Does silence after a rent increase notice mean I have accepted the new rent?

### Notice period Section 116(1) states that a landlord “shall not increase the rent charged to a tenant for a rental unit without first giving the tenant at least 90 days written notice of the landlord’s intention to do so” [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116]. Section 116(3) also requires the notice to use the form approved by the Board and state the intended increase and the new rent [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116]. March 4, 2026 was 89 days before June 1, 2026. Therefore, if the notice was served in a legally effective manner, complied with the required form, and no statutory exception applies, it did not provide the required 90 days’ notice for a June 1 increase [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116]. The question does not establish the method or date of service, the notice’s form, or whether an exception applies, so the final legal result remains conditional on those facts. The supplied section then states: “An increase in rent is void if the landlord has not given the notice required by this section, and the landlord must give a new notice before the landlord can take the increase” [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116]. Accordingly, on the assumed facts, the landlord cannot use the March 4 notice to establish $1,780 as the rent beginning June 1 and must give a new notice before taking an increase [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116]. ### Effect of your silence Section 118 applies to a tenant who does not give a landlord notice of termination of a tenancy under section 47 after receiving notice of an intended rent increase. It deems the tenant to have accepted “whatever rent increase would be allowed under this Act” [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec118]. The wording does not deem acceptance of the amount merely stated by the landlord [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec118]. Thus, if you did not give notice of termination under section 47, your silence may have triggered the deemed-acceptance rule, but that rule cannot itself make an otherwise unlawful increase permissible [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec118]. If you did give notice of termination, section 118’s deemed-acceptance rule would not apply on the stated facts [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec118]. Your March 12 text asking whether the increase had gone ahead does not, by itself, establish either that the increase was accepted or that notice of termination was given [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec118]. ### Highest amount the landlord may charge The supplied sections do not state Ontario’s 2026 annual rent-increase guideline or fully identify the exceptions and calculation governing Hamilton. For that reason, they do not permit a reliable calculation of the exact maximum rent for a properly noticed 2026 increase. Whether $1,780 would be lawful under a corrected notice therefore cannot be concluded from the provided material. The question also does not establish whether a qualifying capital-expenditure or additional-service agreement exists under section 121 [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec121]. If the landlord gives a new notice that satisfies the Act, the amount charged must fall within the rent increase then allowed under the Act [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec118]. The landlord’s proposed $1,780 would not become collectible merely because it appeared in defective notice or because of your silence [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116] [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec118]. If no new compliant notice is given and no other legal basis for charging an increase applies, the current rent would remain $1,650 [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116]. That conclusion depends on the service, form, tenancy coverage, lease terms, and any applicable exception being as assumed [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116]. ### Payments and possible later consequences Payment of an increased rent can have an important consequence. The supplied provision states: “An increase in rent that would otherwise be void under subsection 116 (4) is deemed not to be void if the tenant has paid the increased rent in respect of each rental period for at least 12 consecutive months” [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec135p1]. However, that deeming rule does not apply if the tenant has, within one year after the increase was first charged, made an application in which the validity of the increase is in issue [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec135p1]. Accordingly, paying $1,780 without a timely reservation or application could create a serious risk that the increase will be treated as valid after 12 consecutive rental periods [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec135p1]. ### Other legal and procedural rules The supplied sections do not resolve every issue involving notice form and service, tenancy start date, prior rent history, lease terms, rent calculation, Landlord and Tenant Board procedure, or the procedure for disputing an increase. Provincial or local law may add further rules; check Ontario’s current rent-increase guideline and prescribed forms, applicable municipal rules, and Landlord and Tenant Board procedure, and obtain case-specific advice before withholding or paying a disputed amount [cite:ca-ontario-rta-2006-sec116].