← Back to catalogue/Federal (Canada)Discontinued Case Summary #2015-001
Federal (Canada)Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents ActDiscontinued

Discontinued Case Summary #2015-001: Real estate management company responds fairly and reasonably to surveillance camera concerns

Organization: A real estate management companyComplainant: Anonymous applicant
Plain-language brief

An individual complained that a real estate management company collected his personal information without consent through surveillance cameras. He alleged inadequate signage and over-collection when a camera was focused on him after a dispute about his service dog. The company responded by posting new, clearer signage about video surveillance at all entrances, including the one previously lacking. They also addressed the over-collection concern by explaining that a new security guard had mistakenly focused the camera, and provided additional training to staff regarding service animals. The OPC found the company's response to be fair and reasonable, addressing the complainant's concerns proactively. Consequently, the investigation was discontinued.

Key issues
  1. 1Whether the organization collected personal information without adequate signage for video surveillance
  2. 2Whether the organization over-collected personal information by focusing a camera on the complainant
  3. 3Whether the organization's response to the concerns was fair and reasonable under paragraph 12.2(1)(c) of PIPEDA
Outcome breakdownFavours: Institution
  • Collection without consent: Complaint resolved by institution's actions
  • Inadequate signage: Complaint resolved by institution's actions
  • Over-collection of personal information: Complaint resolved by institution's actions
  • Investigation status: Investigation discontinued
Outcome

Investigation discontinued

Reasoning

The OPC discontinued the investigation because the organization took proactive and satisfactory measures to address the complainant's concerns, including improving signage and providing staff training, which was deemed a fair and reasonable response under PIPEDA.

AI-generated summary for reference only. Always verify against the official decision ↗
Decision notes
Statutes considered
  • paragraph 12.2(1)(c) PIPEDA

This summary is informational only and not legal advice.

Pro · AI

Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.

Pro
Coverage — 13 of 14 jurisdictions searchable

Fully searchable: Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, New Brunswick, Manitoba.

Partial (recent decisions only): Federal (Canada) (651 of 1,631), Nova Scotia (49 of 472), Quebec (6 of 7,090), Prince Edward Island (2 of 279), Yukon (1 of 75).

Coming soon: Nunavut — being re-processed for AI search.

Find decisions like this one — by meaning, not keywords.

Related by meaning is a Pro feature. Upgrade to surface conceptually similar decisions across the corpus, powered by AI.

Upgrade to Pro