CHAPTER 5 LANDLORD’S ANSWER TO TENANT’S T2

THE TENANT HAD CHECKED BOXES “REASONS 1, 3, AND 4” IN LTB’S STANDARD T2 FORM. EACH REASON CARRIED INSTRUCTIONS “SEE ATTACHED WORD DOCUMENT“.

We (landlords) numbered each of the tenant’s 15 Allegations attached to the tenant’s Claim in his Word Documents and answered each allegation in detail (see below) with attached detailed evidence.

1. Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #’s 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6 various parties entered backyard illegally

Landlords submit (R3.2)(R3.4)showing the tenant, (prior to the deck being completed and landscaping restored), introducing a new false claim, now alleging “Not only is it not completed yet as of today you have ADMITTEDLY created a dangerous situation in our backyard for my family and I“. Landlord had not “admitted” anything of the sort and the restoration of the deck was incomplete due solely to the tenant’s conduct and behaviour.

Landlords further submit (R3.3) showing Tribunals Ontario S.26 “Right of Entry, . . . the landlord can enter a Tenant’s rental unit without written notice if there is an emergency“. The tenant then called the police on the landlords when they immediately attended the backyard to put up caution tape around the area the tenant had notified them was allegedly “dangerous”.

The Inspector’s Order to Comply (R1.9) also shows “there was no Code Violation regarding the height of the deck”.

All 5 of the visits to the property set out in tenant’s T2 Word Document paragraph #1, were within the weather permitting time window set out in the contractor’s May 10th email (above) and disclosed to the tenant.

Landlords submit (R1.3) an audio recording covering the entire inspection period recording the tenant greeting the landlord at the scheduled time set out in the Notice and willingly granting entry. This audio evidence shows that, at no time before, during, or after the inspection, did the landlord bully or attempt to bully the tenant, nor was there any opposition from the tenant to the landlord photographing the three tv’s bolted onto walls.

Landlords submit (R3.27) My inspection was cut short as you stood inches away from me, glaring at me clearly to intimidate me”, and (R1.2b) where tenant, replies: “If you were so uncomfortable with the situation you would not have bullied your way into our home“. The audio recorded Evidence (R1.3) shows that the tenant is not being truthful. Landlords submit (R1.6), (see page 1 “A”), from landlord’s paralegal addressing this in detail.

#7. Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #7 – (where the Tenant states)” . . . with a clause that a concrete deck would be present . . . and, if this was not in our lease, we would have never signed the lease . . . which has severely interfered with our enjoyment of the property for money we have been paying each month“, (see Lease Schedule A page 7 titled “General“).

LANDLORD’S ANSWER TO ALLEGATION #7 Landlord submits (R3.6) in which the tenant contradicts his this false allegation by acknowledging that he was informed that the deck would not be “present until spring”: “last year you told us . . . you were first on the list for this year with your contractor“.

Landlords submit (R3.9) where they inform the tenant: “We are considering selling . . . but have not made any decisions . . . and would prefer to leave the decision to sell to align with your schedule to vacate. The concrete yard is first on the contractors lists and we are just waiting for them to schedule the ‘weather permitting’ job. We are in no hurry to sell so please don’t feel the landlords are pressuring you in any way“.

Landlords submit (R3.10), having not received a reply from the tenant, then politely notified the tenant that they were listing the home on mls to close at the expiry of the lease with minimize inconvenience to you“. What had been a cordial relationship up to this point saw the tenant turn hostile immediately following receipt of this email.

Landlords submit (R3.7) a May 23rd email notifying the tenant that the deck contractor “will be hopefully starting on Friday” and asking “to have the lawn furniture, BBQ, and dog droppings removed” and the tenant responding “thanks for the advance notice“. Landlords submit (R3.8) a text to tenant “The work in the back will probably start next week weather permitting” with the tenant on May 28th, replying: “yes everything was removed since the landlords thought he was starting yesterday” showing that the tenant had enjoyed full, unobstructed, use of the backyard throughout the full term of the lease. This contradicts the tenant’s allegation of not having had use of the yard.

(R1.1), is a June 20th 2022 polite email from landlords giving a detailed response and overview to the numerous issues being raised by tenant at that time, including the delivery of the deck and its height. Of all the evidence being submitted here (R1.1) and (R3.14) offer the most concise factual overview on what has taken place, as tenant’s email here falsely alleges that the landlords are the ones harassing, intimidating and threatening him. The tenant rests his entire T2 and his reason for vacating being due specifically to the harassing, intimidating and threatening content in (R1.1) and (R3.14). The only evidence submitted by the tenant alleged to be supporting his allegations in hisT2 are these and they are included as powerful evidence by the landlords’.

The Lease, does NOT support the tenant’s allegation regarding “the deck being present” (see Lease Schedule A page 7 titled “General“). The deck had been included in the lease simply to avoid any possible confusion in the spring when the contractor was arrived and turned the backyard into a construction site. The deck was installed on schedule and budget. Landlords submit (R1.6) (see “E”), an email from landlord’s paralegal addressing this issue in detail.

In Remedy #1 of his T2 the tenant seeks “a rental abatement equal to “$25,000 for 50% of 10 months rent ($25,000.00) for not being able to use the backyard“. The evidence shows that the tenant is knowingly seeking an abatement that he knows he is NOT entitled to.

#8. Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation # 8 – “We have continuously and repeatedly been harassed, and threatened by both our landlords by both email and text“.

LANDLORD’S ANSWER #8 – Tenant has not submitted any evidence to support this claim. Landlords respectfully requests that tenant make available and show these alleged “harassing and threatening emails and texts“. The landlords had been left no choice but to remove their listing from the MLS solely due to the tenant’s repeated hostile and irrational interference, threats, and refusal to allow landlords to show the property.

We have been exemplary landlords for over 25 years and have never been before the LTB prior. The landlords submit an email from the tenant two weeks into the lease (dishwasher complaint) informing the landlords that: “the dishwasher appears to be leaking since we moved in“. The landlords had it repaired the following day (dishwasher receipt).

The Landlords received a text (see furnace complaint) on February 19th, 2022 “our furnace is not working properly we are not getting any heat out of it“. The landlords had Atlantis Heating attend the property that same day and instead of repairing the 4 year old furnace, purchased a brand new top-of-the-line high efficiency furnace (see furnace receipt).

Landlords submit (R3.10), in which the landlords reassure the tenant of their conscious commitment to minimizing any/all inconvenience to him. Landlords submit (R3.11) an email where tenant says “it is a massive inconvenience” for him to allow showings. landlords submit (R3.13) showing a list of Realtors that tried to book appointments. Landlords submit (R3.12a) where tenant is seen saying “anytime is an inconvenience”, and landlords submit (R3.12b) where tenant says he “is not allowing any showings“.

#9. Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #9 May 2nd Charles sent me an email further stating that we could vacate the property immediately without penalty

LANDLORD’S ANSWER #9 – Landlord submits (R3.14) showing that we did offer the tenant “to vacate immediately without penalty“ but the tenant, instead chose to remain in the property through October 18th (6 more months). This email also shows the landlord, despite the tenant’s increasingly hostile attacks, says “if you have interest in putting this back on track simply send me an email confirming same and give me a generic idea as to how long you would like to remain in the home and I’m confident the landlords can work something out . . . . and “the landlords would be happy to continue with you as tenants, but this requires a fresh approach including mutual respect and constructive dialogue”. These is not the single word supporting the tenant’s allegation here of the landlord trying to force a tenant to vacate the property as alleged by tenant.

Landlords submit (R3.15) a May 2nd email where the Tenant replies: “I find your email (R3.14 above) insulting, harassing and threatening“. Landlord have repeatedly asked the tenant to show them the “insulting, harassing and threatening” content he was alleging.

The tenant chose to not pay his rent for July, August, September or October. The landlords received an email from the tenant 2 days following the lease automatically converting to month-to-month giving only 16 days notice. (R3.34).

#10. Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #10. – “Charles sent me an email stating that the reason they purchased the home was to rent it and why would they want to cut it short. Yet further in the email states that they will be showing the home for sale with a close date of September 30th giving us 24 hours notice to show it. Again, all of this was to further harass us and interfere with our quiet enjoyment of the property to get us to leave“.

LANDLORD’S ANSWER ALLEGATION #10 Landlord submits (Standard Lease) showing that September 30th was the “fixed length of time ending on 2022/09/30” set out in the LTB’s Ontario Standard Lease Form and the landlords were observably giving the tenant adequate legal notice of their intentions to build-out the basement at the end of the lease. The landlords’ email the day earlier (Paragraph #9 above) contradicts the tenant’s claim that “the landlords were trying to get us to leave“.

#11. Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #11 “. . . again listed our property for sales with no intention of selling . . . to further harass and interfere with our quiet enjoyment of our home“.


LANDLORD’S ANSWER ALLEGATION #11: The evidence shows that it was the tenant, in fact, that was repeatedly and willingly harassing the landlords. Landlords submit video (R4.38) showing the tenant and his family members driving by the landlord’s private residence taunting and provoking the landlords. The landlords submit (R4.38b) showing another incidence of drive-by harassment by the tenant, while all the while claiming to be “fearful for his safety and the safety of his wife and children”. Landlords submit audio (R3.5b) showing the tenant and his wife harassing the landlords trying to start a physical fight when the tenant was specifically instructed by the By-law officer to not interfere with the landlord’s while the landlord’s were restoring their landscaping. Landlords submit (R3.5).

The landlords did list the property for sale again, with numerous Realtors requesting viewings, however the tenant again refused to co-operate and/or allow any viewings. The landlords submit (R3.18) showing one responding Realtor booked a viewing, and the landlord sent the tenant a 24 Hour Notice To Enter but received no confirmation.

Landlords submit an audio recording (R3.19) of landlord’s arrival the following day with the Realtor and his clients being greeted by the tenant refusing them entry due to a typing error in the notice.

Landlords submit (R3.20) an August 8th email showing the landlords asking the tenant politely for confirmation to show the house. The tenant again refused to reply or co- operate.

Landlords submits (R3.21) showing that the landlords booked another Realtor showing on August 19th for the following day giving the required 24 hr notice. Landlords submits (R3.22) where the tenant on August 20th, replied to landlord’s request for a showing saying: “stop sending these harassing emails to attempt to interfere with his quiet enjoyment . . . no-one will be allowed entry”.

Upon attending the property with a Realtor and his clients, on August 20th to legally show the home, the landlords discovered that the their master key would no longer operate the front door lock. The landlord attempted to gain entry through the side garage door but the master key would again not open the lock.

The landlords submit (R3.23b)(R3.23c)and (R3.23d) which are photographs of the (changed) front door lock on that day and a photograph of the original lock. The landlords submit (R3.23a) showing the landlord’s emailed the tenant informing him of his legal obligations: “you have changed the locks without permission. This is against the law. Please provide keys asap”.

The tenant chose to ignore the landlords requests. The landlords submit (R3.24) showing the tenant’s reply to the landlord stating: “you have forcibly and illegally attempted to enter our home several times without consent . . . . . the tenant will pursue a civil course of action against you for your libellous activities, and will seek damages in excess of $5 Million”. The landlords had legally attempted to enter the garage of their own property but the tenant had changed the entry lock through the garage as well as the front door.

Landlords submit (R3.17) showing them again attempting to legally gain access to their property on September 15th, (2 weeks before delivering his Notice to vacate) and tenant refusing: “I feel that your request is completely disingenuous . . . ” and introducing significant false and disparaging, salacious false allegations against the landlord “my 12 year old daughter feels completely uncomfortable being anywhere near Charles especially after introducing himself to our neighbour as ‘I am not the pedophile that people say that I am’. We have had to call the police multiple times . . . “. Landlords respectfully asks tenant to present what evidence he has to support this egregious and false allegation. Does anyone believe that 2 weeks before moving, he had not already entered into a lease with the new landlord weeks if not months prior?

Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #12 “Landlord entered our home illegally . . . and knowingly and admittedly took photographs of our personal belongings without our consent“.

LANDLORD’S ANSWER #12: Landlords submit (R1.4) showing the landlords did not take photographs of tenant’s personal belongings, but rather took only three photographs of three televisions the tenant had hung on the wall and did not ask for the landlord’s permission to drill holes in the wall and install the TV mounts onto the wall. Landlords submit (R1.5a)(R1.5b)(R1.5c)(R1.5d) showing the damaged walls. Landlord submits (Schedule A) – Agreement to Lease – Residential, see Clause 40) “The tenant hereby consents to the landlord . . . to photograph the Leased Premises during periodic inspections“, and section 12 Changes to the Rental Unit of the Residential Tenancy Agreement it states the following: “The tenant may install decorative items, such as pictures and window coverings. This is subject to any reasonable restrictions set out in the additional terms under Section 15. The tenant cannot make other changes to the rental unit without the landlord’s permission“. Landlords submit (R1.6)an email from landlord’s paralegal addressing this issue with the tenant.

Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #13 – “On June 26th landlord sent me an email stating they were seeking to evict me”.

LANDLORD’S ANSWER To Allegation #13 – The landlord submits (R3.42) in which the landlord politely informed the tenant that his conduct would lead to him being evicted. The landlord states: “You are in breach of our agreement by hanging up tv’s. Clause 15, obstructing our right of entry, entering into a contract in bad faith, violating our rights as a landlord, not providing a copy of insurance, harassing the landlord, falsely accusing us of threats and harassment and being fearful when no one has threatened you. Please specify the threats that I have made that are making you fearful. We are very concerned about your actions and behaviour and will seek to evict you”.

The landlord submits (R3.27) showing that on June 25th the landlord, had addressed the Tenant’s behaviour and conduct during the June 21st inspection: “My inspection was cut short as you stood inches away from me, glaring at me clearly to intimidate me as I tried to inspect. You required that I wear a mask yet neither you or your family members wore a mask and you chose not to social distance causing me stress. It is clear that you entered into a contract in bad faith fully intending to hang up your tv’s and hung them up immediately”.

The landlords submit (R3.28) an email in which the tenant replies on June 24th stating: “If you were so uncomfortable with the situation you would not have bullied your way into our home”. The landlords resubmit (R1.3) an audio recording of the entire Inspection period, showing no bullying by the landlord and no resistance to the landlord taking three photographs by the tenant.

The landlords submit (R3.29) an email in which the Tenant states: “Once again you continue to harass and threaten me after repeatedly asking you to STOP! Now threatening that you are seeking to evict us under LTA, when we have done nothing wrong. I am not sure if you do not comprehend the law or just chose to ignore it but you are clearly very uneducated “.

This June 26th tenant’s email continues: “I will be clear, due to your aggressive, harassing and threatening behaviour, I fear for the safety of myself, wife and children and because of this behaviour CHUCK AND YOURSELF ARE NOT PERMITTED ON THE PROPERTY AT ANY POINT. IF YOU OR CHUCK CHOSE TO ATTEMPT TO COME ON THE PROPERTY The landlords WILL CONSIDER THIS AN ACT OF AGGRESSION”!

The tenant had submitted no evidence to support any of his repeated allegations of “bullying, aggressive, harassing and threatening behaviour”. Note the tenant’s transition to all cap threats and provokingly abbreviating landlord’s name “Charles” to slang “CHUCK” here (all caps). Note tenant’s use of CHUCK in each of his T2 word document headings of what he was alleging to be his evidence.

Clearly, the tenant’s words here are not the words of someone who is “fearful for his personal safety and the safety of their family” as the tenant is alleging in his Complaint, and clearly shows the tenant harassing, intimidating and threatening the landlords while lying to LTB in a legal proceeding.

The landlords submit (R1.6) (see page 2, “C”), an email that the landlord’s paralegal sent the Tenant to address the numerous issues being alleged, specifically the “dangerous deck“, by the tenant and offering the tenant optional time and/or days, to allow the landlord access to the backyard to complete the Landscaping.

The landlord submits (R3.41) showing the tenant reply to the paralegal saying “Asking for 2 weeks to complete putting in safety railings and some landscaping is ridiculous and the landlords will not allow Charles and/or his wife on the property…”. It was in fact the railing contractor that the landlords had spoke with (just in case it was needed) that said “it would take 2 weeks after receiving the measurements of the deck” but the tenant was not allowing the landlords into the backyard to measure or even verify that a railing was required.

Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation # 14 – On June 28th I received notification that a N13 with the LTB stating landlords intentions to do renovations to the home and I need to vacate. This was clearly filed in Bad Faith as evidenced by the fact that 2 days previously landlords threatened me in writing that they were evicting me for completely different reasons”.

LANDLORD’S ANSWER TO ALLEGATION #14 – The N13 was not filed in Bad Faith. The landlords submit (R3.30) showing that prior to entering into this tenancy the landlords had selected a contractor to build-out the basement but delayed doing so for a year to accommodate the tenant. The landlords, upon the tenant vacating the property in October 2022, had the contractor built out the basement. The landlords submit (R3.32) showing tenant’s reply to paralegal in which he restates his 4 key false arguments and overused claims of harassment and bad faith. tenant refused to comply with landlord’s N13. The landlords withdrew the N13 solely due to tenant’s all caps threats echoing that “the landlords were not allowed on the premises“.

Tenant’s Word Doc Allegation #15 – As further proof of landlord’s bad faith filing of the N13 as of July 3rd 2022 the house is still up for sale on MLS”.

LANDLORD’S ANSWER TO ALLEGATION 15 – The landlords cannot see how a house being offered for sale while building out the basement could possibly be called “bad faith“. Landlords submit (R1.6), where paralegal explains in detail the landlord’s intent on continuing upgrading their property. The evidence shows clearly that the tenant had interfered with two efforts to list the home for sale by refusing to grant entry to the landlords and going as far as unlawfully changing the locks.

Had the tenant simply chosen to co-operate/communicate with the Landlords and exercise his legal right to move back into the home when the build-out was completed, he would have been entitled to receive $5,000 in moving expenses, provided he respond within a reasonable timeframe and shared his intentions. The tenant refused to co- operate and/or communicate with the landlords, who were scheduling the improvement to commence on the day after the tenancy (September 30th). The tenant is seeking $10,000 for moving costs that he is not entitled to due specifically to him voluntarily vacating the property.

On October 18th the tenant vacated the premises without giving the landlords a forwarding address for service, leaving behind 3 significantly damaged walls from tv brackets being removed. The landlords submit (R1.5a) (R1.5b)(R1.5c)(R1.5d) showing the damaged walls.

The Tenant’s allegation of the landlords withdrawing their N13 somehow shows “bad faith” is untruthful, illogical and ridiculous. The evidence shows that the landlord was NOT able to access the property to even measure to order the required Permit, due to the tenant’s repeated threatening emails (above) carrying threats with bold all caps letters. Landlords submit (R3.43) their request to the tenant to allow landlords to enter their property to measure the basement to request the Permit: “the landlords will be measuring the basement to enable us to get a permit“. The tenant refused to confirm access. The tenant’s threatening behaviour is the sole cause of the landlords having to withdraw the N13.

The evidence submitted, covering the four months time leading up to the tenant vacating the property, the tenant refused to co-operate or communicate in any way with the landlord, would not allow the landlords, their agents, or potential purchasers onto the property, while repeatedly attempting to provoke the elderly landlord (see tenant’s submitted evidence all “CHUCK” Files) and openly threatened the landlords in writing. The landlords submit (R3.24) showing the tenant “threatening to sue the landlords for $5 Million and lien their properties.”

The landlords submit (R3.34) showing that the tenant intentionally waited until late in the evening on the day after the tenancy had automatically become month to month to give only 18 days Notice to vacate. The landlords are seeking only to have the tenant pay his rent arrears plus a prorated rent for each day in October he remained in the property as prescribed by law.

Landlords submit (R3.39) showing that on Oct 3rd, landlord’s paralegal sent tenant another Offer to Settle “you make payment of outstanding rent payment from July 2022, August 2022, and September 2022 in full . . . in the amount of $15,000. The Landlords will use last month’s rent deposit for October 2022“.

Landlords submit (R3.40) I do not feel that the the below (offer to Settle) is even an offer considering that it is not factually even correct”.

Throughout this entire four month period while not paying any rent, the tenant refused repeated requests to share his intentions/plans to vacate, never disclosed having found or was even looking for a new rental property, consciously refused to give proper notice and simply ran away refusing to give the landlord any forwarding contact information or lawyer information.

THE GOAL IS TO RAISE $500,000.00 TO FIX THIS
Legal Defence Fund plus establish consumer protection agency

A. Having 25,000 Canadian Patriots invest in and read their copy of this ebook: “LTB . . . Unfair, Unjust & Un-Canadian” @ $20 and after reading it simply spread the word; OR

B. Have that same 25,000 Canadian Patriots invest in both “LTB . . . Unfair, Unjust & Un-Canadian” and “Justice Refused” reducing the number of supporters needed to 12,500; OR

C. Have 5,000 Canadian Patriots join our “Founder’s Club” investing $100, receiving both these ebooks and all future ebooks in this series without further investment. Founders will also be identified in each ebook and they are a landlord being exploited FREE advice on dealing with their situation;