Let’s talk numbers.

The median price of a home in my city, Peterborough, is currently $619,900.

If a small housing provider purchases an investment property with a 25% down payment, that leaves them with a $464,900 mortgage.

With a 25-year amortization, a 5-year term, and an interest rate of 4.65%, the monthly mortgage payment alone is $2,623.81.

To be clear - that number doesn’t include property taxes, which in Peterborough can add another $300-$400 per month. It doesn’t include home insurance, which might run another $150 or more per month. It doesn’t include repairs, maintenance, or the inevitable appliance replacements that come with renting out a home. And yet, if a landlord charges $2,600 per month in rent, "housing advocates" will scream from the rooftops about greedy landlords gouging tenants.

So, let’s ask the obvious question: Are small housing providers supposed to operate at a loss? Are we expected to provide housing for free?

The Myth That Selling Will Fix the Housing Crisis

I can already hear the rebuttal: “Stop hoarding houses! If landlords sold their investment properties, more people could buy homes.”  This argument does not address the current economic reality. How does a small landlord selling their one investment property magically make a tenant - who currently doesn’t qualify for a mortgage - suddenly eligible to buy it?

To afford the same house under current lending rules, a buyer would need to qualify for a mortgage at 4.65% (or higher, due to stress testing requirements), have a down payment of at least $36,990 (assuming they’re a first-time home buyer in Ontario), and demonstrate an income sufficient to cover the $2,623.81 mortgage payment, plus property taxes and insurance.

If they can’t qualify for a mortgage now, they won’t be able to qualify just because I sell my rental property. What happens then? The house doesn’t magically disappear; it simply gets sold to someone who can afford it, often another investor, and increasingly, to a corporate one.

If Housing Costs Are Too High, Let’s Fix the Right Problem

If you argue that housing costs are too high, I’m with you! If you argue that wages have not kept up - not only with inflation but also with the actual cost of living - I’m with you there too! But when you start demonizing small housing providers, who, at least currently, are providing housing for people who otherwise wouldn’t qualify to own a home, that’s where you lose me.

Charging a rent that barely covers the costs of owning the home isn’t greed - it’s math.

"Why Should Tenants Pay Your Mortgage?"

This is another favourite argument from housing activists: “Why should tenants pay your mortgage? If you can’t afford the house, you shouldn’t have bought it.”  Alright, let’s play that out. Say I sell the house. How does that magically make a current tenant eligible for a mortgage? It doesn’t. It just displaces the tenant and potentially puts them in a worse situation - maybe in a corporate-owned rental with even higher rent, or in a short-term rental unit that doesn’t provide long-term stability at all.

If the concern is that housing should be more affordable, then let’s fight for government intervention in housing, better wages, and rental support programs - not scapegoat the small landlords who are also struggling with the skyrocketing cost of living.

The Disaster that is the LTB

It’s hard enough trying to make the math work as a small housing provider, but in Ontario, the real risk isn’t just financial - it’s the structural failures of the Landlord and Tenant Board (LTB). Ontario’s system is a slow-moving disaster where, if a tenant stops paying rent, it can take up to a year - sometimes longer - to legally remove them. Meanwhile, the small landlord is left holding the financial bag, paying the mortgage, property taxes, utilities (in many cases), and legal fees, while receiving nothing in return.

Tribunals Ontario are eager to highlight improvements in L1 and L9 applications (applications for non-payment of rent), which make up over half of the LTB’s caseload. They claim these applications are now being scheduled within approximately three months, down from the 8-10 month wait times of early 2023. They also report that 90% of orders are issued within 30 days of the hearing date, aligning with their service timelines. But interestingly, they don’t provide comparative data on when applications are actually being heard - only when they’re scheduled.

This is important, as many Small Ownership Landlords of Ontario (SOLO) observers, myself included, have noted that hearing blocks are being severely overbooked, causing more cases to be adjourned simply due to lack of time. Anecdotally, we’re hearing that rescheduled cases are taking another 4-5 months to be rescheduled. And then there’s the growing concern over the rising number of tenants filing - and being granted - review and set-aside hearings, further delaying evictions for months.

Robeena Khan, a small landlord in Ontario, filed an L1 application in August 2024 after her tenant stopped paying rent. The hearing took place in November, and while she obtained an eviction order in December after the tenant breached that ruling, the tenant immediately filed for a review hearing - triggering an automatic stay of eviction until that review is heard this March. "My tenant currently owes $14,000 in unpaid rent and counting," said Ms. Khan. 

After filing an L1 application in August 2023, Ann Tambur’s case wasn’t heard until June 2024 - a full 10 months later. She finally received an eviction order at the end of July, only for her tenant to file for a review. That review hearing happened in October 2024, but as of today - over four months later - Ms. Tambur is still waiting for an order, well beyond the LTB’s stated service delivery standards.

Jairo Vargas filed his L1 application in February 2024, with a hearing scheduled for May. That hearing block had 15 cases on the docket - only eight were heard. The rest, including his, were adjourned due to lack of time. His rescheduled hearing in August 2024 was derailed when his tenant didn’t show up, claiming a medical exemption - granted by the LTB without any proof. The hearing was pushed to October, where a payment plan was issued. “Tenants are able to manipulate the system” said Mr. Vargas, “and the LTB enables systematic abuse by those seeking to take advantage”. The tenant defaulted on the payment plan in December, so Mr. Vargas obtained an eviction order and booked the sheriff for January 2025. But once again, his tenant played the system, filing for a review hearing claiming they never received the ex parte order - and, conveniently, that they couldn’t afford the payment plan anyway. The review hearing was granted and scheduled for March. "By the time that hearing happens, my tenants will owe just over $33,000. The system is so broken," said Mr. Vargas.

In what other industry would a business be forced to continue providing a service for free, with no ability to collect what is owed? If a grocery store customer walked out with a month’s worth of groceries without paying, no one would argue that they had a right to keep taking food indefinitely. So why is it considered acceptable when it happens in housing?

Small Landlords Are Not the Enemy

It’s easy to paint landlords as the villains of the housing crisis. But most small landlords are teachers, nurses, retirees, or working-class people who invested in a second property as a way to secure financial stability. Most of us aren’t renting out luxury condos at exorbitant prices - we’re providing modest homes that, in many cases, barely break even.

So, can we please stop pretending that small landlords are the problem? If anything, we’re part of the solution, offering housing to those who can’t currently buy. Instead of fighting each other, let’s focus on real solutions:

• Government-funded rental assistance for those struggling with affordability.
• More housing development, including incentives for small landlords to create secondary suites and rental units.
• Tackling corporate landlords, who actually do have the power to drive up rents across entire markets.
• Abolish the LTB, and create a system that works, and functions fairly for both tenants and landlords.

Demonizing small landlords won’t fix the housing crisis. Demanding real solutions might.

‍

____________________________

Disclaimer:

This is an Opinion Article submitted by a member of the Openroom community. The author's opinions are not necessarily representative of Openroom. Openroom has an objective to publish the voices of the rental ecosystem to ensure there is dialogue amongst all.

Want to write an Opinion piece for Openroom?

You can write about anything related to housing and let our editing team review your work. When you're done, send the draft to us through email at hello@openroom.ca. It doesn't have to be fancy because the important thing is to get it out there. Just start writing!

We're happy to answer any questions you might have.