Privacy violations

[HappyMomma]

My ex has made repeated attempts to gain access to my personal information.

Examples:
He requested statements from my personal bank account then emailed demanding I provide consent when the bank refused to hand them over (they actually printed them for him - they just wouldn't hand them over! Insane!).

He went to a different bank and asked them to verify that statements I provided him were valid. When they refused he requested that I provide consent.

He's called my RRSP provider multiple times asking for information on my account.

A few years ago he also went to my place of employment and spoke to my HR manager.

What I want to know is - is there anything I can legally do to try to stop him from attempting to access my personal information (even though, so far, he's been unsuccessful).

Thanks!!!!

[standing on the sidelines]

what are his reasons for wanting the information?

[arabian]

Perhaps you can look into getting a restraining order. Restraining orders are used in civil litigation as well as family law. I'm not sure of how you would have it worded. Perhaps someone else on this forum would have some ideas.

Would you be self represented or do you have legal representation?

[Tayken]

Perhaps you can look into getting a restraining order. Restraining orders are used in civil litigation as well as family law. I'm not sure of how you would have it worded. Perhaps someone else on this forum would have some ideas.

Would you be self represented or do you have legal representation?

A restraining order from calling financial institutes?

The advice to contact your financial institutes is the most wise. They are obligated under the law to protect your personal information.

My recommendation would be to move your financials (if possible) to an other institute or in the alternative provide written instruction, to be added to your client record, that no information regarding your financials or personal information should be disclosed without your written consent.

That way when anyone at the bank does a look up your information a warning notice will pop on their screen. Royal Bank, CIBC, TD, BMO all have this capability to note their client records in this manner.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[arabian]

Actually yes you can get a restraining order. You certainly can have an order that he not attend your place of employment for one thing. If you are forthcoming in your providing him with annual financial disclosure (assuming this is part of your divorce/separation agreement) you can get instruction from the court about when, where he receives annual financial information. Then you simply give that order to anyone you have financial dealings with.

Banks won't give the information out to him (or at least they shouldn't) without you signing a consent form. It's up to you to decide if his actions justify taking things to another level.

[Tayken]

Actually yes you can get a restraining order.

Yes, you can get a restraining order from a person. But, you can't get a restraining order against a bank and the conduct of that person at a bank. How would the bank be notified that they are "restrained" from providing financial disclosure. Furthermore, it shouldn't be necessary to get a "restraining order" as the bank's conduct is governed by a federal Act.

How would the bank know about and enforce the restraining order? How would the court serve the restraining order against all the banks and bank employees?

Fundamentally, the restraining order is between two people. Not a person and an institute. Generally, they don't restrain people from general public locations and limit them to known locations like an employer.

It is better to alert the bank of their obligations to protect their client's confidentiality.

You certainly can have an order that he not attend your place of employment for one thing.

That is because it is a "known" location where the person for whom you are restrained from is probably and likely going to be. Do you understand the difference in the advice you have provided?

If you are forthcoming in your providing him with annual financial disclosure (assuming this is part of your divorce/separation agreement) you can get instruction from the court about when, where he receives annual financial information. Then you simply give that order to anyone you have financial dealings with.

Generally, the financial organization shouldn't need this because they are bound by law to not disclose their client's information without a court order.

This is what happens when the banks don't conduct themselves properly even when there is a divorce:

Landry v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2011 FC 687 (CanLII)
Date: 2011-06-14
Docket: T-245-10
URL: CanLII - 2011 FC 687 (CanLII)
Citation: Landry v. Royal Bank of Canada, 2011 FC 687 (CanLII)

Paragraph 32: "... Consequently, we fix an amount of $4,500 with interest and costs to be paid to the applicant by the respondent."

In this matter a person going through a divorce had RBC employees provide improper disclosure of their financial documentation. This person (applicant) filed a complaint and the respondent (RBC) was ordered to pay $4,500 to the applicant. Give it a read.

Banks won't give the information out to him (or at least they shouldn't) without you signing a consent form. It's up to you to decide if his actions justify taking things to another level.

Well, it does happen and the OP is wise to be concerned and notify the banks of their obligations under the law. See the case law I provided in this message as a "case on point".

Good Luck!
Tayken

[arabian]

Tayken you have your opinion and I have mine. As a business owner for over 30 yrs I am very much aware that, for example, I fire an individual I can request a restraining order for that individual to not enter any of my business locations. If a restraining order was placed on her ex and he went into any bank location requesting information on her the restraining order would come up on the terminal. Security and/or the police would be called.

Protestors are issued restraining orders.

Sometimes all it takes is for a judge to give the offender a "warning."

I will not debate this with you Tayken. I was merely offering a suggestion. Why do you always try to one-up everyone on here? Give it a rest already. I am very tired of your antics.

[Mess]

As a business owner for over 30 yrs I am very much aware that, for example, I fire an individual I can request a restraining order for that individual to not enter any of my business locations. If a restraining order was placed on her ex and he went into any bank location requesting information on her the restraining order would come up on the terminal. Security and/or the police would be called.

Protestors are issued restraining orders....

You are incorrect and giving bad information. You are confusing two very separate things.

Restraining orders are issued in family court and can only be made to immediate family members in a household. You cannot, for example, get a restraining order against your ex's sister who lives elsewhere.

Peace bonds are the equivalent for non-family matters. They are issued usually by a justice of the peace after swearing that you feel threatened. Peace bonds and restraining orders are different legislation and issued by different courts and have different consequences.

Whether or not you have been a business owner for 30 years, you may not get a restraining order against an employee unless they are your spouse.

[arabian]

Restraining orders are not exclusive to family court.

[Tayken]

Tayken you have your opinion and I have mine. As a business owner for over 30 yrs I am very much aware that, for example, I fire an individual I can request a restraining order for that individual to not enter any of my business locations.

You are restraining the person not the location. Also, you have to have cause to get a restraining order. I am sure, if you have been in business for 30 years you know that the other party to the restraining ***ORDER*** has a right to defend themselves against your claim.

If a restraining order was placed on her ex and he went into any bank location requesting information on her the restraining order would come up on the terminal. Security and/or the police would be called.

Good luck serving that "restraining order". I am highly doubtful that any justice would order such a restraining order as the banks are already *restrained* by Federal law and there are ways to recover the damages when they fail to follow the law. (See my case on point.)

Protestors are issued restraining orders.

Not sure about that. As you didn't provide any examples to backup your statement. You could be correct but, I don't profess to be as knowledgeable as you with your 30 years of business experience.

My understanding is that if an area is targetted for an non-peaceful protest that the area is *restrained* by order that no persons can gather there. They are blanket orders and usually an extension of local by-laws for loitering.

I will not debate this with you Tayken. I was merely offering a suggestion. Why do you always try to one-up everyone on here? Give it a rest already. I am very tired of your antics.

But, Arabian, you are by responding to my messages? I always find it funny when you throw this statement out and then continue to debate a topic.

I was simply exploring your suggestion and applicability under law. You take offence to this fact?

Furthermore, I am not trying to "one-up" anyone on this forum. I am offering advice. When I offer advice I base it on knowledge and other sources of knowledge. I often provide links to this knowledge to support my advice.

I am sorry you are "tired" of my "antics". I guess giving good advice that is backed up with case law and other materials is not valuable to you? But, it may be valuable to the original poster.

You can also add me to your "ignore" list if my advice offends you.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[Mess]

Restraining orders are not exclusive to family court.

Just because you say so?

Ontario Women's Justice Network - Protection Orders

[Mess]

If a restraining order was placed on her ex and he went into any bank location requesting information on her the restraining order would come up on the terminal. Security and/or the police would be called.

The order can only be made on one who is party to the court matter. That means that there can only be order made on the other party, an order cannot be made to make a bank do anything unless the bank one of the parties at trial.

[Exquizique]

You are incorrect and giving bad information. You are confusing two very separate things.

Agreed. There's a big difference between FACTS and OPINIONS. It's fine to provide opinions but positioning them as facts when that isn't the case is just plain irresponsible. I hate to see people being misinformed or steered the wrong way especially on legal matters and details that could have adverse consequences on people.

This forum is a great resource for many, but it would be even better if members provide FACT-based advice instead of opinion-/emotion-based advice. My favourite posters on this board have no qualms being liberal with their opinions, but they are responsible enough to know that when they provide advice, they are careful to ensure that it is based on actual objective facts rather than just their opinions.

[Tayken]

The order can only be made on one who is party to the court matter. That means that there can only be order made on the other party, an order cannot be made to make a bank do anything unless the bank one of the parties at trial.

Bingo. That is a concept that many people do not understand. For example, you can't file a contempt motion against a daycare for not abiding by your court order as an example. The daycare (and workers) are not, what is known in the legal community, a "party to the case" or a "party to the agreement".

You can motion to have the bank added to the matter as a party to the case, but they will come with their own lawyer and seeking costs on the party seeking to add them to the matter. They will also come and "vigorously defend" themselves in the matter of the litigation if they are joined to it by order. They will also come with more money than either parent has and they will be coming to seek costs against the party that drew them in up-front.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[Tayken]

Agreed. There's a big difference between FACTS and OPINIONS. It's fine to provide opinions but positioning them as facts when that isn't the case is just plain irresponsible. I hate to see people being misinformed or steered the wrong way especially on legal matters and details that could have adverse consequences on people.

This forum is a great resource for many, but it would be even better if members provide FACT-based advice instead of opinion-/emotion-based advice. My favourite posters on this board have no qualms being liberal with their opinions, but they are responsible enough to know that when they provide advice, they are careful to ensure that it is based on actual objective facts rather than just their opinions.

Exquizique, as always, I am waiting for you to post some interesting case law to review. You seem to catch the most interesting cases that for some reason I miss in the RSS feeds published by CanLII.

Hope all is well with you.

Good Luck!
Tayken