COVID-19 Announcement
RE: ESSENTIAL SERVICES

SFG Paralegal Services is an essential service, available for business, while operating in accordance with Order issued by the Premier of Ontario, and is practicing and encouraging social distancing measures for the safe health of all persons. Learn More [61] Essential services include professional and social services that support the legal and justice system;
[65] Professional services including lawyers and paralegals, engineers, accountants, translators.
Order of the Premier of Ontario | March 23 2020 8:00PM

 


If the Landlord Always Provided Free Laundry Can the Landlord Install Coin Laundry?

A Legacy Amenity That Was Historically Included, Even If Absent From the Lease Terms, May Become An Implied Term of the Lease As Per the Estoppel by Conduct Principle. Withdrawal of a Legacy Amenity Is Usually Unlawful.
Similar Questions About Withdrawal of Amenities Include:

  • Can a Landlord Start Charging An Air-Conditioner Fee?
  • Is a Landlord Allowed to Start Charging For Using a Storage Shed?
  • Does a Landlord Need to Replace a Fence If a Fence Was Always There?
  • If Patio Furniture Was Always There Can a Landlord Take It Away?
  • Can a Landlord Close Up a Decorative Fireplace?

A Helpful Guide on How to Determine If Withdrawing a Legacy Amenity or Legacy Service is Unlawful

Tenancy Lease Agreement That Is Silent About Various Services A legacy amenity is a service that was historically provided to a tenant. Examples include access to parking, access to laundry facilities, access to trash dumpster, included utilities, among other things. Often a lease is silent on whether such a service was included, if a proper formal lease even existed as is legally required. When a lease is absent, or silent on an issue, a determination of whether an amenity or service is implied as included and therefore unlawful to withdraw can often be determined by review of the conduct throughout the relationship.

As was stated in the case of P.T. v. V.R., et alCET-74735-18 (Re), 2018 CanLII 88578 (ON LTB) by the Landlord Tenant Board:

11.  The issue for me to consider here is whether the Landlords have substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment of the rental unit or residential complex by the Tenant or by a member of the Tenant's household by the male Landlord demanding the Tenant and her guests obtain his permission for them to park in the two unassigned spaces she has had the use of for about 4 years before September 2016 and arranging to have the Tenant’s daughter’s car and the Tenant’s guest’s car ticketed.

12.  The lot survey submitted by the Landlord indicates that there is plenty of space to park along the eastern side of the Landlords’ house without encroaching on the right-of-way that is a dead end.

13.  Indeed, the photograph of a car parked beside the Landlords’ house shows it is not on the right-of-way and yet that was where the Tenant’s daughter apparently was parked when she was boxed in for 3 hours by the male Landlord in late January 2018. The male Landlord called the City parking enforcement division to have the Tenant’s daughter’s car ticketed but because she was present the enforcement officer refused to do so.

14.  The lease is silent on the issue of parking by the Tenant’s guests or occupants. However, examination of the parties’ conduct suggests that there was a long-standing and until fairly recently uncontested practice of the Tenant’s guests parking on the property.

15.  In Feather v. Bradford (Town), the Ontario Court of Appeal succinctly set out the general principles of estoppel by conduct as follows:

[56] The general principle of estoppel by representation is aptly stated in Jill E. Martin, Hanbury and Martin: Modern Equity 16th ed. (London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2001), at p. 891:

[A] person who makes an unambiguous representation, by words, or by conduct, or by silence, of an existing fact, and causes another party to act to his determent in reliance on the representation will not be permitted subsequently to act inconsistently with that representation. [Emphasis added.]

16.  Through their conduct the Landlords permitted the Tenant the right to unassigned parking spaces for her car and that of her guests. Having relied upon that representation, the male Landlord is estopped from claiming authority to revoke this right four years later.

17.  Consequently, I also find for at least the past year the Landlords have substantially interfered with the reasonable enjoyment of the rental unit for all usual purposes by the Tenant and the Tenant’s son while he was an occupant of the rental unit by demanding adherence to arbitrary rules with respect to parking for the Tenant and her guests, including her family members, contrary to a long established practice whereby the Tenant’ has two parking spots to use for herself and her guests and guests were able to park behind her car.

Interestingly, in addition to the finding that the landlord withdrew an amenity that was deemed included by the 'estoppel by conduct' principle, the landlord was found to have behaved in further misbehaviour for interfering in reasonable enjoyment of the rental unit due to the manner in which the landlord attempted to demand compliance with the position of the landlord.

Accordingly, when a landlord, or equally a tenant if the tables were turned and involved other facts or another specific issue, the historic behaviour may establish the parameters of what is an included amenity or service.  Once established as a legacy amenity or service, a landlord is unable to withdraw that amenity or service.

Summary Comment

A legacy amenity or service is an amenity or service that was provided or available throughout the tenancy relationship.  While the lease may be silent as to whether such is an included amenity or service, the principle of 'estoppel by conduct' indicates that a party to an agreement is unable to act in a certain way for an extended period of time and then choose to act in a contrary way.  Accordingly, a landlord is unable to provide an amenity or service and then unilaterally choose at a later date to withdraw that amenity or service.

SFG Paralegal Services provides legal services for clients in Thornhill, York Region, Richmond Hill, Markham, North York, among other places!

For more information, fill out the form below to send a direct inquiry to SFG Paralegal Services.

Provide some context to explain the nature of your inquiry.  Your IP Address is logged as: 3.215.182.81
ATTENTION: Confidential information regarding your case must not be sent through this website.  This website is not intended as providing legal advice nor intended as a method to establish a legal-representative/client relationship.  Do not include confidential details about your case by email or phone.  Use this website form only to arrange an introduction with a SFG Paralegal Services representative, before taking any steps to discuss the particulars of your legal case.  Legal advice cannot be provided to you via reply email or over the phone.
SFG Paralegal Services

66 Centre Street, Unit C
Thornhill, Ontario,
L4J 1E9

P: (888) 398-0121
E: sglass@sfglegal.ca

Hours of Business:

9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
9:00AM – 5:00PM
Monday:
Tuesday:
Wednesday:
Thursday:
Friday:

By appointment only.  Please call for details.

Service Within:

Thornhill
Richmond Hill
Ajax
North York
Brampton


Pickering
Aurora
Durham Region
Oshawa
York Region


Newmarket
Vaughan
Toronto
Whitby
and much more


SFG Paralegal Services

SSL Secured Trust https://sfg.legal


Animated Spinner