Canadian Realestate Magazine forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Controversial eviction law to be reviewed

Notify me of new replies via email
Canadian Realestate Magazine | 23 Jun 2015, 11:29 AM Agree 0
The Liberal government is set to review a controversial eviction law after a property management company charged a tenant two month’s rent following an eviction in 2012.
  • | 23 Jun 2015, 03:50 PM Agree 0
    The Land Lord & Tenant act being followed by the tribunal is a joke as far as the Land Lords are concerned. It is ridiculous that the laws side with the so called tenants. Most of the tenants will have enough money to pursue their luxury life but not enough to pay the Land Lord. It will take almost six months to evict a tenant. And by the time they vacate the property it will be a mess and so many things are broken. Most of the small so called Land Lords are the most sufferers. They invest in properties not to become Land Lords but to make a living when not in a position to work. The law is one sided.
    I had a tenant living a luxury life and driving a Range Rover etc: He started as a good tenant, gradually defaults, then some times he comes with cash payment. Then he vanished ( I realised late) but putting his close relatives in the property. No rent coming. Every time I am told "he is out of country, coming next month". By the time I could evict these people, it took me more than six months and 8 months rent. By the time the sheriff came they were gone. I had to spent another $ 5,000/= to fix the place.
    The law has to be enforced quicker instead of favouring the tenants only. The property management in this case is right, I wish I could do that. My tenant did not leave any trace where he is. There should be some means to trace such people, make mandatory to provide a SIN.
  • | 24 Jun 2015, 12:10 AM Agree 0
    I agree with what you say - we rented to a similar tenant (questionable - our bad) who we had to evict after considerable damage to our suite. The damage was actually caused by the Abbotsford BC police force breaking exterior and interior doors and finding nothing to charge our tenant and no responsibility to compensate - (but promising they would be back)
    We were probably lucky that the tenant did leave but we were out by about $3,000.00 to repair the damage
  • Maxy | 29 Jun 2015, 03:27 AM Agree 0
    Just wondering whether tenant's rights should trump landlord's rights. Both parties should have equal and balanced protection under a law that makes sense. I have come to believe that something being legal is not synonymous with being fair, right or just. We have seen cases where a perpetrator of an outrageous civil act boldly declares "I have not done anything illegal". Our society is built on or is supposed to be built on ethical and moral codes and these should be the foundation of our laws. Admittedly actions of a few landlords are despicable but that does not justify a law that imposes blanket punishment on or creates severe hardship for all landlords. Both lanlords and tenants should be responsible for their bad behaviours in equal measure as well as have equal protection against bad behaviour by either party.
  • Abigailbowker | 05 Jul 2015, 02:43 AM Agree 0
    Since landlords cannot evict tenants without a just cause, the law gives has stirred up some controversy through the Ellis Act. Google lawyer.In reviewing a petition for a stay of eviction, the court shall specifically consider resulting from strain of eviction controversy; relocation search and moving.

Post a reply