Desjardins v Carey
Last updated: October 12, 2026
Order
Decision in favor of
Landlord
Dispute Categories
Notices Sent
Subsections of RTA Quoted
Agree with the ruling?
PDF provided by the Ontario LTB Order Catalogue
Citation: Desjardins v Carey, 2026 ONLTB 53508
File Number: LTB-T-092009-24
Timeline
Application Date
Nov 2024
Tenancy End Date
Nov 2024
Hearing Date
Mar 2026
Order Date
Jul 10, 2026
Decision
The Tenant's T2 application alleging illegal entry, substantial interference, harassment, and withholding of vital services was dismissed because the Tenant failed to meet the burden of proof on a balance of probabilities, and claims prior to November 7, 2023, were out of time.
Dispute
The Tenant filed a T2 application alleging illegal entry, substantial interference, harassment, withholding of vital services, and failure to provide a written tenancy agreement. The Landlord disputed the claims, alleging the Tenant assaulted him and that the claims were without merit. The tenancy terminated on November 30, 2024.
Determinations
- The Tenant filed a T2 Application on November 7, 2024.
- The tenancy terminated on November 30, 2024.
- Claims regarding incidents prior to November 7, 2023, are out of time pursuant to subsection 29(2) of the Act.
- The Tenant did not prove the allegations contained in the amended application on a balance of probabilities.
- The Tenant's T2 application is dismissed.
Landlord's Arguments
Arguments
The Landlord argued that the Tenant's application lacked merit, that the Tenant failed to meet the evidentiary burden on a balance of probabilities, and that claims prior to the one-year limitation period were out of time.
Actions and Evidence
The Landlord testified that the Tenant assaulted him on October 9, 2024, after being asked to pay excess hydro for a space heater. He denied illegal entry and harassment, and explained that Wi-Fi was temporarily paused due to excessive noise.
Considerations
Tenant's Arguments
Arguments
The Tenant argued that the Landlord breached obligations regarding vital services, reasonable enjoyment, privacy, and freedom from harassment under sections 21, 22, 23, and 25 of the Act.
Actions and Evidence
The Tenant testified that the Landlord failed to provide adequate heat, illegally entered the rental unit, harassed her, withheld internet services, and made loud noises, causing her distress and anxiety.
Considerations
Similar Cases
Click to switch between order outcomes
Armstrong v Rubio
The Tenant withdrew their application concerning illegal entry and substantial interference, and the LTB file was closed.
Toronto Community Housing Corporation v Godson
The LTB terminated the tenancy and ordered eviction due to substantial interference, property damage, and safety impairment, while granting a delayed eviction date under s. 83(1)(b).
Kapun v Urisha Investments Inc and Greenwin Corp
The Tenant's application alleging tenant rights violations was dismissed because the conduct occurred outside the one-year limitation period set out in subsection 29(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006.
Grob v Misty Holdings Inc.
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's request to review an order that dismissed her tenant applications as abandoned after she disconnected from the hearing.
Armstrong v Rubio
The Tenant withdrew their application concerning illegal entry and substantial interference, and the LTB file was closed.
Toronto Community Housing Corporation v Godson
The LTB terminated the tenancy and ordered eviction due to substantial interference, property damage, and safety impairment, while granting a delayed eviction date under s. 83(1)(b).
Kapun v Urisha Investments Inc and Greenwin Corp
The Tenant's application alleging tenant rights violations was dismissed because the conduct occurred outside the one-year limitation period set out in subsection 29(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006.
Grob v Misty Holdings Inc.
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's request to review an order that dismissed her tenant applications as abandoned after she disconnected from the hearing.
Armstrong v Rubio
The Tenant withdrew their application concerning illegal entry and substantial interference, and the LTB file was closed.
Toronto Community Housing Corporation v Godson
The LTB terminated the tenancy and ordered eviction due to substantial interference, property damage, and safety impairment, while granting a delayed eviction date under s. 83(1)(b).
Kapun v Urisha Investments Inc and Greenwin Corp
The Tenant's application alleging tenant rights violations was dismissed because the conduct occurred outside the one-year limitation period set out in subsection 29(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006.
Grob v Misty Holdings Inc.
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's request to review an order that dismissed her tenant applications as abandoned after she disconnected from the hearing.
Armstrong v Rubio
The Tenant withdrew their application concerning illegal entry and substantial interference, and the LTB file was closed.
Toronto Community Housing Corporation v Godson
The LTB terminated the tenancy and ordered eviction due to substantial interference, property damage, and safety impairment, while granting a delayed eviction date under s. 83(1)(b).
Kapun v Urisha Investments Inc and Greenwin Corp
The Tenant's application alleging tenant rights violations was dismissed because the conduct occurred outside the one-year limitation period set out in subsection 29(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006.
Grob v Misty Holdings Inc.
The Landlord and Tenant Board denied the tenant's request to review an order that dismissed her tenant applications as abandoned after she disconnected from the hearing.
Hounsell v 1000690145 Ontario Inc
The LTB dismissed the tenant's T2 and T6 applications for maintenance failures and substantial interference, finding the landlord responded reasonably to flooding and repairs.
Maisuradze v Farag
A tenant application alleging substantial interference and harassment was dismissed as withdrawn at the hearing, and the landlord's request for costs was denied.
Branco v Shirley
A tenant's T2 application alleging substantial interference was dismissed because the tenant failed to comply with interim order requirements to amend the application and disclose evidence.
Beaulne v Krishnajaro and 2832197 Ontario Inc
The Tenant's application alleging illegal entry, vital services interference, and maintenance failures was dismissed because the Tenant failed to prove the allegations on a balance of probabilities due to evidentiary inconsistencies.
Latest Insights from Our Blog
Stay informed with expert analysis on rental law, tenant rights, and LTB decisions
When Landlords Cry Wolf: Analyzing False Claims and Bad Faith Applications at the LTB
A comprehensive analysis of dismissed landlord applications, bad faith eviction attempts, and frivolous claims reveals the consequences when property owners abuse the LTB system.
Utility Billing Disputes and Illegal Charges: Understanding Your Rights in Ontario's Rental Market
An in-depth analysis of utility billing disputes at Ontario's LTB reveals common overcharging practices, jurisdictional limitations, and the financial consequences for both landlords and tenants when utility agreements go wrong.
How to Enforce an LTB Payment Order in Ontario Small Claims Court (2026 Guide)
Won money at the LTB but nobody paid? Learn how Ontario landlords and tenants register tribunal orders in Small Claims Court, use garnishment, debtor examinations, and writs of seizure to collect.
Need Legal Help? We've Got You Covered
Whether you need to find qualified legal professionals or post your specific legal needs to get competitive quotes, our platform connects you with the right help.
Find Legal Professionals
Browse our directory of verified paralegals and lawyers specializing in Ontario rental law and LTB matters.
Browse ProfessionalsPost Your Legal Needs
Describe your legal situation and receive competitive quotes from qualified professionals in our marketplace.
Post a BountyJoin thousands of Ontarians who have found legal help through our platform