LD25-199

Application · security deposit, rent arrears, repairs. Outcome: partial. The evidence establishes part of the Landlord’s claim. [4] The Landlord has a valid claim for rent owing, cleaning, damage and refilling the oil tank. The Landlord will keep the Tenants’ security deposit, including interest, in the amount of $529.91 to offset the Landlord’s claim

Linked prior order: LR24-06

Order text

Order of The Director of Residential Tenancy
Dockets 25-154 & 25-155 June 05, 2025
INTRODUCTION
[1] This decision determines an application filed with the Residential Tenancy Office (“Rental Office”) under the Residential Tenancy Act (“Act”).
[2] The Landlord claims against the Tenants in the total amount of $16,725.80 for rent owing, cleaning, painting, repairs and refilling the oil tank. The Landlord also seeks to keep the Tenants’ security deposit, including interest, in the total amount of $529.91 to offset the Landlord’s claims.
DISPOSITION
[3] The evidence establishes part of the Landlord’s claim.
[4] The Landlord has a valid claim for rent owing, cleaning, damage and refilling the oil tank. The Landlord will keep the Tenants’ security deposit, including interest, in the amount of $529.91 to offset the Landlord’s claim. The Tenants must pay the Landlord $9,195.89 by the timeline below.
BACKGROUND
[5] The Unit is a three-bedroom and two-bathroom single family home.
[6] On May 6, 2021 the parties signed a written, year-to-year tenancy agreement. Rent was $1,500.00 due on the last day of the month. The tenancy agreement required a $1,500.00 security deposit.
The parties disagree on the amount paid.
[7] On February 9, 2025 the Landlord served the Tenants with a Form 4(A) Eviction Notice (“Notice”) with an effective date of March 1, 2025 for non-payment of rent.
[8] On February 25, 2025 the Landlord filed a Form 2(B) Landlord Application to Determine Dispute (“Application”) with the Rental Office seeking to keep the security deposit, including interest, rent owing and additional compensation for cleaning, painting, repairs and refilling the oil tank.
[9] On February 26, 2025 the Rental Office emailed only the Landlord a notice of a teleconference hearing scheduled for March 27, 2025. The Landlord served the Tenants with the notice of hearing.
[10] On March 15, 2025 the Tenants vacated the Unit due to the Notice.
[11] On March 21, 2025 the Rental Office emailed the parties a 78-page evidence package.
[12] On March 27, 2025 the Tenants requested an adjournment which was permitted.
[13] On April 10, 2025 the Rental Office emailed the parties an updated notice of a teleconference hearing scheduled for April 15, 2025. An updated 80-page evidence package was also emailed to the parties.
[14] On April 15, 2025 the Landlord joined the teleconference hearing for determination of the Application. The Tenants did not join the teleconference hearing. I telephoned the Tenants’ two phone numbers and left a voicemail message with the teleconference instructions and the Rental Office’s telephone number. I also emailed the Tenants the same teleconference instructions. I waited ten minutes before moving forward with the teleconference hearing in the Tenants’ absence.
[15] The Landlord was permitted to submit additional evidence after the hearing. The Landlord submitted 15-pages of additional evidence on May 26, 2025 which was forwarded to the Tenants.
The Tenants submitted an email response, which was forwarded to the Landlord.

[16] Included as Director’s evidence is a one-page email from the Tenants to the Rental Office dated March 21, 2025. The Director’s evidence was forwarded to the Landlord on April 15, 2025.
ISSUE
A. Has the Landlord established claims against the Tenants for rent owing, cleaning, painting, repairs and refilling the oil tank?
ANALYSIS
[17] The Application stated that the Landlord is seeking $7,500.00 for rent owing, and $5,000.00 (“possible more”) for cleaning, painting, repairs and refilling the oil tank. The Landlord also seeks to keep the $500.00 security deposit.
[18] However, the Landlord stated at the hearing that the claim for rent owing is $8,225.80 and the claim for cleaning, painting, repairs and refilling the oil tank is $8,500.00. The total amount sought is $16,725.80.
The End of the Tenancy
[19] The evidence establishes that the Landlord served the Tenants the Notice, with an effective date of March 1, 2025. The Tenants did not pay the rental arrears stated on the Notice and did not file an application with the Rental Office disputing the Notice.
[20] The Landlord stated that he permitted the Tenants to stay in the Unit past the March 1, 2025 effective date. The Tenants vacated the Unit on March 15, 2025.
[21] The Landlord is seeking pro-rated rent for March 1 to 15, 2025.
[22] I find that the tenancy ended on March 1, 2025 due to the Notice. The Landlord’s pro-rated rent claim is determined below.
The Security Deposit
[23] The parties disagree over how much the Tenants paid to the Landlord for the security deposit. I note that the tenancy agreement stated that $1,500.00 was required.
[24] The Landlord stated that the Tenants only paid him $500.00 at the start of the tenancy. I note that the Landlord did not submit any additional evidence to corroborate this claim.
[25] The Tenants’ evidence stated that they paid the Landlord $1,500.00 for the security deposit. The Tenants did not submit any additional evidence to corroborate this claim and did not participate at the hearing to answer any questions under affirmation.
[26] I find that the parties have not provided corroborating evidence to determine the actual amount paid by the Tenants to the Landlord for the security deposit. In making a determination on this fact, I find that the Landlord did provide oral evidence at the hearing under affirmation. Further, I find that the Application states that the Landlord is only seeking to keep $500.00 from the security deposit.
[27] Therefore, I will consider the security deposit amount of $500.00 plus interest in this decision.

Rent Owing
[28] The Landlord is seeking rent owing, in the amount of $8,225.80, calculated as followed:
Month Amount Owed October 2024 $1,500.00 November 2024 $1,500.00 December 2024 $1,500.00 January 2025 $1,500.00 February 2025 $1,500.00 Pro-rated rent: March 1-15, 2025 $725.80 Total $8,225.80
[29] The evidence establishes that the Tenants have not paid rent to the Landlord for October 2024, November 2024, December 2024, January 2025, February 2025 and fifteen days for March 2025.
[30] The Landlord stated that he tried to work with the Tenants by giving them extra time to catch up on their rental arrears. The Landlord stated that the Tenants did not make any payments, which led to the Notice being served to the Tenants.
[31] I find that the Landlord’s rent owing claim is allowed, in the amount of $8,225.80. This claim includes pro-rated rent for 15 days in March 2025 (15 days divide 31 days in the month, multiply by $1,500.00). I note that despite the tenancy ending March 1, 2025, the Tenants continued to live in the Unit. The Tenants were overholding and are required to pay rent for the time they continued to occupy the Unit (see subsection 74(1) of the Act).
Cleaning, Painting, Repairs & Refilling the Oil Tank
[32] The Landlord is seeking additional compensation in the amount of $8,500.00.
[33] Clause 39(2)(a) of the Act states:
When a tenant vacates a rental unit, the tenant shall (a) leave the rental unit reasonably clean and undamaged, except for reasonable wear and tear…
[34] The Landlord stated that the Unit was left unclean, damaged and the oil tank was empty. The Landlord submitted photographs of the Unit taken on March 15, 2025.
[35] The Landlord stated that the Unit required cleaning which was still ongoing as of the hearing date.
[36] The Landlord stated that the Unit had significant damage to the walls, floors and doors. The Landlord stated that a contractor has quoted him $60.00 / hr. with no estimation on the time required to complete the work. The Unit also required painting. The Landlord stated that the Unit was last painted and renovated before the Tenants moved in.
[37] The Landlord did not submit any invoices, quotes or receipts into evidence for the cleaning, repairs, painting and replacement of the doors.
[38] I note that I provided the Landlord an opportunity to submit additional evidence, which included a request for the tenancy agreement, receipt of the payment of the security deposit, the invoice for the oil tank refill, a submission and/or quote from the contractor.
[39] The Landlord only provided a copy of the tenancy agreement and an invoice for the oil tank refill.

[40] The Landlord stated that all utilities were the responsibility of the Tenants. The Landlord stated that the oil tank was empty at the end of the tenancy. The Landlord submitted an invoice show that it cost $830.87 to refill the oil tank.
[41] The Tenants’ evidence disputed the Landlord’s claims set out on the Application. The Tenants’ evidence stated that the alleged damage was pre-existing, and that they asked the Landlord to complete repairs in the Unit without success. The Tenants evidence also stated that the oil tank was not filled when they moved into the Unit.
[42] I find that the evidence establishes that the Unit was left in an overall condition below reasonably clean and that there is some damage to the Unit which is beyond normal wear and tear.
[43] I find that the tenancy lasted approximately four years. The parties’ evidence conflicts regarding pre-existing damage and the oil level in the oil tank at the start of the tenancy. I note there is insufficient evidence to establish these claims.
[44] However, I find that the Landlord provided affirmed evidence, which is weighed more credibly than the Tenants’ written submission post-hearing and prior to the hearing not under affirmation.
[45] Despite the Landlord’s evidence under affirmation, I find that he has provided insufficient evidence which would justify the total compensation sought. Based upon the evidence submitted, I find that the Landlord is entitled to $1,500.00 in additional compensation. This compensation includes consideration for time cleaning, having to fill some amount of the oil tank and having to do repairs to the Unit’s doors, floors and walls which are beyond normal wear and tear.
[46] The Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (the “Commission”) in Order LR24-06 applied the principle of betterment when taking into account depreciation in determining the amount to be awarded to a landlord for damage caused by a tenant. The Commission noted that a party should not be put in a better position than they would have been had the damage not occurred.
[47] In this case, I have also factored in the principle of betterment when coming to the quantum to award the Landlord additional compensation.
[48] As the Landlord has established valid claims against the Tenants, the Landlord can keep the Tenants’ security deposit, including interest to offset the amount owed.
CONCLUSION
[49] The Application is allowed in part. The Landlord will keep the Tenants’ security deposit, including interest, in the amount of $529.91.
[50] The Tenants must pay the Landlord the balance owing of $9,195.89 by the timeline below, calculated as follows:
Item Amount Rent Owing $8,225.80 Additional Compensation $1,500.00 Total $9,725.80 Less Security Deposit + Interest ($529.91) Balance $9,195.89

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT
1. The Landlord will keep the Tenants’ security deposit, including interest, in the amount of $529.91.
2. The Tenants will pay the Landlord the amount of $9,195.89 by August 29, 2025.
DATED at Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, this 5th day of June, 2025.
(sgd.) Cody Burke Cody Burke Residential Tenancy Officer
NOTICE
Right to Appeal
This Order can be appealed to the Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission (the “Commission”) by serving a Notice of Appeal with the Commission and every party to this Order within 20 days of this Order.
If a document is sent electronically after 5:00 p.m., it is considered received the next day that is not a holiday. If a document is sent by mail, it is considered served on the third day after mailing.
Filing with the Court
If no appeal has been made within the noted timelines, this Order can be filed with the Supreme Court of Prince Edward Island and enforced as if it were an order of the Court.