
Criminal background check on tenant
A woman complained that two RCMP employee landlords performed a criminal background check on her using the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) database when she applied to rent a basement apartment. The landlords requested personal identification to "look into" prospective tenants. An internal RCMP investigation confirmed that one officer accessed CPIC for personal reasons, citing the applicant being from "out of town" and concerns for officer safety and organizational security. The OPC found that the CPIC database contains personal information and its use is restricted to legitimate law enforcement purposes. The investigation concluded that the officer's access was for personal reasons, not authorized operational purposes. The complaint was found to be well-founded, and the RCMP took remedial actions including an apology to the complainant and a communiqué to employees regarding CPIC use policies.
- 1Whether the CPIC database contains personal information under the Privacy Act
- 2Whether the RCMP officer accessed the CPIC database for personal reasons
- 3Whether the access to the CPIC database was for an authorized operational purpose
- CPIC access for personal reasons: Access for personal reasons confirmed
- Violation of CPIC use policy: Violation of policy confirmed
- Complaint outcome: Complaint well-founded
- Remedial actions: Remedial actions taken by institution
Complaint well-founded and resolved
The OPC found that the RCMP officer accessed the CPIC database for personal reasons, not for authorized operational purposes, constituting a contravention of the Privacy Act. The RCMP subsequently took satisfactory remedial actions.
The RCMP was informed that the complaint was well-founded and subsequently took remedial actions including making the officer aware of the gravity of the situation, apologizing in writing to the complainant, and issuing a communiqué reminding all employees of CPIC use policies.
This summary is informational only and not legal advice.
Related by meaning
Decisions with similar reasoning and facts — found by AI across statutes and jurisdictions, not just keywords.
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