A demonstration against Bill 31 was held Saturday on St‑Denis Street in Petite‑Patrie. The bill would end lease transfers, making it more difficult to keep rent increases down.
Housing minister and real estate agent France‑Élaine Duranceau is dead set against giving tenants any advantages. She recently refused to enlarge eviction protections for seniors as well.
Here’s a sordid crime story. A man has been sentenced to house arrest for participating in a situation which ended with a man’s death. Jonathan Fortier got off lightly after pleading guilty to criminal negligence causing death because the judge assumed he’s no longer a threat to society.
Bet it would have been different if he wasn’t white.
I don’t think that’s what it says?
«Il est vrai que M. Fortier n’est plus une menace pour la société. Cependant, un simple sursis de peine assorti d’une probation […] serait une peine déraisonnablement clémente considérant le caractère grave et ignoble des crimes», a tranché le juge Boucher.
The judge says while it’s true he’s no longer a threat, he shouldn’t get probation as that would be too lenient given the seriousness of his crimes. So he took that into account , but there are other things. It also says, right at the end, that he already served a year in jail, which would count as 1.5 with standard credits. It says he was on drugs at the time (so less aware of the wrongness of his actions) as a small time dealer, has cleaned up his life, and didn’t cause any injuries; he helped his half brother dump this badly injured but still alive guy somewhere (rather than bring him to a hospital), on the orders of the son of a top Hell’s Angel (which was surely a bit of duress), without it saying if the guy was so far gone he’d have died anyway. The half brother got 10 years, and the Hell’s Angels son got 14.
What he did is awful, but is 1.5 years in jail and 6 months house arrest unreasonable given all this? Seems normal for our justice system, and maybe fine, I don’t know. Clearly TVA covered this due to the sordid story and the mob connections.
Well yes, there was more to the story, but I didn’t want to write a full account of it since the details are in the article at the link : )
Taras Grescoe has a good piece in L’actualité about winter cycling. It’s the French version of his Substack piece from mid‑January.
Normally my cycling season is from mid-March to early December, depending on the weather. But I’ve been using winter Bixi this year and it’s pretty great. Hopefully it has been a success from an operations standpoint and they can expand the number of stations next year, because the lack of stations is the only real drawback.
It’s been a pretty mild winter for sure, I used to ride to work when I livedc closer to my job and honestly I only stopped in the winter becasue of the ice buildup edging me into the path of cars, especially on Bates which was more industrail back then. How are the winter bikes? Are they well maintained & cleaned?
I haven’t encountered a single dysfunctional bike yet which is actually a lot better than in the summer! Then again I’m often using Bixi for several rides a day in the summer, whereas this winter I’ve only been using it a handful of times per week.
La Presse looked into why the expensive bus garage near Rosemont metro station still hasn’t opened, and it’s because the access runs right under that new residential building, making it vulnerable to falling ice and other hazards. Seems odd nobody thought of this till so late in the project.
Completely mystifying. I don’t see how the bus loop would be more vulnerable than any of the many underpasses and other overhead structures STM buses pass underneath everyday.
I guess because it’s below balconies they are worried about people sweeping/ shovelling them off … my old upstairs neighbour whose head was way up his ass used to do that to me all the time.
The weird thing is there’s already a canopy over the bus loop entrance, with wire netting that is designed to catch any objects falling from above. But if the STM is concerned about snow falling from above… I don’t know what to say.
Radio-Canada talked to people working at Place Versailles, where sales are at a standstill since Christmas.
That empty store has a good floor. I wonder why they don’t repurpose as a site for indoor soccer or shinny – just for a while at least.
Dominique Ollivier is suing Quebecor for $1.6 million, saying they dragged her reputation through the mud over the OCPM expenses scandal.
Does it count as dragging her reputation through the mud if she actually demonstrably did what she was accused of?
As she says, the expenses were approved and legal, although admitting “ce n’est pas parce que des dépenses sont légales et permises qu’elles sont acceptables.” But Quebecor was pushing an interpretation of her actions to suggest she had done things that were technically illegal or corrupt.
I think it’s not beyond imagining that Quebecor didn’t like seeing a Black woman elevated to the traditionally powerful position of chairman of the city’s executive committee, but the piece says nothing about Ollivier alleging racism in her case.
Perhaps Plante will come to her rescue /s
The item says Ollivier is still in Projet, and may yet get back into the executive committee, but not as chairman. Plante has been quick to expel others from the party so I think this alone is evidence of Plante’s estimation of the situation. Ollivier never did anything as chairman that caused any scandal.
@Ian to answer your question” Does it count as dragging her reputation through the mud if she actually demonstrably did what she was accused of?”
The answer is possibly.
Unlike common law, in civil law truth is not an absolute defence.
The SCC explained in 2004 in a case involving a CBC broadcast:
“Truth and public interest are factors to consider but they are not necessarily the determinative factors. It is insufficient in this case to focus merely on the veracity of the content of the second broadcast report. One must look globally at the tenor of the broadcast, the way it was conducted and the context surrounding it. The guiding principle of liability for defamation is that there will not be fault until it has been shown that the journalist or media outlet in question has fallen below professional standards. The conduct of the reasonable journalist becomes the all‑important guidepost.”
https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2168/index.do
Yves Boisvert doesn’t think much of her chance of success:
https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/chroniques/2024-02-04/blamer-les-medias.php
Thank you for the clarification; very interesting.
H. John, I’d like to see Quebecor have their wrists slapped, but Boisvert is probably right.
A man was stabbed dead in a riverside park in Montreal North on Friday afternoon. An altercation with another man is mentioned; the victim had no criminal history.
Deborah Ancel 22:42 on 2024-02-03 Permalink
Transfering the lease was the only option I had when I bought a house in 2005 (I didn’t want to sublet). There are less nefarious reasons for transfering a lease than trading rents. They would have gotten $200/month more if they’d let me give notice or pay a penalty.
I hope that lease transfered over and over and over forever.
Ian 19:39 on 2024-02-04 Permalink
A lease transfer isn’t such a bad thing for a landlord – if their building is well kept, A lease transfer means you don’t have to jack up the rent, but you also don’t have to do the spit n’ shne between tenants, replace or update anything, paint the walls, etc – and there’s no gap in your rental income.
On the other hand if your goal as a landloard is to put up an ikea shelf and a bucket of primer, call the place “extensively renovated” and double the rent, well, I can see how lease transfers are annoying.
Tim 15:40 on 2024-02-05 Permalink
Kate, are you aware that the legislation makes it so that if a tenant does not respond to an eviction that it will now be considered a rejection by default? Today, it is considered acceptance.
Additionally, there is language such that the landlord has the burden to prove the validity of an eviction. On top of that, it is written that compensation is targeted at 1 month per year with a maximum of 24 months. These are all changes done for the benefit of the tenant.
I also don’t see a problem with giving the landlord power on lease transfers because they should have a say in the person (or people) that will be living in their property. According to https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-tables-bill-31-housing-1.6873292, “landlords still have to fill out Section G of a lease, which indicates how much the previous tenant paid per month. A tenant can then ask the provincial rental board to fix the rent retroactively based on the old rent within 10 days of signing the lease.”
Joey 12:49 on 2024-02-06 Permalink
@Tim there really ought to be some kind of balance between “you can only sublet” and “you can transfer your lease, which will continue in perpetuity at a fixed rate of increase, to just anyone” – maybe the new tenant needs to demonstrate some relevant criteria? That said, it’s impossible for me to understand why this policy change is being introduced now.
As far as Section G goes, that’s all well and good, but in the absence of a lease registry it’s basically impossible for tenants to know whether the amount listed is accurate. The minister could have garnered a lot of goodwill among tenants if she had included a comprehensive lease registry in the legislation, but she didn’t. And when the subject comes up again, everyone will say that it’s too late, we already did Bill 31 and it’s time to implement the new policies, not develop additional tools.
Tim 09:54 on 2024-02-07 Permalink
@Joey: I agree that a lease registry (or some other mechanism to verify the previous lease) is needed to thwart unscrupulous landlords.