We thought it would be useful to inform you periodically about decisions rendered by the Rental Board as regards non-payment of rents. The sums are still as important, explaining the need for us of reminding you to take adequate measures before the situation gets worse.
Certain decisions reflect the very current example of tenants who choose to carry out justice themselves and refuse to pay their rent asserting the fact that their housing is in very bad condition or that work is not done.
Decision of December 20, 2011, Berardi vs. Lebel and Arsenault
The amount of the conviction is 22,125 $, a sum representing the rents due for the period of August 1, 2008 to November 1, 2011. The tenant recognizes that he has to pay part of the sum, he asked for patience from the owner and his representatives because he was in waiting for a large inheritance, moreover he affirms that he paid part of the sum by cash money payments but states not to have required receipts for payment owing to the fact that the owner could neither read nor write and that his representatives never granted the receipts in question to him.
This absence of a clear proof did not convince the Court.
Decision of June 6, 2011, Château St-Louis vs. Morais
The amount of the conviction is 6,900 $. The proof reported the fact that the tenant owed the rents from March to May 2011, for a total amount of 6,900 $. For his defense, the latter estimated that the bad condition of the housing justified his neglecting to pay the rent, an argument which was, of course, rejected by the Court.
Decision of May 16, 2011, Vallée vs. Legaré
The amount of the conviction is 7,700 $, representing the unpaid rents for the period from February to August 2010. The Court judged the evidence of the works agreed upon but not carried out of the tenant very insufficient.
Decision of December 21, 2011, Sabrina Development and Mechaly vs. Montpetit
In this particular case, the amount of the conviction is 9,000 $, representing the unpaid rents of 4 months. If the argument of ‘work not carried out’ is still raised by the tenant, she enumerates amongst other things a whole series of facts that the Court considered to be completely contradictory and non-credible (exemption from payment of rent for work of paintings, cheques sent but never cashed in by the lessors, agreement of reduction in rent, non-reception of the banking references of the lessors, production of document of doubtful authenticity…).
Decision of July 27, 2011, Lacroix Inc. vs. Chapados and Langlois
A lease with a rent of 1,140 $ was signed between the parties for the period of July 1, 2010 to June 30 2011. Already in October 2010, that is to say 4 months right after the beginning of the lease, the tenants left the housing because of a purchase of housing. The housing was re-let only in April 2011.
The lessor thus claims the sum of 6,840 $ representing the unpaid sums until March 2011. The tenants state that they did all that was possible to re-let the housing, which the lessor admitted while thinking that the candidates proposed were not solvent. The Court considered these refusals to be founded in facts and in law and condemned the tenants to pay to the lessor the total sum of 7,516.17 $ (unpaid rents + electricity and publicity fees).
Decision of March 23, 2011, Société Immobilière Thibault Inc. vs. Thibodeau
In this particular case, it concerns only an accumulation of non-payment of rents, more precisely 26 months of unpaid rents adding up to the sum of 22,660 $ that the tenant will have to pay to the lessor.
Certain decisions reflect the very current example of tenants who choose to carry out justice themselves and refuse to pay their rent asserting the fact that their housing is in very bad condition or that work is not done.
Decision of December 20, 2011, Berardi vs. Lebel and Arsenault
The amount of the conviction is 22,125 $, a sum representing the rents due for the period of August 1, 2008 to November 1, 2011. The tenant recognizes that he has to pay part of the sum, he asked for patience from the owner and his representatives because he was in waiting for a large inheritance, moreover he affirms that he paid part of the sum by cash money payments but states not to have required receipts for payment owing to the fact that the owner could neither read nor write and that his representatives never granted the receipts in question to him.
This absence of a clear proof did not convince the Court.
Decision of June 6, 2011, Château St-Louis vs. Morais
The amount of the conviction is 6,900 $. The proof reported the fact that the tenant owed the rents from March to May 2011, for a total amount of 6,900 $. For his defense, the latter estimated that the bad condition of the housing justified his neglecting to pay the rent, an argument which was, of course, rejected by the Court.
Decision of May 16, 2011, Vallée vs. Legaré
The amount of the conviction is 7,700 $, representing the unpaid rents for the period from February to August 2010. The Court judged the evidence of the works agreed upon but not carried out of the tenant very insufficient.
Decision of December 21, 2011, Sabrina Development and Mechaly vs. Montpetit
In this particular case, the amount of the conviction is 9,000 $, representing the unpaid rents of 4 months. If the argument of ‘work not carried out’ is still raised by the tenant, she enumerates amongst other things a whole series of facts that the Court considered to be completely contradictory and non-credible (exemption from payment of rent for work of paintings, cheques sent but never cashed in by the lessors, agreement of reduction in rent, non-reception of the banking references of the lessors, production of document of doubtful authenticity…).
Decision of July 27, 2011, Lacroix Inc. vs. Chapados and Langlois
A lease with a rent of 1,140 $ was signed between the parties for the period of July 1, 2010 to June 30 2011. Already in October 2010, that is to say 4 months right after the beginning of the lease, the tenants left the housing because of a purchase of housing. The housing was re-let only in April 2011.
The lessor thus claims the sum of 6,840 $ representing the unpaid sums until March 2011. The tenants state that they did all that was possible to re-let the housing, which the lessor admitted while thinking that the candidates proposed were not solvent. The Court considered these refusals to be founded in facts and in law and condemned the tenants to pay to the lessor the total sum of 7,516.17 $ (unpaid rents + electricity and publicity fees).
Decision of March 23, 2011, Société Immobilière Thibault Inc. vs. Thibodeau
In this particular case, it concerns only an accumulation of non-payment of rents, more precisely 26 months of unpaid rents adding up to the sum of 22,660 $ that the tenant will have to pay to the lessor.