties and rooming houses... but in single family homes, a bedbug infestation really has nothing whatsoever to do with the landlord.

Even more aggravating is the fact that effective treatment of bedbugs requires that the people who live in the unit cooperate - and many don't.

No skin off their nose if the landlords have to pay for repeated treatments because they don't do - or stop doing - what is needed.  And I suppose it's not surprising that people often don't want to let others know they have them - which, unfortunately, all too often contributes to more serious infestations, and contamination of more locations.

In any case, in the Maryland case, it sounds like the landlords were, in fact, remiss, in that they did not ensure the problem was properly dealt with - but more than $800k  in damages seems a ~tad~ extreme!

Nice job cleaning up the yard