- Openroom
- Posts
- 36 Questions for a Former Adjudicator of the Ontario LTB
36 Questions for a Former Adjudicator of the Ontario LTB
What's it actually like at the LTB? 36 questions answered!
Weiting Bollu
June 05, 2025
CEO Weiting Bollu sat down with a Former Adjudicator, Ajay Grewal, and 36 others on a virtual call on Wednesday, June 4, 2025. Everyone on the call had an opportunity to submit questions in advance as well as ask live during the 1.5 hour session.
The mini-course and the live event that occurred is not about blaming or shaming tenants or landlords. Eviction is a sensitive topic. We’re here to talk about the realities and legal processes around evictions, especially from the perspective of enforcement. The goal is to understand the system better - not to point fingers, but to have a constructive, informed discussion.
The information shared during this event and below is for general knowledge only and should not be taken as legal advice. Every situation is unique, and if you're dealing with a specific issue, you should consult a licensed legal professional who can provide guidance tailored to your circumstances.
Table of Contents
🔅 Openroom Product Highlight:
The Openroom Rental Debt Ledger - When you’ve got a Court Order or Tribunal Decision with rental debt in it (e.g. rent, utilities, damages), use our service to track interest each day the debt isn’t paid back and report into Equifax every single month to negatively impact credit histories.
Seriously, it’s time to hold people accountable when they don’t pay the lawful rent owing.
Watch the Video
Coming Soon
About Ajay Grewal
Ajay is an experienced family law litigator and real estate lawyer with nearly a decade of dedicated practice. Throughout his career, he has built a reputation for providing exceptional legal counsel and representation in both family law and real estate matters. Recently, Ajay served as an adjudicator on the Landlord and Tenant Board of Ontario, where he honed his expertise in tenant-landlord relations and dispute resolution.
Driven by his passion for helping landlords navigate the complexities of eviction processes, Ajay decided to pivot back into private practice and launched his own firm, Evict Your Tenant. The firm’s mission is clear: to offer expert legal services tailored specifically to landlords across Ontario, ensuring they have the support they need for lawful evictions and landlord-related applications.
Outside of his legal career, Ajay enjoys spending time outdoors, particularly hiking, and cherishes the time spent with his wife and two cats. When he's not in the courtroom or on a trail, you'll find him glued to the Toronto Maple Leafs, still holding out hope every season that this will finally be the year they make it to the Stanley Cup Final. Despite the heartbreak, his unwavering loyalty to the team is nothing short of legendary.
About Ajay’s Company: Evict Your Tenant
At Evict Your Tenant, we know that being a landlord isn’t always easy—especially when it comes to navigating complex eviction laws and tenant disputes. That’s why our mission is simple: to provide landlords with the expert legal support they need to protect their property, their income, and their peace of mind.
Led by Ajay Grewal, a seasoned real estate lawyer and former adjudicator at the Ontario Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB), our firm brings a unique, insider perspective to every case. Ajay’s experience on both sides of the bench means we don’t just understand the law—we understand how it's applied, giving our clients a critical advantage when it matters most.
We’ve helped landlords across Ontario regain control of their properties with strategic, results-driven legal representation. Whether you're dealing with a non-paying tenant, an illegal occupant, or a breach of lease terms, we guide you through every step of the eviction process with precision, professionalism, and a commitment to minimizing disruption.
What we cover
1. Backgrounder on Adjudicators
2. Systemic Delays & Operational Issues
3. Conduct, Bias, & Decision-Making
4. Procedural & Legal Strategy
5. Broader System Reform & Political Questions
6. Non-LTB Disputes & Small Claims Process
Where to find Ajay
Phone: +1 416-799-7991
Web: http://www.evictyourtenant.ca/
Email: [email protected]
37 Questions & Answers for Ajay Grewal
Question 1: How does one even get a job as an adjudicator at the LTB?
Answer: It's just like any other job. You keep an eye out for the listing and apply. When I applied, I can speak from my personal experience, this was in 2023. The Government had provided more funding to hire more adjudicators. I saw the listing and applied. To get a job as an adjudicator, you don't need a legal background; it is an asset, but if you have a lot of life experience, those are algreat candidates. There are adjudicators who don't have a legal background but have been business owners or held high-level positions with business and life experience.
The interview process is just like any other job. I had two interviews. The first interview was a practical interview where they gave a scenario of a landlord and tenant dispute and asked specific questions. They gave us an hour to answer all the questions, and if we didn't submit our response within an hour, our application would be thrown out. In that, they didn't really look for 100% legal correctness. They were just more looking at the way you can solve problems in that situation.
After that, a few months later, I had a formal interview with two vice chairs at the LTB. That was just more interview-related questions about past work history and why I wanted to join the LTB. The whole process, I was surprised, took a while. I first applied and didn't hear back for about 2 to 3 months. Even after that interview and my second review, it took about 9 months to get from the application to the board by council. There is a bit of politics, and there was a bit of a delay because it has to pass in Parliament. I was surprised at that.
Question 2: How does the LTB choose which type of cases to assign to you as an adjudicator versus someone else? Can you give a highlight on that?
Answer: Everything is handed out at random. When I was hired, I was hired as a part-time adjudicator. It's something that I wanted to do part-time because I still wanted to run my practice, and I wanted to do both. The way you're assigned a case and your hearing block is that you give your availability as a part-time adjudicator—what weeks and days you're available. Then you randomly get assigned a hearing block, and you don't know your matters until a few days before the hearing date. That's when you'll start reviewing all the matters, reviewing the evidence, and getting prepared for the hearing itself.
Early on, as a rookie adjudicator, you are given L1 blocks first for N4, as in non-payment of rent. Those are the majority of the applications that are brought in front of the board. They want the individuals who are coming on as new to get a running start on that. We'll just add different applications to your blocks as you progress and get more experienced. You might start taking on some N12 blocks, you might start taking on some N13s. But usually, you start off with landlord applications. As you get more experienced, you will get assigned blocks where you deal with tenant applications. If you spend more time there, you might be doing some reviews, and that would be the more experienced adjudicators.
Question 3: What happens when the eviction hearing was adjourned at no fault of the landlord, but due to LTB administration overbooking? And what happens when a request to shorten hearing time was approved or granted, but no rescheduled date has been granted a month after the original hearing was adjourned?
Answer: This is an unfortunate situation for landlords, and you do see it come up. There's an administrative delay, so that's always noted in the record. You want that there's no negative inference drawn against any party there.
But, to be honest, it just comes down to volume and the capacity that the LTB has at that time, and the number of adjudicators that are available. There's not much you can do except for just wait. People will always email the LTB and calling, and I don't blame them, especially if there are issues of urgency that can make it a little bit more difficult as well.
The biggest impact it has is on procedural fairness. Delays for a landlord application, for example, for non-payment of rent, those arrears are going to keep piling up. For the second part of the question, if no rescheduled date has been granted a month after the original hearing was adjourned, it could take several weeks. Sometimes it could be quicker, and that's just up to the admin department at the LTB.
Question 4: Is there anything that someone can do to quicken or expedite that?
Answer: You can always make a request to get an expedited hearing. It's not promised that they're going to accept that request. You have to provide evidence, strong evidence, to get that expedited hearing date. But it is possible.
Question 5: I have heard that an LTB adjudicator can, under certain circumstances, deny an eviction for a person who has purchased a condo and intends to live in the unit. Is that true? And what would be the considerations for that?
Answer: Thanks for clarifying that. That's an N12, a purchaser's own use application. Personally, I haven't heard of any circumstances where it would be denied as long as the application is made in good faith and the legal test has been met. If you were able to establish that, and the tenant was not able to counter, if you were to follow through with the closing because for an N12 purchaser's own use, you have an executed agreement of purchase and sale with a closing date coming up, or perhaps the property has already been sold. I personally haven't heard of it. I can only judge it by the legal test. If the threshold is met, then the application goes through, and the relief is granted.
Question 6: Why don't most adjudicators give a decision during the hearing?
Answer: Most parties would love to have that. Sometimes they give an oral decision at the end. They'll give an idea of where the ruling is going to go. In my experience, more experienced adjudicators are more common to give oral decisions towards the end of the hearing. The great thing about that is that it prepares the parties for what's coming ahead.
If the tenant has to move out of the rental, they could start preparing for that before the order is issued. The reasoning is because sometimes there's a lot of evidence you have to review. You have to apply the law properly. If you're a new adjudicator, you can't even give a decision because for the first couple of months, you have to run all your decisions through the in-house counsel at the LTB. They'll review your orders, and if everything is good, you can proceed with issuing that order.
That's a big factor as well. If there are new adjudicators, you're never going to get those decisions right away. Another thing is that if you're rushing, you can risk errors in judgment, and there could be more requests for reviews and appeals, which is something you'd want to avoid as an adjudicator. You are obligated to give written reasons, and it takes time. You would want to review the evidence properly. And you all know that there's a high-volume caseload that these adjudicators handle, and if they were to give a decision at the end of each case, it would just prolong the hearing block, and you wouldn't be able to get to the other matters. Those are some of the main reasons why they don't. It's nice to get a decision for sure, but they have reasons why not.
Question 7: What is the length of time for an above-the-guideline increase (AGI) approval?
Answer: Above-the-guideline increases, I'll be honest, I personally did not deal with many of these, but I do know that they can get complicated. It could take much longer; it could take between 6 months to maybe a year. They're more complex than the more straightforward hearings, such as the N4. There's more evidence as well. The tenant's responses can actually trigger some procedural steps. There might be some requests for disclosure. There are more chances of adjournments happening. I didn't deal with too many personally, but I do know that they can get a little bit complicated, especially with the disclosure.
Question 8: Why is a landlord not allowed to reach out to the sheriff until after the termination date? That inevitably gives worst offenders weeks and sometimes months to get actually evicted, as the sheriff is always delayed.
Answer: That's a huge problem, especially nowadays, with the number of applications the LTB is seeing and hearing, and orders being issued. We all know that whatever the date is in the order, whether it's a date where you can enforce for non-payment or a date where it says you have to leave the rental unit by a certain date, you have to wait a day afterwards to actually apply for enforcement through the sheriff's office. This is something where the LTB doesn't have control over after they issue the order.
The sheriff's offices have their own internal delays. I get clients now, for example, Peel region, one of the longest delays in their sheriff's office, could take even 6 to 8 weeks to get an appointment. Some smaller municipalities might just take about 2 to 3 weeks. I definitely understand that this is something where landlords are getting frustrated, because tenants can use this time to their advantage. There's no interim relief for landlords at this time. Landlords will bear the cost of this delay; the longer they stay in the unit, the arrears will keep building up. There have even been situations, for example, where the sheriff's appointment has been booked, and let's say it's 6 weeks ahead, there have been times where the tenants have applied for bankruptcy in that time, which can cause even further delays. That's just an example of something that I've seen happen personally. It's something that has to get fixed. I don't know if it's a staffing issue. Maybe there should be more sheriffs.
I've heard people say that maybe it should be privatized, so having private sheriffs come in might speed things up. That's what I have to say for that. This is something that you only see with tribunals. If you're going to the Ontario Court of Justice or the Superior Court, you have a hearing that day, your order is going to be good probably the day you'll get an endorsement by the end of the day from the judge, and then your order the next day, for a motion that you brought, and that's it. It's going to be issued as of the date. This is how I think it should be. If you go, for example, with a standard order, you wait the 11 days. It's just another delay, and landlords are already frustrated. They've been waiting so long already to get to the hearing date, and then they have another delay to endure.
Question 9: Is there any awareness at the LTB that professional tenants are hurting good tenants and removing good landlords on a large scale? Is it becoming more obvious to an experienced adjudicator when you are coming across a professional tenant or landlord?
Answer: As an adjudicator, we hear this term "professional tenants." I'm sure they're well aware of it. But we look at each case on a case-by-case basis. We're always just weighing the evidence that's been permitted. We're looking at the legal test. We have to apply the RTA to the decisions.
It's up to the landlord to provide evidence in the hearing. If there have been past orders for non-payment, if you have a past decision, you can enter this as evidence, and that could be considered by the LTB. But if you don't bring up anything with regards to the past behaviour, then we don't. We don't have an internal data like we don't have an open room where we type in the person's name and then say, "Oh, wait a minute, he or she has three, four orders against them, so I'm going to have to rule against them this one as well."
Question 10: Over the last few years, the gap for a hearing of non-payment of rent date in the tribunal keeps growing. Why is the province not willing or likely to reduce the gap? What's the reason for lack of political will to fix things in the LTB?
Answer: Previously, there was a huge backlog during COVID. We can't put all the blame on the province. Courts were closed for the first time in our history. With that, we've seen a surge in case volume, especially with N4s. Those cases shot up.
You can't really blame the province. They've been trying what they can do with regards to funding, hiring more adjudicators, and shortening the gap between filing for an L1 and getting your hearing date.
But I also think it's not a beneficial political move, especially during an election or a housing crisis. I think that if the province does something or acts in a way that facilitates more evictions, or perhaps more N4s being heard, that could be quite an unpopular opinion with tenants and impact getting votes during election time. Our government didn't really mention much about how they were addressing these issues. It seems like they didn't do anything the first time around, and I don't think they're going to do much the second time around.
Question 11: What type of metrics does the LTB consistently track? And is there a goal that is provided in terms of the number of cases closed monthly, etc., that the management of the organization is striving towards?
Answer: Personally speaking, for us, the biggest thing for adjudicators was that we had an obligation to have our orders issued within 30 days of the hearing date. That's something that was stressed all the time. Every month we would have to send in an Excel sheet of any orders that we have that are past the 30-day deadline. We would be sending that to a vice-chair who, as an adjudicator, to keep that number low.
It's our reputational line, and we want to make sure that these cases are being heard expeditiously. That was the biggest metric that I worked with. I know that they track a number of things with regards to the type of hearings.
Statistics for Quarter 1-2025
The LTB and other Tribunals have some data that is open to the public. It can be found at Tribunals Ontario - Open data
Q1-2025 LTB Applications Received
Tribunals Ontario - Open data (https://tribunalsontario.ca/en/about/open-data/#panel8)
Q1-2025 LTB Landlord Application Days to First Hearing Averages
Tribunals Ontario - Open data (https://tribunalsontario.ca/en/about/open-data/#panel8)
Q1-2025 LTB Tenant Application Days to First Hearing Averages
Tribunals Ontario - Open data (https://tribunalsontario.ca/en/about/open-data/#panel8)
Question 12: In terms of speeding up the process, would open court or Zoom speed up the process?
Answer: It may. There are benefits to both. With Zoom, the great thing is access to justice, being able to hear matters all over Ontario, whether you're in a rural area or a metropolis. For access to justice, it's great. Previously, all eligible offices have been consolidated. What I can say about open court is, I might not be able to say whether it would speed up the process. The great thing about having an open court process is having settlements, what you can call hallway settlements. Other matters are going on, and you can take the time to walk over to the landlord or tenant and discuss if there's any way to resolve this. Everyone's there.
Another issue is court etiquette. Everyone comes dressed up, more serious, not just sitting at home in their PJs. It makes a huge difference for sure. One thing I noticed with the Zoom process is that you can have technological issues; parties might log off and not log back in for 30 minutes, or you have to, as an adjudicator, say, "Okay, I'll just stand this matter down, we'll hear others." And some people are just not that tech-savvy. I think open court is great; it may speed up the process. There are definitely reasons for both.
Question 13: What expenses can an adjudicator get reimbursed on?
Answer: I was never reimbursed for anything else on the board. Perhaps if it was back in the days where it was regional, maybe mileage or something like that for traveling back and forth. But we were just on a stipend pay. It's all public knowledge how much we make, and that's how we get paid. If there was some way where I could, and I forgot about it or didn't do it myself, I'm going to be quite upset about that. But I don't know about any expenses that you can claim.
Question 14: Are there internal or departmental instructions from the LTB authorities to minimize the number of evictions?
Answer: There actually isn't. We would interact with members or vice-chairs. We know with administrative law and tribunals that tribunals are creatures of statute. So we have a statutory obligation. We apply the RTA; we balance the rights of landlords and tenants, always ensuring procedural fairness as well. We understand as adjudicators that eviction is a serious remedy, so we always have to make sure we weigh appropriately, apply the legal test properly, and make sure that it meets the legal threshold. It is a legal obligation. It's not a discretionary thing where we're told by our bosses or higher-ups to minimize these evictions.
Question 15: Can a formal complaint be filed against an adjudicator that has shown unfair bias for an evicted tenant against a landlord that had evidence and legal reason for eviction of that particular tenant?
Answer: There's a complaint mechanism built in. You could file a complaint. It gets reviewed by the executive chair, who will, if the matter is ongoing, probably wait for the decision to be made before they bring it up with a member. It really depends on the complaint, because unfair bias could be something that touches on procedural fairness as well. So that might be grounds for a review or an appeal rather than saying it's against the adjudicator.
But if there is egregious conduct, for example, the adjudicator flatly doesn't give one of the parties a right to be heard, something process-related, or maybe they made some prejudicial comments, or they said some things they shouldn't have, then that would be grounds for a complaint, for sure. But you can't, a lot of the times, landlords or tenants don't agree with the decision, and they just file a complaint, because we always think that we're biased ourselves. We think that we're right, and it should have been decided in our favor. But there is a review mechanism for that.
Question 16: How does one side's lack of veracity affect the decision of an adjudicator? What kind of errors on forms cannot be overcome?
Answer: That's something a lot of parties face. If you are lying or introducing misleading information, that's going to damage your credibility. At the end of the day, it might lead to a dismissal, it might lead to a denial of the relief that you're trying to seek from the tribunal itself. There are errors that you make that can be fatal to your application. One of the most common errors on the N4, for example, or any notice of termination, is an incorrect termination date. That makes the form defective, and your application is dismissed.
There are certain procedural defects that can't be cured. I can't remember offhand, but there's a regulation or a rule that goes through requirements for all applications in the LTB. If you follow the appropriate rules regarding those timelines, your application can be dismissed. But recently, there's the new introduction of a rule that it's "substantially compliant," which is good. It's nice to see that small errors can be overlooked, but something serious, such as messing up on the termination date or service, there's no curing that.
Question 17: How to get an N4 eviction when the tenant claims they have nowhere to go and cannot afford housing?
Answer: Even if it's social housing, there are tests that you look for as an adjudicator to see if this is a viable tenancy. You look at the rent that's owed, and it's black and white there. You do take into account relief under Section 80.
There are some circumstances where you might take into account and it presents where you might delay the eviction a little bit. But it's the same test either way. It doesn't matter whether you're in social housing or if you're in a place that's owned by a small landlord.
Question 18: How long does board counsel take to turn around an adjudicator's draft decision?
Answer: In my experience, quite quickly. The counsel that was in-house with the LTB were very helpful. You would probably get a turnaround within less than a week in my personal experience. Then you may send it out again to review, and they'll get back to you quite quickly. If it's something that's urgent, and you let them know, then that timeline can be expedited as well.
Question 19: I won a case against a landlord recently pertaining to indoor air. Once the air testing is completed, if the results show what I suspect, am I able to pursue another case for pain and suffering? I have been going through a lot with health due to air quality, and the management refused to acknowledge it at all. So this is about once you have won a case, can you go after them again?
Answer: You might have grounds to bring a claim in Small Claims Court. That's something where you'd have to serve your plaintiff's claim, and you provide your evidence. The decision from the LTB could be a part of the evidence that you're providing to Small Claims. That's something where you would have to look at the facts, and probably have a consultation with a legal representative to get a little bit more detail regarding advising them on the law and what the caps for damages are. You probably need a bit more information, for sure. But if you do have grounds in Small Claims, you can definitely go through there.
Question 20: Why are tenants not required to send evidence in advance of a hearing, and never shared beforehand?
Answer: My clients are always complaining about this. Evidence is submitted on the day of the hearing, during the hearing. I've even accepted evidence during a hearing. Parties will email it to the LTB, and then we'll look at it; we'll stand the matter down. There's Rule 19 that addresses submitting evidence. Both parties are required to submit evidence 7 days before the hearing. We know that it doesn't happen.
In other courts, if you didn't follow the timelines, it just wouldn't be accepted. But the adjudicators have a lot of discretion to accept it. That's the reason behind it. A lot of the times these tenants are self-represented, and they don't know exactly what they've submitted. If it's something easy that they could submit, like a payment they had made, then, typically, we'll ask them, "Can you just send us proof of that right away?" But the landlord is always given a chance to respond. You might even have to stand the matter down, respond to it later, or it might get adjourned. But it's another issue that comes down to procedural fairness and self-represented litigants.
Question 21: We have heard stories of chairs and vice chairs overturning a member's decision. Some have appeared contentious. Are these generally well thought out overturns, or are there other forces at work such as politics?
Answer: No, there's nothing with politics or anything like that. There's nothing like, "Oh, they personally disagreed, and they want to just overturn it." A lot of the times, the legal review is there to maintain some sort of consistency internally, making sure that you're following the right precedents. A lot of the times, this will happen with someone who's a newer adjudicator. They've passed the point where they don't have to submit their decisions to the in-house counsel, but they're still fairly new. They might make some mistakes. There's a review process for it, whether it's an error in interpreting the law or something to do with procedural fairness. Everything is well documented. There's nothing where it would ever be something like a political decision.
Question 22: What are the most common issues tenants are bringing to the LTB?
Answer: Maintenance and repairs, and illegal entry, such as "my privacy is being violated." A lot of these issues, such as maintenance and repairs, are brought not as applications but as a response to a landlord's application, facing your own issues, which tenants have the right to do as well. I would say those two, and perhaps illegal rent increases, like many cases where people agree or are asked to pay a certain amount which is way above the guideline amount. You'll see that as well.
Question 23: How does a tenant go about filing a lawsuit against their property management?
Answer: This is about trying to sue the property management. If it's something that can be addressed in Small Claims Court, for example, for damages, for negligence, or for a breach of a duty that's not covered under the RTA, you would go to Small Claims Court. They can go ahead and file a plaintiff's claim. You name the property management or the landlord as the defendant.
Please consult a lawyer or a paralegal before you do this, just to make sure you're naming the right party, because you can often confuse who's responsible for what occurred. You might state that the property manager was responsible, when, in fact, the responsibility actually landed with the landlord. So it definitely get legal advice before you do that.
Question 24: What proof do you look for on proving a bad faith eviction when you were an adjudicator?
Answer: That's a good question. I dealt with this a lot with my N12 and N13 cases. Definitely, if your tenant is claiming bad faith, you want to see specific, documented proof. I can name a couple of examples. For example, in an N12 for the landlord's own use, if the unit was re-rented shortly after the eviction at a higher rate, that establishes bad faith. The landlord never moved in in a reasonable amount of time, or the person didn't take possession, or they never intended to.
You can look at even advertising and listings on MLS. This is easy proof that you can provide to the board, and a lot of this can establish bad faith. For N13 applications, if they didn't perform the claimed renovations that they were going to do, and it was something that didn't require the unit to be vacant. These are some specific examples. Then there's obvious relief that can be provided by the LTB to the tenant who's claiming bad faith, and they're successful in doing so.
Question 25: Is there a time frame where you cannot take on any LTB related cases after working as an Adjudicator/Member?
Answer: Yes, it's one year.
Question 26: Does the LTB have any plans to cancel the virtual hearings and go back to the old in-person hearings?
Answer: Not that I've heard of. I think this is something that's going to be here to stay. Then again, I haven't really been involved in any discussions regarding this with members that work there or vice-chairs. It's been about a year and a half since I've been gone from the LTB. In my opinion, I don't think so. I think this is how they're going to conduct the hearings for the foreseeable future.
Question 27: After you leave the LTB, there is a one-year period where you can't take on any cases in relation to the LTB, correct?
Answer: Yes, exactly. When I left, for one year, I had to wait that whole time, even though I knew what I wanted to do after I left. But for one year, you can't represent anyone in front of the board. They're very strict with it. When I left, my mentor there, who's a vice-chair, told me, "Don't mess around with this requirement," because there have been members in the past who didn't listen. If they're lawyers or paralegals, the Law Society definitely found out about it.
Question 28: What are the three most common mistakes a landlord makes in the eviction process?
Answer: Common mistakes in the eviction process, that's another good question. One of them would definitely be errors that you can't overcome. We talked about that before. That's quite a common mistake, a typical example of putting in the wrong termination date. Another one is a lot of self-represented landlords come on, and they don't really know what the law is saying or what the legal test is, and they're not providing the right evidence. That's another common mistake, especially if you have a complicated matter. It's very advisable to go see a legal representative or at least get some kind of consultation or representation there. So it would be these errors, and perhaps being self-represented, and not providing the right evidence at the hearing. You might have a valid claim, but you're just not providing the right evidence for the adjudicator to make their decision.
Question 29: Why do adjudicators accept and entertain misrepresentation and misleading statements?
Answer: What happens is a lot of the times, a landlord is at the hearing, and they're listening to the tenant say a lot of statements that are quite misleading. The landlord might be wondering if the adjudicator is actually taking this as evidence or accepting it. But a lot of the times, we're not. We don't accept the misrepresentations, but we have to allow it because it's their opportunity to be heard. Sometimes parties can make false or misleading statements, but we don't have the time to challenge those on site.
For each statement, we can't say, "Okay, we're going to litigate this right now. Is this correct?" because we're on a timeline. We have a lot of other cases to handle. It's something that we'll go back to the recording, we'll see what the evidence was like, what evidence was submitted as well. You have to assess the credibility of those statements, weighing the evidence, which are two things that have been said before as well. Also, we have to remain neutral. There's a lot of stuff going on in our head when we're listening to these statements, but we're just not vocalizing it. We're not saying, "Oh, no, that's wrong," or "This is not right," or that.
Also, sometimes individuals will make incorrect statements by mistake, like they might give the wrong amount for the rent that's due, or they might give a wrong date, and they didn't mean it; it wasn't intentional. Intention is a big thing as well.
Question 30: How does the LTB discourage vexatious or frivolous litigation? How often are costs awarded or fines charged in those cases?
Answer: I have never personally heard of anyone getting fined for that at the LTB. I've seen it in other courts. The standard is quite high to get awarded those costs at the LTB. It can be addressed by labeling someone a "vexatious litigant." You could introduce past orders against them, and that could present evidence, almost like character evidence or a pattern of behaviour. We touched on that before. You don't want to just go to the hearing and say, "Hey, they've had three or four orders against them. You should research it." No, you have to provide that to the adjudicator. But regarding costs for that, I don't think it's in their jurisdiction to do it.
Question 31: Say, for example, an individual tenant had unpaid rent cases before, a history of it, and then this current landlord presents that to you as evidence of their past behaviour. Does that get taken into account?
Answer: Yes, that's a great question. If it is provided as evidence, appropriately, like it's uploaded, it's served, we will take that into account. It could establish some character evidence. Also, if a tenant makes a claim for non-payment of rent, and says, "Oh, I need to delay the eviction for a certain reason," and they've used that same tactic before, that may influence your decision regarding expediting the relief, instead of listening to the tenant. But first, you have to establish that the legal test has been met and all that. Then, when you're looking at the relief regarding delaying it, that might play a factor there.
Answer: You get your hearing block a few days before. For example, a full L1 hearing block for me used to be 50 different matters. So L1s, for non-payment of rent. You're just doing a lot of math there. You're going case by case, and you're just making sure the math is adding up. It can be a lot of work. That's where, when you become a bit more experienced, at the beginning, I used to review a lot more evidence than I should have.
But as you get a little bit more experienced, you start to figure out what's relevant and what's not relevant. You get a day paid to review everything. But it could take longer than that as well. That's for reviewing everything. Then you go to your hearing date, and then you have time to write your orders. If you have your hearing on Monday, Tuesday, maybe Thursday, Friday, you would sit down and write your orders while they're still fresh in your mind.
Question 33: Do you go back and replay the sessions?
Answer: Sometimes you have to. From the beginning, when you start your training, they really emphasize jotting down the time on the recorder for matters where you might have to go back and perhaps address something. Maybe a witness said something, or there's something where you're like, "I'm going to have to look into this a bit."
At the beginning, the management of it is quite hard to get used to because you're an adjudicator. You have 50 matters in front of you. There are so many people that are in the queue. You're basically trying to manage the parties. You might have tenants and landlords yelling at each other, so you're muting them. At the same time, you're trying to be an adjudicator, trying to make decisions. It can be quite overwhelming in that regard.
Question 34: There's an assistant that is in each hearing room, is there not?
Answer: You get a moderator. Moderators are there just for organizational purposes. But there's a lot of back and forth as well. Sometimes you stand a matter down, you address another matter. You might have a legal representative who gets upset at you and says, "Hey, look, I've been waiting for a while, and I have a consent order here that you forgot about." And you will forget about it sometimes, even though you're getting updated by the moderator. It might just slip your mind.
Question 35: What is a hearing block? And how long is it?
Answer: Hearing blocks are just the set time where all the matters are going to be heard. As I mentioned before, a full day hearing block for me, which would go from 9 AM till 5 PM with a little bit of a break for lunch, would be 50 matters for N4 L1s. You're just doing a lot of math there. You could have a half-day hearing block from 9 to 12. They tell you that you're going to be responsible to sit there as a party from the beginning until the end.
You never know when your matter is going to be heard. Typically, the way we hear matters is that we will address anything that's on first, or the DRO will take care of that if we have a DRO, because not every hearing will have a DRO there. We'll have to take consents ourselves, and then we move on to the uncontested matters, and then we end off with the contested matters.
In the end, if there's overflow, then that's going to be adjourned. That can happen all the time. The parties get frustrated when it's 4:30 or 4:45, and it's getting close to 5 PM. But we'll stretch it. If we need to go a little bit longer, we do try to hear the matter if we can, if we can finish the matter. That's the best-case result. I personally saw experienced adjudicators who didn't really have to spend time reviewing because they would just decide everything on the spot. They were so experienced at it. They wouldn't have to spend too much time reviewing everything beforehand.
Question 36: Tenants left, and I don't know their latest address. What should I do, or what can I do?
Answer: That happens a lot. They run away or they leave, and you don't know, and they don't even want you to know. That's the main thing. So there are different ways you could do it. You could use some investigative techniques. You could hire companies that are called skip tracers. That's what they do. They do investigative work. They try to find where they're living or where they're working. This issue comes up a lot. It's just investigative stuff.
For example, if you go to Small Claims and you want to enforce a judgment, if you want to file a notice of garnishment, that needs to be served on them personally. So you have to do a lot of investigative work. I get clients who come all the time, and they tell me, "This person owes me $5,000; I really need to go after them." And I would tell them, "You know what, I don't even think it's worth it for $5,000."
You have to assess how much it's going to cost for you to legally do this with all the money you have to pay third parties as well, and then how much are you going to actually get in return? If it's a higher amount, maybe $15,000, it might be worth it. I honestly think anything less than $10,000, you really have to sit down and make that assessment.
Additional Resources Referenced
Organizations and Boards
•SOLO: A group dedicated to helping small landlords
•Equifax Canada https://www.equifax.ca/personal/
•MLS (Multiple Listing Service): Mentioned as a place for advertising and listing properties https://www.realtor.ca
•Ontario Court of Justice / Superior Court https://www.ontariocourts.ca/ocj
•Sheriff's Office https://www.ontario.ca/locations/courts
•Attorney General / Associate Attorney General https://www.ontario.ca/page/ministry-attorney-general
•Law Society https://lso.ca/home
Forms and Applications
•N4 (Notice of Termination for Non-payment of Rent): A common type of application for non-payment of rent. It is one of the most frequent applications brought before the LTB. https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Notices%20of%20Termination%20&%20Instructions/N4.pdf
•L1 (Application to End a Tenancy and Evict a Tenant - Non-payment of Rent): An application related to non-payment of rent, which the LTB is trying to reduce the time for the first hearing. https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Landlord%20Applications%20&%20Instructions/L1_Instructions_20200401.pdf
•N12 (Notice of Termination for Purchaser's Own Use/Landlord's Own Use): An application for personal use by the landlord or purchaser. https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Notices%20of%20Termination%20&%20Instructions/N12_Instructions_20200728.pdf
•N13 (Notice of Termination for Demolition, Conversion or Repairs): An application related to renovations or demolition https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Notices%20of%20Termination%20&%20Instructions/N13.pdf
•L2 (Application to End a Tenancy and Evict a Tenant or Collect Money) https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Landlord%20Applications%20&%20Instructions/L2_Instructions.pdf
•T2 and T6 applications: These are the most common issues tenants bring to the LTB, relating to maintenance and repairs (T2) https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/tenant%20Applications%20&%20Instructions/T6_Instructions_20200401.pdf and tenant rights (T6) https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Tenant%20Applications%20&%20Instructions/T2_Instructions_20200401.pdf.
•Notices, Forms, Filing Fees of the LTB: https://tribunalsontario.ca/ltb/forms-filing-and-fees/#panel1
Legal and Administrative Resources
•Landlord and Tenant Board Key Performance Indicators https://tribunalsontario.ca/en/about/key-performance-indicators/ltb-key-performance-indicators/
•Rule 19 (of the LTB Rules) to Disclose Evidence https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/ltb/Practice%20Directions/Practice%20Direction%20on%20Evidence.html#:~:text=In%20accordance%20with%20Rule%2019,LTB%20orders%20or%20directs%20otherwise.
•Small Claims Court: A venue where tenants can file claims for damages or negligence not covered by the RTA (Residential Tenancies Act) https://www.ontario.ca/page/suing-someone-small-claims-court
•Legal Representative (Lawyer or Paralegal): It is advisable to consult one for complicated matters, such as understanding legal tests, providing the right evidence, or filing lawsuits in Small Claims Court. https://learn.openroom.ca/expert
•Free template for evidence package (Openroom): Openroom provides a free template to help parties organize their evidence in a more readable and comprehensible format for adjudicators. https://learn.openroom.ca/court-evidence-template
•Skip tracers: Companies that conduct investigative work to find where former tenants are living or working, useful for enforcing judgments. https://learn.openroom.ca/post/skip-tracing-examination-hearing
About Openroom University
Free learning mini-courses are part of the vision behind Openroom of creating a transparent and connected rental ecosystem. We believe that knowledge is power and we should have more information to make informed decisions.
If you like what we do, let us know at [email protected] or consider buying us a coffee!
Reply