Décision

Marino c. Zoran

2013 QCRDL 3980

RÉGIE DU LOGEMENT
Bureau dE Montréal

No :	31 121205 112 G

Date :	05 février 2013
Régisseure :	Anne Mailfait, juge administratif

Massimo Marino
Locateur - Partie demanderesse
c.
Nitai Zoran
Locataire - Partie défenderesse

D É C I S I O N

[1] Le tribunal est saisi d’une demande d’accès au logement, demande déposée par le locateur le 5 décembre 2012.

[2] Le recours est fondé sur l’article 1863 C.c.Q.

LES FAITS PERTINENTS

[3] Le bail entre les parties débute le 1^er mai 2012 et prend fin le 30 avril 2013. Le loyer s’élève à 1 225 $ et deux locataires sont titulaires du bail.

[4] Néanmoins, le locateur ne prend recours que contre le locataire Nitai Zoran car dit-il, l’autre locataire consent à l’accès. Le locataire défendeur nuance : son colocataire était d’accord pour quitter le logement il y a quelques mois mais la question de l’accès au logement n’a pas été discutée.

[5] Le litige débute lorsqu’une inondation survient au logement en juin 2012 en raison d’un problème affectant le toit.

[6] Le logement en litige appartient au locateur mais l’immeuble où le logement est situé appartient à un tiers lequel prend en charge la réfection du toit. Le litige met ainsi en cause l’assureur de l’immeuble et non l’assureur personnel du locateur.

[7] La chronologie des faits est la suivante :

[8] Le 9 juin, le colocataire fait état au défendeur de la décision du locateur de procéder aux travaux de réparation durant un mois, ce qui suppose leur départ du logement (L-1).

[9] Il importe de noter que le dommage est survenu début juin et c’est dès cette date que les locataires s’interrogent : « Did she mention anything about if Massimo took care of fixing the ceiling and the flood damage ? » (courriel entre les deux colocataires, Massimo étant le locateur) (L-1).

[10] Le 23 août 2012, le locateur écrit aux locataires (L-2) :

« First of all i want to give all my apologies for the situation that has occurred, but i hope you understand that i am doing everything possible to resolve it as fast as possible since it is in my interest as well to have everything finished. However, I know it was said that everything was supposed to be finished by now, and that’s what I and all the other owners whose units have been damaged from the same flood in the building were told by the Insurance Company which is taking care of the repairs. However, during the past few months, the Insurance has slowed down the beginning of the construction first because they wanted to evaluate further the damage and find different contractors and also because at some point, about a month after the damage occurred, asked us that the roof has to be repaired before the construction could begin in the units. Since then, one of the owners has been working to find the right contractor for the roof and has obtained some quotes. I was out of the country for a while after the decision to redo the roof was made, but before leaving I was assured by him that everything was going to be started by the beginning of August and therefore finished as planned. However, to my surprise, when I came back on Monday I found out nothing was done and that we were still waiting on the roof to be started. When I heard this I was not happy about the situation since I knew Nitai and Adam were planning on moving back in by next week. Since then I’ve been in contact with the person who is taking care of finding a contractor everyday this week and today I received a confirmation that by tomorrow he should contact the contractor and that by next week, hopefully Monday, the roof can be done and then the construction in the units can start right after. However the day when the repair of the roof starts depends only on the availability of the contractor chosen (and the timeframe that they can offer us will be a major factor for the choice of the contractor) although the roof will only take one business day to be completed. I have also formally asked him that the repairs in my unit be finished first and I will be trying to push as much as I can so that can be done to avoid more delays. I hope you understand that I am doing everything I can for this situation to be resolved but a lot of things are out of my control.

Also, as you probably know already, I have not charged Nitai and Adam rent for the month of August because of this situation and I will NOT charge rent until all the repairs are done in the unit. I will keep updating Nitai or yourself if you prefer about the progress of the work and I am really hoping everything will be resolved as soon as possible. Again I’m really sorry about all the problems this situation is causing, but I can assure you I am doing all I can to fix the problem

Thank you for your understanding and don’t hesitate to contact me.” (sic)

[11] Puis, le 7 novembre 2012, le représentant de l’assureur écrit aux propriétaires des condos de l’immeuble (P-1) :

« Good news. The agreement on all the work has been approved and the amount accepted. A ball point figure is $ 125,000.00 of damages.

The work can begin and Groupe CJL will be in contact with you to elaborate a schedule. The work will be done at the rate of 2 units at a time.

Please note that you are responsible for the furniture in the condos. You may want to involve your insurer for the cost of moving and storing the furniture. Also, you could ask for the loss revenue, if your policy allows it.

Someone asked if the work can be postponed till the Holidays, unfortunately the construction laws do not allow work during the Christmas vacation.

You may have to obtain a city permit to allow a container to be placed between the building and the sidewalk on the asphalt. This cost is covered by your insurance. » (sic) (Le tribunal souligne)

[12] Les travaux sont fixés vers la fin du mois de novembre et début de décembre pour une durée de deux à trois semaines. La représentante de l’assureur demande au locateur de s’assurer que les meubles seront sortis afin de laisser le logement vide (P-2).

[13] Le 13 novembre 2012, le locateur avise les locataires et leurs parents ainsi (P-3) :

« So the construction will start next week… Everything has to be out for 3 weeks and you guys can’t live in the apartment so we will need to find an arrangement… I was wondering if you guys have personal insurance and if you can check if the insurance would cover the expenses for you moving out temporarily if not ill take care of it but its possible your insurance might cover it…. Let me know and in the mean time I’m looking for alternate arrangements. » (sic) (Le tribunal souligne)

[14] S’ensuit une correspondance entre les parents des locataires et le locateur :

« Massimo,

It was brought to my attention that the work which was supposed to be completed by the end of August is supposed to happen next week.

It is unacceptable to ask my son to leave his apartment for a long period at a time during his studies, without proper notice.

Moreover, I was shocked to read that you actually asked my son to check his insurance to cover any moving out costs which accrue as a result of failure to solve a simple construction people within a promised time frame.

I appreciate the fact that you finally are acting in order to fix the problem in the apartment however you will be required to postpone the construction work to May and as a good faith measure I approve you starting to deposit the rent payments until the end of the agreement.

Thank you,

David Zoran»

« Hello Mr. Zoran,

I am sorry the construction was delay but I a l. Sure you can understand that it was out of my hands and I tried to push t as fast as possible to make the construction but it was the insurance company taking care of it of the building and it’s not only my unit but actually 4 units of the building. I just found out the construction would start next wee yesterday and so I am trying to find arrangements for everything. I know it’s not the perfect situation but I cannot postpone the work until may since that was already asked and the insurance company won’t allow it and believe me I would rather do it in may as well. I will ask again but in the mean time I asked Nitai to see if his insurance could help since it might cover this but I also said in the email that I am looking for arrangements for them. Unfortunately I didn’t have personal insurance before the damage and it will be at my expenses. I have already made concession of not cashing rent since August, please understand I am losing out of this and I’m doing everything I can. I understand it is not the best time for the construction for a student but as I said I tried as much as I can and I never expected it would take 3 week. It you request it I can forward you the email that says I found out yesterday about this. Sorry for the inconvenience and I’m sure we can find an arrangement for all this. I will ask if its possible to postpone but I can’t promise.

Thank you

Massimo Marino»

«Hello Mr. Zoran and Mr. Patterson,

First of all I would like to apologize for all the inconvenience this situation is arising. Please understand that I am doing my best to resolve this in the best way possible and that in some things I just do not have control to change. This is the case for the insurance company delay to start the construction. I totally understand that Nitai and Adam are in the middle of exam time since I was a student not long ago and actually I’m still pursuing my studies while working and I know its not an easy time to relocate. The thing is that this construction needs to be done for health reasons as well. I know the damage seems localized only in one room, but that’s the damage on the surface. During the inspection (which I just came to know about it this week) the insurance company has found that inside the walls and the other rooms work needs to be done in the structure since the water infiltration cause other problems and for example since the owner of one of the unit is doing his own work, the insurance company is still pushing him to do it in the next month to avoid any possibility of mold or other thins to arise and spread in the building. That is the reason why all the furniture has to me moved since construction will involve other areas of the apartment. However the removal of the furniture is my responsibility and I am looking into a solution to maybe rent a pod and store all the furniture inside for the time being so that it doesn’t have to be moved too far.

Also I have just spoken to the construction firm and they confirmed that they can start the work in the unit on December 17^th, 2012, but if that’s the case they will do as much as they can before the holidays and then they will continue the work starting on January 8^th 2013 (which should be 1-2 weeks more). This is the best solution I can offer not to disrupt with the studies of Nitai and Adam, please let me know if this works out for your and we can work together to find an arrangement for January until all the work has been done.

Thank you for your time and please do not hesitate to contact me with any concerns.

Regards

Massimo, »

« Massimo,

Further to our phone conversation, what you propose will be unacceptable to us.

Nitai has signed a lease agreement with you while you had more than 3 months to provide solutions while they were away from school.

In our conversation, you have said that you understand Nitai and Adam’s need to stay in the apartment, and you have no problem with that. It sounds like you are getting yourself to be pressured by the same guy, who according to you, was supposed to take care of the problem on your behalf last summer, in addition to the construction company who is looking for work (which from the work description, will take them quite a lot of time !!!).

Moreover, being in the RE industry and knowing how insurance companies work, I do know that they have zero incentive to rush the starting date.

At this time Nitai has no problems with the apartment, and as bound by the lease agreement, he is going to stay in the apartment until the end of the term, April 30, 2013.

I hope this will end our discussion about this matter, with no need for us to take other measures to protect Nitai’s rights and well-being.

Thanks for your understanding,

David Zoran »

« 21 novembre 2012

Hello Mr. Zoran,

I am really sorry about your misunderstanding of the severity of the problem, but as per the Quebec Rental Board and Quebec Civil Code, my duty is to make sure the dwelling that I am renting is in the best livable conditions, and these repairs are necessary to insure that this is the case. I don’t know if you understand that with the water infiltration that we had there is a high risk of mold formation which could not only cause more damage to the structure but also is a health hazard for Nitai and any tenants. Since it is my responsibility to assure the well being of the tenants and make sure the dwelling is in the best livable conditions, Nitai will have to vacate the premises by December 17th, 2012 and furthermore from January 8th, 2013 (the date of end of construction will be known once the work will start in December).

I’ve attached 2 documents of the Quebec Civil Code and a copy of the Quebec Lease exactly as the one signed by Nitai and Adam (i have the original copy in my possession) and I please ask you to take a look at Article 25 of the Lease and article 1865 of the Quebec Civil Code, which both state that if urgent and necessary repairs are to be made in the dwelling to ensure the property is livable, I have the right to vacate the unit without notice and without authorization from the Quebec rental Board (Regie du logement du Quebec). Furthermore I have not charged rent since August, but it seems that this has gone unnoticed to you that your son has been living in my unit for free for all this time as I promised, and I also found an arrangement to do the construction at the end of exam period and at the beginning of the new semester to avoid disrupting Nitai’s studies at minimum, but it seems that this is still not acceptable to you that I’m trying to find the best solution for all of us. This is the best I can do since it is not my personal contractor doing the work and it is the insurance company which does not want to delay the work because of the health risk that can become a problem in the whole building if more time is needed to do the work. I would like you to understand that there are 4 units out of 6 in the building that are getting the same type of work done for the same reason, therefore it is an urgent matter. I cannot take the responsibility of risking someone getting sick because of this problem, that is why this work, has to be completed in the shortest delay as possible.

I understand that the work was supposed to be done this summer, however I hope you understand that we had to redo the roof before the insurance would start the work inside and because it is a condo building and we wanted to make sure the roof was done right at the right price, it did take some time to find the right persons to do the job and to get all the owners to agree. Now the roof was finished in September and after that it was the insurance company which took time to make a decision on when to start the work. I can also send you the plan of the work that needs to be done in the unit at your request and you can see that there is quite a bit of things that need to be changer. I hope you understand that it’s the insurance company paying for all the work therefore it’s their evaluation that decided all the work that needs to be done in the units in the building including my unit. It was not my choice and for me it would work great if we could wait until May, however this is not possible because as stated before I cannot take the responsibility of someone getting sick or the structure deteriorating more.

As explained before, it is under my responsibility to make sure all the furniture is out and to find an appropriate accomodation for Nitai and my expenses. I do not know if he plans to stay in Montreal during the holidays but before and after I will find an accommodation for him and Adam and all the furniture will be stored in a storage room during the time of the construction.

I hope this clears up some things and that we have an understanding.

Thank you for tour time

Regard

Massimo Marino »

« Massimo,

After a quick consultation with legal experts based in Quebec, it appears like your understanding of the Quebec Civil Code is very selective and perhaps purposely skewed. I will ask you to refer to Section 1923, which reads:

The notice given to the lessee indicates the nature of the work, the date on which it is to begin and an estimation of its duration and, where required, the necessary period of vacancy; it also specifies the amount of the indemnity offered, where applicable, and any other conditions under which the work will be carried out, if it is of such a nature as to cause a substantial reduction of the enjoyment of the premises. The notice shall be given at least ten days before the date on which the work is to begin or, if a period of vacancy of more than one week is necessary, at least three months before that date.

As stipulated above in accordance with Quebec’s tenancy laws, you have neglected to provide the Tenants proper notice as stipulated by the Régie on several different accounts. As it appears like you are to request a period of vacancy of far more than one week, you will be required to give a notice for vacancy at least 3 months in advance. Of course, in pursuance to Section 1925 of the Quebec Civil Code, at this point the Tenants have not had the opportunity to agree or refuse your request, as the proper notice has been not been given. Please find attached a form that you may send over to the Tenants to notify of the repairs that you wish to carry.

It is also obvious to all that to argue that repairs which have been put off for more than 6 months, are all of a sudden, “urgent and necessary”, is completely void of validity. In any case, this argument which you present is irrelevant at this time due to your failure to comply with the stipulations mentioned above.

Without prejudice, any legal action that will be taken by you in court against the Tenants will be handled by our law firm’s office in Montreal, and may call for the reimbursement of costs incurred by all parties involved on behalf of the tenants.

Govern yourself accordingly.

Regards,

David » (sic)

[15] Finalement, devant l’impasse, l’expert en sinistre transmet, le 28 novembre 2012, au locateur la lettre suivante (P5) :

« Monsieur Massimo Marino,

Please be advised that your insurer, Intact Insurance, does not want any further delays in the repairs of the inside of the building that they cover. The damages are major and need immediate attention.

There was a delay caused by the necessity to redo the roof before proceeding to the repairs inside the building. Your insurer could not authorise the repairs inside since there was a possibility of a reoccurrence. Now that the roof is done work can begin.

May we remind you that water damage can often lead to the presence of mould or mildew. Certain types of mould/mildew may be toxic and may pose a risk to human health. Your Condominium Association has hired a contractor experienced and trained in the restoration of water damage.

We ask you to vacate your condos in order that the work can begin as soon as possible. The contractor has given you till December 17^th 2012 to do so. There is no justification not to do so. Your tenants should understand that this is serious and should cooperate. » (sic)

[16] Le locateur demande par la suite au locataire Nitai ZORAN, de quitter le logement en lui indiquant que non seulement il a déjà permis aux locataires de ne pas payer de loyer depuis août 2012 mais qu’il accepte la responsabilité de déménager les meubles des locataires, de les entreposer dans un lieu sécuritaire le tout durant la période requise pour exécuter les travaux (L-4).

[17] Le locataire défendeur répond ceci le 2 décembre 2012 (P-6):

« Hi Massimo,

Thank you notifying me of the renovations that you wish to pursue in my unit. As far as I understand today, the dates for the renovation would be starting December 17 for 1 week, and continuing on January 8 for an additional 2 weeks, requiring temporary vacancy of the unit for approximately 3 weeks overall. I also acknowledge your offer to store my furniture in a safe place, and to “find arrangements” for me.

Considering the above-noted facts, I wish to inform you that the notice which you have emailed me is not pursuance to articles 1922 and 1923 of the Civil Code of Québec, and therefore is not enforceable and is legally irrelevant. I would like to highlight apart of article 1923 which you seem to have blatantly ignored, and I quote:

The notice shall be given at least 10 days before the date on which the work is to begin or, if a period of vacancy of more than one week is necessary, at least three months before that date.

Unfortunately, as the renovations require a vacancy of three weeks time, the notice which you have provided me does not comply with the three months requirement listed above. In addition, as stipulated by article 1923, you have failed to specify the amount of the indemnity you wish to offer due to the vacating of the unit. Offering to help “find arrangements” is not an amount, and is purposely ambiguous.

If you intend to request temporary vacant possession of the unit at least three months from today, I would very much appreciate a proper notice so I will be prepared to vacate the unit for the renovations you have described.

Regards,

Nitai » (sic)

[18] En date de l’audience, soit le 22 janvier 2012, les travaux n’ont toujours pas débuté.

[19] Le locateur prétend qu’il n’a pas le choix d’exiger le retrait de tous les meubles car telle est l’exigence de son assureur. Celui-ci requiert également que les travaux soient effectués le plus rapidement.

[20] Le défendeur allègue que le logement est en bonne condition et les dommages sont tolérables de sorte qu’il n’y a aucune urgence à effectuer les travaux. Il souligne que ses études au Québec prennent fin en avril, date à laquelle il quittera le logement.

[21] Le locateur réplique que lui et l’assureur de l’immeuble craignent l’apparition des moisissures mais le locataire assure qu’aucune moisissure n’est apparue et que si l’inondation en avait causé, elle serait déjà apparue.

[22] Le locateur concède que le but premier des travaux est de vérifier la condition réelle de l’intérieur des murs car il admet que personne n’a vu de moisissure dans le logement.

[23] En audience, le locateur amende son recours afin que le tribunal statue, advenant l’accueil de la demande, sur les modalités et les conditions de relocalisation des locataires.

ANALYSE

[24] Il appert de la preuve que l’intention véritable du locateur est d’obtenir l’évacuation des locataires afin d’effectuer des travaux majeurs.

[25] Or, sa demande, telle que formulée, n’autorise le tribunal qu’à émettre une ordonnance d’accès.

[26] S’agissant du recours du locateur pour accéder au logement, le tribunal doit le rejeter puisqu’il n’y a aucune preuve que les locataires ont refusé l’accès au logement. Le détail des travaux envisagés et décrits par l’expert en sinistre démontre le contraire. En l’absence d’une faute, il n’existe aucun fondement légal à émettre une ordonnance.

[27] Demeure la question essentielle et urgente, selon le locateur, de l’exécution des travaux. À cette fin, le tribunal a évalué avec les parties la possibilité de se prononcer sur cet aspect du litige.

[28] Cette avenue doit toutefois être écartée en raison du défaut du locateur d’inclure le colocataire à titre de codéfendeur. Cette lacune dans la procédure introductive d’instance ne saurait être occultée ou contournée puisqu’une décision ordonnant l’évacuation doit nécessairement être opposable aux deux détenteurs de cette obligation indivisible que constitue l’habitation du logement.

[29] Le locateur tente de témoigner que le locataire absent consent aux travaux et à l’évacuation mais d’une part, aucune preuve émanant de ce dernier ne convainc le tribunal que tel est le cas et d’autre part, le locataire présent à l’audience le nie. Il y a donc un doute sérieux et une réelle ambiguïté quant à ce consentement.

[30] Le locateur doit donc corriger sa procédure pour y inclure le colocataire.

[31] Ceci étant, le tribunal invite le locateur à vérifier la mesure avec laquelle ses courriels du 13 novembre et du 21 novembre 2012 sont conformes aux dispositions de l’article 1923 C.c.Q. et suivants :

« 1922. Une amélioration majeure ou une réparation majeure non urgente, ne peut être effectuée dans un logement avant que le locateur n'en ait avisé le locataire et, si l'évacuation temporaire du locataire est prévue, avant que le locateur ne lui ait offert une indemnité égale aux dépenses raisonnables qu'il devra assumer en raison de cette évacuation. »

« 1923. L'avis indique la nature des travaux, la date à laquelle ils débuteront et l'estimation de leur durée, ainsi que, s'il y a lieu, la période d'évacuation nécessaire; il précise aussi, le cas échéant, le montant de l'indemnité offerte, ainsi que toutes autres conditions dans lesquelles s'effectueront les travaux, si elles sont susceptibles de diminuer substantiellement la jouissance des lieux.

L'avis doit être donné au moins dix jours avant la date prévue pour le début des travaux ou, s'il est prévu une période d'évacuation de plus d'une semaine, au moins trois mois avant celle-ci. »

« 1924. L'indemnité due au locataire en cas d'évacuation temporaire est payable à la date de l'évacuation.

Si l'indemnité se révèle insuffisante, le locataire peut être remboursé des dépenses raisonnables faites en surplus.

Le locataire peut aussi obtenir, selon les circonstances, une diminution de loyer ou la résiliation du bail. »

« 1925. Lorsque l'avis du locateur prévoit une évacuation temporaire, le locataire doit, dans les dix jours de la réception de l'avis, aviser le locateur de son intention de s'y conformer ou non; s'il omet de le faire, il est réputé avoir refusé de quitter les lieux.

En cas de refus du locataire, le locateur peut, dans les dix jours du refus, demander au tribunal de statuer sur l'opportunité de l'évacuation. »

« 1926. Lorsque aucune évacuation temporaire n'est exigée ou lorsque l'évacuation est acceptée par le locataire, celui-ci peut, dans les dix jours de la réception de l'avis, demander au tribunal de modifier ou de supprimer une condition abusive. »

« 1927. La demande du locateur ou celle du locataire est instruite et jugée d'urgence. Elle suspend l'exécution des travaux, à moins que le tribunal n'en décide autrement.

Le tribunal peut imposer les conditions qu'il estime justes et raisonnables. »

«1928. Il appartient au locateur, lorsque le tribunal est saisi d'une demande sur les conditions dans lesquelles les travaux seront effectués, de démontrer le caractère raisonnable de ces travaux et de ces conditions, ainsi que la nécessité de l'évacuation.» (Le tribunal souligne)

[32] Enfin, il importe de souligner que les faits en cause n’appellent aucunement l’application de l’article 1865 C.c.Q. puisque le caractère urgent des travaux n’est pas démontré. En effet, non seulement 6 mois séparent le dégât d’eau de la demande de travaux mais le témoignage du locataire fait état d’un logement habitable et ce témoignage est confirmé par le locateur qui précise que le but premier de l’accès est de vérifier l’état des murs intérieurs.

[33] Enfin, l’expert en sinistre, dont le locateur tente de produire en preuve le descriptif des travaux, n’est pas venu témoigner, laissant ainsi le tribunal sans preuve prépondérante quant au caractère urgent des travaux.

POUR CES MOTIFS, LE TRIBUNAL :

[34] REJETTE la demande du locateur sans frais.

		Anne Mailfait

Présence(s) :	le locateur le locataire
Date de l’audience :	22 janvier 2013

D É C I S I O N