Home » Featured Posts
Category Archives: Featured Posts
Canadian PIPEDA Laws
Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act or PIPEDA for short
A Guide For Businesses & Organizations
Complying with the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act
In Canada, we are protected by two federal privacy laws. The Privacy Act covers the personal information-handling practices of the federal government and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) is Canada’s new private sector privacy law, which came fully into effect on January 1, 2004. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada is here to help provide information and guidance to businesses across Canada as they gear up for the implementation of PIPEDA.
Good privacy is good business
In an increasingly competitive marketplace, businesses rely on personal information to identify and stay in touch with their customers. They use it to seek out new customers who might be interested in their products. They want to find out what the market is looking for and what it will bear. And they want information about their employees, so that they can administer benefits and ensure a safe and productive workplace.
Obtaining and using that personal information in ways that don’t offend the fundamental human right of privacy is the challenge for modern businesses.
Respecting and protecting privacy is a key element of good customer relations — and that makes it a key element of competitive advantage. Your customers want privacy, your employees need it and your competitors are going to provide it.
It’s not an abstract legal concept. It’s simple consideration, respect and courtesy — the essence of a good relationship with your customers and employees. Showing respect for privacy is part of showing respect for your customer, and respecting your customer is the cornerstone of a strong customer relationship.
PIPEDA in brief
PIPEDA sets out ground rules for how private sector organizations can collect, use or disclose personal information in the course of commercial activities. It balances an individual’s right to privacy with the need of organizations to collect, use or disclose personal information for legitimate business purposes.
PIPEDA has been coming into effect in stages. As of January 2001, the Act has applied to personal information about customers or employees in the federally-regulated sector in the course of commercial activities. It also applies to information sold across provincial and territorial boundaries. As of January 2002, the Act has also applied to personal health information collected, used or disclosed by these organizations.
Since January 1, 2004, PIPEDA applies right across the board — to all personal information collected, used or disclosed in the course of commercial activities by all private sector organizations, except provinces which have, by then, enacted legislation that is deemed to be substantially similar to the federal law. To date, Quebec, British-Columbia, Alberta, and, in matters relating to health care, Ontario, New Brunswick and Newfoundland and Labrador, have promulgated legislation deemed substantially similar to the federal law.
Although the application of the Act expanded in 2004 to commercial activities that normally fall under provincial jurisdiction, it does not extend to employment in those activities. The only place PIPEDA applies to employment is in federal works, undertakings, or businesses. This means that if you are operating a federal work, undertaking or business — PIPEDA applies to your employment practices. But for the rest of businesses, it does not. It’s a good idea for businesses and organizations to review their privacy practices in employment anyway, because it’s very likely that provincial privacy laws will apply to employment.
The basic outline of PIPEDA looks like this:
- If your business wants to collect, use or disclose personal information about people, you need their consent, except in a few specific and limited circumstances.
- You can use or disclose people’s personal information only for the purpose for which they gave consent.
- Even with consent, you have to limit collection, use and disclosure to purposes that a reasonable person would consider appropriate under the circumstances.
- Individuals have a right to see the personal information that your business holds about them, and to correct any inaccuracies.
- There’s oversight, through the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, to ensure that the law is respected, and redress if people’s rights are violated.
Your responsibilities under PIPEDA
PIPEDA reflects the realities of the business world. It’s based on the Canadian Standards Association’s Model Code for the Protection of Personal Information, which is incorporated into the legislation. The Code came out of a collaborative effort by representatives of government, consumers and business groups, and lists 10 principles of fair information practices, which are summarized as follows:
- Accountability: Appoint an individual (or individuals) to be responsible for your organization’s compliance; protect all personal information held by your organization or transferred to third party for processing; and develop and implement personal information policies and practices.
- Identifying purposes: Your organization must identify the reasons for collecting personal information before or at the time of collection. Before or when any personal information is collected, identify why it is needed and how it will be used; document why the information is collected; inform the individual from whom the information is collected why it is needed; identify any new purpose for the information and obtain the individual’s consent before using it.
- Consent: Inform the individual in a meaningful way of the purposes for the collection, use or disclosure of personal data; obtain the individual’s consent before or at the time of collection, as well as when a new use is identified.
- Limiting collection: Do not collect personal information indiscriminately; do not deceive or mislead individuals about the reasons for collecting personal information.
- Limiting use, disclosure, and retention: Use or disclose personal information only for the purpose for which it was collected, unless the individual consents, or the use or disclosure is authorized by the Act; keep personal information only as long as necessary to satisfy the purposes; put guidelines and procedures in place for retaining and destroying personal information; keep personal information used to make a decision about a person for a reasonable time period. This should allow the person to obtain the information after the decision and pursue redress; destroy, erase or render anonymous information that is no longer required for an identified purpose or a legal requirement.
- Accuracy: Minimize the possibility of using incorrect information when making a decision about the individual or when disclosing information to third parties.
- Safeguards: Protect personal information against loss or theft; safeguard the information from unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, use or modification; protect personal information regardless of the format in which it is held.
- Openness: Inform your customers, clients and employees that you have policies and practices for the management of personal information; makethese policies and practices understandable and easily available.
- Individual access: When requested, inform individuals if you have any personal information about them; explain how it is or has been used and provide a list of any organizations to which it has been disclosed; give individuals access to their information; correct or amend any personal information if its accuracy and completeness is challenged and found to be deficient; provide a copy of the information requested, or reasons for not providing access, subject to exception set out in Section 9 of the Act; an organization should note any disagreement on the file and advise third parties where appropriate.
- Provide recourse: Develop simple and easily accessible complaint procedures; inform complainants of avenues or recourse. These include your organization’s own complaint procedures, those of industry associations, regulatory bodies and the Privacy Commissioner of Canada; investigate all complaints received; take appropriate measures to correct information handling practices and policies.
Individuals who feel their privacy rights have been infringed upon can complain to the Privacy Commissioner of Canada. The Commissioner’s role is that of an ombudsman, trying to find solutions to privacy problems, resolving complaints through negotiation and persuasion, and using mediation and conciliation if appropriate.
What is personal information?
Personal information includes any factual or subjective information, recorded or not, about an identifiable individual. This includes information in any form, such as:
- age, name, ID numbers, income, ethnic origin, or blood type;
- opinions, evaluations, comments, social status, or disciplinary actions; and
- employee files, credit records, loan records, medical records, existence of a dispute between a consumer and a merchant, intentions (for example, to acquire goods or services, or change jobs).
Personal information does not include the name, title, business address or telephone number of an employee of an organization.
What is not covered by the Act?
- The collection, use or disclosure of personal information by federal government organizations listed under the Privacy Act
- Provincial or territorial governments and agents of the crown in right of a province
- An employee’s name, title, business address or telephone number
- An individual’s collection, use or disclosure of personal information strictly for personal purposes (e.g. personal greeting card list)
- An organization’s collection, use or disclosure of personal information solely for journalistic, artistic or literary purposes
For more information
We recognize that gearing up to protect privacy isn’t easy. It takes time, attention and resources. But part of our job is to help you with it.
For more information to help your business prepare for the implementation of PIPEDA, contact the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada at 1-800-282-1376 and request a copy of our Guide for Businesses and Organizations: Your Privacy Responsibilities free of charge This Guide also includes a Privacy Questionnaire with some common sense questions you can use to help you get started.
For this and other useful information, such as the Commissioner’s findings under PIPEDA, you can also visit our Web site at www.priv.gc.ca or you can write or call :
The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
112 Kent Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1H3
Telephone: (613) 947-1698
Toll-free: 1 (800) 282-1376
Fax: (613) 947-6850
Web site: www.priv.gc.ca
Follow us on Twitter: @privacyprivee
How to file A Privacy Complaint
At the federal government level, your privacy rights are protected by two separate laws:
The Privacy Act :applies to federal government institutions, and the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA), which also applies to many private-sector organizations.
Under these laws, individuals have the right to complain to the Privacy Commissioner of Canada if they feel their personal information has been mishandled.
Privacy Act
(federal government institutions) The Privacy Act sets out the rules for the collection, use and disclosure of personal information by federal government institutions. It also gives individuals the right to see the information the government holds about them, and to request any corrections.
PIPEDA
(private-sector organizations) The Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) sets out the rules that private-sector organizations must follow when they handle personal information in the course of their commercial activities. For federally regulated businesses, PIPEDA also applies to the personal information of employees.
Read the Guide here : A Guide for Individuals – Your Guide to PIPEDA
How To File A Complaint (PIPEDA)
Before filing your complaint read the Guide to the Complaint Process. It has useful information on what matters can be subject to a PIPEDA complaint and what you can expect to happen. The Privacy Commissioners office suggests to try first to resolve your concerns directly with the organization associated with your complaint. Please read or download “A Guide for Individuals”.
You can also call toll-free at 1-800-282-1376. One of the information officers can answer any questions you may have about the complaints process. It was nice in our experience, talking to a person about this process, rather than an automated phone system.
If after reading the guide and you choose to file a privacy complaint against a private-sector organization, use one of these 3 options off of the Privacy Commissioners of Canada website :
- Fill out the online complaint form from the Privacy Commissioners website. (link is on top right)
- Fill out a complaint form electronically, print and mail or fax your complaint : Download a PDF version
- Print a complaint form, fill out by hand and mail or fax your complaint : Download a RTF version
** Note: If you are filing out a complaint form on behalf of someone else, you will need written authorization from that person. Here is a link to the OPC Authorization form.
Instructions :If you use option 2 or 3, you send your completed form to:
Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada
112 Kent Street
Place de Ville, Tower B, 3rd Floor
Ottawa, ON K1A 1H3
Fax: 613-947-6850
Inquiries: 1-800-282-1376 (toll-free)
There is no charge for filing a complaint with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and you do not need to hire any special advisors to help you with the process. It was, in our experience, a pretty straight forward process, even though the parties that filed complaints in our case did not agree with some of the findings. Not all matters have been settled by the Privacy Commissioner ,in our complaints filed against Landlord Legal.
The personal information you provide on this form is protected under the provisions of the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act.
** Be aware your name and the details of your complaint will be shared with the organization that is the subject of the complaint.
Tenant rights advocate warns the public and discusses tactics of the self proclaimed “terminator”, Catherine Stewart!
A tenant rights advocate had many dealings with the Landlord and Tenant Board, Civil courts, Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario,Privacy commissioner and the Law Society over past three years. The tenant rights advocate speaks up online of known tactics from paralegals and lawyers who deal in what is known as “SHARP PRACTICE” and frowned upon by the Law Society of Upper Canada.
Sharp practice is the term given to lawyers and paralegals when knowingly they break laws, court rules and procedures, lie and pretty much do or say anything they want claiming, it is defense of their clients, or themselves, even knowingly submitting false testimony and false evidence to their court hearings, which is against the law.
The LSUC has continually neglected to investigate these complaints of the involved paralegals or lawyers.There has been a drastic increase in the number of complaints filed with the Law Society of Upper Canada accusing many registered Law Society members of such sharp practice methods and illegal actions, unbecoming a paralegal.
The Law Society has been known to turn a blind eye to sharp practice allegations filed with them to investigate !
Ask yourself these questions as you read some of the tactics used at the bottom of this post !!
- How do paralegals and lawyers get away with this “Sharp Practice” tactics in our court system ?
- Why should paralegals and lawyers get away with this “Sharp Practice” tactics in our court system ?
- What cost of Canadian tax dollars is spent for the intentional tactics used by these lawyers and paralegals?
- What is the effect of the court system with back logs of honest cases to be heard but delayed.?
- Who protects the Canadian citizens who put their trust in the law and the courts to protect them ?
- Why does the Law Society turn a blind eye to the LSUC members who commit sharp practice?
- How far does sharp practice and breaking the rules and regulations go in our Canadian courts?
- How many vexatious cases are filed and delayed, from Sharp Practice paralegals & lawyers?
- How much police time is wasted on false complaints filed by sharp practice paralegals and lawyers?
- How much of Police budget is wasted for the paralegals who file false complaints against opposing party?
- How much stress is put on the opposing parties when dealing with sharp practice paralegals and lawyers?
- How much money is wasted by the opposing parties when dealing with the known legal scumbags?
This post deals specifically with the known practices and interaction with several paralegals, lawyers, ex OPP officer, Barrie landlords and a civil court judge of which the writer had involvement with from 2013 – 2016.
- Toronto Lawyer David Strashin
- Disgraced paralegal Diana Smith barred from practicing law in Ontario
- LTB paralegal Howard Tavroges discloses confidential client information to Stewart after signing LTB Order
- Walters Falls paralegal, Catherine April Stewart accused of Sharp Practice tactics
- Barrie Civil Court Judge Kalwoski
- Barrie landlords Dykstra Bros Electric (Ralph,William,Donald Dykstra)
* * Barrie Civil Judge Kalwoski breaks rules of the Justice act as a fair and impartial judge when he hears cases involving the retrieval of a LTB Order, and other additional motions involving SCC#1851-13 & SCC#1852-13 where he calls Catherine Stewart to his chambers during ongoing proceedings without the other party being present. It is suspected Judge Kalwosky had put personal notes in the court files to influence the outcome of the future Superior Civil Court proceedings !!
** Diana Smith was found to be practicing law under different names when she was not legally licensed by the Law Society of Upper Canada to practice law in Ontario.Diane Smith sold her house and moved to Newmarket with her son to avoid future civil cases filed against her. She did not show for the allegations against her at LSUC hearings.
** Toronto lawyer David Strashin was aware of the false testimony, and false evidence allegations concerning his client, and friend paralegal, Catherine Stewart. Stewart had filed Human Rights evidence herself, well past the given date stated by the HRTO Registrar, Richard Hennessy for proceedings held in Toronto, Canada. (HRTO 16799-14 & HRTO#16250-13).
The late evidence was allowed into the proceedings as was David Strashin allowed to represent her, after Strashin and Stewart break HR rules of procedure, neglecting to properly notify the tribunal or the other party that he was her legal representative.
Evidence from the applicant was still delivered to the offices of Catherine Stewart, legal contact on file, when no evidence that Strashin was given that he was now the legal rep on file, as per the rules for contact information, to receive any evidence or documents pertaining to the hearings as far back as August of 2015.
The complete details of Toronto Human Rights lawyer, David Strashin, are discussed in the upcoming Human Rights conclusion postings.The new posts will bring up and disclose new facts discovered about Strashin after numerous emails were received and our investigation details of Strashin during the Human Rights hearings.
Catherine Stewart, her boyfriend Paul Smith and the Dykstra Bros used Toronto lawyer David Strashin, after claiming to the unfair mediator Mary Truemner, during the proceedings “I dont know this Human Rights stuff” and refused to proceed further until a 2 1/2 hour late Strashin finally showed for a scheduled hearing.
* William Dykstra (left) knowingly states lies on the stand for the Civil hearings he filed in attempts to shut down Privacy Violators website. William Dykstra had no knowledge of any business with the tenant business as his cowardly brother Ralph Dykstra was the only Dykstra brother to deal with the residential and commercial tenants.
William Dykstra states in Barrie Civil courtroom…he did it to “hurt the tenant”.
You can not trust a Dykstra to honor any deal they make,as proven with the LTB agreement he had Stewart sign on their behalf forcing litigation to retrieve the funds they owed the tenant.
Ralph Dykstra (right) did not appear on the stand for the civil but instead had William state lies. The transcripts from SCC#1852-13 will be published with his testimony discussed at full length.
The involvement of “Sharp Practice” goes deep into our court system involving Landlord and Tenant board hearings, Civil Court hearings and many Human Rights hearings here in Ontario, Canada.Sharp practice costs citizens thousands of dollars and many years of their life defending their legal cases only to lose to these legal scum bags. (my opinion)
Look up “Absolute Privilege” on the Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII) website here http://canlii.org/en/on/ and you will see what many lawyers and paralegals are doing and saying, regardless of the law or the rules of procedure for any court and you will see and understand why I am trying to warn the public and point out to the readers the methods used.
Many faithful readers are familiar with the Barrie landlords, Dykstra Bros Electric retired owners, Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra, all from Barrie, Ontario and mentioned in many of the Landlord & Tenant board posts here on Privacy Violators website, as well as the Human rights allegations a tenant had filed.
- LTB #30421-13 hearing – Found guilty of discussing private tenant details with other tenants
- LTB #33911-13 hearing – break & enter/illegal lock change – NO SHOW
- LTB #31816-13 Privacy invasion allegations – 100’s photos taken at tenants home prior to filing #32321-13
- LTB #32321-13 – Attempted forced eviction after complaints filed against Dykstra Bros Electric slum lords
- Civil #1546-13 – tenant files to retrieve money owed from LTB order Dykstra’s signed but neglected to honor
- Civil #1852-13 – Civil hearing to shut down Privacy Violators website- * Filed in WRONG court to do so !
- HRTO #16250-13 – Human Rights allegations filed against Ralph,Donald and William Dykstra
A privacy breach involves improper or unauthorized collection, use, disclosure, retention or disposal of personal information.
Many posts are listed here on Privacy Violators website concerning Catherine A Stewart and her ex OPP officer over Landlord and Tenant board hearings, vexatious Civil Court proceedings filed and Human rights allegations brought up against the pair.
- LTB #33911-13 – break & enter and illegal lock allegations against Catherine Stewart and her landlord clients
- LTB #31816 – Over privacy invasion and 100’s of photos of tenants home by ex OPP officer Paul Smith
- LTB #1851-13 – Vexatious civil suit – paralegal Stewart files in wrong court to shut down Privacy Violators
- LTB #1546-13 – Civil to retrieve order signed by Catherine Stewart for landlord clients and not honored
- Privacy Commissioner complaints filed against Catherine Stewart over privacy invasion
- Law Society complaints against Catherine Stewart for break in & illegal lock change attempts
- HRTO # 17699-14 – Human rights allegations against ex OPP officer and his paralegal girlfriend
- Upcoming Law Society complaints over false testimony,false evidence, contact against the rules and more !
Catherine Stewart has been known to do the following improper actions and infractions while working in both capacities as a paralegal and a paralegal.There are new complaints to the Law Society to investigate the conduct unbecoming a paralegal from complaints presently being filed by the ex tenant and the Human Rights applicant.
- Known to represent landlords illegally in LTB when not fit the definition of landlord under the LTB Act
- Known to use disgraced paralegal Diane Smith at LTB hearings to represent her management firm
- Known to use term “landlord representative” in LTB hearings NOT “legal representative” (manipulation)
- Operates as a paralegal business under the name Landlord Legal inc
- Allows accountant tenants at her small office 117 Bayfield Street,Barrie to accept unsecured legal documents
- Known to sign Catherine April Stewart when acting as a paralegal business (is her legal name)
- Known to serve standard No Contact and No Trespassing letters with no identifying letterhead
- Serves documents to opposing party directly – against the rules when they have legal representation
- Operates as a Barrie property manager under the name Landlord Legal (NO inc at end)
- Catherine Stewart is known to forcibly break into tenants home, while police watch and do nothing.
- Known to breach rules of the Business Act knowingly signing documents with wrong legal name
- Known to harass any opposing party with numerous false complaints to police
- Known to sign April Stewart as a Barrie property manager business – not legal name
- Known to knowingly sign and submit Human Rights documents as April Stewart – not legal name
- Known to use APRIL STEWART for LTB and then shift to paralegal CATHERINE STEWART
- Knowingly uses false name & signature when her legal name is CATHERINE APRIL STEWART
- Known to sign false affidavits for boyfriend Paul Smith testimony for her clients – has commissioner stamp
- Known to use ex OPP boyfriend’s illegal private investigator & retired OPP police status to her advantage
- Stewart uses ex OPP Paul Smith private investigator status when he was not legal to work in that capacity
- Paul Smith is known to use PI license & status when he was not legal in that capacity for her business uses
- Catherine Stewart is known to submit legal document to HRTO allegations that did not exist at LTB
- Paul Smith files false documents when he claimed to file a “Certificate of service” that did not exist
- Ex OPP Paul Smith gives signed document “Certificate of Service” to Catherine Stewart instead of filing at LTB
- Paul Smith stated he was a process server for 10 years – should know how to file a legal document as a cop
- Paul Smith knowingly gave a false document for evidence to be used by C A Stewart in civil hearings
- Paul Smith gives false statements & non existent documents for Stewart’s Privacy Commissioner complaints
- Paul Smith gives false testimony for Human Rights allegations against him (detailed documentation provided)
- Stewart knowingly submitted false testimony to the Privacy Commissioner, civil trials and the Human Rights
- Paralegal Catherine Stewart is known to not follow Civil Court Rules of procedure against other litigants
- Stewart known to not show up for Civil motions filed against her because of improper actions/document filings
- Known to go back chambers with Barrie Civil judge Kowalski during legal proceedings against same tenant
- Catherine Stewart is a Landlord Rights only advocate who knowingly violates other peoples rights
- Stewart is known to break rules of the Law Society of Upper Canada – Read NEW Law Society complaints
- Signs as April Stewart when working as a property manager for landlord & tenant rights hearings !
- Stewart is known to file vexatious lawsuits with no chance of recovery to delay Law society complaints
- Stewart is known to file vexatious suits to waste courts time, other parties money and time
- Known to file useless civil cases to delay Human rights proceedings filed against her
- Known to use absolute privilege defense to break the laws and rules to defend herself & landlord clients
- known to file vexatious lawsuits and claim matters were dealt with in another forum
- Catherine Stewart is known to refuse to pay court orders owed, issued and were agreed and signed by her.
- C A Stewart puts unrelated witnesses on witness list so they cannot be used in court against her elsewhere
- Known to use her ex OPP boyfriend Paul Smith to lie on the civil stand when he’s not on the witness list
- C A Stewart Does Not Appear in court to answer for the break & enter Barrie police witnessed
- Stewart does illegal searches, uses her boyfriend, ex OPP, illegal PI services of Paul Smith to do it
- Photographs tenants units but does not use photographs in LTB court.Against the LTB rules and harassment.
- Known to consistently not to give disclosure evidence before hearings as per the rules, esp in Barrie LTB
- Known to harass ex tenants who file Human Rights claims against her company and her clients.
- Stewart is known to give lectures and courses with Paul Smith instructing on how to manipulate courts
- Stewart is known to teach Realtors and landlords to breach tenants rights deliberately
- Stewart teaches landlords and realtors to peek in the windows when tenant not home
- Known to issue many no trespass notices with no letterhead from Landlord Legal (will be uploaded for display)
- Has been known to break many rules and regulations of the Landlord and Tenant Board Act 2006
- Has been known to not give any disclosure or evidence to other tenants or parties at LTB
- Has been known to make false police calls for her benefit (ex: keep the peace while she breaks in)
- Has been known to refuse court summons for her ex OPP boyfriend Paul Smith to appear in court.
- Has other paralegal lie in court on her behalf to the LTB Judge when she stated “OUT OF THE COUNTRY”
- Puts boyfriend, ex cop on witness stand when he is completely unrelated to the hearings
- Puts boyfriend on the civil stand when he is not on the witness list ordered to be delivered to all parties
- Has been known to breach human Rights of tenant and manipulate the courts
- Catherine Stewart has been known not to show for allegations against herself or her legal firm
- Stewart has been known to file vexatious court cases to delay or state its been dealt with elsewhere
- Catherine Stewart has been known not to pay court orders issued for not showing in court
- Catherine Stewart has been known not to pay court orders for motions she lost in court.
- Stewart has received confidential client information from LTB paralegal Howard Tavroges
- Catherine Stewart uses her property management website to openly threaten HR applicant
- Stewart has been known to give confidential court contact information to police for her own purposes
- Stewart has been known to change court documents at the Barrie courthouse illegally
- Stewart has been known not to file documents properly and complicates court hearings deliberately
- Stewart has been known to use Toronto lawyer David Strashin to manipulate HRTO proceedings
- Stewart is known to file Human Rights evidence past the given date by Registrar,Richard Hennessey
- Stewart is known to harass Human Rights applicants who file allegations against her and her boyfriend.
- Catherine Stewart and ex OPP Paul Smith, are known to use the Barrie & OPP to harass the HR applicant
Not a complete list and will be expanded with the many posts waiting approval.
After reading the many methods known to be used by the Barrie paralegal Catherine Stewart, and her little property management company, to manipulate legal proceedings, you can see the deliberate delays and the intentional refusal to pay court orders issued to her directly or to her landlord clients, only deliberately causes additional back log of honest legal cases not being heard in our courts.
The intentional court delays and refusal to pay court orders ends up costing the opposing parties a great deal of money and personal time to deal with her tactics.
Go to school for one year and buy your paralegal license today and fuck with the law !
Ex OPP officer worked as private investigator for many years, unsanctioned and illegally for Walters Falls paralegal !
An ex Ontario Provincial Police officer, Paul Smith, has been investigated during Human Rights allegations (HRTO #17699-14) that were brought up against Smith, and his paralegal girlfriend, Catherine A Stewart, and has been discovered to be working as a private investigator illegally for landlord legal inc, of Barrie Ontario for many years.
Although Paul Smith did indeed have a private investigators license for over 7 years, Smith was not sanctioned by any private investigator company to work legally as a private investigator, but continued to give signed statements mentioning his PI reports and PI status, as well as being a retired Ontario Provincial Police officer, in sworn statements given to, and signed by his paralegal girlfriend who has a commissioner stamp to do so. One lies and the other swears to it.. very convenient for paralegal, property manager Catherine Stewart when she signs the legal documents to defend her LANDLORD ONLY clients.
Smith would give false evidence, false testimony, and stated whatever, property manager and paralegal girlfriend, Catherine Stewart needed to be sworn and she would protect him from liable suits, Human Rights allegations and criminal actions brought up against him, stating “absolute privilege” while she acts as his paralegal protecting these lies they swear to. Barrie Police officer Det Steeles, refused to investigate the false evidence allegations brought up to him concerning Smith.
Paul Smith was further accused with Catherine Stewart of entering false evidence, which Smith had signed and gave to Stewart for evidence into HRTO #17699-14, which both parties were named in Human Rights application.
Ex OPP officer Smith, was also involved in breaking many more Rules and Procedures for Stewart, in the Human Rights (HRTO#17699-14) allegations brought against Smith and Catherine Stewart when he contacted and delivered legal documents to the Human Rights applicant at an address NOT ON FILE when the applicant had legal council representing him.
The illegal personal contact by ex OPP officer Paul Smith, is against any Court Hearing Rules, as well as the Human Rights rules when legally represented, alarmed the HR applicant and made him afraid of what the pair would do when, consistently and knowingly they both were brazenly breaking laws and rules for their HR allegations against them. Paul Smith has admitted working as a PI and process server for his paralegal girlfriend for over ten years and should know the laws and rules and regulations governing process serving.
The pair have gotten away with tactics like this for a long time and Barrie police office Steele received complaints from the Human Rights applicant, of these tactics and actions but did not investigate nor act on the complaints. It seems like the Barrie police service also works for Catherine Stewart as well, when they do not investigate legitimate complaints filed against the paralegal for break and enter, entering false evidence and harassment allegations or the ex Ontario Provincial Police officer involved !! We can only assume the Barrie Police and the OPP protect their own when they do not investigate these complaints !!
Human Rights Registrar, Richard Hennessy of the Human Rights Tribunal was well aware of the allegations and many more motions brought up by the applicant in HRTO#16799-14, but the mediator, Mary Truemner did not hear any of the motions brought forward, instead this unfair mediator swept it under the rug and refused to hear them !
Further posts concerning the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario, Registrar, Richard Henessey and mediator Mary Truemner will also be published shortly so the public can learn the Human Rights Tribunal knows the manipulation that goes on during HRTO hearings by lawyers and paralegals and does nothing to stop it.The Human Rights Tribunal in Toronto is a mockery of the justice system and will be discussed in full in further posts to come.
An article detailing “absolute privilege” and the abuse that goes on when paralegals knowingly break the law and rules of procedure during court hearings and get away with it is in the works and will be published soon.
After a long investigation, and many emails received, the stuff that paralegal Catherine Stewart has done in the past, and has gotten away with it, even when the Law Society is aware of the allegations is staggering and the public needs to be aware of the tactics used by a few of these known paralegals, who go to a college training school for one year and bought their licenses and have nothing to lose.
Paul Smith and Catherine Stewart were accused of violating a tenants privacy when Paul Smith, on Stewart’s orders, entered the tenants unit owned by Dykstra Bros Electric of Barrie, Ontario and proceeded to take photos of every inch of the unit in preparations to evict him. The Landlord and Tenant Board rules do not allow one party to have an advantage over another when preparing for an eviction or an LTB hearing, which makes the photos ineligible to be entered into evidence as LTB Judge Sean Henry states in the May 7th, 2013 transcripts to be published in a future post.
Paralegal and property manager, Catherine Stewart has been accused in the past of breaking into a tenant’s home while Barrie police officers, CST Turner and CST Melanie Beard stood by and watched. The Barrie police officers would not charge Catherine Stewart, Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra or Donald Dykstra with break and enter although they witnessed it first hand, stating it was a landlord and tenant board matter. Catherine Stewart has been known to give confidential court information to the Barrie police, in the form of a private cell number that was given for court purposes only.
The tenant involved did file a LTB complaint (LTB #33911-13), stating paralegal Catherine Stewart and her landlord clients ordered Barrie’s Central Lock and Key owner, Paul Robertson to cut a security chain, pick the lock and enter 40 Ellen Street, Barrie Ontario while the Barrie police watched. Barrie Police Constable Melanie Beard was summoned and present for the LTB hearing, as were the locksmiths involved, for the break and enter allegations, but Catherine Stewart neglected to show for the allegations against her, stating she “was out of the country” when witnesses to the contrary were available.
Ex OPP officer, Paul Smith and Catherine Stewart, both of Walters Falls, Ontario have been known in the past to use Smiths’ ex OPP status and his illegal private investigator license to influence the Landlord and Tenant Board hearings that paralegal, Catherine Stewart, takes on defending Landlords only.Smith was also involved in Privacy Commissioner complaints against Stewart where he gave statements claiming he was a licensed PI working for Smith when he entered and took 100’s of photos of a tenants unit prior to Stewart preparing for a forced eviction hearing.
Paralegal Catherine Stewart is known online, to be the “self proclaimed” terminator and has gone as far as threatening the applicant of the Human Rights application. publicly on her property management website which can be viewed here at, http://www.landlordlegal.ca.
The paralegal / property manager hides behind online applications on her website to screen clients and has signs posted on a door at her little cubicle office located at 117 Bayfield Street stating No Tenants allowed but she is a property manager. Figure that one out, a property manager that wants no contact with the tenants on behalf of her landlord clients.. that says a lot of her intentions and tactics !!
There have been many posts alleging the privacy violations done, false evidence submitted, false testimony submitted, and the many laws, and rules and regulations that Catherine Stewart has been known to commit while manipulating rules and hiding behind her landlord only advocate role.
This Tenant ONLY rights advocate will continue to warn the public and file Law Society complaints against this paralegal for her conflict of interest while working as both a paralegal and property manager and bring the truth behind her break ins, false evidence and manipulation Stewart and her Toronto lawyer and friend David Strashin allows for Stewart’s Human Rights hearing and her landlord only clients.More complaints are to be filed with the Law Society concerning Catherine A Stewart aka Barrie property manager April Stewart.
Any tenant who goes against Catherine Stewart in LTB, should be aware that Catherine April Stewart is not legally allowed to represent landlords in LTB hearings as both a paralegal and a property manager and should make the Judge at the LTB hearing aware of the conflict of interest she is in when she does not fit the definition of a “Landlord” but references herself as a “Landlord representative” in any court documents and signs them as April Stewart, which is not her legal name !!
The upcoming series we have titled the “Stewart Solution” will give other tenant’s ideas and alternatives when dealing with landlord problems and the manipulation of the self proclaimed “terminator” which is known in our court system, costly for the tenants wastes police services time and money, and the courts time, which could be dealing with real paralegals interested in furthering justice, not manipulating it and hiding behind this false title and status.
Howard Tavroges is another paralegal accused of giving confidential client information to Catherine Stewart during the Civil court hearings and Human rights allegations.
Howard Tavroges is known to work at the Barrie Landlord and Tenant Board representing on behalf of C A Stewart or April Stewart as she commonly flips back and forth on the names, and her business roles, on many occasions.
April Stewart of Landlord Legal neglects to mention Human Rights allegations to Canada AM
Read the TENANT side of the story.
April Stewart, the owner of a small property management company and paralegal service ran out of Barrie Ontario recently appeared August 27th 2016 on a popular morning news show of interest, Canada AM.

April Stewart is known to own a small property management company in Barrie Ontario.
Catherine April Stewart is a licensed paralegal who offers services for Landlords only, disguised as a property manager, but in reality is a paralegal who knowingly robs ANY TENANT she encounters of their RIGHTS !!
As a property manager Catherine Stewart owes rights to the tenants she manages for her landlord clients.
As a paralegal working for the landlord she gathers all the information she needs and offers NO RIGHTS to the tenant. The Law Society of Upper Canada needs to investigate the illegal entry and conduct unbecoming a paralegal claims that were brought against her in 2013 when she filed unsubstantiated civil matters on October 22nd 2013 and still pending in Barrie courts today.
Read the HUMAN RIGHTS ALLEGATIONS AGAINST CATHERINE APRIL STEWART of Landlord Legal
Read the Landlord Legal August 15th 2013 40 Ellen Street, Barrie, illegal break in allegation posts here
Read the harassment allegations of the Barrie police for Landlord legal
The story featured the self proclaimed Landlord only rights advocate in a story entitled “Expert warning: Choosing right tenant is “like a marriage,’ getting out “just as difficult”
Privacy Violators would like to point out there are two sides to the story when it comes to Catherine April Stewart and Landlord legal of 117 Bayfield Street, Barrie, Ontario.
The story that aired on August 27th 2015 on CTV popular news show did not mention the Human Rights allegations that were brought against this individual, her Dykstra Bros Electric clients and her legal firm.
The story does not mention any references to the tactics taught by April Stewart’s seminars she teaches to the landlords, real estate agents and investors to evict the tenant at any cost.
Catherine April Stewart has filed vexatious civil claims against her clients ex tenant who had filed Human Rights allegations against Catheriine Stewart, her landlord clients and her ex OPP boyfriend Paul T Smith.
The CTV news did not get all the facts regarding this person or the rights she violates to be the publicly known Landlord Rights advocate self proclaimed the “terminator”
The Human Rights allegations will proceed on April 21st and April 29th 2016 against theses individuals and the results and evidence will be posted here.
Its a shame that her Human Rights allegations did not come into mention
Watch the CTV NewsGo article (4 minutes 13 seconds) with Catherine April Stewart on August 27th 2016 :