The Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB) exists to provide fair resolution of disputes between landlords and tenants. However, analysis of recent decisions reveals a troubling pattern: some landlords are attempting to abuse the system through bad faith applications, frivolous claims, and procedural misconduct. When these tactics fail, the consequences can be severe—both financially and legally.
The Anatomy of Bad Faith Applications
Bad faith applications at the LTB typically fall into several categories, each carrying significant risks for landlords who engage in such conduct.
1. False Personal Use Claims (N12 Notices)
The most common form of bad faith involves landlords serving N12 notices claiming they need the unit for personal use, when their real intention is to re-rent at higher rates or sell the property.
However, the LTB has developed sophisticated methods to detect and punish such behavior:
- Presumption of Bad Faith: When a landlord doesn't occupy the unit within a reasonable time or re-rents it within a year, there's a legal presumption of bad faith
- Burden of Proof: Landlords must provide compelling evidence to rebut this presumption
- Consequences: Tenants can seek substantial compensation for bad faith evictions
Despite these deterrents, many landlords continue to attempt false personal use claims, often with disastrous results.
2. Frivolous Damage and Interference Claims
Some landlords file applications claiming tenant damage or interference without proper evidence, hoping to pressure tenants into moving or accepting unfavorable settlements.
The case of Brown-v-Vermee-20220117 provides a stark example of the consequences. The landlord:
- Intentionally attempted to mislead the Board by manually changing application filing dates
- Brought frivolous applications he knew would be dismissed
- Provided false information to expedite hearings
- Was ordered to pay $450 in costs to the tenants
3. Recycled and Invalid Notices
In JC-VC-v-DT-HT-2017-TEL-70486-16, landlords repeatedly served invalid N5 notices based on previously voided allegations—a practice the LTB termed "recycling" notices. The result:
- Application dismissed for abuse of process
- $150 in costs awarded to the Board
- Landlords barred from filing further applications until costs were paid
The LTB's Response to Bad Faith Conduct
The LTB has developed increasingly sophisticated tools to identify and punish bad faith applications:
Cost Awards as Deterrent
When landlords engage in frivolous or bad faith conduct, the LTB regularly awards costs against them:
- Paquette-v-Barratt-20220111: $200 awarded against landlord for unreasonable conduct and failure to appear
- maxwell-v-bedard-20240916: $400 awarded for bringing frivolous review request
- JBM-and-KDM-v-TVDG-20170301: $700 awarded for unreasonable conduct and failure to follow procedures
Dismissal of Applications
The most immediate consequence of bad faith conduct is dismissal of the application, often with prejudice:
- Applications based on invalid notices are routinely dismissed
- Landlords who fail to appear after bringing frivolous applications see their cases dismissed
- Procedural misconduct leads to automatic dismissal
Administrative Sanctions
In severe cases, the LTB can impose administrative sanctions, including:
- Prohibition on filing new applications until costs are paid
- Referral to regulatory bodies for professional landlords
- Public censure through published decisions
Common Patterns in Dismissed Applications
Analysis of dismissed landlord applications reveals several recurring patterns:
1. Procedural Failures
Many applications fail due to basic procedural errors:
- Invalid notices that don't meet statutory requirements
- Failure to pay required compensation before termination dates
- Missing or defective affidavits
- Improper service of documents
2. Lack of Evidence
Landlords frequently file applications without sufficient evidence to support their claims:
- Damage claims without proper documentation or estimates
- Interference allegations without credible witnesses
- Personal use claims without genuine intention to occupy
3. Abuse of Process
Some landlords use the LTB system as a harassment tool:
- Filing multiple applications based on the same allegations
- Serving numerous invalid notices to pressure tenants
- Making frivolous claims to force costly legal representation
The Successful Defense Against Bad Faith
Tenants and their representatives have become increasingly sophisticated in defending against bad faith applications:
Challenging Procedural Defects
Experienced tenant representatives routinely challenge:
- Invalid notice periods and content
- Missing statutory requirements
- Improper service methods
- Jurisdictional issues
Exposing False Claims
Tenants successfully expose false claims by:
- Documenting landlord conduct and statements
- Gathering evidence of true intentions
- Presenting credible witness testimony
- Challenging inconsistent landlord evidence
Seeking Cost Awards
Tenants increasingly seek and obtain cost awards when landlords engage in bad faith conduct, creating financial consequences for abuse of the system.
The Broader Impact on the System
Bad faith applications have several negative effects on the LTB system:
Resource Waste
Frivolous applications waste valuable LTB resources:
- Hearing time that could be used for legitimate disputes
- Administrative costs for processing invalid applications
- Delayed resolution of genuine cases due to system backlog
Erosion of Trust
Bad faith conduct erodes trust in the system:
- Tenants become more defensive and less willing to settle
- Legitimate landlord applications face increased scrutiny
- The adversarial nature of proceedings intensifies
Increased Costs for All Parties
System abuse increases costs for everyone:
- Higher legal representation costs
- Longer proceedings due to increased scrutiny
- More complex evidence requirements
Lessons for Property Owners
The analysis reveals several critical lessons for landlords:
1. Honesty is the Best Policy
Attempting to mislead the LTB almost always backfires:
- The Board has extensive experience detecting false claims
- Consequences for dishonesty are severe and public
- Reputation damage can affect future proceedings
2. Proper Preparation is Essential
Many applications fail due to inadequate preparation:
- Ensure all notices meet statutory requirements
- Gather comprehensive evidence before filing
- Understand procedural requirements thoroughly
3. Consider the True Costs
Bad faith applications carry hidden costs:
- Legal fees for unsuccessful applications
- Cost awards to opposing parties
- Damage to landlord-tenant relationships
- Time and stress of prolonged proceedings
The Evolution of LTB Jurisprudence
The LTB's approach to bad faith applications has evolved significantly:
Increased Scrutiny
Recent decisions show increased scrutiny of landlord applications:
- More detailed questioning of landlord intentions
- Higher evidentiary standards for certain claims
- Greater willingness to award costs for misconduct
Sophisticated Analysis
The LTB now employs sophisticated analysis techniques:
- Pattern recognition across multiple applications
- Cross-referencing of landlord conduct in different cases
- Detailed examination of timing and circumstances
Precedential Value
Published decisions create precedents that guide future cases:
- Clear standards for what constitutes bad faith
- Established consequences for various types of misconduct
- Guidance for practitioners on acceptable conduct
Looking Forward: Implications for the Rental Market
The LTB's increasingly firm stance against bad faith applications has several implications:
Deterrent Effect
The prospect of cost awards and public censure deters bad faith conduct:
- Landlords are more careful about the applications they file
- Legal representatives are more cautious about questionable claims
- The overall quality of applications has improved
Key Takeaways
The analysis of bad faith applications at the LTB reveals several critical insights:
- Bad faith conduct is expensive: Cost awards regularly exceed $400-700, with some reaching much higher amounts
- The LTB is sophisticated: The Board has extensive experience detecting and punishing false claims
- Consequences are public: Dismissed applications become part of the public record, affecting reputation
- Patterns matter: Repeated misconduct leads to escalating sanctions
- Professional standards are rising: The industry is moving toward higher ethical standards
Conclusion
The LTB's firm stance against bad faith applications serves an important function in maintaining the integrity of Ontario's rental housing system. While the temptation to "cry wolf" may seem attractive to some landlords facing difficult tenant situations, the consequences of such conduct are severe and long-lasting.
For property owners, the message is clear: the LTB system works best when used honestly and in good faith. Those who attempt to abuse the system do so at their own peril, facing not only the immediate consequences of dismissed applications and cost awards, but also the long-term damage to their reputation and relationships within the rental housing community.
The evolution toward higher standards and greater accountability ultimately benefits everyone in the rental housing market—landlords, tenants, and the broader community that depends on a fair and efficient dispute resolution system.
