Toronto Rental Cost (& AirBnB) Issues

[Bayer]

You want to be a renter? Then you have to tolerate the risks.

Well, paying $800,000 for the 1 bedroom I used to rent $1800/month at ROCP would be irrational. So I choose to continue to rent in this city.

And the risks are not the same at all. That of having your rent increase by any amount year after year is what the tightening of rent controls was meant to mitigate. It makes tenants more secure, though it is not going to make the city more affordable - realistically, I don't think anything but changing market conditions can have an effect on affordability, and pigs will fly when the Ontario government decides to build significant additional social housing.

 

[jje1000]

I think the solution is to frankly have small apartment buildings being built in the inner suburbs that can take over really underdeveloped retail strips and such.

I think that is the easiest way to greatly increase the housing stock.

Yes, a gradual densification via infill/replacement apartment buildings (like the Toronto Special-type apartments that were built in the 1950s in places like the Annex, Lawrence and Don Mills), is part of the solution in making suburbs more efficient. The Avenues guidelines can help improve the quality of larger arterials, though I think that fees should be dropped to make middle-class mid-rises more lucrative (most mid-rises now are high-end).

I would also say that allowing the subdivision of suburban houses into apartments can also make the suburbs more density-efficient (many of the aging populace in the suburbs are 'overhoused', meaning that they have more space than they need), and more or less regulate a process already occurring in places like Brampton and Scarborough.

However, these are longer-term solutions to introducing more supply- the current short-fixes are mostly regulatory ones that deal with rent control, tenant-landlord relations, and short-term rental issues.

 

[TheKingEast]

Well, paying $800,000 for the 1 bedroom I used to rent $1800/month at ROCP would be irrational. So I choose to continue to rent in this city.

And the risks are not the same at all. That of having your rent increase by any amount year after year is what the tightening of rent controls was meant to mitigate. It makes tenants more secure, though it is not going to make the city more affordable - realistically, I don't think anything but changing market conditions can have an effect on affordability, and pigs will fly when the Ontario government decides to build significant additional social housing.

Stop. Most landlords were raising rent (if at all) by small amounts. A small group of assholes raised rent by a ridiculous amount. Did we really need a complete overhaul to buy votes?

Before the changes, I had never raised rent more than $50 and never back to back years if I hd the same tenant. My other friends who leased units were the same way.

I'm glad tenants feel more secure, until they have to move... But all of this is at the expense of the landlord. I agree, the government will do jack all about the lack of affordable housing, so they will rely heavily on landlords to house the population including the droves of immigrants they are bringing in each year. All this while putting a noose around landlords' necks.

This doesn't have a happy ending, though because there will be even less inventory out there and thus rents will increase for that reason. More and more landlords will leave the market, more potential landlords won't even bother.

You think I want to charge $2200 for a 1 bedroom? I'd much rather charge $1700 which is what I charged previously before the rule changes. But I've been left with no choice now. I wish more tenants saw the bigger picture.

Where I came from, if you couldn't afford the rent, you'd a)move further away until you could comfortably afford the rent b)improve your income c)get a roommate if you MUST rent a luxury unit. But some renters are unwilling to do that and feel they are owed affordable rental with high end finishes at the corner of Yonge and Bloor below the going rate.

 

[Northern Light]

Instead of focusing on supply, why not address demand, but on a provincial scale. For starters, if you’re not employed in the city, there is no reason for TCHC tenants to reside in city units. Instead, build public housing outside the GTA, in order to clear inventory for those who need to live in the city. Next, force Ottawa to push new immigrants to live elsewhere. We have a huge country, there’s no reason for everyone to move to Toronto, especially for those who don’t work here.

A similar chat on supply and demand on housing here
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...cates-reject-law-supply-demand/?noredirect=on

Our premier sees himself as both the super mayor and the city’s saviour on the housing issue. So, let’s see what he does on this file. Hopefully he’s not just tweaking the supply side of the equation.

There can be some rational discussion about this..........but this is not a material solution.

Mobility rights for Citizens are in the Charter.

A new immigrant can be a Citizen inside three years.

Most new immigrants have to show they either have a job offer in place or a can fill and in-demand occupation.

Those jobs are overwhelmingly in larger (higher cost) centres.

There are no jobs for neurosurgeons in Kenora.

A great number of supplementary services required by low-income earners are also located in Cities and you would have to (expensively) duplicate these in other areas if you want to implement large scale migration.

Getting people to volunteer to move away from their friends, families and familiar surroundings is no easy task.

Further, as with immigrants, if you assume that most TCHC residents are employed (true) or would like to be (true), then you can only seriously consider sending them where employment opportunities exist in large numbers.

As a purely practical matter, reducing demand in the market by focusing either on TCHC residents or on new immigrants simply isn't practical at scale, and wouldn't produce large scale savings.

That doesn't mean there isn't room to tinker around the edges (providing inducements to new immigrants who settle in less expensive, rural areas where there ARE jobs that they could fill; or likewise, helping those
who may have moved to the City but been trapped by its high costs move back to a town they are from.

But this will never be a large part of the answer.

They key on supply is obvious; on demand, its about raising income levels from both private and public sources. (ie. higher minimum wages, and higher benefits payments under EI, Social Assistance and CPP/OAS/GIS)

 

[Admiral Beez]

Housing is affordable, otherwise we’d have a surplus. Those that are owning or renting Toronto’s housing can afford it.

It’s the arbitrary definition of affordability that throws on this off.

 

[TheKingEast]

Housing is affordable, otherwise we’d have a surplus. Those that are owning or renting Toronto’s housing can afford it.

It’s the arbitrary definition of affordability that throws on this off.

I'd be curious to see the number of people spending 1/3 or less of their pay on rent/mortgage.

Looking at the average salary and average rent, home prices...there's plenty of people swimming in debt and are in serious trouble.

 

[SunriseChampion]

You want to be a renter? Then you have to tolerate the risks.

Well, yeah.

You want to live? Then you have to tolerate the risks.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Housing is affordable, otherwise we’d have a surplus. Those that are owning or renting Toronto’s housing can afford it.

It’s the arbitrary definition of affordability that throws on this off.

As a percentage of your income at the time, how much did your home cost when you bought it?

 

[doug]

Well, paying $800,000 for the 1 bedroom I used to rent $1800/month at ROCP would be irrational. So I choose to continue to rent in this city.

And the risks are not the same at all. That of having your rent increase by any amount year after year is what the tightening of rent controls was meant to mitigate. It makes tenants more secure, though it is not going to make the city more affordable - realistically, I don't think anything but changing market conditions can have an effect on affordability, and pigs will fly when the Ontario government decides to build significant additional social housing.

No, the risks aren't the same, but there's risk either way...and you're completely discounting the risk a landlord takes....you've already got the LTB on the renters side, why be so greedy?

 

[Bayer]

Stop. Most landlords were raising rent (if at all) by small amounts. A small group of assholes raised rent by a ridiculous amount. Did we really need a complete overhaul to buy votes?

Before the changes, I had never raised rent more than $50 and never back to back years if I hd the same tenant. My other friends who leased units were the same way.

I'm glad tenants feel more secure, until they have to move... But all of this is at the expense of the landlord. I agree, the government will do jack all about the lack of affordable housing, so they will rely heavily on landlords to house the population including the droves of immigrants they are bringing in each year. All this while putting a noose around landlords' necks.

This doesn't have a happy ending, though because there will be even less inventory out there and thus rents will increase for that reason. More and more landlords will leave the market, more potential landlords won't even bother.

You think I want to charge $2200 for a 1 bedroom? I'd much rather charge $1700 which is what I charged previously before the rule changes. But I've been left with no choice now. I wish more tenants saw the bigger picture.

Where I came from, if you couldn't afford the rent, you'd a)move further away until you could comfortably afford the rent b)improve your income c)get a roommate if you MUST rent a luxury unit. But some renters are unwilling to do that and feel they are owed affordable rental with high end finishes at the corner of Yonge and Bloor below the going rate.

It's interesting to see the situation from your point of view. I knew that rents would go up; it was inevitable. Stability after you sign the lease has a cost. And indeed, the owners of the two condos that I rented, each for 10 years, did the same as you: several years without any increase, and all in all, lower than the legal rate. I thought I had been lucky.

The story of people being faced with outrageous increases took a life of its own, and the Liberals took advantage of it to make a left turn with the election coming. Before they did, that story did spook me and I moved to Manulife, not for lower rent (I do pay that 2200, and they apply the legal rent increase down to the last cent) but just for the security of tenure.

 

[TheKingEast]

It's interesting to see the situation from your point of view. I knew that rents would go up; it was inevitable. Stability after you sign the lease has a cost. And indeed, the owners of the two condos that I rented, each for 10 years, did the same as you: several years without any increase, and all in all, lower than the legal rate. I thought I had been lucky.

The story of people being faced with outrageous increases took a life of its own, and the Liberals took advantage of it to make a left turn with the election coming. Before they did, that story did spook me and I moved to Manulife, not for lower rent (I do pay that 2200, and they apply the legal rent increase down to the last cent) but just for the security of tenure.

I mean, it benefits me to see rents jump. But it just doesn't make sense. I constantly look at what people are paying in rent on sites like Bungol and shake my head. It's too much! How can you save and eventually buy if you're paying so much rent?

I just want a good tenant who will pay the rent and not bother me (unless absolutely necessary). I have some tenants I don't hear from for years aside from collecting a new series of cheques. That's what I like. And for that, I don't raise the rent each year. I never agreed with raising rent every year if you had a good tenant. Now, though? You have to and that's after setting a high rent to begin with.

The libs really made a mess of things.

 

[SunriseChampion]

I mean, it benefits me to see rents jump. But it just doesn't make sense. I constantly look at what people are paying in rent on sites like Bungol and shake my head. It's too much! How can you save and eventually buy if you're paying so much rent?

I just want a good tenant who will pay the rent and not bother me (unless absolutely necessary). I have some tenants I don't hear from for years aside from collecting a new series of cheques. That's what I like. And for that, I don't raise the rent each year. I never agreed with raising rent every year if you had a good tenant. Now, though? You have to and that's after setting a high rent to begin with.

The libs really made a mess of things.

Man, you sound like the good landlords I've had! Respect.

Those were the best. Mutually respectful and mutually beneficial. I'm handy too so I do most minor repairs myself without even involving the landlord unless parts or material over a certain cost need to be purchased.

You sound like a legit landlord. Good on ya.

 

[SunriseChampion]

No, the risks aren't the same, but there's risk either way...and you're completely discounting the risk a landlord takes....you've already got the LTB on the renters side, why be so greedy?

I'm not sure it's greedy to want security of shelter, seeing as shelter (unlike most things people claim to need) is a necessity.

Greedy is arbitrarily over-inflating the cost of rental housing. Easily most of the ridiculous cost increases in rents the last few years have been driven not by demand but by greed. I've seen realtors pushing landlords to evict tenants in order to increase rent astronomically (happened to me as well). Now, if people are willing to pay the high rents, then nice one, but it's been a massive mess as far as I'm concerned.

A few landlords I've dealt with would rather gamble on trying to get more money then be satisfied with a good tenant. They'll be trying to gouge me for money or illegally evicting me all whilst telling me how I'm so great, helpful, respectful, blah, blah, blah, writing me up letters of reference that make me look like Jesus. It's a bit much.

Then there are the good landlords, who are like heaven-sent angels, not seemingly beholden to the whims of their realtors, etc.

 

[doug]

Then there are the good landlords, who are like heaven-sent angels, not seemingly beholden to the whims of their realtors, etc.

yes, these are the ones desperately trying to evict a deadbeat tenant who hasn't paid rent in 6 months...and their hands are tied....The LTB sides with the deadbeat.

 

[TheKingEast]

yes, these are the ones desperately trying to evict a deadbeat tenant who hasn't paid rent in 6 months...and their hands are tied....The LTB sides with the deadbeat.

Maybe landlords should make their voices heard? Tenants did and look what happened.