Protection For Renters...but not Landlords?

[Mark1111]

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#210080

Once again the NDP government is taking away another tool that Landlords use to protect their investment. Fixed term leases just allows both parties the ability to part company after the term has completed.

[Hassel99]

The article does not say what you think it does.

[kgcayenne]

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/b ... dmail.com&
"Well, you can sign another year's lease, but I want $230/mo more than what you were paying." <-- this is why.

While article does not specify which 'certain circumstances' are allowed to have vacate clauses, it does not say they are disallowed, so the protection can still be there.

Why the opposition Mark1111?

[alanjh595]

The article does not say what you think it does.

Exactly. The article only seems to be stroking the heads of the renters and telling them that the NDP are looking after you. It has no teeth and can easily be sidestepped by the next rental agreement that will be required and have to be agreed to and signed off on by the renter before he/she is allowed to renew.
It might sound good on the surface by the renters and just another pain in the *bleep* for the landlords, but this will just drive up rents for the next group of new tenants and those that are about to have their lease expire soon.

[Mark1111]

Color me skeptical...I have no faith at all that any interference by the provincial government will lead to a positive results for either tenants or landlords. Leave the market system alone and go bother someone else.

[alanjh595]

Color me skeptical...I have no faith at all that any interference by the provincial government will lead to a positive results for either tenants or landlords. Leave the market system alone and go bother someone else.

I'm sorry, did we agree?

[GordonH]

I really don't see anything wrong here.
Only ones that would have a problem with this are unscrupulous landlords who tend to screw tenants at any chance they can.

[alanjh595]

I really don't see anything wrong here.
Only ones that would have a problem with this are unscrupulous landlords who tend to screw tenants at any chance they can.

I agree, and those predators will always have a long line-up of prey at their door. This new legislation will only protect those of the lower IQ group and disenfranchised.

[Queen K]

The ones with few means to fight back. Exactly. No problem here with it whatsoever.

[seewood]

I don't have an issue with it so landlords don't jack rents up. Even the Landlord association agrees with it.
If I were to rent my suite out long term ever again, I want the fixed term lease in place just so if the tenant is a pill, they can be punted in 6 months. Don't have the long drawn out process with the RTB and the unit potentially being trashed.

[alanjh595]

It this is entered into new legislation, it will make it much more difficult, expensive, and time consuming to enter into a rental agreement.

Bad credit record......................out.
Criminal record.........................out.
didn't pay last month's hydro bill....out.
Farted on the 23rd of Feb............out.
Long hair.................................out
Questionable work history.............out
*bleep* off one of my friends..........out
smell funny..............................out
Non Asian...............................out

Then let's talk about your job and prospects for the future. You think meeting you future in laws was uncomfortable...just wait until you have to meet a new landlord and enter a 1 year contract with him. Good luck.If he chooses YOU, he has no family members available and you are the last resort before leaving the basement empty[.