Yesterday, the Regroupement des comités logement et associations de locataires du Québec (RCLALQ) unveiled the results of its annual compilation on housing repossession and evictions.
The APQ has a different vision of what is happening in the residential rental market.
According to the RCLALQ, there is an urgent need to review the protection granted to tenants. For the APQ, this is not the case.
According to the Association des Propriétaires du Québec (APQ), it is necessary to bring several nuances to their assertions delivered with great pomp to try to pass off their proposals as urgent and necessary.
-
“Indeed, the number of eviction requests processed annually by the Administrative Housing Tribunal has exploded since 2020 in Québec. Between 2010 and 2019, the Tribunal generally issued more or less fifty judgements per year for cases of expansion, subdivision or change of assignment leading to eviction. From 99 in 2020 however, this number has exploded to 217 in 2021 and 185 for 2022 which is not yet finished.”
Do you know the eviction procedure for these cases?
The tenant can always refuse. And: The tenant may contest the merits of this eviction before the Administrative Housing Tribunal.
If there is a dispute by the tenant at the Administrative Housing Tribunal, the landlord must show that he really intends to subdivide the dwelling, enlarge it or change its use, and that the law allows it.
-
And for repossession of a housing, the tenant can always and again refuse.
Indeed, in cases of repossession, the landlord must apply to the TAL to win the case and be allowed to repossess the dwelling after paying compensation to the tenant. The Association des Propriétaires du Québec (APQ) rejects the RCLALQ’s proposals that demonstrate that the reality on the ground, of rental-housing owners, is not taken into account and neglects the impact on the tenants that could be created by the application of such measures.
-
“Require that all repossessions, eviction and major works projects obtain court authorization and be subject to mandatory monitoring within one year.”
This proposal does not take into account the costs for this measure and assumes bad faith on the part of the rental-housing owner. However, it is easy for the tenant to do this verification.
-
“Prohibition of repossession projects and those leading to the eviction of tenant households, when the rental vacancy rate is below the market equilibrium threshold of 3%.”
So then, do we take away from the owner an essential component of the right of ownership? What would be the impact on values and interest for an investor with the use of such methods?