← Back to orders

LR22-37

IRAC · July 11, 2022 · denied · Auto-indexed

Open saved PDFOriginal source ↗
Decision date
July 11, 2022
Panel / officer
M. Douglas Clow
Applicant
tenant
Tenant
Andrew Pollock and Barbara Power
Outcome
denied
Issues
eviction
RTA sections
25, 4, 26(2)

Quick summary

Auto-indexed

Tenant appeal · eviction. Outcome: denied. The appeal is denied. Director’s Order LD22-208 is confirmed, subject to a variation in the date the Tenants are to vacate the Premises. The Issue The Commission must decide whether the Director’s decisions ordering the termination of the rental agreement and denying the Tenants’

Linked prior order: LD22-208

Order text

Docket LR22045 – Andrew Pollock & Barbara Power v. Dale & Teresa Cook Monday, July 11, 2022 Docket: LR22045
Order: LR22-37
BEFORE THE COMMISSION ON Monday, July 11, 2022.
Panel Chair - Erin T. Mitchell, Commissioner
M. Douglas Clow, Vice-Chair
Hearing Date: Thursday, July 7, 2022
ORDER
IN THE MATTER of an appeal, under section 25 of the Rental of Residential Property Act (the “Act”), filed by Andrew Pollock and Barbara Power against Order LD22-208, issued by the Director of Residential Rental Property and dated June 21, 2022.
Compared and Certified a True Copy
(Sgd.) Susan Jefferson Commission Administrator Corporate Services and Appeals

Orders of The Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission Order LR22-37 – Page 2 Docket LR22045 – Andrew Pollock & Barbara Power v. Dale & Teresa Cook Monday, July 11, 2022 This appeal asks the question of whether the Director of Residential Rental Property (the “Director”) erred in terminating a rental agreement and denying that an amount is due and owing to two tenants.
BACKGROUND
Andrew Pollock (“Mr. Pollock”) and Barbara Power (“Ms. Power”) (collectively the “Tenants”) rent premises located at 31 MacAusland Drive, Apartment 4, Charlottetown, PE (the “Premises”), from Dale and Teresa Cook (the “Landlords”). Rent for the Premises is $1,000 per month with rent due on the first day of the month. A security deposit of $500 was paid.
On May 11, 2022, the Landlords served the Tenants with a Notice of Termination by Lessor of Rental Agreement (“Form 4”) which cited breaches of clauses 14(1)(a) and 14(1)(e) of the Act.
The effective date of the Form 4 was June 11, 2022. On May 11, 2022, Ms. Power filed with the Director an application to set aside the Form 4.
On May 11, 2022, Ms. Power also filed with the Director an application requesting that an amount found to be owed be paid to the Tenants (“Form 2”).
In Order LD22-208 dated June 21, 2022, the Director denied the Tenants Form 2 application and ordered the Tenants to vacate the Premises by 11:59 p.m., June 27, 2022.
The Tenants appealed.
The appeal was heard by teleconference on July 7, 2022. The Tenants participated on their own behalf. The Landlords also participated and were represented by their counsel, Maggie Hughes.
Disposition
The appeal is denied. Director’s Order LD22-208 is confirmed, subject to a variation in the date the Tenants are to vacate the Premises.
The Issue The Commission must decide whether the Director’s decisions ordering the termination of the rental agreement and denying the Tenants’ claim that an amount owing be paid are justified.
Analysis
The Landlords are seeking to evict the Tenants on the basis of what can be generally described as disruptive and confrontational behaviour. The evidence establishes that the Tenants have had numerous negative interactions with other occupants in the building, particularly those in Apartment 2. It appears that these interactions primarily stem from the Tenants alleging the occupants of Apartment 2 create noise, which is impacting their quiet enjoyment. The Tenants have called police on several occasions with noise complaints. There have been episodes where the occupants of Apartment 2 have been confronted by the Tenants and report being fearful of them. The Tenants have taken photographs and videos of the occupants of Apartment 2, many of which were submitted into evidence. The Landlords’ evidence is that they have received threatening and intimidating messages from Mr. Pollock. The Landlords have also provided evidence that they have lost several good tenants in the building as a result of the disruptive behaviour of the Tenants.

Orders of The Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission Order LR22-37 – Page 3 Docket LR22045 – Andrew Pollock & Barbara Power v. Dale & Teresa Cook Monday, July 11, 2022 On appeal, the Tenants did not directly address the allegations regarding their behaviour.
Instead, they focused their submissions primarily on disputing the identity of the occupants of Apartment 2, and on their concerns with respect to the number of individuals living in Apartment 2. Neither of these elements are relevant to the matter under appeal. The Commission directly asked the Tenants to address the allegations regarding their behaviour, but they did not do so.
The Tenants’ claim for return of rent stems from their belief that the Landlords did nothing to address their concerns about noise. The Tenants submitted numerous videos into evidence which purport to establish noise that is disruptive to their quiet enjoyment. The Commission finds that this video evidence fails to establish the Tenants’ claim. Further, the evidence before the Commission is that the Landlords took steps to soundproof Apartment 2, and offered to soundproof the Tenants’ apartment, but the Tenants declined. The Commission finds that the Landlords took all reasonable steps to address the Tenants’ concerns regarding noise.
At the hearing it was revealed that the Tenants paid $500 of their rent for the month of July.
This payment was accepted by the Landlords.
The Commission therefore finds that there is no reason to disturb the findings of the Director in Order LD22-208, except for a variation in the date the Tenants are to vacate the premises to Friday July 15, 2022 at 11:59 p.m.
NOW THEREFORE, pursuant to the Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission Act and the Rental of Residential Property Act;
IT IS ORDERED THAT
1. The appeal is denied.
2. The rental agreement between the Landlords and the Tenants shall terminate at 11:59 p.m. on Friday, July 15, 2022. The Tenants and all occupants shall fully vacate the Premises by this time and date.
3. Director’s Order LD22-208 is hereby confirmed in all remaining respects.
4. A certified copy of this Order, together with Order LD22-208, may be filed in the Supreme Court and enforced by Sheriff Services as permitted by the Act.
DATED at Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Monday, July 11, 2022.
BY THE COMMISSION:
(sgd. Erin T. Mitchell)

Panel Chair - Erin T. Mitchell, Commissioner
(sgd. M. Douglas Clow)

M. Douglas Clow, Vice-Chair

Orders of The Island Regulatory and Appeals Commission Order LR22-37 – Page 4 Docket LR22045 – Andrew Pollock & Barbara Power v. Dale & Teresa Cook Monday, July 11, 2022
NOTICE
Subsections 26(2), 26(3), 26(4) and 26(5) of the Rental of Residential Property Act provides as follows:
26. (2) A lessor or lessee may, within fifteen days of the
decision of the Commission, appeal to the court on a question of law only.
(3) The rules of court governing appeals apply to an appeal under subsection (2).
(4) Where the Commission has confirmed, reversed, or varied an order of the Director and no appeal has been taken within the time specified in subsection (2), the lessor or lessee may file the order in the court.
(5) Where an order is filed pursuant to subsection (4), it may be enforced as if it were an order of the court.

Similar cases

Orders that share issues or RTA sections. Useful when comparing how similar facts were decided.

  • LD26-293granted · rto

    Application · eviction. Outcome: granted. I find that the Notice is invalid and the Application is allowed. The tenancy will continue and the Tenant may continue living in the Unit.

  • LD26-289granted · rto

    Landlord application · eviction. Outcome: granted. I find that the Notice is valid and the Application is allowed. [12] The Tenants and all occupants must vacate the Unit and return the Unit’s keys to…

  • LR26-38dismissed · irac

    Landlord appeal · eviction, rent increase, compensation. Outcome: dismissed. The Landlord's appeal is allowed in part. The Commission substitutes a finding that the Occupation Notice is valid. The rem…

  • LD26-281dismissed · rto

    Application · eviction, rent arrears. Outcome: dismissed. 1. The Application is dismissed because the Rental Office does not have jurisdiction to determine the dispute between the Applicant and the Re…

  • LD26-279granted · rto

    Landlord application · eviction, rent arrears. Outcome: granted. The Notice is valid and the Tenants and all occupants must vacate the Unit by the timeline below.

  • LD26-275granted · rto

    Application · eviction, disturbance, illegal activity. Outcome: granted. I find that the Notice is invalid and the Application is allowed. The tenancy will continue and the Tenant can continue living …

  • LD26-274granted · rto

    Landlord application · eviction, disturbance. Outcome: granted. The Notice is valid and the Tenant and all occupants must vacate the Unit by the timeline below.

  • LD26-268granted · rto

    Application · eviction, disturbance, illegal activity. Outcome: granted. The tenancy will continue in full force and effect.