An elderly Toronto man says he missed a court date related to his impending eviction because he was recovering from a heart attack in hospital.
But the process went ahead anyway and the Court of Appeal ultimately ruled in favor of the landlord, accusing the tenant and a sister with whom he shares the apartment of knowing how to “cheat the system”.
Now, the couple is raising concerns about what they call an “unfair” decision as they face an eviction scheduled to take place today.
“I don’t understand how the courts can be so lacking in basic compassion,” Kathleen Finlay told CP24. “I mean, this seems like it was designed to be punitive.”
After moving into their downtown Toronto apartment amid the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, Kathleen Finlay and her brother, John, say they faced numerous problems with their rent. The unit looked nothing like what was advertised, they say. There was no hot water, a ventilation problem stinked up their bedrooms and an unfinished repair created a safety hazard, to name a few of the allegations in court documents filed by the tenants.
These problems severely affected John, who is disabled and was diagnosed with heart disease earlier this year, his sister says.
Furthermore, Kathleen says that “they made her lose quality of life.”
“It’s really difficult for him to get in and out of the apartment because there are a series of horrible ramps. He can only go through the basement and he has to use the walker to get up and down and around the ramp,” Kathleen said in an interview with CP24.
While the apartment itself was never advertised as walker or wheelchair friendly, the brothers were angry and upset about the other alleged problems.
Kathleen says that’s why they stopped paying rent two months after moving in; She believes the unit violated the Residential Tenancies Act, or RTA, as it did not align with how it was advertised online and ultimately created challenging living conditions for her brother in particular.
The couple racked up more than $150,000 in back rent payments. However, they argued that the living conditions caused them damages that exceed that amount.
Medical evidence not credible: judge
The brothers stopped paying rent in September 2021. Kathleen says that in November, the property management company began taking legal action against them.
Around the same time, Kathleen said her brother started having medical problems. She said that in January 2024 she had been diagnosed with heart disease. As a result, the brothers requested to suspend the process, which was ultimately denied.
The court decision, which granted the owner possession of the apartment, stated “[John’s medical condition] “has been made repeatedly during the course of these proceedings, and despite the court noting at several points that the claim has never been accompanied by credible medical evidence, the claim is once again presented without such supporting evidence.”
The tenants appealed that decision. On Friday, the couple were scheduled to appear at the Court of Appeal at the landlord’s request for permission to proceed with enforcing the court order and obtaining possession of the apartment, starting today.
However, Kathleen says her brother suffered a heart attack that morning while in a hospital emergency room.
Kathleen provided CP24 with documentation she described as notes from health professionals describing John’s condition. While a note from April suggests that the stress caused by the court process and eviction put him at risk of cardiac arrest, the documents do not confirm that John suffered a heart attack.
The motions judge denied a request by the Finlays to postpone Friday’s hearing.
Tenants ‘abuse the system’: judge
According to the Court of Appeal decision, this is not the first time the couple has evaded court proceedings over the matter. Instead, he says this is the latest in a long history of procedures in which the Finlays blamed their lack of attendance on a medical reason.
A doctor’s note was sent to the judge in early April, giving the couple a brief 10-day extension to move out. They remained in the unit, which he said was an example of how tenants appear to be “abusing the system.”
“After the Finlays stopped paying rent, the unfortunate game of cat and mouse so typical of bad faith tenants began. The Finlays are among the most successful among those who know how to ‘game the system,’” the decision reads. “…Indeed, the Finlays made a previous foray into this court in this litigation, and in the decision awarding costs of an abandoned appeal, reported in 2024 ONCA 153, the court noted that ‘the tenants’ conduct appears to be abusive of the system… The frivolous, vexatious and abusive nature of Finlay’s strategy throughout, and of this appeal in particular, is evident not only in the support of the appellee J. Black and in the award of costs made by this court , but also in litany procedures: 33 litigation events.”
The brothers did not have an attorney at the time and represented themselves.
“I was trying to fight the court battle and my brother was fighting for his life, and they were able to take advantage of that opportunity to take advantage of us and get something before a judge very quickly and this is the result,” Kathleen said. .
Since then, Kathleen says her brother left the hospital to pack his things.
At the moment, Kathleen says John has no plans to return to the hospital. She said he is considering medical assistance in dying as an option, to “die with dignity.”
“This is really so unfair and punitive that I don’t know any other way to describe it.”
They have been ordered to pay accrued rent through early March 2024, which amounts to more than $150,000, in addition to the costs of previous motions and bond for the costs of their appeal. The total amounts add up to more than $250,000.
The property management company, Hannah Properties of One Clarendon Inc, sent a request for comment to its attorney, Sanj Sood.
In response, he said: “The [Court of Appeal] “The decision speaks for itself.”