Sault landlord fined after human rights complaint from disabled man

A Sault Ste. Marie landlord faces a hefty fine after the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO) ruled in favour of a disabled man claiming discrimination, stolen meat and a soiled mattress.

The applicant said the respondent, who was his landlord, knew he was deaf, partially blind and required certain accommodations of his disability-related needs when he moved into his home in 2021. The tenant moved out after only two weeks due to behaviour by the landlord that adjudicator Will McNair said took advantage of a vulnerable person.

In his decision, McNair said the respondent discriminated against the applicant based on his disability and violated his right to equal treatment with respect to occupancy of accommodation.

The landlord did not respond to the allegations made through the HRTO and did not participate in the proceedings. 

In accordance with the Tribunal’s Rules of Procedure, he was deemed to have accepted all the allegations in the application and to have waived the right to participate in the hearing

Due to his disability, the applicant communicates through American Sign Language, text messages or a service called Canada Video Relay Service accessed through his phone. He alleges the landlord refused to accept communication with him through text.

"Instead, he spoke at the applicant. The applicant could not understand and so could not respond," said McNair in his decision.

On move-in day, the landlord refused to temporarily move his truck to allow the applicant an easier path to bring in his belongings.

"The applicant was forced to use a less direct path that included stairs and a light post," said the allegations. "Because of his limited sight, he walked into the light post several times."

McNair said although the respondent was aware that due to the applicant’s limited sight, he needed a path free from obstacles, he refused to accommodate this need by moving his truck when asked.

A friend helping the applicant move in later told him the landlord referred to his disability in derogatory terms.

The applicant alleges he was not given a key to his own room, as other tenants were allowed, and when he was able to secure his door the landlord allegedly kicked it down and assaulted him.

It is also alleged that the respondent changed the conditions of the lease after it was signed, specifically the amount changing from $1,400 for first and last to $1,500. The respondent also gave a handwritten note to the applicant a few days later seeking $100 for a storage fee that was not previously agreed upon.

That note was presented as an exhibit to the affidavit and said, in full: "YOU HAVE TO GIVE ME $100.00 FOR STORAGE IF YOU DON’T MAKE YOUR DECISION BY SAT [JUNE] 26 2021. YOU HAVE TO MOVE THAT’S WHAT YOUR CASE WORKER TOLD ME SOCIAL ASSISTANCE YES OR NO $100.00 EXTRA TODAY."

The applicant said that the respondent’s demand for more money was an effort to take advantage of him as a person with a disability. He moved out to a shelter for a month and when he returned his mattress had been urinated on and his belongings removed, including hundreds of dollars in frozen meat, for a total estimated loss of $3,100.

Shortly afterwards, the applicant moved to southern Ontario “to escape the situation and to find better support services” for his needs, said the decision.

McNair ordered the respondent to pay a total of $8,336.63 in compensation to the applicant for financial loss and damages related to the infringement of his human rights.

"By refusing to move his truck when asked, and by refusing to communicate via text message, the respondent disrespected, marginalized and isolated the applicant, even though granting these accommodations would have caused him no hardship whatever," said McNair in his decision.

"The respondent tried to take advantage of the applicant’s vulnerability and isolation to extract more money from him. Ultimately, the respondent became violent.

"This conduct put the applicant in the precarious position of having to choose between enduring escalating human rights abuses or losing his belongings and housing. He chose the latter."