In general, you are not going to find a place for less than 1000. In fact, anything under this is usually what a person is charging for a room. Room rentals have also become a thing. Many people are doing this and, here is the kicker, at least in Ontario. Those renting out rooms ALSO want first and last month's rent and also run credit checks! Imagine that, to rent a ROOM! How did we get here?
The first place to look at is regulation, or the lack of it, and the desire to do nothing about it. Ontario, where I live, has almost become a free for all zone for landlords. No rental controls for buildings built after 2018, the idea that you can force people to submit to a credit check for every rental application. The ridiculous request for the first and last month of rent and in some cases a deposit are what incentivizes people to get into the business of renting. Another way that rents have gone through the roof, pardon the pun, is the use of renovations to evict a tenant. The idea is this, inform the tenant they have to leave for a renovation to take place, then when the tenant is gone. Poof, never mind the reno is not needed, up goes the rent and the tenant who left is out of a home. Another way landlords are using the law to get tenants out and increase rent is to ask for the unit to be vacated for a family member, well, well, well. So uncle Joe is going to move in, or is he? In most cases, he is not, again up goes the rent happy landlord, unhoused person. Is it any wonder why we have tent cities across Canada? Then there is the short-term rental issue.
Ah yes, short-term rentals. I have to admit, I like them. And I have no problem with the concept. They provide a great way for someone to make some money to pay for rent or the mortgage. The concern is when people by a home for that sole purpose. Or build a home for the sole purpose of making money as a short-term renter. It gets even more messy when an owner of a low rise decides to rent out apartments as short-term rental units.
So what can we do to fix this? Certainly tent cities are not the answer, and yet it appears that governments are more or less shrugging their shoulders and saying, let the police handle them by essentially doing little to nothing to fix it. You see, the poor and disabled are not interesting enough to politicians. They do not vote and, for the most part, do not pay any kind of tax. Letting the police handle them is just as dumb as doing nothing. Police do not have the time or proper resources to go chasing after the homless all the time. Frankly, it is not what taxpayers pay them to do. So the answer has to come in the form of action that makes sense.
1. Those renovations, prove that it is needed. Some cities like Hamilton, Ontario are putting bylaws that now require that. Toronto, one of Canada's largest cities, is also looking at a bylaw.
2. Again, looking at Hamilton, the city has taken the approach that regulation is key to managing housing. Tackling Short-Term Rentals by creating a bylaw that requires a license to operate and only allows a guest to stay up to 28 days. This means those who use sites to list their second home on short term rental sites have to have a license, and this also applies to a person who rents out a room on the site. Toronto also has such a bylaw, and it is being beefed up.
3. Another thing that needs to go is the notion of paying last month's rent. Across Canada, except in Quebec, renters are required to fork out the first and last month's rent. In an era of high rents, the idea of asking people to put out 2 months of rent is offensive. It's bad enough that in each attempt to rent, a person has to provide credit checks for each application. Which by the way can wreck credit scores. So axing the deposit, which is what the last month's rent is, should be a no-brainer but, again, the government just shrugs its shoulders and says meh. But, meh won't work anymore, and axing the deposit is the best way to give more breathing space to people who are looking for an apartment or home to rent.
4. Ah, and what about our fictional uncle Joe, who the landlord says he needs your unit for? That may be a real thing but, in most case's uncle Joe is never going to take possession. Really, would you charge your family member 2k a month to rent your basement or one of your apartments? So creating a rule or set of them might be in order. That prevents people from using the family member needs to have a home loophole to rent the unit at a higher rate to a new person. It's not unfair to ask for proof that the person who is a family member is going to live in the unit. Some affidavit or other proof, this is a reasonable ask. Even the possibility of banning renting to a family for certain types of rental units, like those in a high rise, are options that should be explored. Maybe it may be a good idea to show that indeed uncle Joe is paying full rent, yep the whole 2k for up to a year. With the requirement that the landlord aka the niece or nephew of uncle Joe has to show statements that they are indeed paying rent to live in the unit just like any other renter. After a year, good ole uncle Joe can then pay a smaller amount or 0. The point is to close the loophole and ensure that there is a real relative living there, not a new tenant paying 3 or 4k for the unit.
5. Reforming landlord tenant boards. In particular, the one in Ontario is a critical, just about every filing requires an intervention by the board via a hearing. There are cases that come before the board that should never have made it to a hearing stage. It might be a good idea to look at what the board does and consider the various orders it receives filings for and how they are managed. But, again, the government does not want or care to do it. That has lead to a massive increase in the backlog of cases and is costing everyone involved in the process. The solution may require new hires and less political appointments for buddies and supporters of the premier, a look at what is a serious vs. a not so serious case and throwing out some cases altogether may be the answer. To be fair, not all landlords are crooked, money grubbing people. They are also stuck in a bad situation with having to deal with tenants who do not pay the rent, refuse to leave, and damage property. But, the majority want to hang on and stay where they are because there is simply no place apart from the park, parking lots, shelters, and under bridges in a tent. Is that really acceptable? No.
It is time to embrace innovative approaches, add regulation and get the politics and business mentality adjusted so that the issue of housing can be addressed. Simply put, this can no longer continue to be the norm and the divisive nature of housing is only leading to the risk of more and more clashes between tenants and landlords along with the unhoused. It just takes one spark to start a fire and the whole thing blows up, which technically is what has happened here.
The answer ls not just more housing but, better management of the rules surrounding tenancy and the implementation of rules and regulations to underpin the value of each person's right to a home. It's time to recognize the unhoused and the tenants as stakeholders and to invite them into the process to make the changes needed. And it is time for governments to stop playing politics and start doing it's part to resolve the issue.
Below are some additional resources you can review that relate to this topic.
The Monitor has an excellent article that addresses Ontario Rent Control.
Want to learn more about rent control policy in Canada. Visit the Canadian Centre for Housing Rights site. They have an article about rent control across Canada.
No comments:
Post a Comment