In the letter, the unknown writer directs me to serve the hearing order to the tenant and to be prepared to provide a certificate of service to the Board if asked. I quote:
- However, to ensure that the tenant(s) receives a copy of the order, the Board is also directing you to give a copy of the order to the tenant(s).
If a review or re-opening or re-application was filed, their jurisdiction would return. But absent any of those events, this file is closed. Finished. Done. I agree that any employee of the LTB may be considered a statutory delegate, at times performing a function as a delegate for the Minister as set out by statute. But there is no such authority in statute for this "direction".
If an adjudicator had included this direction in the order, I might agree that it has weight and must be followed. The adjudicator is empowered by statute, including the Statutory Powers Procedure Act which allows the Board to make rules. The Board makes Rules, and they include Rules about service of documents, Rule #5.
The Residential Tenancies Act also speaks to service of applications, in s.188:
- Service of application
188. (1) An applicant to the Board shall give the other parties to the application a copy of the application within the time set out in the Rules. 2006, c. 17, s. 188 (1).
1.5 A Member may waive a Rule where appropriate, provided that the Rule does not have a non-waiver provision
However, nowhere in the Act or the Rules does it talk about a landlord serving an order. The Member can at times waive Rules. You can't make up new Rules without the Rules and Guidelines Committee doing so.
Perhaps the Board finds its authority within its general jurisdiction to make directions to parties, but Boards don't really have any such inherent authority. They do have s.23 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act:
- Abuse of processes
23. (1) A tribunal may make such orders or give such directions in proceedings before it as it considers proper to prevent abuse of its processes. R.S.O. 1990, c. S.22, s. 23 (1).
But that would be about matters in proceedings before it. This matter accompanying the anonymous letter is no longer before the Board. The Board is functus officio.
Just another example of the contemptuous manner in which the LTB and this government treats landlords. The landlord may live 100 miles from the tenant, but he's got to drive over and deliver the order. Oh, unless the tenant has a fax machine!
My advice to landlords is to comply regardless of how you feel. Otherwise, if the tenant claims he never got the order and didn't know the amount or the voiding date, you may be back before the LTB. Same with applications and notices of hearing. Make sure that they are personally served in accordance with the Board's Rules.
4 comments:
This seems crazy. Talk about an abuse of the system.
Hi Harry
I am wondering if that was done due to the looming postal strike, and the Board was trying to make sure that the Tenant's received notice.
Elaine
Absolutely it was about the postal strike Elaine, but what kind of state are we living in when a bureaucrat with no jurisdiction can "direct us" to deliver mail.
They could have said something like "We strongly recommend that in order to avoid delays or reviews based on the tenant not receiving a copy of the hearing order, the landlord deliver ..…
I would have advised the landlords the same thing. It probably would be easy for tenants to say they didn't get the order. Or accidents might happen and the order might fall into the wrong hands. So yes, the best and safest way to do this is to hand them the order yourself. Better safe than sorry, that's what we always say.
Post a Comment