the way he describes it is like this...tersely...

- tenant says he's moving himself in. just him.
- they sign.
- tenant indicates he's moving his mom in, too.
- gatekeeper says no. none shall pass.
- gatekeeper offers back deposit
- tenant refuses.

now, i need to get some more information, obviously. there's a lease. sure. but, the gatekeeper has some rights, as well. the gatekeeper can't really tear up the lease, but it can refuse entry to the mom, and then immediately evict if she goes in anyways. and, then what? does the tenant want an eviction notice on day one? i think there's a certain grey area that this falls in, where the tenant is insisting on unacceptable terms, before they move in.

again: if the tenant had already moved in, it would be very, very different. but, as it is, the best argument that the tenant has is costs related to temporary housing. remember: a body like the landlord & tenant board can only award concrete costs. it can't award psychological damages, or something. he'd have to go to the human rights board, for that.

and, see, i do suspect that the gatekeeper may unfortunately have a case he has to fight. but, he'll probably win it, so long as he gives back the deposit. that's the only concrete cost, here.

to force a landlord to rent to a tenant under these circumstances would clearly be toxic. it won't happen. so, the unit is open. and, that's my primary consideration - even if i have to help the guy win a court battle, that he's going to have to fight anyways.