CBC News: Massage parlours in private condos a problem

[qwertyaccount 15793]

Video (starts at time index 11:10): http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Local_News/Toronto/1317912017/ID=1737181415

 

Article: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2011/01/11/toronto-massage-condos.html

 

Police in Toronto and surrounding municipalities are struggling to deal with the widespread problem of massage parlours operating out of residential buildings.

More and more illegal massage parlours are setting up shop inside residential condominiums, according to police, and trying to find them and shut them down is difficult.

For the residents who own condos in those buildings, like Horst Kroll, it has brought them face to face with the sex trade.

Kroll, who lives in a condo on Sheppard Avenue East in Toronto, said he sees young women inside his building who he suspects are working in the massage parlours.

"They are usually Chinese. Good looking girls. Very young," he said.

Kroll, 74, bought his condo decades ago. He said he now lives right above a massage parlour, which he believes is a front for a brothel.

"Not too long ago I had somebody knock on my door at 10:30 at night," Kroll said. "I opened the door and the man in front said, 'Where are the girls?' I said, 'You are on the wrong floor.'"

He said there are loud noises and strangers coming and going throughout the day. Kroll said he has even seen women engaged in prostitution out on the balcony of the apartment.

"The word has spread out that this place is very, very good for doing illegal business because nobody cares," Kroll told CBC News

Kroll said he has complained to police, the city and the management at his condo, but so far nothing has changed.

Security cameras were recently installed on each floor. But residents claim that isn't enough.

"I live in a building that I'm ashamed to live in. I'm afraid to take my dogs out because I've been threatened more than once by drunks coming in for prostitutes," said Sophia Furtado, another resident.

Det. Dave Rydzik of Toronto police, said the suspected massage parlour in Kroll's building is just one of hundreds. "They are popping up all over the place," he said.

Police must have proof and a warrant to make an arrest and lay charges ? and that could take years.

"When you are talking about a private dwelling unit it's a difficult investigation for us to proceed," Rydzik said.

Bruce Robertson, Toronto's director of licensing, said there's no question the massage parlours are illegal.

"They would not get a business licence to operate out of a residence," he said.

But the operators of the massage parlours don't go looking for business licences. They just set up shop and start operating.

Police said sometimes if the illegal massage parlours get too much attention from police they just quietly move.

"Often just the visits alone and the attention they're receiving from us will make them leave," said Rydzik.

'"They'll go to another unit maybe in that apartment or condo, or maybe they'll go to another condominium building."

[Carrie Moon 68826]

Det. Dave Rydzik of Toronto in the article wasn't quoted directly with this statement if the "" are the defining factor of his direct quotations..so I'm wondering what clown this came from as it's completely untrue. ''Police must have proof and a warrant to make an arrest and lay charges ? and that could take years.'' Having direct knowledge of the process...it certainly does not take years! especially when several neighbors complain.

 

I am a strong proponent of a sex workers rights to work but not when it encroaches on disturbing others right to enjoyment of their homes... which also is confusing to me. A landlord can evict tenants on that reason alone no?

 

[PistolPete 61421]

Yes I believe so, if you look under the headers,for the landlord there is a Notice for Termination..form L2?. There is a lot paper work involved, but if push comes to shove, a tenant can be evicted within 10 days, if there was complaints. We are talking about many complaints, and something that neighbors find illegal to them.

From the

Ontario Landlord and Tenact Act

http://www.ltb.gov.on.ca/en/Forms/STEL02_111309.html

[Andee 220524]

Det. Dave Rydzik of Toronto in the article wasn't quoted directly with this statement if the "" are the defining factor of his direct quotations..so I'm wondering what clown this came from as it's completely untrue. ''Police must have proof and a warrant to make an arrest and lay charges ? and that could take years.'' Having direct knowledge of the process...it certainly does not take years! especially when several neighbors complain.

 

I am a strong proponent of a sex workers rights to work but not when it encroaches on disturbing others right to enjoyment of their homes... which also is confusing to me. A landlord can evict tenants on that reason alone no?

 

 

You are right Carrie. Landlords can evict tenants who are engaging in illegal activities on the premises. When serving the Notice of Eviction, they could use the argument that the tenant is engaging in illegal activities (running a common bawdy house), or other reasons, running a commercial business, etc. Also the City By-Law could investigate and impose fines for running an illegal massage parlour. It has been done here in Ottawa and it did not take years, so why not Toronto, then.

[Carrie Moon 68826]

You are right Carrie. Landlords can evict tenants who are engaging in illegal activities on the premises. When serving the Notice of Eviction, they could use the argument that the tenant is engaging in illegal activities (running a common bawdy house), or other reasons, running a commercial business, etc. Also the City By-Law could investigate and impose fines for running an illegal massage parlour. It has been done here in Ottawa and it did not take years, so why not Toronto, then.

 

Right.. but that's not actually what I meant.. I meant isn't it a simple procedure to evict someone merely by their disturbing of other tenants? with noise and such? Not sure but I would think that would be the easier route to go with 2 or more neighbours making a common complaint.

 

But back to your point.. it wouldn't even need to be proven to be of a sexual nature. Not having a business permit in a residential area is also cause..

 

something smells fishy in this article. The police aren't being helpful and/or saying it's too much work? Are they being paid off.. or horribly misquoted if they're being quoted at all.

[qwertyaccount 15793]

The tenancy laws in Ontario lean heavily in the tenants favour, although not as badly as they were a few years ago.

If a landlord is dealing with a tenant that knows their way around the system, the tenant can delay evictions for some time. Proving noise complaints can sometimes require tape recording and sound level meters.

Most businesses in Canada, and specifically Ontario, do not require any form of license, said another way, only businesses that are mandated to be licensed require a licence. A massage parlor is such a business, a call centre, consulting firm, etc. do not.

There was even a by-law passed in the city of Toronto permitting home offices in residential dwelling units, as long as the person conducting business resides there.

The condominium corporations, in Ontario at least, have a tougher nut to crack. There is noting in the Condominium Act restricting someone from running a home business. There could be something in the condominium corporation?s declaration, bylaws or rules restricting use, but those have fewer teeth than the Act, and are an expensive pain to enforce. The Act also has few enforcement remedies available to the Corporation to deal with troublesome unit owners or their tenants. It could be months or years for some rule violations to go though mandatory mediation and then the court system.

[thompo69 198]

The tenancy laws in Ontario lean heavily in the tenants favour, although not as badly as they were a few years ago.

If a landlord is dealing with a tenant that knows their way around the system, the tenant can delay evictions for some time. Proving noise complaints can sometimes require tape recording and sound level meters.

Most businesses in Canada, and specifically Ontario, do not require any form of license, said another way, only businesses that are mandated to be licensed require a licence. A massage parlor is such a business, a call centre, consulting firm, etc. do not.

There was even a by-law passed in the city of Toronto permitting home offices in residential dwelling units, as long as the person conducting business resides there.

The condominium corporations, in Ontario at least, have a tougher nut to crack. There is noting in the Condominium Act restricting someone from running a home business. There could be something in the condominium corporation?s declaration, bylaws or rules restricting use, but those have fewer teeth than the Act, and are an expensive pain to enforce. The Act also has few enforcement remedies available to the Corporation to deal with troublesome unit owners or their tenants. It could be months or years for some rule violations to go though mandatory mediation and then the court system.

 

You've pretty much summed it up. I would only add that I think it's becoming pretty standard in Ontario to include provisions in the declaration of a new condo development prohibiting use of residential properties for business. But, that does nothing for older buildings that lack those provisions.

[Megan'sTouch 23875]

Here is what my lawyer tells me based on OTTAWA, I also included my own research.

 

Eviction - Relatively easy. Even if bawdy houses are decriminalized it would be fairly easy for a landlord to argue that a massage business or prostitution interferes with tenants' reasonable enjoyment.

 

Bylaw - Relatively easy to give a fine that would likely be $500-2000. They would need some evidence to do this.

 

Criminal Bawdy House Charges - EXTREMELY unlikely in Ottawa. This could take months or years. They would need A LOT of hard evidence and a lot of money to put into an investigation. It is highly unlikely this would happen, and if it did, the charges would likely not stick. I cannot find a single case in Ottawa of a low-volume independent lady being charged with bawdy house for hand job. There are a ton of cases that set precedents that hand jobs are not considered prostitution or an "act of indecency".

 

On another note, what the fuck are these people doing? Haven't they ever heard of discretion?!? Doing it on the balcony? Drunks guys wandering in at all hours of the night? Is this stuff made up?

 

Not just to protect yourself, but out of respect for other residents in your building, and out of respect for your clients' privacy, it is essential to operate your business in an extremely discreet manner. This means being low-volume, not having clients late at night, keeping voices down while the door is open or while you're in hallway of your unit, telling clients not to knock, etc. Anyone who's booked an appointment with me and received my confirmation email knows what I'm talking about.

[qwertyaccount 15793]

No one, well, almost no one, would ever complain about a doctor or lawyer working from home or seeing clients there, and they do. Some neighbours would even brag about living next door.

 

All it takes is working with the same decorum for no one to notice or care.

 

Starting and advertising a second parallel business, such as a men?s fashion consultant, couldn?t hurt. Hell, I?d pay for just that!

[Carrie Moon 68826]

huh.. I didn't know that you were able to legally have a home based business. I used to live common law with a chiropractor and when he tried to have that type of business in his house he literally had to go door to door getting neighbor's permission to do so as part of setting this up. I realize this is more traffic flow than being a lawyer from home.. but I was basing my understanding on that.

 

We were unsuccessful at that time.. mind you it was about 12 or more years ago and I don't know if things have changed with respect to the bylaws or if you're just referring to condo bylaws.

[Lowdark 5613]

There wasn't much from the landlord of the building (such as, has he tried to address the complaints? What was the response? Was there any action currently being taken?). And as others have noticed, there were only a few quotes from the police. I would expect there to be more input from the people whose responsibility it is to enforce the law. And did the writer knock on the door in question? If so, what did they notice? And if they were asked to leave or snubbed, well that would have been an interesting addition to the story. And wouldn't it have been in the name of solid journalism to actually highlight the parts of the specific legislation that would pertain to this case? Instead, the whole article seems to be centred on the unproven assumptions of some (justifiably) upset neighbours and a few vague quotes.

 

This story may be true and it's something I hope could be addressed to everyone's satisfaction if it is, but the actual story gives me pause. And so does the feeling that we've been seeing more of this in the media, all with a specific bias, since Canada's prostitution laws were labelled unconstitutional. Maybe it's just me.

[qwertyaccount 15793]

...And wouldn't it have been in the name of solid journalism ...seeing more of this in the media, all with a specific bias, ...

 

Sadly, the new media has always told the story that the media wants to tell, facts be damned.

[Megan'sTouch 23875]

I'm of the opinion that if these people are being as disruptive as the news article portrays them, then the condominium corporation should warn them to stop, and if they don't, have them evicted. From my conversation with my lawyer, it wouldn't be that difficult to do.

 

I don't understand why people are using cases like these to show why prostitution should still be criminalized. I think that bawdy houses and massage parlours that are disruptive to residents should be treated the same way as any other disruption. Should college students who have large & loud music drinking parties be subjected to bawdy house or similar charges? Does it really matter if disruptive drunken guests are there to party or there to see a worker? Why do people think that prostitution needs "special" laws? All "problems" of prostitution (disruptiveness, abuse, trafficking, underage, drugs, etc.) can be addressed with existing laws.

[playtoe 201]

Not sure if anyone pointed this out but the article mentions "condo's". So, unless your referring to a MP renting a unit from a condo owner, no you can not evict a home owner from their house.

 

For a rental unit, I don't believe it's a simple eviction for disturbance. I believe there is a legitimate process a landlord must follow to evict a tenant for any reason. Some reasons may be easier to proceed with; however, all are time consuming to the landlord.

 

Right.. but that's not actually what I meant.. I meant isn't it a simple procedure to evict someone merely by their disturbing of other tenants? with noise and such? Not sure but I would think that would be the easier route to go with 2 or more neighbours making a common complaint.

 

But back to your point.. it wouldn't even need to be proven to be of a sexual nature. Not having a business permit in a residential area is also cause..

 

something smells fishy in this article. The police aren't being helpful and/or saying it's too much work? Are they being paid off.. or horribly misquoted if they're being quoted at all.

[PistolPete 61421]

For a rental unit, I don't believe it's a simple eviction for disturbance. I believe there is a legitimate process a landlord must follow to evict a tenant for any reason. Some reasons may be easier to proceed with; however, all are time consuming to the landlord.

 

Form N-6 Needs to filled out submitted, case heard, then action taken, normally I believe assigned by the courthouse for eviction. On a Ontario Residential Lease, it states on it, the Rental Property is for Residential Living for who ever signed. Therefore if there was something going on that was illegal, and it was pissing off neighbors, the tenant could get the boot.

http://www.ltb.gov.on.ca/stdprodconsume/groups/csc/@ltb/@forms/documents/form/stel02_111569.pdf

[Carrie Moon 68826]

Some very good points about holes in the story.. they don't mention whether the accused massage parlour is run by renters or owners of the condo. If owners.. they would not be able to simply evict them. Upon watching the video it looked like so many low-rent apts that I just assumed they had set up as renters...

 

if owners however.. they would easily be able to go after not only the baudy house charge but living off the avails.. and if renters the owner could also be charged.

 

Megan has a point though.. while in this case they could go this route what if fellow condo owners are disturbed by major partiers in the building. I've only owned houses in the past.. never a condo so I don't know much about it.. but aren't there condo rules that if disobeyed have consequences?

 

The camera person did knock on the door.. but indeed why didn't L.E.? Cops have done that to at least 2 well known providers that I know based on complaints from disgruntled women and in both cases left the providers alone and uncharged. Mind you this was easily 5 or 6 years ago..and policies change.

 

A really incomplete story..

[Andee 220524]

Some very good points about holes in the story.. they don't mention whether the accused massage parlour is run by renters or owners of the condo. If owners.. they would not be able to simply evict them. Upon watching the video it looked like so many low-rent apts that I just assumed they had set up as renters...

 

if owners however.. they would easily be able to go after not only the baudy house charge but living off the avails.. and if renters the owner could also be charged.

 

Megan has a point though.. while in this case they could go this route what if fellow condo owners are disturbed by major partiers in the building. I've only owned houses in the past.. never a condo so I don't know much about it.. but aren't there condo rules that if disobeyed have consequences?

 

The camera person did knock on the door.. but indeed why didn't L.E.? Cops have done that to at least 2 well known providers that I know based on complaints from disgruntled women and in both cases left the providers alone and uncharged. Mind you this was easily 5 or 6 years ago..and policies change.

 

A really incomplete story..

 

Incomplete for sure. Sensationalism sells papers.

 

I know an SP who was approached by an Asian businessman who offered her $100 a day for the use of her apartment if she would vacate it for 12 hours a day from 10 a.m. until 10 p.m.

 

She was offered another location to work out of as an SP. I told her this made no sense. Why didn't he have his girls work out of that location.

 

It's because he wanted a new location. She was thinking of the 3K a month she would get for her apt. I reminded her that we was basically turning her apt. over to organized crime (the girls working there could not speak English and they wanted to install cameras, so I suspect they were being trafficked).

 

I told her that she would be the one facing eviction and criminal charges if anything ever came down. It would be easy for them to vacate (pick up and leave her holding the bag). As well, her housing was a subsidized unit and I told her she shouldn't be messing with her assistance like that. She had waiting a long time to get that apartment.

 

It's obvious they don't like to leave a paper trail, so they tend not to want to sign leases etc. Some will buy houses or condos and rotate girls in and out (be active, stay quiet for awhile and start up again). The goal is to do as much business in a short a time possible without getting busted and move on to the next place.

 

I had to encourage an intervention with some close friends of hers to convince her that having her apt. available only for sleeping was not wise - that it was probably not that simple, that she was biting off more than she could chew.

 

Thank God she didn't go for it, but she had one pissed off businessman and I did fear for her, but luckily nothing happened.

 

From what I hear usually when they operate, they tend to be quiet, but the traffic of patrons in and out usually ends up arousing suspicion.

 

The article suggested they were mostly Chinese, but the description doesn't fit the usual profile. I have a few male friends who frequent in-house Asian MPs and to my knowledge none of them have ever been able to visit 24/7 or have sex on the balcony. quiet

[qwertyaccount 15793]

...condo owner, no you can not evict a home owner from their house...

 

Yes, the board of directors can, in Ontario at least, evict an owner and/or their tenants. It's a pain in the butt, but it can be done.

 

The real problem for condo's are home businesses like day care, with a bunch of kids being dropped off and picked up every day. The running in the halls, screaming & yelling, lots of these kids using the pool and other common elements, etc.

 

Streetwalkers using the parking lots to service their Johns and littering it with used rubbers is yet another problem.

 

A nice escort, who you wouldn't know is an escort, meeting a few well groomed polite guests a day, don't pose a problem.

[Hands95 60]

The real problem for condo's are home businesses like day care, with a bunch of kids being dropped off and picked up every day. The running in the halls, screaming & yelling, lots of these kids using the pool and other common elements, etc.

 

I think this comparison has a lot of merit. Disruption, as previously stated, is what should be dealt with. After that, there should be no judgement on what activity is going on behind closed doors!!

[Guest W***ledi*Time]

CBC News reports, 10 Feb 2011:

 

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2011/02/10/toronto-massage-condo.html

Toronto police say they have made a number of arrests at a Toronto condominium where residents complained to CBC News that an illegal massage parlour was operating.

 

Residents at 4091 Sheppard Avenue East complained to CBC News last month that an apartment in their building was being used for sex trade work for the past 10 years. They said their complaints were ignored.

 

In just a matter of weeks

police have arrested six people at the condo and seized $20,000 in cash from one apartment

.

 

Staff-Sgt. Dave Rydzik says police are patrolling the area more often.

 

"Sometimes we use undercover officers that will obviously pose as customers and once they're invited in they can conduct their investigation," said Rydzik.

 

Police forces across the GTA say they're seeing more and more illegal massage parlours popping up in residential buildings. Finding them and shutting them down is difficult, according to police.

 

Horst Kroll, a longtime resident of the condominium says he's received lots of compliments for leading the campaign to get rid of the massage parlours.

 

He says his neighbours say, "'You've done a really good job.' I have a lot of people helping me right now."

 

But Kroll, 74, says the management of his condo still hasn't taken action.

 

However, in an e-mail to CBC News a spokesperson for the building management says they are taking the situation very seriously and are considering making amendments to their condo rules.

 

Rydzik says there are hundreds of similar massage parlours across the city but police need proof and warrants before they can lay a charge.

[Carrie Moon 68826]

Good! It's operations like this that give the rest of us a bad name.