HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL FINDS LANDLORDS' RENT-TO-INCOME RULES DISCRIMINATORY

September 12, 2000

A Human Rights Board of Inquiry has found that landlords are not permitted under new regulations to the Ontario Human Rights Code to discriminate against low-income applicants by imposing a minimum "rent-to-income ratio".

Board of Inquiry Adjudicator Mary Anne McKellar was appointed to adjudicate a 1989 human rights complaint alleging that a 25% rent-to-income rule discriminates against young, single women. In her ruling, McKellar finds that the evidence shows that there is no correlation between rent-to-income ratios and risk of default.

Bruce Porter, Executive Director of the Centre for Equality Rights in Accommodation (CERA), who represented the claimant in the case, says that the decision is an important victory for low-income households in search of affordable housing.

"Low income households can’t possibly find an apartment where they would pay 25% of income on rent, so these kinds of policies simply force them into the most overpriced apartments on the market or, worse, into shelters," Porter said. He said that many landlords were under the impression that minimum income criteria are now legal because of the Conservative Government amendments. "The increasing use of minimum rent to income ratios has been a significant factor contributing to the rise of homelessness, particularly among young people and families," Porter said.

The decision is the first to interpret a controversial amendment to the Ontario Human Rights Code passed by the Conservative Government in June 1998 dealing with landlords’ use of income information in selecting tenants. Ms. McKellar notes in her decision that during committee hearings, government members "offered repeated assurances that it was not the Government’s intention to authorize the use of a 30% rent/income ratio, but that their intention was confined to clarifying what information landlords could request from prospective tenants."

Sandra Vander Schaaf, the complainant in the case, says the victory makes it worth an 11-year wait for a decision. "This is what I was after. My point has been heard. Landlords can’t refuse to rent to tenants on the basis of these arbitrary rent-to-income ratios. I hope this decision will mean there will be less of this kind of discrimination in the future."

The Board of Inquiry ordered the landlord in the case to pay Ms. Vander Schaaf $2,500 for the loss of her right to be free from discrimination.