dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
21
share rss forum feed


andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1
reply to oh LOOK

Re: SaskTel Under Privacy Investigation

Asking for the SIN number is normal.Anything else is not.They use the SIN to see your credit history and check to see if you are going to pay or not


um no

@videotron.ca
said by andyb:

Asking for the SIN number is normal.Anything else is not.They use the SIN to see your credit history and check to see if you are going to pay or not

I never had to give SIN to bell or Videotron. Ever.

Only one place ever asked for it in my life (aside from bank etc) Hydro Quebec.

Maybe Bell asks for it if you are doing something on credit? No clue. But I'd never give it anyhow for services like net or phone.


LookThis Ovr

@videotron.ca
reply to andyb
@Andy
»www.priv.gc.ca/resource/topic-su···ex_e.asp

You know, you do have a right to flatly refuse to give your SIN. Or health card number, or student ID number (in Bell's case), or Driver Lic.


andyb
Premium
join:2003-05-29
SW Ontario
kudos:1
Yes you have the right to refuse as does bell or whoever have the right to refuse service for your cellphone plan or whatever because you refused to show SIN card.Its called a credit check and done everywhere...BUT in ONT it is illegal to ask for a healthcard number.Even different gov departments except for MOT are not allowed to ask for it.


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
said by andyb:

BUT in ONT it is illegal to ask for a healthcard number.Even different gov departments except for MOT are not allowed to ask for it.

But you may freely offer it, even at ServiceOntario offices.
--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


um no

@videotron.ca
reply to andyb
said by andyb:

Yes you have the right to refuse as does bell or whoever have the right to refuse service for your cellphone plan or whatever because you refused to show SIN card.

No. Service can't be denied because of it. Maybe if there is some big ticket item you are buying on credit or something that requires it. Otherwise, no.

Service can't be denied. Do you see the resellers asking for it (Ebox excluded).

Even when Cogeco was asking for it, and denying services to some people Cogeco then came out, back-peddled, and said no services will be denied if you don't give SIN. They stated this in the forums here.

SIN is not an ID card. Which is what these companies are doing. Nor should the be storing this info.

Link is there for you to see.

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to andyb
said by andyb:

Asking for the SIN number is normal.Anything else is not.They use the SIN to see your credit history and check to see if you are going to pay or not

The ONLY organizations who have a legal right to require your SIN are CRA and HDRC.


indeedy

@videotron.ca
said by MaynardKrebs:

The ONLY organizations who have a legal right to require your SIN are CRA and HDRC.

And Hydro-Quebec if you live in Quebec.
Though you can decline to give it to Hydro-Quebec, this is one of the only instances where there could be repercussions. Such as no electricity services.

peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON
reply to MaynardKrebs
said by MaynardKrebs:

The ONLY organizations who have a legal right to require your SIN are CRA and HDRC.

Plus banks.


BGB
Wants moar interwebz
Premium
join:2009-07-09
Waterloo, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
said by peterboro:

said by MaynardKrebs:

The ONLY organizations who have a legal right to require your SIN are CRA and HDRC.

Plus banks.

Plus employers you work for for taxation purposes....


dillyhammer
START me up
Premium
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..
reply to peterboro
said by peterboro:

said by MaynardKrebs:

The ONLY organizations who have a legal right to require your SIN are CRA and HDRC.

Plus banks.

Wrong.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Cogeco UBB, No Modem Required - »[Niagara] 40gb of "usage" while the modem is unplugged

peterboro
Avatars are for posers
Premium
join:2006-11-03
Peterborough, ON
said by dillyhammer:

said by peterboro:

said by MaynardKrebs:

The ONLY organizations who have a legal right to require your SIN are CRA and HDRC.

Plus banks.

Wrong. Mike

Right. Sat in the bank manager's office and argued I didn't.

Manager called head office who emailed a link to the legislation. No SIN, no account.


DKS
Damn Kidney Stones
Premium,ExMod 2002
join:2001-03-22
Owen Sound, ON
kudos:2
said by peterboro:

Right. Sat in the bank manager's office and argued I didn't.

Manager called head office who emailed a link to the legislation. No SIN, no account.

Indeed. They can have your SIN for Canada Revenue purposes.

»www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs···eng.html

quote:
Your SIN is the authorized number for income tax purposes under section 237 of the Income Tax Act and is used under certain federal programs. You have to give it to anyone who prepares information slips (such as a T3, T4, or T5 slip) for you. Each time you do not give it when you are supposed to, you may have to pay a $100 penalty. Check your slips. If your SIN is missing or is incorrect, advise the slip preparer. You also have to give it to us when you ask us for personal tax information.

Your SIN card is not a piece of identification, and it should be kept in a safe place. For more information, or to get an application for a SIN, contact Service Canada.

--
Need-based health care not greed-based health care.


dillyhammer
START me up
Premium
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..
reply to peterboro
said by peterboro:

Right. Sat in the bank manager's office and argued I didn't.

Manager called head office who emailed a link to the legislation. No SIN, no account.

I stand corrected.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Cogeco UBB, No Modem Required - »[Niagara] 40gb of "usage" while the modem is unplugged


El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
said by dillyhammer:

I stand corrected.

Mike

Seeing as I work for a bank, it's part of KYC (know your customer) which is a small portion of AML (anti-money laundering) and also this policy was standard accross TD, Citi and my current employer.

Pretty much what this accomplishes is that if your Bank account is used at any point in money laundering activites they have to confirm with legal authorities that you have been properly identified as the account owner, and that you are who you say you are.

I'm not sure if these policies existed before 9/11, because I didn't work in finance at the time, but you probably could have made the case that you didn't want to give them your SIN until you applied for a loan, at which point you would have had to give it to them.
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have


neochu

join:2008-12-12
Windsor, ON
reply to DKS
said by DKS:

Indeed. They can have your SIN for Canada Revenue purposes.

»www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/ndvdls/tpcs···eng.html

quote:
Your SIN is the authorized number for income tax purposes under section 237 of the Income Tax Act and is used under certain federal programs. You have to give it to anyone who prepares information slips (such as a T3, T4, or T5 slip) for you. Each time you do not give it when you are supposed to, you may have to pay a $100 penalty. Check your slips. If your SIN is missing or is incorrect, advise the slip preparer. You also have to give it to us when you ask us for personal tax information.

Your SIN card is not a piece of identification, and it should be kept in a safe place. For more information, or to get an application for a SIN, contact Service Canada.

If you read the report the SIN is legitimate to use when starting a buisness and or post billed service (credit) relationship to verify the personage, but its not legal to make it the only identification unless dealing with the primary provider only -- Revenue Canada (it remains optional for everyone else.)

its just a matter of laziness and 3rd parties that refuse anything else until they are all complained against. Since everything is outsourced of course, you rely on your 3rd party to tell you what is legal or not and to do the background research for you. That and having your own privacy legal team as required by law can be severely expensive.

Naturally the privacy commissioner can't go after the third parties people (since their only activated when a customer complains about a direct interaction) so its the primary service provider that gets it.:rolleyes:

(since most people don't know or have any direct relationship with the aggregates, privacy commissioner can't do anything.)

Reccomendation 114 and recommendation 92 in that report is always the kicker with every single telco operator thanks to mass production in the call centre Environment. Without the solid source you start asking for really really weird questions that get very intrusive. Forcing every service contract to wait 48 or more hours for approval of service will put you out of buisness so its part of the buisness to verify instantly, in whatever means possible.

The Telco/store/employer/merchant/bank for instant gratification uses some third party provider who themselves refuses anything but such information for their aggregation. The chain of command from then on makes the third party's practices the company's practices though hard-coded processes.

Even up to those in PR who are as hard-coded as the CSR robots on the phone. (hence the Cogeco issue mentioned)

(see 'Express Address' on Pg 41 and 42. I bet thats whom Sasktel uses for identity verification. Hence why their mentioned)

That, outdated CRM software that forces them into archaic methods (because their too cheap to do it properly like 90% of IT out there), zero tolerance scripting on everything, and mass production cause these kinds of issues.

Its probably cheaper for Sasktel to pay the modest fine they'll get then to implement the training runs outside of their outsourcing.

Though change the third party and you will see these things stop dead flat within 3 months.

Like everyone you will see the process change to reflect more legal means once the verification methods (forced) into doing the checking via primary sources in-house, or through an aggregator that does.