TENANCY RIGHTS:
One might expect or assume that a law having to do with the rights of tenants would apply to ALL tenants. One might also expect that "tenants" would be defined as anyone who rents their accommodation. These expectations, in the Province of Ontario, would be wrong.

The Province of Ontario "Tenant Protection Act, 1997" S.O. 1997, c24, is the regulation referred to in this report. A brief of it is HERE on the Earthtym.net site. You can review or download a copy of it from the Ontario Rental Housing Tribunal internet site. A link to their site is provided in our site Offsite LINK List which can be reached from the bottom of this page or from the Earthtym.net Pages by Topic listing.

Laws which address broad topics with many potential claimants, by necessity, become limited in application in a large population either by definition of application, or, by definition of application. In this case, the areas which would now (2001) have the most complaints and be the least enforceable, are excluded. That is, persons who rent rooms.

In the metropolitan area termed "Toronto", with a population of more than 6 million, a conurbanization of at least 6 previous towns and boroughs --- there is a plague of economic desperation, opportunism, and frustration. The housing order of the Province and the City in regard to policies, regulations, and taxes --- has led to a decreasing availability of rental units and an increase in residential property taxes. Many homeowners, desperately trying to maintain their standard of living in spite of decreasing incomes and increasing expenses --- have chosen to rent rooms in their homes.

Many of these in-residence rooms are substandard and located illegally in areas not zoned for this tenancy. In many cases, this is a black market economy: the government has no idea of the number as they are often not registered, there is no standard of basic structural and privacy applicable, and, the homeowner may not declare the income or pay taxes on it. Every year or two there is a fire in which tenants die in such housing for lack of a second entry-exit. Often the rooms are set out in semi-finished basements never designed nor intended for this use. The flooring, heating, insulation, and air flow are often inadequate and so provide health and safety challenges. This is a known problem.

If the tenant shares a kitchen or bathroom space with the landlord, they are no longer classed as a tenant according to the Tenancy Act. That is, they have NO Protection against abuses by the landlord. As will be partly illustrated below in my personal example:

The landlord can legally ...

1. enter the tenant's room at any time;
2. change the locks and bar entry to the tenant;
3. introduce conflict into the lifestyle of the tenant;
4. move the tenant's belongings into the street;
5. restrict access to the tenant by visitors;
6. not maintain the space in good repair;
7. not provide a safe and healthy space.

In other words, the Province of Ontario, and its law, sanctions the deception of and the abuse of the poor, the single, the new arrival, the young adult, and the retired ... who provide the main resource for these homeowners. Once the tenant has rented and moved in, they are at the mercy of the landlord. They don't likely know that, until, the communication between them and the landlord deteriorates to such an extent that they resort to the law.

Often too late for reconciliation, the Law (society) abandons and abuses the rooming tenant with complex and lengthy legal documentation, and, clerks who don't know and fear to comment on the law. The tenant faces a relative high cost in time and monies to themselves which may endanger their job and frustrate their health. Often, the tenant adopts negative attitudes and emotions towards landlords, the government, and themselves --- NONE of which is positive to the society.

In greed for material gain and social status, a more recent class of homeowner has developed to take advantage of this legal deficiency and market demand. A former landlord, new to this country, was encouraged by a real estate broker to invest in real estate and use room tenancy to enable adequate income coverage. The fact that the landlord was able to arrange a private mortgage and carry out the real estate transaction clearly illustrates that the legal and real estate industries are fully aware of these conditions and that politicians who don't have their head in the sand must be also.

This system of tenancy abuse keeps the tenant on the move and off the voter registration list, or, pacifies the tenant into being a victim who likely will not vote anyway. Rooming tenants are traumatized by abuse into becoming obsessed with home ownership and can become willing slaves to workaholism which diminishes their life enjoyment and encourages other addictive behaviors. More housing is sold to persons who can ill afford it. More stress related illness pervades the society so health care workers are kept overbusy.

Government leaders are quick to victimize their citizens by suggesting that health care and policing cost increases are the fault of citizenry who don't work hard enough AND abuse the healthcare system. Everyone is kept too occupied to complain and take action to rectify the problems. So, why should any authority be concerned. Everyone wins except the tenant. And they have the least money and the least power.

Home ownership is not a landlord-tenant perception for many.
Mortgagees and homeowners who want more income to maintain their ownership benefits often grudgingly "give up" space in "their" home to roomers. They are not renting out space because they intended to or wanted to but because they feel forced to by economic restraint and lifestyle requirements. Such frustration may carry across to tenants with the owners expressing severe dissatisfaction with the roomer if perfectionistic procedures are not followed ... even when the owner does not follow them.

I was accused by one past landlord of not wiping the sink dry after using a shared bathroom on the main floor. The owner was concerned that water droplet marks would deter from the "appearance" given to guests who might use it. The reality was that I had always left the sink clean and it was the husband who this time had been "careless". In another incident with the same homeowner, I was "warned" not to use the microwave oven in the common kitchen without wiping out the steam condensation afterwards. As it was, I never cooked anything that steamed to that extent whereas another roomer did in an obvious way according to his diet. This authoritarian and disrespectful communication style of "warning" someone rather than "informing" them does not encourage harmony.

Desperation and greed can lead to lies and fantasies.
Also with the landlord mentioned above, I was the first person to rent a room in their newly acquired home. They went on to rent out 2 other rooms in the basement and one on the upper second floor. The landlords told the second person to rent that I had been renting from them for 2 years --- suggesting that they were good landlords and that they had owned the house for more than 2 years --- both suggesting stability and harmony. I had been in the house for less than 10 days at the time and had met them for the first time only several days before that. Other lies regarding the public transit situation and the refrigerator-freezer use were also used to entice the prospect to take the room and move in. These predicated the later disappointments and frustrations which arose. Yet the landlords considered themselves to be "religious" and felt justified in their lies because that was the "way of this culture."

Unhealthy and unsafe circumstances prevailed for a friend of mine who was renting elsewhere. His landlord had renovated their basement to provide a bathroom and two rooms, with the kitchen area forming part of the larger room. The basement was poorly heated and poorly insulted leading to mildew growth. A ceiling fluorescent fixture dangled from the ceiling. The uncarpeted floor above was known to carry loud footsteps at 2:00 AM. The floor of the rooms was cold and uninsulated. There was only one narrow entrance, through the garage --- unsafe in a fire and unsafe from fumes from the garage. After two years of requests for maintenance and after hours quietness, nothing had improved. The attitude of the landlord had worsened to one seemingly of strained tolerance as the tenant was assumed to follow the same standards as the owners, like a child rather than as a 40-year-old adult. Lack of affordable housing choices left him feeling forced to stay where he was.

In a later recent experience, which led to the genesis of this report, a landlord determined that she wanted me out of her house on the basis of fantasies that she projected and never shared with me. I had given her 2 months notice of moving out. I had begun renting a basement room from her in December, 2000, for an agreed upon amount of $350 per month. This was low for the market as it had an ensuite bathroom (shower) and some storage space was provided elsewhere. On the other hand, kitchen facilities were shared with the owner; there was no separate entrance; it took 6 weeks of requests before I got a personal key to the entry. We seemed to communicate very well and, on Guidance, I voluntarily increased my monthly rental payment to $1,000 per month for the next 5 months, after my notice to leave.

For reasons which were never communicated, although I was receptive and requested feedback on at least 3 occasions, the landlord became increasingly defensive and distant to me during the last month that I was there, beginning within 2 weeks after I gave notice. She eventually made it obvious that she was contacting my clients and telling them something which stopped their continuing to book sessions with me, even to the point of one not continuing with her session from a midway point. As at least $1,000 worth of preplanned business was lost in this manner, it was not surprising that Guidance instructed me to take her at her word. I had asked for a rent reduction to $800 for the last month of my expected tenancy, and, at the time, she had shouted at me that I could pay whatever I wanted to.

At the beginning of the last month, I was Guided to pay her $50 in lieu of previous payments and her current obstructiveness, and, to offer free sessions --- to a worth of $1,000 --- to those clients whom she was interfering with. This would have provided her with an average rent over the term of $718.75, an increase of 205% over the agreed upon rent. It would have benefited my clients and allowed me to complete the sessions I had planned. At that point she increased her aggressive demands by demanding that I move out by the 13th of the month, even though she had accepted my earlier notice to the end of the month, and, that I had technically paid the rent for the complete month.

By the Grace of God and Spiritual Guidance, I first found a place to move to, then experienced a week of delay in concluding the transaction --- to be offered an excellent space, for $350 per month, nearby. I was offered this several days before the 14th, accepted it within 12 hours, and arranged to move most of my things on the 14th of the month. As there would be 2 truck loads with a span of time between the two, and as money was now tight, I was Guided to do the complete move alone, and did. As I was happy to be leaving such a spiritually negative environment with a landlord and former client caught up in abusive imprinting and Basic Personality characteristics of Projection and vengeance, these last minute surprise developments were very pleasing.

Not content to allow the benefits of Guidance to unfold to our mutual benefit, my landlord continued to obstruct to the maximum of her influence. When I arrived back at the residence late on the 14th to move some of my things before returning the truck, she had carried out and did the following with her cousin and nephew.

1. My room had been entered many times;
2. My belongings had been moved to the garage;
3. The entry lock had been changed;
   --------- AND, on my arrival ---------
4. I was refused entry or a key;
5. I was refused use of the room for the rest of the month;
6. My belongings were all moved out onto the driveway.

Under the law of the Ontario Tenancy Act, ALL of these actions are illegal for a landlord to perpetrate on a tenant. But THOSE were the next questions to arise and be clarified. Within the Act, was I a "tenant" and did I have any rights or protection?

DEFAMATION and LIBEL:
It was apparent from the above influences on my business that defamation was being carried out by my landlord and former client. This suggestion was revealed by the unwarranted negative attitudes expressed by her cousin to me a week before the move, and by her cousin challenging me with a half-truth while helping move my things swiftly out of the garage.

On Defamation, you will find a detailed reference from the Offsite LINK page on the Earthtym.net site to a page on legal devices called "torts". Libel is a synonymous concept defined as "a false and malicious statement that damages the reputation of a person or organization". Defamation has been defined as "material which lowers the person's esteem in the eyes of a reputable segment of the community." Or, one can also define defamation as "an invasion of the interest in reputation and good name, by communication to others, which tends to diminish the esteem in which the plaintiff is held, or to excite adverse feelings or opinions against him."

The cousin chose, by energy blocks and imptinting, to assume a god-like pride of knowing everything after only hearing a tainted single side to the reality, it was not surprising that her listening skills were minimized. Earlier, I had explained to her 3 times in a repetition that I would prefer her NOT to proceed with her next session until her son could attend as the session involved a high intensity block which her son could assist her with. Three times she implied that she could not take the session at that time, defensively, because she could not afford it.

I had gifted her a session earlier and she new that I did not charge by the hour and had provided her on a number of occasions with Guidance at no charge. She also knew that I had provided a session to a teenage girl 2 months previous and had not asked for the money. She further knew that I had provided an emergency session for a preteen relative and had not made a fuss when no one paid the bill for her. My concern was straightforward, honest, and professional. I wanted her to have the best opportunity to succeed whenever we did her next session. Money was not a problem to me. She made it a problem in her mind. Perhaps with a good degree of assistance. Her loss.

It became evident that defamation was being pursued by by landlord - former client as the President of her company interrupted his call to me to make an appointment when she overheard him and told him to get off the phone. He said he would call me back. He e-mailed me to say that he would not be taking any further sessions. No reason given. I requested feedback and offered continued service on 3 occasions with no response from him. I take it as a rule of thumb, after 3 unacknowledged contacts, the person is not interested and further offers are abusive. Everyone gets 3 chances to benefit. A similar situation took place with the secretary of the company, for whom I had spent 40 hours to prepare a very large and lengthy session.