Date: 2017-06-28; File Number: TST-83712-17
Case Overview:
- The first lease was signed in March 2012, but the tenancy started on 2012/04/01: This is a one-year fixed term tenancy, with a rent of 2650 dollars/month.
- The second lease was signed in January 2013, but the tenancy started on 2013/04/01: This is a 15-month fixed term tenancy, with a rent of 2680 dollars/month.
- The landlords requested that she start paying 2680 dollars/month, starting January 2013. This was proven by the tenant submitting copies of a rent check dated 2013/01/05 for 2680 dollars.
- The third lease was signed in April 2014, but the tenancy started on 2014/05/01: This is a 24-month fixed term tenancy, with a rent of 2740 dollars/month.
- The tenant started paying the landlords 2740 dollars/month in June 2014, all the way until they vacated the unit on 2016/04/30.
- The tenant testified that she received no notices from the landlords with respect to any of the rent increases written in the three leases.
案件概述：
- 第一份租约是在2012年3月时签署的，但租赁实际是在2012/04/01开始的 — 这是个一年的定期租赁，租金为2650元/月。
- 第二次租约是在2013年1月时签署的，但租赁实际是在2013/04/01开始的 — 这是个15个月的定期租赁，租金为2680元/月。
- 房东要求她从2013年1月开始就每月支付2680元。这点我们可以从租户提供的那份在2013年1月5日的支票副本里看到。
- 第三次租约是在2014年4月签署的，但租赁实际是在 2014/05/01开始的 — 这是个两年的定期租赁，租金为2740元/月。
- 房客从2014年6月开始向房东支付2740元/月，一直到2016/04/30。
- 房客作证说，在这段时间里，她除了那三份租约以外，没有从房东那里收到任何关于租金上涨的通知。
Case Ruling:
- The landlords shall pay the tenant 2580 dollars. This is the total excess rent that the tenant has paid to the landlords over this time. The landlords shall also pay the tenant 50 dollars for the cost of filing this application, which brings the total to 2630 dollars.
- The tenant has the right, at any time, to collect the full amount owing (outstanding balance), as prescribed in this order.
法官的决定：
- 房东应向租客支付2580美元，作为在这段时间内租客支付的所有超额租金。 房东而且还需要支付50美元的申请费，总计2630美元。
- 租客有权在任何时候按照这份法官的裁决来收取全部欠款。
Things to Remember:
- A landlord shall not increase the rent charged to a tenant without first giving them at least 90 days written notice. The notice shall be in a format approved by the Board (N1 form), and must clearly indicate the landlord’s intention to increase the rent, as well as the amount of the new rent. An increase in rent is invalid until the landlord sends out a sufficient notice (Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, SO 2006, c. 17, s. 116).
- A lease is not a “notice”, it is an agreement. The fact that the rental increases were outlined in the three leases (which the tenant has signed/agreed to), does not relieve the landlords from their legal obligation to give their tenant a proper notice of rent increase. And since the landlords failed to do so, these rental increases were seen as invalid.
- Refer to Price v. Turnbull’s Grove Inc., 2007, ONCA 408 for a precedent case about whether a “notice of rent increase” is valid or not.
- A tenant, or former tenant of a rental unit may apply to the Board to order the landlord to pay the tenant any money the person collected through ways that the Act deemed “unlawful”. No order shall be made under this section with respect to an application filed more than one year after the money was initially collected (Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, SO 2006, c. 17, s. 135).
- The tenant filed this application on March 31, 2017. All of the rent increases at issue in this application took place more than a year before the filing date.
- Refer to Millennium Property Management Inc. v. Dmytraszko, 2015 ONSC 6004 for a precedent case about “void” vs. “unlawful” rental increases. In this case, insufficient notice was given, and the increase in rent also exceeded the amount permitted under the Act.
所以，大家一定要注意：
- 只要房东没有至少提前90天发出涨租的书面通知，就不能向房客收取更多的租金。这个 “通知” 必须采用被LTB批准的格式（N1表格），而且必须明确明确表述房东想要增加租金的意图，以及新租金的金额。在房东发出一份符合标准的通知之前，任何的涨租都是无效的（《住宅租赁法》, 2006年, SO 2006, c.17, s. 116）。
- 租约不能算作 “通知”，因为它只是一个协议。虽然在这个案件的三个租约中都有租金上涨的条例，而且租客已签署/同意了这些租约，但是这并没有免除房东发出涨租通知的法律义务。由于房东没有这样做，所以增长的这些租金会需要退还给租客。
- 有关 “租金上涨通知” 是否有效的先例，请参阅 Price v. Turnbull’s Grove Inc., 2007, ONCA 408。
- 无论是当前的租户，还是前租户，都可向LTB提出申请来命令房东向他们支付由 “非法” 的方式而收取的任何款项。但是如果这些申请拖了一年多才提交的话，LTB就不能下达任何命令 （《住宅租赁法》, 2006年, SO 2006, c.17, s. 135） 。
- 承租人是在2017年3月31日提交的这份申请，但是这份申请中所有有争议的租金上涨都很遗憾地超过了一年的期限。
- 大家一定要分清楚 “无效” 和 “非法” 涨租的区别。具体详情请参阅 Millennium Property Management Inc. v. Dmytraszko，2015 ONSC 6004的先例。在那个案件里，房东不但没有给予足够的通知，还让自己的涨租幅度超过了《住宅租赁法》所允许的范围。
Tom Li Paralegal Services 