For the current year and commencing January 2011, the Municipal Licencing and Standards department (MLS) has provided updated information on the resumption of the audit program in multi-residential apartment buildings (MRAB). MLS has included a list of buildings scheduled for auditing as well as specific items to be targeted in their audits. For example, the audits will include ‘common areas, mechanical systems and grounds of the building’ for property standard violations. Refer to this link for details: http://www.toronto.ca/licensing/mrab/audit_activity_by_ward.htm
According to the article “Inspectors to probe city’s 5,000 rental buildings” published in April 2010, Jim Hart (Executive Director of MLS) stated: ” We’re actually going to get our own staff to go out there effectively with a checklist and do every single (rental) building in the city and kind of rate them,” and that “he’s determined to send out about 100 inspectors to give nearly 5,000 buildings a once-over, so his 12-member audit team can better focus its efforts on the buildings most in need of improvements”. Refer to this link for the full article: http://www.torontosun.com/news/torontoandgta/2010/04/12/13558506.html
The important question is: How much of this stated objective has been achieved so far by MLS?
In an earlier post on MLS auditing … AUDIT OF MULTI-RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT BUILDLINGS a deficiency was identified in the Ombudsman annual report. That deficiency had to do with the “lack of effective communication between bureaucrats and public” at MLS department. Based on the Ombudsman report tenants were clearly frustrated and dissatisfied with MLS staff when trying to resolve landlord violations. This is a serious impediment to resolving landlord violations of property standards in the GTA.
Concerns about landlord violations related to repairs and maintenance, and overall property standards have been raised by tenants in East York and elsewhere in the GTA. At present, tenants need to be vigilant about violations of property standards in light of the historically low annual rent increase for 2011 ( http://www.news.ontario.ca/mah/en/2010/06/2011-rent-increase-guideline.html). Premier McGuinty closed a loophole that would have allowed landlords to pass on HST costs to tenants. See the clarification at this link: http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20100412/100412_hst_tenants?hub=CP24Home.
The response from landlords to this clarification is
the province will force them to cut back on badly needed maintenance and repairs”
For additional information on the response from landlords you should check to the complete article at this link: http://www.yourhome.ca/homes/newsfeatures/article/794321–landlords-call-province-s-hst-measures-unfair.
This article also brings “Vacancy Decontrol’ into the discussion and reminds us that landlords can eventually recover losses when renting to new tenants. Tenants should keep in mind that “Vacancy Decontrol’ allows landlords to charge new tenants whatever the market can bear. That is allowed under the regulations of the Residential Tenancies Act.
Obviously events in the past year related to the very low Annual Guideline Increase for 2011 and closing the HST loophole will have negative implications for repairs and maintenance and property standards in rental buildings. The response by landlords is unacceptable and violates the regulations in the Residential Tenancies Act. Tenants should not hesitate to contact the MLS building audit department about landlord violations of property standards at the MLS phone number 3 1 1. In addition, tenants should contact their local councillors by letter or email to submit complaints about violations.
An important aspect of the MLS audit program is how tenants are notified of an upcoming audit in their building. The following statements are included in the information published at the MLS website http://www.toronto.ca/licensing/mrab.htm:
Residents may make any complaints respecting their units that have not been addressed by the landlord.
Residents of neighbouring rental apartment buildings will also be notified of the date and time that the mobile administration office will be available to address their maintenance-related concerns
Information is not forthcoming on specifically how tenants are to be notified about an upcoming audit. Hence, questions about how tenants are notified of building audits can be problematic and need to be addressed:
- How do tenants know that an audit is to be done on their building?
- Will the notice of an audit be posted by MSL inspectors or by the landlord?
- Exactly where should notices of an upcoming audit be posted? If these notices are not posted in an obvious location such as the main entrance or exit then most, if not all, tenants will be unaware of the presence of a Building Audit team in the neighbourhood. Tenants won’t be able to report any property standards violations.
- Will the MLS Building Audit team conclude that there are no property standard violations occurring in a particular building if they do not receive complaints from tenants of property standards violations?
Tenants should pay close attention to the posting of MSL audit notices indicating that a Building Audit team (particular a mobile office) will be in their neighbourhood. MLS needs to be very clear about how, where and when tenants are notified of an upcoming audit and also precisely whose responsibility it is to notify tenants that a given building or neighbourhood is to be audited. Otherwise, property standard violations would remain unresolved and the quality of life of tenants impacted negatively.
NOTES
We recommend you check these links:
i) City of Toronto Apartment Standards link http://www.toronto.ca/apartmentstandards/home.htm – contains information on by-law enforcement and property standards. Useful information is also provided on processing complaints, maintenance request forms and history of by-law violations.
ii) The East York Tenants Group post REPAIRS & Building Maintenance issues
East York Tenants Group 
Please add me to your list.
thx
After reading this article I have to ask whether some landlords might be involved in backroom deals with MLS and many violations are being routinely ignored. If that’s the case tenants are in a hopeless situation in getting violations addressed. Landlords have been enjoying the benefits of their own ‘gravy train’ for decades. Yes! Landlords receive all kinds of financial incentives and tax benefits at every level of government. That ‘gravy train’ has included being GIVEN (not loaned) MILLIONS OUR TAXPAYERS DOLLARS to construct rental apartment buildings.
I would like to know if there is new information regarding the auditing project by Municipal Standards and Licensing of apartment buildings. I live at 165 Barrington Ave and have brought certain noise violations to the attention of Ranee Management who are the current property owners.This building should be audited.
I submitted additional concerns in writing to the property manager about a recurring thudding sound that occurs usually late at night and/or early morning that disturbs my sleep and that of other tenants. Depending on the time of year the thudding might stop and then recurs at another time of the year. The property manager responded with a letter advising me to discuss the noise issue with the superintendent. I did, and the superintendent (with a straight face) stated categorically that there is absolutely no noise in the building. I reminded the super that another tenant who was a long time tenant had complained about the noise over a year ago and that she (the super) witnessed the noise first hand while in attendance at the tenant’s apartment. Without missing a beat or displaying any discomfort the super said that ‘It’s probably the line you are in’…. whatever that means! I updated Ranee management in writing of the discussion with the super but never received an acknowlegement.
Incidentially the previous property management (Oakbrook Developments) was aware of the noise and indicated to tenants it was either a problem with the water tank, or the elevator cables, or ageing plumbing and pipes, or the heating system, or the ventilation fans. Tenants were also told the noise has to do with the ‘line’ the tenant’s unit is in – a very unsatisfactory if not insulting response. So, why don’t they go and fix the problem with the ‘line’?? Tenants were told that the problems were being investigated but the problems remain.
Just over two weeks ago (around the 3rd week in November) a tenant on the 6th floor had the awful experience of a huge flood in the early hours of the morning after 1:00 am. The superintendant, security and other maintenance staff were on hand to deal with this. This is the second big flood this particular tenant had to deal with in the past year or so. Water flowed down through to some of the lower floors as well. As with the previous flood the water was gushing into the corridor and flowed toward the elevator. I have no idea of the extent of damage to the tenants belongings but heard it had to do with the pipes.
Earlier this year I emailed the MLS office about an audit notice posted at 165 Barrington to notify them that the address on the notice was incorrectly stated as #156 Barrington and not #165. Oddly enough, that notice was not posted in a visible spot at the front and back entrance of the building that are normally used by tenants. Instead it was only posted at the rarely used north east exit that leads to the back lawn. I received an email response from the Building Audit Team providing the following clarification:
“The Notice posted in your building states that we are auditing 156 Barrington Ave and that our mobile office will be on site at the above property. The notice posted at 165 Barrington Ave is just notification to the Tenant of the building that we are in the area namely 156 Barrington and are free to drop by the mobile office to obtain information pertaining to the property standards requirements for Multi-residential apartment audits.”The notice was taken down within 2 days of my contact with the Building Audit Team.
Why was that notice posted in an obscure location rather than in obvious locations such as the front and rear exits normally used by tenants? Very few tenants were even aware of that MLS notice posted at the north-east exit at 165 Barrington Ave. This building needs to be audited by the MLS to ensure that any violations are dealt with appropriately and promptly.
In one of my earlier letters to the Ranee Management I raised questions as to whether there were fundamental issues with the mechanical systems or construction of the building.. I was reassured in writing that they weren’t any. Yet the problems continue. This building needs to audited.
The East York Tenants Group were updated on this issue. Councillor Janet Davis’ office was contacted and they in turn passed the complaint on to the Inspector at MLS. The property manager and the elevator technicians investigated and discovered that there was a broken piece of magnet lodged in the elevator system. Apparently that was the source of the noise and it only affected units located alongside the elevators between the 4th-8th floors. The puzzling question is how that piece of magnet got lodged in the mechanics of the elevator!!! Tenants have expressed relief that no more noise and appreciate the intervention by Janet Davis’ office.
All we are hearing about is ‘stopping the gravy train’ but not a single word to address outstanding landlord violations. Has this project by Jim Hart of MLS been cast aside now that we have a new mayor? It would bring some relief to us tenants if Jim Hart’s project actually achieved what it set out to do. Some so-called ‘good buildings’ have property managers and staff who are rude, intimidating and unpleasant and they do a third rate job. MLS should focus on ALL buildings and not be selective. All the hassles and awful stress tenants have to face from these violations must come to an end. That rent increase guideline is very low for 2011 and is undoubtedly a sore point for landlords not to mention that they can’t pass the HST on to tenants this year. I for one won’t be at all surprised if maintenance and repairs deterioriate. Your article is very disturbing and makes me wonder if these inspectors are doing their job.
This is so devious and cunning to display an audit notice on exit that is seldom ever used by tenants. IT is downright dishonest and defeats the purpose of these audits. Very few tenants will see it and won’t be aware that the audit team are in the location doing audits. Why arn’t these notices posted at the main entrance and exit for all to see? Tenants wont be able to report landlord violations that should investigated on the spot. Isn’t there anyting that can be done about this?
There is an organization that list buildings that have been given a ‘thumbs up’ for tenants. This link will allow you to view the buildings in East York that have been audited. http://crbprogram.org/search.php?r=5&c=1&w=7
Tenants should check this link to see how many rental buildings in East York have been ‘approved’ by this organization.
With the annual rent increase set at the low rate 0.7% does anyone believe that landlords will pay much attention to repairs and maintenance? Not likely. My building has many problems with repairs and maintenance. It is frustrating dealing with the Building Audit department about violations and contacting an inspector on their phone number. (I am not talking about the 311 number which seems to be improved.) You have to keep pressing all kinds of buttons and the list of options from that automated voice at the other end are irrelevant and you have no chance of ever raising your complaint with an inspector. The MLS is wasting our tax dollars too. Do those inspectors sit around in their mobile office all day? It is so annoying. How will tenants know that an audit is being done on their building if notices are not posted in a visible location? Seems the only options tenants have is to file a T2 or a T6 at the Landlord and Tenant Board and that is so time consuming with so many work pressures.
It is so typical of landlords to ignore the fact that they can always recoup their so-called ‘losses’ whenever a new tenant moves in. With Vacancy Decontrol they can charge new tenants whatever they feel like charging. Landlords don’t ever lose. Otherwise they wouldn’t be in the business, would they?
What about that report about ‘aging highrises’ and the fact that it is mostly the ‘poor’ who reside in those buildings? That is disturbing and I wonder how safe these buildings are. Will these buildings ever be audited? Will any of these buildings even pass the audit? So Landlords are not allowed to add the HST to rent and they are also not pleased about the very low annual rent increase for 2011. Why is that? After all, isn’t it the same method that has been used to calculate annual rent increases for decades – it is called the Consumer Price Index!
Here is the link to that article on aging highrises http://www.thestar.com/news/article/920303–toronto-s-poor-concentrated-in-aging-highrises?bn=1
According to that link in your article landlords claim they will be “forced to cut back on badly needed maintenance and repairs”. What a nerve they have! Common sense tells me that landlords would walk away from their ‘business’ if it was not making substantial profits. They are making profits. Every effort should be made to include these aging rental buildings in the building audit program for 2011.