Bill 60, the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025

Dear friends,

Our government has introduced yet another bill — Bill 60, the Fighting Delays, Building Faster Act, 2025 — put forward by Ontario’s ruling Progressive Conservative Party. I’ll focus only on the proposed changes to the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) and share a few short comments from the perspective of a practicing paralegal.

Section 43 RTA deals with how a notice to a tenant (a Notice of Termination) must look. Right now, the form must be approved by the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB), for example, Form N4. The amendment adds that the form may be prescribed by regulation. In other words, lawmakers are reserving the right to design the forms themselves. Hopefully, they’ll make them simpler, because landlords still manage to get confused by three short lines on today’s forms.

Section 48.1 RTA says that a landlord must pay the tenant one month’s rent as compensation (or offer another unit) if the landlord needs the rental unit for their own use. That payment must be made before the termination date, and the date on the N12 notice must be at least 60 days after the notice was given — hence the familiar phrase “60-day notice.” And here’s the surprise: under Bill 60, the landlord doesn’t have to pay compensation if they give 120 days’ notice instead of 60. In my view, this would be great news for landlords. The waiting time for an N12 hearing is already around four months, unlike non-payment cases that move faster. If the tenant refuses to leave, you can’t remove them without a hearing anyway — so you’re waiting either way. At least now you could save yourself the compensation payment. In practice, I constantly nag my clients from day one after serving an N12: pay the compensation, don’t wait. Tenants often refuse to accept it, thinking that helps their case, but you’ll have proof you tried. The worst thing is showing up at the hearing without proof of payment — the hearing ends before it begins. Now, this change means you just give 120 days instead of 60 and save yourself both money and headaches.

Section 58 RTA allows a landlord to terminate a tenancy for persistent late payment of rent. The law doesn’t currently define what “persistent” means, but there’s a long-standing body of case law saying it means a regular pattern of late payments. Bill 60 says that the government itself will define “persistent late payment” by regulation. We’ll see what that means. Given how landlord-friendly this bill is, I wouldn’t be surprised if they decide: three late payments in a row — that’s enough, go ahead and file.

Section 59 RTA is revolutionary — I couldn’t believe my eyes. Right now, for month-to-month tenancies, the termination date on an N4 notice must be at least 14 days after the notice is given. But our lawmakers apparently decided to make life easier for landlords — seven days will be enough. That’s right: on the 8th day you can file with the LTB. Given that hearing wait times are now around two months, tenants won’t have much time left to enjoy rent-free living.

Section 77 RTA says that if a tenant signs an N11 (Agreement to End the Tenancy) or gives an N9 (Notice by Tenant to End the Tenancy), the landlord can apply to the LTB to evict the tenant. Subsection 8 says the tenant can still file a motion to set aside the order. Lawmakers now want to make that harder — they’ve added new conditions for filing such motions (“if the prescribed circumstances, conditions, or tests are met”). Good job, I’d say — in practice, more than half of these motions involve tenants mumbling at the hearing or claiming they signed under pressure. Some even deny everything: “That’s not my signature.” The landlord brings witnesses who saw them sign — and the tenant still insists, “Wasn’t me.”

Section 82 RTA is another revolutionary one. Currently, at a non-payment hearing, tenants can raise any issues that could form the basis of their own tenant application — for example, maintenance problems, landlord harassment, interference with reasonable enjoyment, and so on. Under Bill 60, a tenant must pay half of the rent arrears before being allowed to raise those issues. I predict the number of tenant complaints will drop sharply at non-payment hearings.

Section 83 RTA says that the LTB adjudicator must consider all the circumstances of both parties and may, in some cases, refuse or delay an eviction. Now the amendment adds that this discretion is subject to any prescribed limitations or conditions. Something tells me that in some future hearings, adjudicators will start saying: “Dear tenant, I’d love to help you, but the limits are set by regulation — so you’ll have to move out.”

What’s not in this bill. Some journalists claim this bill abolishes security of tenure — the tenant’s right to stay indefinitely after a lease ends. As I understand it, the Premier has publicly said there will be consultations on that topic. But in this particular bill, there isn’t a single word about ending security of tenure.

In conclusion, I think this is an excellent bill for landlords. It genuinely balances the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants and will speed up the LTB process. What do you think — will this bill pass?