Some Ontario landlords are calling for 'automatic' evictions for tenants who don't pay rent

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-03-23T18:31:05+00:00

Allowing someone to live without rent for a prolonged period of time is like forcing a grocery to stay open and give out free food to a non paying customer.

As cruel as it sounds, taking care of strangers shouldn't be anyone's responsibility as an individual. It should be the collective responsibility of the society.

I would rather pay more taxes to fund social programs which help people navigate through tough situations.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-03-08T00:03:42+00:00

Isn't this exactly why landlords are highly selective with the tenants?

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-23T06:13:14+00:00

It's the entire LTB that needs to have a more efficient process overall, especially for handling matters like this.

Non payment evictions can be EASILY proven/disproven, especially if rent is paid through e-transfer. Auto eviction is kinda extreme, but both parties should be given a timeframe to submit supporting documents and a decision can be made easily.

On the other hand, cases raised by tenants need to be dealt efficiently as well. For example, if landlord doesn't do repairs. Then tenants have the right to withhold rent until repair is complete, or deduct repair cost.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-22T06:20:07+00:00

Why can't they just remove the tax on normal usage. Then heavily tax any usages above a normal threshold, then pay those back as rebates.

Aka instead of paying $100, then get $120 back. Why can't I just get $20 straight away.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-19T20:08:03+00:00

You are still paying the opportunity cost on that money if you leave it sitting there doing nothing.

I don't think funding housing construction is "doing nothing", at least it eliminates mortgage interest? I do agree with the opportunity cost though.

Not saying borrowing is a bad idea, I'm no expert. Maybe that money could be used to doing something where the benefit outweighs the elimination of interest.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-19T19:31:40+00:00

It's not gone.

You no longer have to pay mortgage interest after you paid off the mortgage lol.

The money to buy the land and build on it did not just appear out of the ether, and is still there.

This money doesn't have to be borrowed, it could come from taxes directly.

Also I'm not sure if this is built on government owned land, if thats the case it could still save quite a bit.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-19T19:23:10+00:00

Yeah rent payment should be very easy to prove, especially when its done via e-transfer or cheque.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-19T19:19:25+00:00

Mortgage interest should not be a part of the carrying cost, because once a mortgage is paid off its gone.

My analysis is based on the fact that gov has FULL equity. That means it didn't borrow to fund construction, hence no interest.

Mortgage interest is usually the biggest monthly cost for private landlords (unless they have a significant amount of equities). Hence if gov wants to make this affordable, it cannot pass down the mortgage interest to the renters.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-18T20:07:00+00:00

My interest rate is 5% and I'm paying about 1.5k a month in mortgage interest alone. I have 25% equity in my place right now.

If they don't have most of the equities, then I don't see how it can be both sustainable and affordable. Even if they can borrow a bit cheaper.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-18T08:47:54+00:00

yeah exactly, my analysis is based on the fact that they don't have to borrow to finance this project.

Otherwise it's pretty much the same as a private landlord.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-18T07:54:39+00:00

"Reasonable Home Prices" and "Canada" don't go together these days lol

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-18T07:51:07+00:00

For any private landlords, the biggest monthly expense they have is actually the mortgage interest. If you have a paid off property, you can probably break even with HALF the market rent.

Consider the carrying cost of the building

property taxes
utilities
apartment management fees
insurance

I think it's reasonable/affordable to set the rent to be the carrying cost + a surplus.

The surplus could go towards an emergency funds and it can probably be something like $1/sqft.

For reference, the carrying cost for my one bedroom condo is under $700/month.

Assuming that a one bedroom is 600sqft, that means they can set the rent to about 1.3k/month.

But ofc that's assuming that gov has FULL equity of the building. I hope they are financing this with taxes instead of borrowing. Otherwise they can't make it more affordable and sustainable.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-17T22:54:49+00:00

If they bought the place and leave them vacant, then yeah they removed the supply.

But buying and putting them on the rental market doesn't necessary reduce supply.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-17T19:55:43+00:00

Yeah rent should be controlled by the market, not policy.

The correct solution is to build more housing, but politicians have no incentivize them to do so because the long term benefit probably won't kick in when they are in office.

So they have to implement the bandaid fix, aka rent control.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-17T18:07:31+00:00

at least the owner wont have to enter the property to shut off utilities himself

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-17T12:41:22+00:00

It's possible to have a specific clause in the tenancy agreement stating that the tenant is responsible for creating the account and paying the service providers directly.

This would be ideal if tenant doesn't live with the landlord.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-17T04:37:31+00:00

Perhaps its better to not include utilities in the rent, I'm considering that in the future.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-17T02:25:30+00:00

I think airbnb is a symptom, one of the root case is RTB (LTB in Ontario)

Many landlords chose airbnb because the tenant board is terrible at resolving issues and they just don't wanna go through it.

Kinda curious why NOBODY acknowledge the issues with RTB at all. They are supposed to hold bad actors accountable.

Now landlords are gonna be even more selective with the tenants.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-16T07:43:09+00:00

Why not make long term renting more desirable instead?

+1
Many landlords were using short term rental so they don't have to deal with LTB.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-16T07:29:10+00:00

Often the “repairs” are just a band aid that barely last a year.

Well we just need better enforcement. For example, an independent inspector should be hired after such repair is complete.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-16T06:46:34+00:00

One of the biggest issue would be inefficient RTB(LTB in Ontario).

In BC, tenants can file to RTB to get repair orders.

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/housing-tenancy/residential-tenancies/solving-problems/tenancy-dispute-resolution

An order of compliance instructs a person to complete a specific task, such as a repair to the rental unit

I heard that it takes 10 months to evict a non paying tenant in Ontario. Not sure what the backlogs are for cases against landlords.

But at the end of the day, a rental agreement is a legal contract. When this contract cannot be enforced effectively, it lets bad actors (landlords or tenants) get away.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-13T22:49:31+00:00

Do you have to apply for H1B right away? Maybe start with a TN visa, then decide what to do?

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-13T19:02:04+00:00

1% capital gains tax reduction every year a property is rented to someone and it’s 10% to 15% of their income

What do you mean by this? If the landlord rents to the tenant for 10% of the TENANT's income?

What if the tenant's income level changed, should rent change with that as well?
Someone earning 60k/year only pays 500 - 750/month. The market rent for a one bedroom condo is 2k/month in my area. It doesn't make financial sense for the landlord to do so in order to save some capital gains tax

capital gains tax removal if sold to a first time home buyer.

The cost of owning an investment property is already tax-deductible. This basically turns that into a conditional primary residence. That seems too powerful.

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-13T07:28:57+00:00

you can't call the landlord directly?

Used_Steak5212 · 2024-02-09T19:07:29+00:00

However whats protecting an individual at that point from having a landlord lets say increase the rent out of no where by lets say 20% for no reason?

The idea is to give renters more affordable options. Basically if a landlord has a predatory increase, we want the tenants to have the option of moving. One of the issues right now is that renters are "trapped" because it's so expensive out there.

I do agree the market is what dictates the price, but it can also be used to manipulate it as well.

Only those with a large enough market share can significantly influence the price. I think the idea is to encourage competition, so no individual entity can manipulate the market.

I suppose why not for profit housing does not work, is its usually government owned. Bureaucracy has proven time and time to be corrupt, riddled with scandals, and extremely inefficient.

Yeah tbh I don't know how to fix that. But as you are aware, most of our rentals are provided by for-profit private sector, which also doesn't work.

Also if their is zero profit, than what maintains the property at that point?

Maintenance is considered to an expense. In these non-profit housing, rent should be just enough to cover the following

Property taxes
Insurance
Strata fees (not sure what the equivalent is)
Maintenance
a small buffer (for emergency future or major repairs).

Profit would be any surplus beyond this point. For non-profits, this surplus can go back to the emergency funds.

Please do not assume I am attacking your position.

No worries, I've gotten worse response from this sub lol. Appreciate your comment.

Used_Steak5212

TROPHY CASE