A few years ago, I wrote a blog post about a client of mine who tried to sell his tenanted condo, but was thwarted by the existing tenant.

My client, whom I’ll call “Gabriel” for the sake of ease today, had been renting to the existing tenant for just over five years when he decided to sell all his investment condos and exit the space completely.

Gabriel told the tenant that he would be selling and gave her ample notice, but she was difficult right from the start.  She refused to allow access to the property at all, let alone to take photos so we could market the property.  This meant that we couldn’t list the property for sale on MLS, as it’s a basic requirement to, you know, have access.

We were completely snookered.  You’d have a hard time selling a condo if you can’t advertise it for sale, but you’d have an impossible time selling a condo if the buyer can’t gain access to view it!

Lo and behold, I was able to find buyers, off-market, who would purchase the property at a market discount.  Gabriel flew to Toronto from overseas to facilitate the viewing with the buyers.

We got access.

The buyers made an offer.

And the property was sold.

The buyers provided an N12 to the tenant requiring vacant possession, but went above and beyond by providing 120 days’ notice instead of the 60 days required by law.  They further provided a signed affidavit swearing that they would owner-occupy the condo, and even provided a copy of their mortgage commitment to ensure that the tenant had no doubt – they were buying the condo to live in!

Every requirement for vacant possession, under the Landlord & Tenant Act, had been met.

But the tenant refused to acknowledge the N12 and simply said, “I am exercising my right to appear before the Landlord & Tenant Board.”

Four months passed by, with no communication from the tenant.  On the scheduled day of closing, the tenant was still in the unit, so the buyers exercised their option to terminate the purchase, which they had included in case this situation played out, which it did.

Game over.

Eight months later, when Gabriel appeared before the Landlord & Tenant Board, he was asked, “Where are the buyers noted in this N12?”

Gabriel told the Board, “Well, they bought the condo eight months ago, and obviously they walked away when the tenant refused to acknowledge the legal N12.”

The Board said, “Come back when you have another buyer,” and dismissed the case.

Welcome to Ontario, folks!

Heck, welcome to Canada, where just about everything you thought you knew is backwards and upside down.  Every value, every law, every tradition that we’ve ever held near and dear seems to have been upset over the last half-decade or more, and property rights here in Canada certainly fall into that category.

“What is the point of a law if the law is not upheld?” Gabriel asked me after that experience.

The problem with his comment was that the law was being upheld.  The tenant, upon receiving an N12, has the right to appear before the Landlord & Tenant Board.  Even if it takes eight months, and even if the buyer for the property walks away, the tenant still has that right.

Does this mean our system is “broken?”

It depends on who you ask.

There are just as many bad tenants as there are bad landlords, and just as many awful cases of injustice for tenants as there are for landlords.

We used to cover this topic a lot here on TRB.

My favourite post came two years back.

September 18th, 2023, I wrote: “Landlords & Tenants: The Modern-Day Hatfields & McCoys”

I don’t know that I can make it any more obvious, unless you’re not familiar with the Hatfields and McCoys, that is.  Just consider this the Capulets and the Montagues, or if you went to a school where Shakespeare was cancelled for not being inclusive enough, then consider it the Sharks and the Jets.

If you have time for some light reading, I would also offer these posts:

May 10th, 2023: “Giving All Landlords A Bad Name”

May 12th, 2023: “Giving All Tenants A Bad Name”

Two weeks ago, some news broke about a potential game-changer in the Ontario rental market.

“Doug Ford Government Proposes To Allow Tenant Evictions When Leases Are Up In New Bill”
Toronto Star
October 24th, 2025

From the article:

Last week, Gabriel came out of the woodwork and sent me a text message with a link to a National Post article, and the following note:

“Think this will go through?  These indefinite leases would finally be over.  My tenant has been holding me hostage for three years now.”

I wrote him back and said:

“The government will backtrack on this within a few days.  Just watch.”

I wasn’t really counting, but I think it was maybe three or four days before this happened:

“Ontario Government Backs Down On Consultations To End Rent Control, Indefinite Leases”
CBC News
October 27th, 2025

From the article:

After push back by politicians, housing advocates and renters across the province, Ontario’s Minister of Housing Rob Flack posted on social media Sunday that the government would not proceed with consultations “on potential changes to Ontario’s tenancy lease framework.”

He said the province would continue to push forward with “common sense reforms” to strengthen the rental market.

“Residents expect stability and predictability in Ontario’s rental market, and now is not the time to consider changes to this system,” said Flack.

“Ontario will continue … by restoring balance at the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB), cracking down on abuse of the system, and encouraging new rental construction to make it easier for families to find a place to call home.”

This was always going to happen.

Politics is politics.  The Ontario government can’t afford to lose the votes of any renters, and since they already have the votes of most landlords, there’s no real incentive for them to push this legislation through.

I have long maintained that politics isn’t about serving in the best interests of the constituents; it’s about self-preservation.  Elected politicians must do anything and everything to remain in power, and that affects every decision they make.

So I have given up on the concept of “right and wrong,” and simply come to realize that if everybody were jumping off a bridge, then it is, in fact, the correct thing to do.

Kudos to the Provincial government for trying, but I wonder if they knew this would be the reaction, and were actually just testing the waters?

Every piece of rental legislation is going to create challenges, and there simply is no one-size-fits-all solution.  But the objection to the Provincial government’s proposed legislation was two-fold:

1) It would effectively end rent control
2) It would displace hundreds of thousands of renters

Let’s look at #1 first, via this article:

“Say Goodbye To Rent Control, Indefinite Leases If Ontario Passes Housing Proposal: Advocates”
CBC News
October 24th, 2025

From the article:

Housing advocates say if passed, the proposal will hurt long-term renters and vulnerable tenants, like seniors and students, across Ontario.

“Everybody’s panicking. This is not the solution for affordable housing,” said Stacey Semple, a volunteer organizer with Acorn, a non-profit organization that advocates for various social justice issues, including affordable housing.

“He is taking rights away from tenants,” she said, referring to Ford. “The landlords are getting free passes to evict long-term tenants, especially because they want to collect more rent because it’s more economically viable.”

Currently, tenants are protected by what’s called “security of tenure,” which gives them the right to remain in a rental unit as long as they follow the lease agreement and residential tenancies act.

It also allows them to continue on a month-to-month rental basis after a fixed-term lease ends. Landlords are unable to evict tenants without a legally valid reason.

But if the proposal is brought about, Semple says Toronto and other areas large populations of renters will be hit especially hard. According to 2021 census data by Statistics Canada, 48 per cent of Toronto’s population are renters.

I don’t disagree with this.

Well said: “This is not the solution for affordable housing.”

But is it the private sector’s job to provide affordable housing?

Don’t answer, because that’s rhetorical.

As for the “landlords getting free passes to evict long-term tenants to collect more rent because it’s more economically viable,” here’s where things are really getting muddy.

Of course, collecting more rent is “more economically viable.”  Surely about this, there is no disagreement?

But whether or not a landlord, being a private citizen, operating a for-profit venture, is allowed to seek “economic viability” is being questioned by our society at large.

I am not suggesting that we allow every landlord to evict every tenant, everywhere.  But I am suggesting that we need to reconsider the definition of “eviction.”

The Toronto Star article referenced at the top offered us this heading:

Currently, tenants are protected from eviction unless there is a legal reason — such as unpaid rent or the landlord wants to move in — even after their lease expires.

But what is an “eviction?”

If a tenant signs a 12-month lease, should their lease “end” upon the conclusion of those twelve months?

No.  Not according to the Landlord & Tenant Act.

We have effectively created “evergreen lease agreements,” which I am not particularly for nor against.

But at some point, we need to go back to the very beginning, right?  We need to consider what a 12-month lease agreement is and should be?

Time and time again, I speak to folks who tell me, “I’m just gonna lease my place for a year,” and when I explain that the tenant can stay forever, they turn around and explain to me, “No, well, I wouldn’t do it like that.  I would only lease it for one year…”

And time and time again, I hear from tenants (usually TRB readers or referrals) who tell me, “My landlord said my lease is ‘up’ and told me to move out,” when that is clearly not what the law dictates.

Don’t get me wrong – I’m not all for landlords.  I’ve gone to bat for many tenants, as described above, whose unscrupulous landlords bully them upon the “conclusion” of their twelve-month leases, threatening to change their locks, telling them they’ve re-leased the unit, or crazy things like threatening to call the police and “have them removed.”

Many tenants don’t know their rights, and many landlords take advantage.

But at the same time, many tenants do know their rights, and the internet is littered with Reddit forums and Facebook groups on how to shake down landlords for tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

As with everything else in life, I wish there were a middle ground, rather than two extremes.

I’m just really tired of writing blogs like this: “Snookered: How A Toronto Tenant Can Get The Landlord Sued”

Interestingly enough, our friends in the United Kingdom have just upended their existing tenants’ rights legislation.

Not sure if you have this website saved under “favourites”, but here you go:

“Seismic Renters’ Rights Act Becomes Law”
The Negotiator
October 27th, 2025

They lost me here:

“… making removing rogue tenants both a lengthier and more expensive process for landlords and letting agents.”

Jolly good show, mates!

I know the Brits are super busy right now putting people in jail for comments made on Facebook, so you have to commend them for passing this “seismic” legislation.

I wonder if Canada is far behind in terms of creating a “national database” of private landlords to be monitored, scrutinized, poked, prodded, and eventually told how to act, think, and feel by the government?

Sorry, I lost my tin-foil hat there for a moment…

But it looks as though England has done away with “fixed term” lease agreements and has moved entirely to “periodic” or rolling basis tenancies.

Here’s another resource for those who have lots and lots of time on their hands:

UK Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government: “Guide To The Renters’ Rights Bill”

The one thing I don’t know about the rental system in the UK is whether or not tenants can appear in front of the Landlord & Tenant Board, for anything, at any time, and expect to win, like they do here in Ontario.  I don’t know if tenants in the UK, who are behind on their rent by eight months, are evicted, since that’s rarely the case here in Ontario…

So draw the focus back here to Ontario, just for a moment, and answer me the following:

Is it possible to support landlords and protect tenants in this day and age?

Answer “yes,” or answer “no,” but I challenge you to do what nobody’s doing out there today, and explain why…