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

Should investors be on the hook for their tenants’ bad behaviour?

Notify me of new replies via email
Canadian Realestate Magazine | 06 Nov 2014, 10:00 AM Agree 0
Investors should be bracing for more Canadian municipalities following in the footsteps of a small university town in Nova Scotia, which is suggesting that landlords face fines if their tenants routinely ignore noise and liquor laws.
  • JS - Victoria BC | 06 Nov 2014, 01:14 PM Agree 0
    "Another way to be prepared for the risks of renting to students, adds Irving, is to include a clause in the lease that ensures the investor is covered in the event a fine is handed down for bad tenant behaviour."

    This clause should be standard all leases (residential or commercial) as landlords are in the situations of providing real estate situations and not in the business of being responsible for other people actions. If the individual leasee is old enough and mature enough to seek out a rental situation, they are also old enough and mature enough to be responsible for their own actions. If you seek responsibility - you accept accountability.
  • K. Read | 06 Nov 2014, 01:36 PM Agree 0
    This is nothing new. Strata corporations require the owners to be responsible for behaviour of tenants and their guests.
    Fines are issued to the owner.
    Best protection is to have a reputable licensed property manager handle the leasing. There is a skill involved in selecting tenants, whether students or not.
    K. Read
  • simon c, vancouver | 06 Nov 2014, 06:54 PM Agree 0
    This is totally wrong! What would you think if the landlord were jailed for life when his tenant committed murder? This is another example of the authorities passing the responsibility of law enforcement to citizens in general. The authorities are finding easy targets to get their money (in fines, cost, etc.) but making no real efforts in educating the general public to observe and conform the law. How far are you willing to be pushed?
  • Concerning landlord | 07 Nov 2014, 07:01 PM Agree 0
    I agree with Simon. City just trying to grab a cash grab on the owners. The students are well educated at university or college level should have common sense to realize they are responsible for their action. The landlords are not responsible for them. Maybe make there parents responsible -- they are the ones who nurture them and are supposed to help them, not the landlord. This generation of students are umbrella from their parents over everything so make their parents pay for all the children's action.
  • E. Harold | 19 Nov 2014, 09:45 AM Agree 0
    what a load of crap - Pass the buck, eh ? - charge the person who committed the offence ? - who goes to jail ? - utter nonsense !!!
  • KP Whitby | 24 Nov 2014, 09:50 AM Agree 0
    Including a clause in the lease "that ensures the investor is covered in the event a fine is handed down for bad tenant behaviour" is all well and good and can't hurt, however in the event the municipality levels a charge and fine against the Property Owner (Landlord) this can be registered on title and will be paid, in the event the tenant is not able to pay the fine or just refuses the Landlord gets nothing but an additional bill if he chooses to pursue collection and the tenant moves on. I feel the tenant should be charged and the charges pursued aggressively and reported to the University or college of attendance where there could also be some form of sanctions after all they are paid for by tax dollars. This may get the message across but I guess what I am saying is lay the blame where it belongs and charge the offender.
  • E. Harold | 15 Dec 2014, 09:40 AM Agree 0
    absolutely ridiculous !!! - if parents are not responsible for the acts of the children WHY shaft a Landlord because of their upbringing - Bring back the Strap and Spanking - a good whack on the ass Does wake people up !!!
  • Hans | 21 Dec 2014, 12:51 PM Agree 0
    The township that imposes these by laws can be taken to court and be held accountable for trying to shuffle the fines to the land lord instead of collecting from the tenants who are residents of the township and are responsible for any other bylaw violations . I think this stems from the idea that some how the landlord is being cast into the role of a host like at your house party where you offer alcohol to your guests and then can be held liable for their actions attributed to their alcohol consumption at your party. Tenants are residents and not visitors. Townships should beware of creating unconstitutional by laws .
  • Ron Graner | 30 Dec 2014, 07:44 PM Agree 0
    Once a Tenant has rented or leased a property, unless it is an emergency, the Landlord cannot enter without 24 hours notice and only between the hours of 8:am and 8:pm. There are many other rules that restrict the Landlord from violating the Tenant's right to "quiet enjoyment". How then is the Landlord to be held responsible for its Tenant's behaviour, other than those remedies stipulated in the lease agreement? And how can the Landlord determine if that behaviour violates the agreement?
  • | 11 Jan 2015, 06:31 PM Agree 0
    Hans is absolutely correct. This is why, if someone runs from the police and gets away, they cannot charge the owner of the car for a hit and run because the police have to know who it was that actually drove the car...because you CAN'T charge someone for the crimes perpetrated by another.
    It is that simple and small town NS is about to learn a lesson if they think this by-law will stand up in court. Good luck to them, yes I am infuriated at the thought of it.
  • | 19 Jan 2015, 11:56 AM Agree 0
    This will be overturned in any court in the nation, no can be held acceptable for the actions of another.
  • Lin | 03 Feb 2015, 07:42 AM Agree 0
    This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. REALLY ! How can you be responsible for the actions of others, when you are not there to patrol the tenant. Whoever decided this one clearly has never been a landlord. The laws are already heavily in favor for the tenant. Just make it easier for a landlord to evict a tenant.
    I believe if this law is passed it will have a huge impact on investment in real estate.
  • DC | 10 Feb 2015, 01:24 PM Agree 0
    That fine and dandy - collect money - hit them where it hits but in the wrong direction. If there is a clause this could be grounds for immediate eviction, would it work ? Or would they just sit it out by dragging the landlord and tenat act ? It should simplified, first offence equal warning. Second time - 24 hours and out of here. Just like being rowdy in a public area and being ask (not an option) to leave.
  • Monica Benoit | 16 Apr 2015, 09:48 PM Agree 0
    When the tenant tells the Landlord s/he won't pay for the noise/liquor fine, what form does the Landlord plan to use to recuperate the money at the Housing Tribunal?? I am not aware of a form that covers this kind of thing. You might get away under 'Damages' but that would depend on the arbitrator....
  • Fed Up | 14 Oct 2015, 11:58 AM Agree 0
    High time this society in general holds the offender accountable and responsible for their actions.
    Its called being a decent human being and should be taught right from toddlerhood.
    Stop passing the Buck!!!!!
  • BC investor | 14 Oct 2015, 12:15 PM Agree 0
    Id like to know where there is a landlord's/investors board to protect the rights of the landlord/investor.
    we take all the risks and the tenant gets all the rights.
    eviction is next to impossible unless you move in or a close relative moves in, or the place has to be gutted and is unlivable.
    good luck getting a tenant out for anything else, even failure to pay rent, that took over two months and the supreme court ruling, bailiffs and thousands of dollars in fees/lost rent/damages/bailiff costs/storage of their crap costs/cleaning costs/ on and on it goes.
    Good luck ever trying to recoup any of it, as when they finally get ousted out by the bailiff they are nowhere to be found to try to collect.
    Would be fair if a landlord can get a garnishee order against a tenant for such gross behavior.
    And yes they were thoroughly screened prior to a rental agreement being signed, some xxxxxx are just extremely versed on how to play the system.........
    Even a fantastic property management company not go to such time/expense to persue such a XXXXX tenant on your behalf. They seem to spend little time to service the basics of maintenance issues in strata complex properties (my experience) for their 10% fees never mind asking them to waste endless hours to file applications/arbitration/evictions/court hearings/gas and travel time to all the many hearings involved etc..... you can bet all those costs would be handed down to you the landlord.
    Stock market is looking better by the day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Penny | 15 Jan 2016, 03:41 PM Agree 0
    This is a ridiculous proposal. It's just another reason Landlord's don't want to rent to anyone less than an A tenant as some of the advice suggests. This makes it hugely difficult for some good worthy, but down on their luck, folks a chance to rent a decent place.
    The laws should make it easier to get tenants out of they are trouble and then Landlord's would likely
    give them more chances instead of putting all the burden on the Landlord's driving them away from the business or greatly reducing units geared toward less than A tenants who are still good people trying to do their best in their life
Post a reply