YUFFA v SLOIM

Split/Other wins · North York · 2025-09-11

Adjudicator

Mayra Sawicki

Dispute

Damage to Property, Substantial Interference

Notice

Other

Amount

<$5K

Landlord

M.Y.

Tenant

H.S.

Landlord rep

R. Basser

Tenant rep

K. Warwick

What happened

The Landlord applied to terminate the tenancy after the Tenant removed a security camera from the exterior of the residential complex. The Landlord alleged willful damage and serious impairment of safety. The Tenant, an 87-year-old who has resided in the unit for 31 years, admitted to removing the camera because he felt it invaded his privacy. Criminal charges for theft and mischief were previously withdrawn. The Board determined that while the Tenant caused willful damage, the act did not constitute a serious impairment of safety, as the property had functioned without cameras for three decades prior.

The ruling

The tenancy continues on the condition that for the next 12 months, the Tenant does not remove or interfere with security cameras on the complex. The Tenant must also pay the Landlord $186.00 for the application filing fee by October 11, 2025. If the Tenant breaches the camera condition, the Landlord may apply for an ex parte eviction order within 30 days of the breach.