|
RTA - COVID. McCready v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation [COVID RTA s.83(6)]
In McCready v. Toronto Community Housing Corporation (Ont Div Ct, 2025) the Ontario Divisional Court dismissed a motion to extend time to commence an RTA s.210 appeal.
Here the court considers the COVID-era provision, RTA s.83(6), "which, for rental arrears accumulating during the COVID-19 pandemic (after March 17, 2020), required the Board to consider whether the landlord attempted to negotiate an agreement with the tenant including for the payment of arrears":[8] The tenant makes two arguments on the merits of her appeal. The first is that the Board erred in failing to consider s. 83(6) of the Residential Tenancies Act, 2006, S.O. 2006, c. 17 (the Act) which, for rental arrears accumulating during the COVID-19 pandemic (after March 17, 2020), required the Board to consider whether the landlord attempted to negotiate an agreement with the tenant including for the payment of arrears. In her additional submissions, the tenant broadened the scope of this argument saying the Board failed to consider how the COVID-19 pandemic and her disability impacted her ability to comply with the mediated repayment agreement.
....
Subsection 83(6)
[12] Section 210 of the Act limits the court’s jurisdiction to appeals on errors of law. Although the tenant has claimed a breach of s. 83(6) of the Act, her argument does not raise a plausible error of law.
[13] Subsection 83(1) authorizes the Board to refuse to grant an eviction unless it is satisfied having regard to all the circumstances, that it would be unfair to refuse. In its reasons, the Board expressly considered s. 83. The Board member acknowledged the tenant’s health challenges and their impact on her ability to work full-time hours, but also noted the substantial arrears of rent.
[14] Subsection 83(6) is limited to requiring that the Board consider whether the landlord has attempted to negotiate an agreement with the tenant. It states that for arrears after March 17, 2020, the Board shall “consider whether the landlord has attempted to negotiate an agreement with the tenant including terms of payment for the tenant’s arrears.”
[15] Here, the Board expressly considered the history of arrears and non-payment, which dated back before 2020. The Board adverted to the multiple attempts to reach agreement with the tenant, which were breached. At para.19, the Board stated: “The Landlord has attempted to work with the Tenant on multiple occasions, however the arrears of rent only seem to increase after each repayment plan agreement is entered into.” Contrary to the tenant’s expanded argument, the Board was not required by the Act to more generally consider the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.
[16] The tenant does not agree with the Board’s decision under s. 83, but the determination under that provision is an exercise of discretion: Jackson v. Capobianco, 2017 ONSC 3324, at para. 7. An appeal on this ground does not raise an error of law and is bound to fail.
|
