Category: Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service Page 1 of 2

Legislation Commented On: Residential Tenancies Act, SA 2004, c R-17.1, Part 4

PDF Version: “Money for Nothing”: Landlords Take on Residential Tenants’ Security Deposits

Landlords must place their residential tenants’ security deposits in an interest-bearing trust account. When interest rates are low, landlords take for themselves all of the interest earned in these accounts. When interest rates are higher, landlords take at least the first three percent of the interest earned on their tenants’ money, delivering the rest to their tenants. In addition to benefiting from this “spread,” landlords’ duty to pay interest on security deposits to their tenants ends when tenants vacate the rental premises, but landlords can keep the security deposits for at least ten, if not thirty days. If landlords wrongfully withhold security deposits, they can keep both security deposits and the interest earned for weeks, months or even years of negotiation, law suits, judgment filings and service, and collections. This might seem like small change if your idea of a landlord is a couple renting out a basement suite in their home. However, landlords in Alberta these days tend to be Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITS) and some of these REITS have thousands of residential tenants. If a REIT has 20,000 rental units in Alberta with an average of one $2,000 security deposit per unit, a REIT would have $40,000,000 of their tenant’s money earning the REIT at least 3% interest annually. That would be $1,200,000 per year. Money for nothing and all legal. The three percent spread and the interest-free holding after tenants vacate are enabled by Alberta’s Residential Tenancies Act, SA 2004, c R-17.1 (RTA) and its regulations. The refusal of the Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service (RTDRS) to require landlords to pay interest on wrongfully withheld security deposits, or to otherwise compensate tenants, is not required, but it seems to be their policy.

Shared Accommodation in Alberta: Law for Roommates and Those Sharing Living Space with Their Landlords

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On December 20, 2024

In Landlord/Tenant, Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service

By: Jonnette Watson Hamilton

Case Commented On: Layeghpour v Paproski, 2024 ABCJ 140 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Shared Accommodation in Alberta: Law for Roommates and Those Sharing Living Space with Their Landlords

Shared accommodation has become increasingly common in Alberta for many reasons, including the unaffordability of both owned and rented housing. I discuss this phenomenon in Part One of this post. Shared accommodation includes roommates sharing a dwelling, individuals sharing living spaces with owner-occupiers of single-family homes, duplexes and condominiums, and – sometimes – multigenerational households. Sharing living space usually means sharing a kitchen, bathroom and/or living room. However, shared accommodation law is a grey area of the law – underdeveloped by Canadian courts, its existence is unknown to most people. Contrary to the expectations of many, Alberta’s Residential Tenancies Act, SA 2004, c R-17, does not apply to shared accommodation. That means the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service (RTDRS) is not available to resolve any disputes. The Innkeepers Act, RSA 2000, c I-2, does not apply either because “innkeeper” is defined to include only those who provide lodging to any person who presents themselves as a guest who appears to be able and willing to pay and “in a fit state to be received” (s 1(b)). It is the common law that applies to the relationship those sharing accommodation are found to have, whether that is a licence or a lease relationship. It is therefore best to prevent disputes with an agreement – preferably a signed, written agreement. The Centre for Public Legal Education Alberta has excellent resources for those planning or already in shared accommodations on their “Roommates and Shared Accommodation” website, which I describe in Part Two. In Part Three, I focus on my primary reason for writing this post, and that is the decision of Justice Sandra L. Corbett in Layeghpour v Paproski, 2024 ABCJ 140 (CanLII) in which she sets out much of the common law governing shared accommodations.

Alberta’s Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service has a Complaint Process

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On April 11, 2023

In Landlord/Tenant, Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service

By: Jonnette Watson Hamilton

Reports Commented On: RTDRS Annual Report, 1^st edition (March 2020 – April 2021) and RTDRS Annual Report, 2^nd edition (March 2021 – April 2022)

PDF Version: Alberta’s Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service has a Complaint Process

Alberta’s Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service (RTDRS) has a complaint process. It is almost a secret, and landlords and tenants can easily be unaware of its existence. The Residential Tenancies Act, SA 2004, c R-17.1 (RTA) does not mention an RTDRS complaint process. Neither does the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service Regulation, Alta Reg 98/2006 (Regulation). An RTDRS complaint process is not referred to in the RTDRS Rules of Practice and Procedure (April 2023). Nor is it commented upon in the Code of Conduct for Tenancy Dispute Officers, the persons who decide landlord-tenant disputes at the RTDRS. It is not mentioned in the RTA handbook for landlords and tenants: Residential Tenancies Act and regulations [2023], nor in the 2018 version of that handbook. I could not find any mention of the complaint process on the Government of Alberta’s RTDRS website. The only public mention of an RTDRS complaint process is in the two annual reports that have been made public – the RTDRS Annual Report, 1^st edition (March 2020-April 2021) and the RTDRS Annual Report, 2^nd edition (March 2021-April 2022).

Another Trap for Unwary Alberta Residential Tenants: Short, Rigid Appeal Periods

By Jonnette Watson Hamilton

On February 24, 2023

In Property, Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service

By: Jonnette Watson Hamilton

Case Commented On: Afolabi v Wexcel Realty Management Ltd, 2023 ABKB 68 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Another Trap for Unwary Alberta Residential Tenants: Short, Rigid Appeal Periods

I have written before about the difficulties tenants face when trying to exercise their right to appeal orders granted by the Tenancy Dispute Officers (TDOs) of the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service (RTDRS); see here and here. Those posts only briefly mention the timeline for filing an appeal, which is 30 days from the filing of the RTDRS Order in the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta according to section 23(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service Regulation, Alta Reg 98/2006 (Regulation). I have also written before about some other fundamental deficiencies in that Regulation (here and here), as has my colleague, Shaun Fluker (here). This decision by Justice Michael A. Marion provides an opportunity to discuss the trap for unwary tenants caused by the appeal timeline provisions in the Regulation and by related provisions in the RTDRS Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules).

Alberta Extends the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service Regulation for Another 5 Years

By Shaun Fluker

On April 11, 2022

In Residential Tenancies Dispute Resolution Service

By: Shaun Fluker

PDF Version: Alberta Extends the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service Regulation for Another 5 Years

Order Commented On: Order in Council 084/2022 (April 6, 2022)

On April 6, the Lieutenant Governor in Council issued Order in Council 084/2022 which amends section 35 of the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service Regulation, Alta Reg 98/2006 to extend the Regulation for another 5 years (moving the expiry date from April 30, 2022, to April 30, 2027). There is nothing particularly unusual about this amendment, and indeed it would be very problematic if the Regulation were simply left to expire on April 30 given the role and function of the Residential Tenancy Dispute Resolution Service (RTDRS) in adjudicating landlord-tenant disputes under the Residential Tenancies Act, SA 2004, c R-17.1 and the Mobile Home Sites Tenancies Act, RSA 2000, c M-20. My reason for noting this here is because of what did not occur along with the amendment. Specifically, the absence of any apparent review of the Regulation and its governance measures concerning the RTDRS.