Bill 492: CORPIQ responds to former MNA Françoise David’s letter of opinion

CORPIQ says the former MNA for Gouin must take responsibility for the bill’s discriminatory nature and its negative impact on seniors.

CORPIQ rejects the accusations leveled by former MNA Françoise David and the seniors’ advocacy group the Réseau FADOQ, reminding them that they had been clearly informed of the potential consequences of adopting bill 492, which prevents landlords from repossessing a unit based on the single discriminatory criterion of age.

A law that grants a right based on age inevitable creates discrimination, as is the case for pension plans, driver’s licenses and voting rights. Regarding housing, however, bill 492 is not only discriminatory, it removes rights as well. Prior to the new law owners could house their family members in their own building. Now their family plans, their life plans, are seriously limited.

Ms. David is attempting to make CORPIQ the scapegoat for the two negative consequences of the bill she initiated. First, for the fact that older people will find it more difficult to rent a unit in a duplex or triplex, as a survey of building owners confirmed. And second, that owners will “preventatively” repossess a unit before the tenant attains the criterion (age) allowing him or her to live in the unit for life.

Real estate brokers representing buyers looking for small buildings are already beginning to require tenants’ proof of age. A tenant’s age might make all the difference to a couple wanting to buy a plex to house their children or parents, only to see their plan fall through. And it’s taking longer for building owners trying to sell what amounts to their life savings to find a buyer.

A misguided bill

The former MNA confirmed the true intention behind her law: “To prevent real estate developers from making a quick profit by throwing elderly tenants out into the streets.” Yet companies and co-owners (not spouses) are not even permitted to repossess a unit. She wanted to apply a drastic remedy to a situation that was already covered by the law. In CORPIQ’s opinion, bill 492 was simply not relevant.

CORPIQ has publicly expressed its agreement with the goal to prevent repossession for speculative purposes. The organization suggested requiring more controls after a repossession and heavier sanctions for those done under false pretenses. Yet that wasn’t enough for Ms. David. By specifically targeting the elderly as tenants in need of protection, the former MNA hoped to attract sympathy for her bill and political support. However by pushing a law based on age, Ms. David set herself squarely in the centre of the type of discrimination she finds so repugnant.

Rental property owners weren’t—and still aren’t—unfavourable to seniors; they actually appreciate older tenants. The issue rather rests solely on discrimination based on age, a purely objective criterion that now determines whether a small property owner can or cannot repossess a unit for his or her own family. This type of discrimination didn’t exist in the past. It was just created with this new bill.

Playing her behind-the-scenes game for a year, the former MNA for Gouin continually refused to hear the warnings raised right from the start by CORPIQ and a seniors’ defense association. It’s rather late now for her to be finally realizing and denouncing the discrimination the law created.

Bill 492 dissuades half of building owners

A study conducted between January 10 and 23¹ shows that 33% of owners of buildings with 2 to 5 units would be cautious to rent to people aged 70 or near that age, and 18% would prefer not to rent to them, for a total of 51%. This reticence reaches 64% among owners who live in their buildings, even when the pre-rental screening rates the candidate satisfactorily.

 

Another reason that may dissuade owners from renting to seniors is the potential difficulty of reselling the building, as buyers’ occupation and management options would be limited. While 39% of plex owners say having a tenant eligible for the new law would probably not affect the resale value of their building, nearly as many (37%) believe the contrary: that their building’s market value would take a hit. This percentage rises to 46% among owners living in their buildings and to 58% once the undecided responses are redistributed.

Nearly 30% of plex owners now have at least one tenant who meets the age, income and duration-of-occupation criteria making him or her eligible for the law limiting repossession. Approximately one out of five units will have a new tenant in 2017.

 

(1) Survey conducted from January 10 to 23, 2017, among 656 respondents, all owners of rental buildings with 2 to 5 units, thus representing the Quebec market. The margin is error is 3.7, 19 times out of 20. 

» Read Françoise David’s opinion letter (In French)