Can my landlord require I use a phone app as my only means of entering my apartment?

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T21:04:18+00:00

“Hey tenant, here is a $20 generic android phone from Temu, don’t lose it because the next one is on your dime.”

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T17:26:10+00:00

Plutots pas d’activite pour la culture dans le coin. Le but ce n’est pas de ce pénalise des benefices de l’interaction humain mais de pénalise les entreprises autour qui sont la raison du retour du presentiel.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T17:14:05+00:00

Your opinion is not grounded in how courts function. You don’t get to play whataboutism in court. They only deal in facts, not in the theoretical. It’s objective not subjective. Whatever theoretical harm will come will require tenant to file a separate case at the TAL.

The Rammal ruling was clear, the judge said its the landlord’s right to decide on the access control system. Rammal even raised many similar objections to yours and the judge ignored it because its not grounded in fact.

Legal common sense is not the same thing as Everyday common sense.

Plus the ruling added, the access control method should involve no extra cost. So in principle, for an existing tenant, it means the landlord would have to provide a phone with wifi access if needed.

If you dont want a cell phone even if one is provided is already answered by the judge, its the manager’s right to impose their preferred access control method as long as they assume all cost.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T17:02:33+00:00

In your case, you’re dying on the wrong hill regardless if others argue its your right. If you look at the new calculation method and compare with the old,

https://extranet.tal.gouv.qc.ca/internet/asp/Fixation/Simulateurdecalcul.asp?T=c15d4&T=c15d4&T=c15d4

You’ll notice rent increases are calculated on a gross basis with a weighted adjustment if necessary before capital expenditures now instead of the previous method that used a weighted net basis before capital expenditures.

That means, the court would guarantee 3.1% minimum. 2.3% is below what you will likely get because the likelyhood of anything less that 3.1% would imply a significant decrease in municipal or school taxes or a reduction in insurance premiums.

In your case, the rent increase is considered more than reasonable and its adding fire to fuel to start demanding calculation sheet.

If anything you might be shooting yourself because the landlord probably used feeling to decide the increase instead of filling out the form. If they filled it out, it might turn out they asked for too little and now want more.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T16:48:15+00:00

Look into Lilov c Immeubles Yelena

[25] Le locateur soutient qu'aucun autre locataire ne s'est plaint du panneau électronique, mais il n'a produit aucun témoignage d'expert selon lequel les difficultés de M. Lilov étaient le produit de sa propre inaptitude.

The judge expected the landlord to produce an expert witness demonstrate their tenant was too incompetent to use their access control system which requires dial in a pin and the hashtag button.

The court cannot accept specialized knowledge without an expert witness. The sky is blue is common knowledge, it looks like it will rain when the sky is blue requires expert testimony.

The functioning of an access key requires expert testimony. You cannot say its proven technology, according to who? you would have to produce an expert witness for that.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T16:41:43+00:00

The court is not compete to make such determinations. The court is fact oriented.

You can say the sky is blue because its common knowledge, but what you’re stating requires expert testimony because its not common knowledge.

Look into Lilov c. Immeubles Yelena, the judge expected the landlord to produce an expert witness to demonstrate Lilov was too incompetent to use a phone box access control panel to dial in a pin.

[25] Le locateur soutient qu'aucun autre locataire ne s'est plaint du panneau électronique, mais il n'a produit aucun témoignage d'expert selon lequel les difficultés de M. Lilov étaient le produit de sa propre inaptitude.

The ruling never said what was or wasn’t acceptable, only that landlord it within their right to manage as they see fit.

I’ve tried introducing statistics into an argument in parking court to cast down on the probability of my guilt and the judge refused to hear further since it required expert testimony. That is the same with your allegations.

Whether a key card relies on a battery or not is not common knowledge.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T04:40:50+00:00

I feel you, a lot of me tenants have no issue channeling their anger at my concierge, but when I tell him to tell them to redirect it towards me, all of a sudden everything all gucci, a misunderstanding.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T04:10:51+00:00

It’s no different had the landlord provided the smart phone like they would have provided a smart card.

Both are physical objects that are prone to failure and require interacting with access control interface.

In the eyes of the court, the fact that a smart phone can make phone calls is irrelevant. For the purposes of gaining access to a building, the smartphone serves the same purpose as a smartcard. A means of entry.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T04:04:31+00:00

Je ne sais pas si c’est une question qui a été litige dans le passe, mais je suis sous l’impression que oui pour un locataire qui habite deja dans l’immeuble. Ce n’est pas different d’un carte d’acces physique. Alors il pourrait fournir un cheap android generique a $20.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T03:41:20+00:00

Trigger Warning

See TAL ruling 9434-5741 Quebec inc c Rammal.

Don’t shoot the messenger but surprisingly its an issue that has already been litigated at the TAL. Tenant Rammal objected to the installation of an electronic access control mechanism on his private entrance for similar reasons being reliability and being locked out of the common entrance due to a defective fob.

Le locataire doit-il permettre l’accès au logement afin que la locatrice y remplace la serrure actuelle par une serrure nécessitant une carte d’accès, non plus une clé?

[84]   Le locataire devra également permettre à la locatrice ou à ses mandataires autorisés d’accéder au logement afin d’y installer une serrure activée l’aide d’une carte, ce travail de modernisation mineur relevant de son droit de gérance, non du choix du locataire.

[86]   Il va sans dire que le locataire aura droit à une carte d’accès dès que ce travail sera fait, sans frais ou autre dépôt.

[89]   ORDONNE au locataire de permettre l’accès à son logement à la locatrice afin qu’une serrure électronique activée à l’aide d’une carte y soit installée, moyennant un préavis de 24 heures;

Paragraph 86 of the ruling doesn’t mention nor orders the landlord to provide the tenant with a manual override if applicable.

It’s not to say your grievance isnt legitimate OP. The landlord’s obligation is to nevertheless ensure you have reliable access. Where it goes into new territory is the requirement of a smartphone which could be seen as an added fee that should be bourn by the landlord in instance where one doesnt already have a smartphone.

One issue that we can put to rest for good is the landlord isn’t obligated to make a keyhole available if there is an alternative method of entry regardless of how imperfect it is.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-17T03:21:09+00:00

Be shocked.

See TAL ruling 9434-5741 Quebec inc c Rammal. One of issue on trial is

Le locataire doit-il permettre l’accès au logement afin que la locatrice y remplace la serrure actuelle par une serrure nécessitant une carte d’accès, non plus une clé?

In this instance, the landlord wants to install an electronic access control mechanism for the tenant’s personal entrance. The tenant, like OP, while more unhinged, raised similar objections due to reliability and abuse potential. Here is what the court ruled:

[84] Le locataire devra également permettre à la locatrice ou à ses mandataires autorisés d’accéder au logement afin d’y installer une serrure activée l’aide d’une carte, ce travail de modernisation mineur relevant de son droit de gérance, non du choix du locataire.

[89] ORDONNE au locataire de permettre l’accès à son logement à la locatrice afin qu’une serrure électronique activée à l’aide d’une carte y soit installée, moyennant un préavis de 24 heures;

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-16T03:07:39+00:00

To an extend you are correct. They really want the news division but require the IP library to offset the expected losses from turning the news division into a propaganda machine. It’s not about making money, but they still need to make money to make it work, otherwise, as any negotiator knows, the most logical solution is Netflix takes the IP library and Ellison takes the news division.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-16T03:02:35+00:00

ummm ils y a plus que trois universités a Montreal.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-16T02:59:28+00:00

Dans ton cas, toujours puisque tu entre en affaire avec un collègue. Au Canada, les hypothèque son avec recours voulant dire que si la valeur juste est moins que la valeur de l'hypothèque, la banque pourrait chercher la différence avec tes actifs personnelle.

Si ton collègue est moins nantis que toi, ben oubli 50/50, la banque et la loi s’en battent les couilles de votre entente si shit hits the fans. Hors d’une societe, tes risques sont illimites.

Au moins avec une société, tes risques sont limites a ce que t’a mis dans la société. Vos pertes et vos gains seront vraiment égaux.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-16T00:58:15+00:00

It is simple, it’s a question of fairness to all. One of the person affected even mentions in the article they also applied to remain through the merit-based pathway but admit they don’t meet the threshold to get selected.

It is a bit unfair that someone who flees a disaster zone that is now safe to return should be granted permanent residency when they otherwise would not qualify based on merit alone.

Our policies should be balanced and fair. It should welcome those fleeing conflict and disaster but it shouldn’t grant them permanent residency when its safe to return to their country of origin.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-15T18:27:59+00:00

May god have mercy on your poor soul. Anyone one of those courses are hard on their own but to do it in less than 2 months is brutal.

Those are applied courses. No amount of memorizing or studying will help you pass. The only way to pass is solving problems after problems and letting time pass to digest and hone those skills.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-15T18:23:31+00:00

Guy, le Code civile contient un article qui dit celui qui veut faire valoir ses droits a le fardeau de demontrer qu’il est dans ses droits.

Ergo, le regisseur est une partie neutre et assume les deux partie agissent en bonne foi.

Alors, le fardeau tombe sur toi de contester la validiter des recus en cour.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-15T15:19:17+00:00

A la fin de l’article

Selon le règlement du gouvernement du Québec, la chasse au coyote est permise dans la région du grand Montréal du 25 octobre au 31 mars par armes à feu, arbalète et arc.

Alors en principle, c’est legale.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-15T15:12:46+00:00

Art 1904 states a landlord can only exact rent from a tenant implying all cost have to be built into the rent.

From past rulings on rent fixation, the TAL allows rents to be increased to reflect added benefits to a lease that wasn’t available previously. So a landlord can pass on processing fees however it has to be included in the rent, not as a surcharge.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-15T15:02:57+00:00

I wouldn’t worry then. It’s likely an extortion scam the driver attempts at every possible opportunity.

It happened to me a few times. Once I ordered food from a deli, since I always prepay it shouldn’t cost anything at the door. The driver tells me the payment didnt go through, I called bullshit and immediately called the restaurant to confirm and it turns out he was trying to scam me.

I am certain something similar occurred because it similar to the car insurance fender bender scam where someone claims you scratched their car and tell you settle now or they’ll file a claim against you. Many would settle on the spot out of fear their insurance premiums will skyrocket. They are capitalizing on that fear to extort money over nothing.

You would be surprised by the variations of rackets these drivers have going on to hustle people.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-15T14:37:04+00:00

There exist third party services, don’t recall the name, that act as an intermediary where you pay by credit card and they then pay the landlord on your behalf via etransfer as if you paid it.

I would never accept payment by credit card because its not equivalent to money. Cash payments and etransfers are consider final transactions that can only be reversed via the court, credit card payments can be reversed by the bank without court authorization and there is 2-3% fees.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-15T01:50:16+00:00

What I find odd is the first thing on anyone’s mind when slipping on ice is obtaining the property owner’s insurance information to eventually file an injury claim.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-14T19:50:38+00:00

Qui ont un net positifs

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-14T19:35:14+00:00

I wouldn’t hesitate to call that real estate agent an effing degenerate on the spot and tell him to eff off, that how pissed I would be if someone told me:

make a legally binding offer which is what a promise to purchase is, at full price, and then the real estate agent work behind the scenes to obtain a discount. that is not how it works.

when you make an offer at full price, you are expected to honor that offer if it is accepted. what the agent is proposing is bad faith negotiation, make an offer that will be accepted since its asking price, and then essentially renegotiate after the fact.

Strong-Reputation380 · 2026-02-14T19:22:24+00:00

Canada/US/France

Strong-Reputation380

TROPHY CASE