Let me tell you — without ChatGPT — what Bill 60 actually is and how it might affect our already complicated Canadian life. Make yourself comfortable, here we go.
Historically, the rental situation in Ontario has been somewhat skewed in favour of tenants. You couldn’t evict tenants without a reason, and even with a reason (for example, those who stopped paying) it wasn’t easy either. Long hearings with the possibility of unreasonable adjournments caused delays in eviction processes during which tenants simply lived for free, while all expenses, including the mortgage, still had to be paid by the property owners (landlords).
But as we know, when the government becomes overly zealous about protecting someone’s rights, the result is often the opposite. Since eviction became difficult, many property owners tightened their screening requirements for new tenants, meticulously — almost under a microscope — examining every applicant and rejecting them at the slightest doubt. Moreover, some landlords prefer to keep their units vacant rather than rent to someone who might cause problems and would be difficult to evict. Why do you think Toronto introduced its vacancy tax recently?
At some point, I even started to suspect that this anti-landlord stance may not be accidental at all and might be intended to cool down the housing market by reducing the number of investors — so that buying property and renting it out would no longer be an attractive option for people with money.
And then, at a certain moment, someone in the Ontario government decided that the tenant-protection pendulum had swung way too far, since fewer and fewer people were willing to buy property for rental purposes. Add to that the housing crisis, which arrived at the worst possible time — clearly, something needed to be done to fix the imbalance. Or perhaps there were other motives — who knows.
In any case, this ultimately led to the creation of what is now known as Bill 60, a set of new Ontario laws, including those aimed at rebalancing the relationship between tenants and landlords (fewer guarantees for tenants, simpler processes for landlords, faster court hearings and physical evictions after a court decision, creation of a central database of non-payers or those evicted through court, etc.).
Despite the seemingly one-sided nature of these new laws (strengthening the position of landlords and therefore worsening the situation for tenants), I actually see many positive points for tenants.
If it becomes easier to evict tenants who violate their agreements, screening and approving new applicants will also become much simpler — finding a rental and getting a landlord’s approval will be easier. After all, if the risk for landlords is lower, they will be less picky when selecting new tenants, right?
If more investors enter the market, rental prices will go down. It’s the basic law of supply and demand: if there is more of something (rental housing) on the market, where do prices go?
If a dispute arises (and the landlord is in the wrong), tenants can expect much faster resolution of their issues.
Who will lose? Who might face problems under the new law?
I see a potential decline in the position of irresponsible tenants — those who either don’t pay rent, damage the property, or cause other inconveniences for landlords, making them overly cautious even toward normal responsible tenants.
Overall, I see Bill 60 as a positive development that helps improve and rebalance the real estate market for almost everyone.
What do you think about this?
Write to me — I’m very interested!
Serge Skyba
Realtor® at Realty 7 Ltd, Brokerage
416-305-6525
serge@agent1.ca
