Archives

A tenant informed us of the inability to reach the security guard since he was elsewhere in the Rockhill complex and there is no way to contact him directly. She had to wait 45 minutes for him to return to the office.

In this situation, the only option is to leave a message and hope someone calls back. However, it seems that the telephone system does not always allow leaving a message, which makes communication impossible in this case.

Several tenants have come forward since the last meeting, reporting receiving notices for imaginary amounts.

Despite discussions with the administration, they continue to receive new notices every month. In some cases, the person in charge of the building had told the tenant that everything was fine and that they owed nothing, but a few days later, a new letter was sent to them.

During the meeting with the administration on February 21, 2024, the CLR raised a coordination issue that makes it difficult to discuss rent increases.

The administration encouraged tenants to negotiate their renewals if they are not satisfied. However, there is a lack of organization that makes the process complicated and frustrating.

A tenant tried to schedule an appointment for her renewal. She called but had to leave a message on voicemail because no one answered. Someone called from Ottawa but did not speak French. Anyway, she was only calling to say that she would pass the message to someone in Montreal the next day. The day after next, as no one had called her back, she tried again and managed to speak to someone and schedule an appointment. When she showed up for the appointment, the Minto representative was not aware of it, but she received her anyway. The tenant obtained a reduction, but more importantly, a promise regarding the renewal conditions given her personal situation. However, the administration's representative refused to put this promise in writing. The tenant left with only the financial aspect in writing and experienced stress regarding other aspects of her lease. The lack of organization will create frustration, and people will simply show up at the office without an appointment if nothing is done.

The Regional Director will talk to the team to ensure that everyone uses shared calendars. He also agrees that promises should be put in writing, and if approval is required, then a follow-up will be done within 48 hours after the discussion to confirm the promise in writing.

The Rockhill administration told the RTC that they have escalated the issue of the numerous billing errors and related unjustified notices of legal action. Unfortunately there is nothing concrete so far and the Montreal-based team is left without the ability to drive this process, as they cannot commit to any specific steps or timeframes.

The RTC reminded the administration of the level of stress caused by the numerous and frequently elderly tenants targeted without justification. This is particularly intolerable as the letters are sent multiple times in spite of having discussed the issues in person with administration representatives.

The administration was advised that, in light of the large number of invalid notices being sent out, a tenant could successfully argue to the administrative tribunal that they can no longer take those letters seriously since they regularly are sent by mistake.

The administration said that they were verifying the accounts one by one. The RTC countered that what tenants are looking for is a commitment to a change of procedures so that good tenants that pay their rents are not treated like delinquents through no fault of their own.

During the meeting on February 21, 2024, the RTC brought up a particularly difficult point regarding communications.

Several emails had been sent since the last meeting, but the administration had not followed up on them, including those concerning electrical wires. Is this a sign of not wanting to respond or not having the time to respond?

The Regional Director assures that it was because there was not enough time.

The RTC mentions that if it's a matter of time, then it seems certain that it's necessary to request additional resources or to optimize processes.

The administration explains that they will indeed hire people to help, and that the assistant manager will be able to assist in the short term. They will be included in emails and meetings.

The RTC agrees that hiring someone who will be able to read client communications and coordinate with the team will be very beneficial, in order to be able to receive a response within 24 to 48 hours (and not just an automated one). When no response is forthcoming, it's assumed that the email was classified as low priority, especially since the emails in question were more informational in nature and not contentious, so would have been easy to respond to. Surely, understanding client questions, gathering information, and responding takes time, and if this time is not currently available, then it makes the problem critical.

Tenants are being billed amounts that, upon simple verification, are found to be incorrect. What's even worse, they discover this through an aggressive formal notice, or receiving a telephone call when the tenant is traveling.

According to an administration spokes person, a formal notice is sent immediately before any verification. This approach is unnecessarily aggressive and counterproductive: it causes stress, hassle, time losses, and various expenses (e.g., legal consultations), in addition to creating a sense of distrust towards the administration.

It is essential for Rockhill to ensure the accuracy of the amounts before bothering honest tenants with formal notices accompanied by threats of legal action, when it is unjustified. Furthermore, when tenants reject increases deemed excessive, Rockhill must make a note of this in the client file management system to avoid harassing tenants by prematurely demanding sums before the lease adjustment session.

A fire alarm triggered shortly after midnight on January 1 raises questions among tenants:

• When security was contacted during the alarm, the guard was not aware that the alarm was sounding.
• No communication through the loudspeakers, either to encourage tenants to evacuate or to announce the end of the alert.
• Tenants notice that many fire alarm stations remain non-functional and covered with tape. Does this lack of connection explain why security was not aware?

Tenants are concerned about this incident.

On December 5th, we experienced another power outage.

According to Hydro-Québec's website, it was a localized outage at Rockhill. We did not receive any communication from the administration to explain what happened, despite it being a specific issue at Rockhill.

Asked if it was equipment breakdown. the Building Manager replied that he had not received any information that the outage only affected Rockhill. He was going to check their incident reports to understand the reason for the outage with their electrician. He reminded us that their electrician was qualified and certified. He would report to us what they would find as an explanation for this power outage.

Several tenants have mentioned reporting issues in person or through Rent Café that are still unresolved months or even years later.

In some cases, a balcony issue dating back several years results in water infiltration into the apartment below during heavy rains. Nothing has been done despite multiple visits to assess the problem.

A tenant lived without a refrigerator for more than a month and had to insist repeatedly with the coordinator before their abnormal situation was resolved.

Another tenant mentions missing mosquito screens that have never been replaced.

There are several complaints about odors due to plumbing issues that have never been corrected, despite multiple separate visits.

Is there a follow-up by Rockhill to identify and prioritize requests that remain unresolved after several months?