They had just arrived from abroad and were staying with family.
The couple seemed very decent and reasonable people. They told me they were in the process of transferring thier "war chest" of savings to Canada and offered to show me thier savings. I told them this would not ensure I would be paid the rent as they could simply transfer the money the next day.
One of the applicants even had a job interview the following week as a medical practioner!
I explained that the rental rules in ontario are very much biased in favor of tenants and that without a reliable source of income I could not take the chance on renting to them.
They even offered to get a guarantor, but I had to explain that this would only complicate any proceedings at the LTB: delaying or stop an eviction.
They did not offer to pre-pay their rent, and I did not ask them to do so. If they had offered, I would have rejected that option as it would only open me to legal action.
They REALLY wanted the property and asked me what were the chances of them getting it. I told them that they seemed like good decent people and they deserved an honest straight forward answer. I had to tell them that is was extremely unlikely that under ontario's rental laws I could take a chance on them.
When I got home that night, they had none the less, each faxed a neat and completed rental application to me.
I never called them back. (I hope they found a good home)
Cheri, barbara and "activists", YOU are the reason two decent deserving tenants were rejected.
You can NOT legislate landlords to accept high risk tenants. Please read that sentence again.........You can NOT legislate landlords to accept high risk tenants
You can beat your chest and scream all you want that "housing is a right", but nothing will change.
If you want high risk tenants tenants to receive decent housing from private landlords you will HAVE to change the rental laws to reasonably protect ontario landlords and their properties. (otherwise you must also accept responsibility for this situation).
- Posts: 1705
- Joined: May 31st, 2010, 9:20 pm
How does he want his "spot check system" to operate? Government paid for spies?LLC wrote: “We need stronger proactive enforcement (such as spot checks on landlords) and heavier punishment against those who engage in this kind of practice.”[/b]
- Posts: 1264
- Joined: November 6th, 2011, 7:56 pm
I totally agree with you.Skitter wrote:Apparently some tenants are being asked to pre-pay their rent many months in advance before being allowed to move in.
Obviously this is in contravention of the RTA.
No doubt some politicians and "activists" will demand more regulations in the hope of curbing this practice.
Of course it wont work.
The politicians and "activsits" fail to understand:
1)current legislation ALREADY prohibits landlords from collecting several months pre-paid rent. A preventive authority (LTB) ALREADY exists and the ability to take punitive action against the landlord ALREADY exists.
2)If Politicians and "activists" really want to resolve this issue, they need to ask, themselves. ......WHY are landlords requiring pre-paid rent? Only then can the real cause be dealt with. But politicians and "activists" dont REALLY want to address the REAL issues.
And I caution the OHRC, socialist politicians and "activists"....................dont forget..........at least these high risk tenants ARE being given rentals and they ARE receiving housing for their rent.
Frankly I will not rent to anyone that can not provide proof of a source of income and whom can not complete a satisfactory credit check. As a small, law abiding landlord, the risks for me to do otherwise are simply too great.
These requirements ARE legal and would likely result in many tenants being rejected: tenants who ARE currently being given a home, ironically by the same landlords that are being targeted in the media.
http://www.thestar.com/news/investigati ... -newcomers
Perhaps the reporter would like to investigate WHY this situation has arisen............but I doubt it, the star doesnt write about "WHYs".
Fortunately, two landlords were even interviewed to create some balance to the article even if it the tenant whacks on the government's payroll got more space.
Ironically the newcomers that applied for my rental probably would have WANTED to pay a few extra months in advance and could have enjoyed a great homel that they loved: instead they had to be rejected.....................nice work "activists".
You can spot check me all you want..............I wont accept any more rent than first and last, and I HAVE to reject newcomers who cant show a source of income.
YOU made ontario's broken rental rules, YOU can take responsibility for them................and YOU can find newcomers rental accomodation.
Sorry, you dont get to suck and blow at the same time.
- Posts: 1764
- Joined: August 9th, 2009, 9:46 pm
The only sensible comment in the Star!Georgina landlord Stephen Peacock said non-paying tenants are a real concern for landlords, regardless of whether the renter is an immigrant or not.
“I have bad Canadian tenants and good immigrant tenants,” said Peacock, who has had his share of bad renters, with one Canadian father and son owing him $7,000 in rent and $3,000 on unpaid hydro bills.
“A landlord can have a tighter screening process, but you can’t ask for anything over and above the law.”[/b]
If landlords could easily evict non-paying “hell” tenants and ask for a damage deposit as a safeguard, he said, they would be more willing to take a chance on those with no credit history and employment references.
Ontario’s Residential Tenancies Act allows landlords to ask for first- and last-month rent deposits and requires them to make tenants aware of their rights by providing a government information sheet.
Who is online
In total there are 114 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 114 guests (based on users active over the past 600 minutes)
Most users ever online was 1270 on November 10th, 2013, 11:52 pm
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 114 guests