OLA in "L'EXPRESS" (Semaine du 15 mars au 21 mars 2011)

[Hawk]

It's good to have you here Coldfire. I know your product has a lot of potential but we have to question every aspect of our business. It's a tough business climate we are in with lots of pitfalls.

Every time we go to the board for a non-paying tenant, someone who is harassing other tenants, etc. we usually face government paid for legal aid. We have to make sure we don't give them any ammo against us. As the former advertiser wrote, the Landlord and Tenant Board in Ontario is not used to new things and not used to thinking outside the box. I'd like to add the LTB is pro-tenant so we will be challenged by the adjudicators if the tenant starts bringing up something new.

I look forward to more discussion.

[Skitter]

From a strictly non-expert/layman point of view and opinion (as I am not a lawyer), it seems that the OHRC was referring to the limits that are imposed on the landlord in the context of what criteria they can or cannot use to exclude a person from housing eligibility. Because BuyMyRent does not provide housing, our service may not be subject to those same standards. Nevertheless, we do not wish to seem discriminatory in our practice, which is why a review of this policy is pending.

-fair enough...............but the bottom line is................in order for me to comply with YOUR requirements, I may have to violate the OHRC.

Its a catch 22 for small landlords.

You NEED to know I have only accepted tenants that can reasonably afford the rent (otherwise the payout risk to your company is too high). BUT in ontario, if I only accept tenants that meet your criteria, I can be acussed of violating the OHRC.

I am VERY interested to your answer on this question. This is a common scenario in ontario (in fact I may be going thru it soon).

If I signed up for your service and I screened tenant using your criteria, a lease signed and the tenant moved in...............would your company pay out in the following circumstance:

The original female tenant who moved in brings in her boyfriend. They have a fight and she moves out leaving him in the apt. She disappears into the great beyond, never to be found as is the case with most tenants, but he stays in the apt and refuses to pay rent. I take him to the LTB and after many months finally get a judgement and have him evicted.

Would your company pay me for the lost rent? (up to the max allowable limit)

I ask this question because from YOUR perspective, you are stuck insuring against a loss for a tenant that was NOT screened to your criteria (therefore putting unreasonable risk on you)...............technically it can be argued that as a landlord I did not follow your agreed company policy.

What would happen..............pay or no pay??

[AverageJoe]

Do you scrutinize your home insurance policy like this? What if a tenant starts a fire using the stove. The house burns down. The tenant's lawyer says the stove was 20 years old (or older) and you get sued. What do you do?

[Skitter]

Do you scrutinize your home insurance policy like this? What if a tenant starts a fire using the stove. The house burns down. The tenant's lawyer says the stove was 20 years old (or older) and you get sued. What do you do?

-joe you arent even comparing "apples to apples"..............

Please let the company owners respond.