1
Harassment by Landlord / Re: Adjudicator bias (UPDATE)
« on: November 26, 2023, 03:33:40 am »
Update from the author:
The bias adjudicator did rule in LL’s favour. The decision was released in May. Based on my experience at the hearing, I was certain that the review request would be denied EVEN THOUGH THE ADJ. ASSIGNED THE BURDEN OF PROOF ON THE TENANTS UNDER THE N12.
I appealed which was granted and the matter was remitted back to the LTB for a new hearing in front of a different member. Originally the Board had refused our request to come the T2 with the L2. However, at appeal I argued that decision was in violation of the principles of natural justice as having made a finding that the landlord in good faith requires the unit for residential occupancy, the Board frustrated our t2 application as they can no longer judge our complete evidence that the ensued harassment, illegal entries and abuse stemmed from the LL desire to sale the unit.
Now, within 8 days of Dc releasing its decision, LTB scheduled a new hearing BUT ONLY FOR THE N12 under “adjourned and seized matters” without so much as a word on our T2 application that has same determinative facts which was filed over a year ago. Then, I went into the portal and found that my access to request to combine or submit anything was suddenly BLOCKED.
After my emails went unanswered, I had to get the ombudsman involved. Then the Board combined my the two applications and matter is scheduled to be heared on Dec. 7, 2023 at 9 am.
Last time around the adj. did not let any observers into our hearing and did not state on record was is the hearing closed to the public. Neither I or the opposing side requested a closed hearing.
Along this troubled journey, I came to learn the shady practices being used (even during the appeal process) to promote the interests of the LL. I am not sure how Frank I can be from a liability standpoint to discuss what transpired but trust me fighting for my rights under legislation that supposedly has a tenant protection focus HAS BEEN AN UPHILL BATTLE.
The bias adjudicator did rule in LL’s favour. The decision was released in May. Based on my experience at the hearing, I was certain that the review request would be denied EVEN THOUGH THE ADJ. ASSIGNED THE BURDEN OF PROOF ON THE TENANTS UNDER THE N12.
I appealed which was granted and the matter was remitted back to the LTB for a new hearing in front of a different member. Originally the Board had refused our request to come the T2 with the L2. However, at appeal I argued that decision was in violation of the principles of natural justice as having made a finding that the landlord in good faith requires the unit for residential occupancy, the Board frustrated our t2 application as they can no longer judge our complete evidence that the ensued harassment, illegal entries and abuse stemmed from the LL desire to sale the unit.
Now, within 8 days of Dc releasing its decision, LTB scheduled a new hearing BUT ONLY FOR THE N12 under “adjourned and seized matters” without so much as a word on our T2 application that has same determinative facts which was filed over a year ago. Then, I went into the portal and found that my access to request to combine or submit anything was suddenly BLOCKED.
After my emails went unanswered, I had to get the ombudsman involved. Then the Board combined my the two applications and matter is scheduled to be heared on Dec. 7, 2023 at 9 am.
Last time around the adj. did not let any observers into our hearing and did not state on record was is the hearing closed to the public. Neither I or the opposing side requested a closed hearing.
Along this troubled journey, I came to learn the shady practices being used (even during the appeal process) to promote the interests of the LL. I am not sure how Frank I can be from a liability standpoint to discuss what transpired but trust me fighting for my rights under legislation that supposedly has a tenant protection focus HAS BEEN AN UPHILL BATTLE.