Canadian Privacy Decisions

An individual complained that her telecommunications provider disclosed her personal information without consent when a technical support representative remotely accessed her computer to fix an email issue. The representative inadvertently set up an automatic email forwarding to an acquaintance's address, causing personal emails, including a temporary password, to be sent to the wrong recipient. While the provider implemented corrective measures, the OPC noted the provider initially misrepresented steps taken to address the issue.

• Disclosure of personal information without consent
• Accuracy of representations made to the OPC
• Adequacy of internal procedures and training

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada investigated Peoples Trust after a breach compromised the sensitive personal information of 12,000 customers. The investigation found that the financial institution failed to implement adequate safeguards in its online application portal and retained customer data unnecessarily on a vulnerable, unencrypted web server. These failures contravened PIPEDA's principles regarding safeguards and data retention. Following the breach, Peoples Trust took comprehensive remedial actions, including redesigning its portal, enhancing monitoring, and improving retention practices, which resolved the issues.

• Adequacy of information security safeguards for sensitive personal data.
• Unnecessary retention of personal information beyond required purposes.
• Vulnerabilities in web application portal development and maintenance.
• Effectiveness of breach response and risk mitigation measures.

This report details an investigation into the loss of a USB key containing the personal information of 5,045 Canada Pension Plan Disability appellants. The investigation found that both Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and Justice Canada failed to adequately translate their privacy and security policies into practice, leading to weaknesses in physical, technological, administrative, and personnel controls. Both departments accepted nine recommendations to improve data protection, many of which were similar to those made in a previous investigation involving ESDC.

• Adequacy of physical, technological, administrative, and personnel security controls
• Failure to translate privacy and security policies into meaningful business practices
• Protection of sensitive personal information including SIN and medical details
• Custody and storage of portable electronic devices containing personal information

An individual complained that a videographer hired to record her wedding shared her personal information without consent by posting the wedding video online for business promotion. The OPC found that using the video for promotional purposes was a commercial activity requiring consent, which the videographer had not obtained. Although the videographer initially disputed this, they eventually removed the video and agreed to include consent provisions in future contracts, leading to the complaint being resolved.

• Was the use of the wedding video for promotional purposes considered a commercial activity under PIPEDA?
• Did the videographer obtain the complainant's informed consent for the use of her personal information?
• Did any exemptions under PIPEDA apply to the videographer's use of the video without consent?

An individual complained that an online dating service used his personal information without consent and failed to provide him access to his information after he cancelled his membership. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) found that the original owner violated PIPEDA by denying the complainant access to his personal information and by continuing to send him marketing emails after consent was withdrawn. The OPC also found the service failed to have a privacy policy and safeguard information. While issues were found to be well-founded, they were resolved by the new owner who purged the data and implemented a privacy policy.

• Access to personal information
• Withdrawal of consent for marketing emails
• Retention of personal information
• Safeguarding of personal information

An individual complained that a legal firm failed to respond to his requests for estate information, in which he claimed beneficiary status. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) found that the firm contravened PIPEDA by not responding within the 30-day time limit. However, the OPC also determined that the individual was only entitled to access his own personal information, not general estate information, and that the firm had conducted a reasonable search for any such information. The complaint was ultimately found to be well-founded and resolved.

• Individual's right to access general estate information as a beneficiary versus personal information.
• Organization's obligation to respond to an access request within 30 days, even if no responsive information is held.
• Determining what constitutes an individual's 'personal information' under PIPEDA in the context of estate administration.

Three individuals complained after discovering their sensitive dating profiles, posted on PositiveSingles.com, appeared on nearly 60 other affiliated dating websites without their knowledge or consent. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada found that while the profiles remained within the company's controlled network, users were not adequately informed about this practice. Furthermore, inadequate safeguards allowed some personal information to be accessed by non-members. The organization revamped its website to provide clearer disclosures about profile sharing and its network structure, and improved its security measures.

• Adequacy of consent for the use and disclosure of personal information across affiliated websites.
• Whether users were adequately informed about the company's network structure and profile sharing practices.
• Sufficiency of security safeguards to prevent unauthorized access to personal information.
• Transparency of privacy policies and practices regarding data management.

The OPC investigated a complaint alleging Apple used and shared a user's unique device identifier (UDID) without knowledge or consent for tracking and targeted advertising. While Apple initially argued UDID was not personal information, the OPC found it was, especially given Apple's ability to link it to account details. The OPC determined Apple's privacy policy lacked clarity on UDID use for advertising, though its administrative uses were acceptable. Apple has since ceased using UDID for advertising, replacing it with Ad ID, and enhanced opt-out mechanisms for Ad ID, leading the OPC to find the complaint well-founded and resolved.

• Whether UDID and Ad ID constitute personal information under PIPEDA.
• Whether Apple obtained meaningful consent for the collection, use, and disclosure of UDID and Ad ID for advertising purposes.
• Adequacy of notice provided by Apple regarding its use of UDID and Ad ID.
• Apple's responsibility for disclosures of UDID and Ad ID to third-party app developers.

A bank customer complained that the bank improperly demanded to record information from his driver's license when picking up a replacement credit card. The bank initially claimed this was for anti-money laundering purposes, but later admitted this explanation was incorrect. The Office found the demand for information was not well-founded as no information was actually collected. However, the bank contravened PIPEDA by misinforming the customer about the purpose of the collection, a contravention that was resolved by revised bank procedures and staff training.

• Whether the bank limited the collection of personal information to what was necessary.
• Whether the bank's employees could explain the purposes for collecting personal information.

A customer complained that his cell phone service provider disclosed his personal information to an imposter and inadequately responded to his request for access to his data. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (OPC) found that the provider contravened PIPEDA by allowing an employee to disclose sensitive account details without proper authentication. The OPC also found that the provider initially failed to meet the 30-day deadline for responding to the customer's access request, but this aspect was later resolved. The OPC recommended the company review its privacy management programs.

• Disclosure of personal information without consent
• Failure to properly authenticate a caller
• Adequacy and timeliness of response to access request
• Effectiveness of employee training and adherence to procedures

A complainant alleged that a telecommunications firm failed to provide her with access to her personal information, specifically notes and transcripts of recorded conversations relating to her account dispute. The investigation found that the firm failed to respond to the access request within the statutory time limits and deleted records that were the subject of the request, contravening PIPEDA. The firm accepted recommendations to amend its policies, procedures, and provide enhanced training to staff, leading to the resolution of the complaint.

• Timeliness of response to access requests
• Retention of personal information subject to an access request
• Adequacy of privacy policies and staff training

A married couple complained that a bank mortgage specialist disclosed the husband's personal financial information to his wife without his consent. The bank argued there was implied consent given the purpose of applying for a joint mortgage. The Assistant Commissioner found the bank did not make a reasonable effort to inform the couple about potential disclosures between them, meaning consent was not meaningful. While a contravention was found, the bank had since adopted reasonable practices.

• Meaningful consent for disclosure of personal information to a spouse
• Reasonable efforts to inform individuals about purposes of disclosure
• Implied consent in the context of joint mortgage applications

CIPPIC filed a complaint alleging 24 violations of PIPEDA by Facebook across 12 subjects, focusing on knowledge and consent. The Assistant Privacy Commissioner found Facebook contravened the Act in areas such as default privacy settings, advertising, third-party applications, account deactivation/deletion, deceased users' accounts, and non-users' personal information. While some allegations were resolved through Facebook's proposed corrective measures, others remained unresolved, particularly concerning third-party applications and the safeguarding of user data.

• Adequacy of notice and consent for collection, use, and disclosure of personal information.
• Sufficiency of security safeguards for personal information.
• Transparency regarding new uses of personal information and the implications of privacy settings.
• Handling of personal information of non-users and deceased users.

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada investigated two separate incidents involving misdirected faxes containing personal information at two banks. In both cases, the banks failed to adequately safeguard personal information, leading to its disclosure to unintended recipients. While both banks took corrective actions, including revising policies and procedures, the OPC recommended further improvements in customer notification and information recovery.

• Adequacy of safeguards for personal information transmitted by fax
• Effectiveness of privacy policies and employee awareness
• Timeliness and scope of customer notification following a privacy breach
• Procedures for recovering erroneously transmitted personal information

This report details an investigation into CIBC's handling of misdirected faxes containing customer personal information, which occurred between 2001 and 2004. The investigation found that CIBC's privacy practices failed to adequately address these incidents, resulting in breaches of customer data and trust. The bank has since implemented significant remedial measures to enhance its privacy safeguards.

• Adequacy of CIBC's privacy policies and procedures
• Effectiveness of CIBC's response to misdirected fax incidents
• Timeliness and appropriateness of customer notification following a privacy breach
• Organizational awareness and adherence to privacy obligations