New Site

So ... since I am no longer welcome at the Ontario Landlord's Association forums - nice, eh...take my $99 and kick me out when I did not break a single one of their posted rules -- and then refuse so much as to respond to my emails... clearly won't be recommending them to anyone any more.

ANYWAY... because of that, I got motivated to set up my own website - complete with a forum... am also blogging there... not sure what, if anything I'll do with this blog, but please do drop by my new home at http://onlandlording.org .... and would love to have you stop by and chat at the ONlandlording forum, also.... can even use private messaging, profiles, search, and so on.... no control freaks :)  Hope to see you there.

The Legalized Theft Board

I know that it aggravates some people when I refer to the LTB (as in the Landlord & Tenant Board, which is their proper name) as the Legalized Theft Board.

But that has most certainly been not only my experience, but also the experience of many other landlords who post in the Ontario Landlords Association forums - and, no doubt, of thousands more besides.

I happened to be on the LTB site yesterday looking something up and noted, once again, their (supposed) mission statement:

The mission of the Landlord and Tenant Board is to inform landlords and tenants about their rights and responsibilities under the Residential Tenancies Act and provide balanced and timely dispute resolution in accordance with the law.

Right there on the front page. And hey... if they actually did that, I'd be happy to call them the Landlord Tenant Board.

Unfortunately, what they claim to do bears little/no resemblance to what they actually do.

• Rules are required to be followed to the letter by landlords, but not at all by tenants. Legal resources provided to tenants, but not landlords. Privacy for tenant information, but not landlords'.... where in the mission statement does it suggest tenants should be advantaged at every turn while landlords are not?
• almost 6 months for a case where the tenant gave notice, tried to rescind it 2 days before their stated move-out date, and then paid not one blessed cent rent for that almost 6 months? HOW is that timely?
• the adjudicator finds that the landlord is credible, the tenant is not, and awards judgements to the landlord on all three counts - but goes out of his way to ensure that not one cent will ever be collected and that the tenants get several extra weeks at the landlord's expense  - as a result of a conversation after the hearing to which the landlord was not privy?  HOW is that balanced?

I could go on and on ... I've learned an awful lot as a result of my research & reading - but I can tell you with 100% assurance that the vast majority of evidence - BY FAR - is that the LTB in Ontario has completely lost sight of its mission statement and its purpose.

The mission statement would be far more accurately stated as follows:

The mission of the Legalized Theft Board is to ensure security of tenancy for all tenants whether they live up to their responsibilities under the Residential Tenancies Act or not.

Period, full stop.

Interestingly, the LTB seems to now be rather ~slow~ to post annual reports and/or recent decisions on their website. The last Annual Report which is available is from 2009 - 2010; decisions end as of December 2011.

Things that make one go hmmmm.... could it be that they know they've lost the plot and are loathe to advertise it? Inquiring minds want to know!

In any case, the people who are most impacted by the failure of the LTB to live up to its mission statement? Not landlords.

We are hurt financially - but hey, we still have a roof over our head (at least until you get ~lucky~ like I did and get more than one problem tenant in a short period and lose everything thanks to the Legalized Theft Board) ....

it is the good tenants who don't take advantage of the ~system~ (using the term loosely) to rape their landlords that are harmed.

It's the single mom or dad on OW who can't find a landlord to rent to her because she has no garnish-able source of income.

Or the person with a disability on ODSP who is even less likely to find a place because they not only have no garnish-able source of income, they have the potential to cost us even more money and aggravation because Ontario has decided that landlords are responsible for any and all accommodations, no matter how unreasonable or expensive.

Or the older potential tenant who we are cautious about renting to because you know, they could become disabled or develop Alzheimer's and hey, guess what? Landlords in Ontario are regularly forced to cough up for any and all accommodations, no matter how unreasonable or expensive.

Or the person who is coming from another country, or from a mental health facility, or from the streets... yeah, no... no credit rating, no garnish-able source of income? No shelter, sorry.

It sucks. It breaks my heart. But don't blame the landlords. Blame your Ontario government - the one that has decided that the ONLY people in Ontario who should have rights when it comes to rental housing are the deadbeats & scammers.

Not the good tenants.

Not the good landlords.

Sorry 'bout that... I wish I could be part of the solution. But you know what? Still can't find anyone that can be bothered listening.

Cindy Forster, housing critic for the ONDP did respond to my email - well sort of - she ignored MY email, but did respond to one someone more well known among the ONDP forwarded on my behalf - but that was more than 2 months ago now... somehow I think that "we will have to get back to you in response..." means "please just go away."

Pretty sad when my own party can't be bothered, eh?  *sigh*

But at least they did send an acknowledgement - the Ontario Liberal's can't even be bothered with that. My tax dollars at work. Or not.

Ah well...I'm a stubborn old bitch ...think it's time to start yet another letter writing campaign.

Perhaps this time, I will post the actual letter, and names, addresses & dates of each person I send it to, and any response. Still no guarantee I will get a response, but hey, it might be a fun experiment, no?

So... here we go again

As a result of all the nonsense involved in getting things sorted with the Dirt Squirrel here in Victoria Harbour, we knew that our other house was a ticking time bomb...

same sort of situation there... single mom on OW ... now that we are no longer so naïve as to think that the LTB, Ontario government, and/or Sheriff's Office have any interest at all in ensuring that landlords don't get ripped off - but instead, are all about helping deadbeats and squatters to do exactly that ... I've been dealing with constant anxiety knowing that it could all go to shit in Peterborough too.

And sure enough:

Here... see for yourself.

Holes punched in ceiling of attic apartment
(which is NOT part of their rental and was left LOCKED.
Window is broken, and the fridge we bought specifically for our use up there is gone.)

 

There are no undamaged doors remaining in the house.

 

View from the other side of the door.

 

Demolished wall.

 

Shower stall is bent/broken, bathroom is filthy.
Don't you love the sink? Wanna move in?

But at least there IS still a sink upstairs - in the downstairs bathroom, the entire vanity is gone. Just gone.

 

The entire basement is buried in a mountain of disgusting mouldy clothing.
While I was there, the tenant's bf emptied the dehumidifier tray - into the pile of clothes, NOT the sink -
too drunk to make it to the sink.
Suppose I should be happy there is even a working sink.
Seems to me it rather defeats the purpose of a dehumidifier though.

 
 

They demolished the walls - but hey, look - they started to paint the stairs...doesn't that look wunnerful?

 

The tenant has made a whole lot of excuses to keep me from driving the 2.5 hours (one way) to check things out (gee, I can't imagine WHY?) ... and when I did force the issue, have my daughter bus to Peterborough from Oshawa and back to put a notice on her door, since the tenant is ignoring my Facebook messages, and then make the drive, she was "too embarrassed" to be there (according to the drunk who was there with her son to show me around and assure me that he could fix it all for me. Honest. For cheap! Oh, and she didn't mean for any of this to happen ... oh, alright... as long as she didn't MEAN to destroy my property, it's all good now, I guess.)

So... since I am not able to talk to her, still have no idea when she intends to get the **** out of my property, or if it is going to be another fight. *sigh* On the plus side, she did actually pay August's rent. Of course, to fix everything they've demolished will likely cost every cent of every month's rent they have paid to date and then some.

Do have one tool now that I didn't have with the other house though - as much as the thought of it disgusts me - and the hassle & expense of having to drive 2.5 hours each way every time I need to work or go to the doctor or whatever.... the attic apartment IS mine and I do have the right to move into it. Since she won't talk to me via facebook or the phone, and since I clearly can't allow them to continue to live in such filth and to do any more damage, I've given her notice that I'll be moving in on Monday. Hubby's decided to join me, at least for this week ... wants to fix the attic window for me, replace the locks and the door, etc, so that I'll be safe up there. It's going to be SUCH a ~fun~ week!

And - by the way - as flip /uncaring/coping as this post probably sounds, you can rest assured - especially you, tenant who promised not to let me down, not to prove me wrong and hubby right, etc etc - I am trying my damnedest to stay mad ...and bitchy .... in reality I am absolutely and completely devastated by what you have done to my beautiful old house. The only house that I ever bought...painted... owned.... MY house.

just. devastated.

So ...Tamara... you came up with Dirt Squirrel ...got a name for this one yet?

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?

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!

Too Funny

DS found my blog and called and complained to the Midland Police (wrong police department for this area, hon... but thanks for letting me know where you are; good to know).

Have, at his request, fixed the one place where her actual name was included, which was, actually, in a direct quote from a police officer that actually knew her name - the one that called today had a different name for her, apparently.  Interesting - I suppose when one makes a habit of ripping people off, the use of a number of different names makes sense.

Funny how DS didn't have any hesitation to use our names to spread lies, but objects to having any of hers in any way associated with the truth, eh?  Funny - but again, not surprising.