SIN and The Landlord

[MosaicRentals]

Sorry for hijacking the other post...



That conversation got me thinking... What are my rights as a Landlord and what are the rights of a prospective Tenant with regard to supplying their social insurance number?

This is what I have been able to find...



"Institutions from which you earn interest or income, such as banks, credit unions and trust companies, must also ask for your SIN."...



"You are not required to provide your SIN number to any other private-sector organization or person such as a landlord. "...



Source https://www.priv.gc.ca/faqs/index_e.asp#q012



Security Deposits are subject to interest and because I have to deposit the S/D into an interest bearing Trust Account I submit that a SIN would be required by the Landlord so as to apply interest to the appropriate Tenant.



So I should be able to legally require the SIN in order to pay interest on the S/D.... ?

 

[Alvaro Sanchez]

Here: https://www.priv.gc.ca/cf-dc/ser/2006/s19_060203_e.asp



Extract:

ARCHIVED - Commissioner's Findings
Settled case summary #19
SIN not required when signing apartment lease
Complaint

A student complained that he was unable to rent an apartment without providing his SIN to the property management firm.

Outcome

The property manager told us that his firm required the SINs of
potential renters in order to verify identities, conduct credit checks,
and, if necessary, contact collection agencies.


However, the federal government, in an effort to prevent the SIN from
becoming a universal identifier, issued a policy limiting the
collection and use of the SIN to specific acts, regulations and
programs. While there is no legislation that prevents organizations
from asking for the SIN for other purposes, such as identification,
organizations that are subject to the Personal information Protection and Electronic Documents Actmust
clearly indicate to the customer that provision of the SIN for
identification purposes is optional and not a condition of service.


The manager therefore revised the lease agreement so that a driver`s
licence is the only piece of identification required. He no longer
requests SINs from potential lessees.


Upon learning of the changes the property management firm instituted
as a result of his complaint, the student and the Office considered the
matter to be settled.

 

[Sherilynn]

You don't need the SIN to pay interest. It is up to each individual to determine their own tax burden, and that is really the only issue involving the SIN.



Currently in Alberta you will find that interest is often zero anyway (even for my tenant that has been with us for 4 years).



Here is a link to Service Alberta's Security Deposit Interest Calculator. Simply fill in the details and then print out the result and attach it to your statement of security deposit when the tenant moves.

 

[invst4profit]

AS I have indicated in the other thread it is legal in Ontario to require a applicant to provide their SIN. It is optional on the part of applicants to provide their SIN. It is optional on the part of landlords to accept any applicant that refuses to provide a SIN.

You will not find on record any legal contradiction to the right of a landlord to refuse the application of a individual refusing to provide their SIN.



Whether a applicant refuses to provide their SIN or not a landlord will still be requiring authorisation to allow that landlord to do a credit check. The reality is that in most cases the refusal to provide the SIN is related to their reluctance to have a credit check performed.



I can still perform a credit check without their SIN but by simply refusing to provide a SIN a applicant will fail my screening process.





(The case example provided by Alvaro was a complaint examined by the privacy commission not a legal court challenge of a landlords right to collect SIN. It was resolved without prejudice between the parties and holds no legal authority. A complaint is reviewed by a Ombudsman that acts only as a mediator. The PIPEDA primarily regulates Federal Works Undertakings or Business (Banking, transportation, Airlines etc.)

PIPEDA has no jurisdiction over the right of a landlord to reject a applicant.



Bottom line on this issue: I am not a lawyer but I do have a lawyer. If each landlord were to ask there lawyers opinion on this matter they may get different answers as to whether a landlord may reject a applicant for refusing to provide there SIN. What they will not however disagree on is that there is no legal case on file where a applicant has successfully challenged a landlord and won. The reason being it has never been challenged in a court of law in Ontario. Until it is challanged in a court of law it will remain legal to reject for refusing to provide a SIN but that will never happen as no landlord worth their salt would ever tell a applicant why they are rejected.

 

[MosaicRentals]

Thank you Sherilynn but I think I should have been clearer on what I was suggesting.



In respect to the information I quoted I believe that should a Landlord deny an application for not suppling a SIN I think a lawyer could possibly set a precedence in the event of legal action.



Further, whether the interest payable is a 0% or 8% should not matter, this is subject to change at any time.



I already attach a copy of the calculation from the Service Alberta site as well as provide a link so they can do it themselves.



All that being said, I have never given that as a reason for denying an application. Although we are not bound to provide any reason I still like to have a clear reason for myself. As such I stipulate on the application that all information is required any missing information may delay or cancel the application. Its been my experience that it is not hard to find a reason for denying an application if you look hard enough.

 

[invst4profit]

That is the key to screening. When we screen we are in fact looking for reasons not to accept an applicant. Attitude, appearance, income level, employment, credit, pets, smoking, source of income etc are all viewed from the perspective of "what is wrong" or where is the risk in allowing this person to take possession of my property.

I do not trust any applicant not to lie or attempt to deceive.



We are looking to eliminate or possibly at best reduce risk. Each landlord has personal standards and applies those standards as they see fit in my opinion. The only opportunity to protect our investment is before an applicant becomes a tenant. In my screening process I will deny for whatever reason I see fit. Sometimes those reasons may appear contrary to the Human rights code but I do what I know is necessary to insure I protect my investment.



I operate my business on the bases that applicants have no rights (they have the option to chose to live elsewhere), tenants have too many rights.

If the government were to change the RTA and LTB to better protect landlords I could afford to be more flexible but as is I have few options.

 

[Sherilynn]

I don't quite understand why you require a SIN on an application. You can perform a credit check and judgment check without it. (And as I mentioned, you do not require a SIN to pay interest, so that argument is flawed.)



What am I missing?

 

[invst4profit]

For me I believe the SIN insures that you get the correct report. Individuals with the same name or similar could be screened in error. I do not completely trust any report not based on a individuales SIN.

In addition because it is required on my application form the filling out of the form is in itself part of my screening. Applicants do not have the option of deciding what to include without being judged by me.

If information is deemed by the applicant to be not necessary or none of my business they have disrespected my request and indicate they may be difficult tenants.

It is their option to apply elsewhere.



Equally important in Ontario is the ability to collect from delinquent tenants. The individuals SIN can be even more important when taking a tenant to Small Claims Court in regards to garnishee of wages.



I consider it mandatory considering the value of my property and the level of trust I must place in complete strangers. If I am going to trust you then you had better provide me everything I need, without question, right down to the brand of your underwear. OK too much, maybe, but I don't care what applicants think as I do not consider they have any rights nor do I value their opinions at that stage of the application process. They are only names and numbers that want something of extreme value from me.

 

[Sherilynn]

I have had no trouble confirming that the credit report is the correct one by comparing addresses and employers.



However, in my collections I have always seized bank accounts, so perhaps having the SIN number would be of value if I ever had to seize wages.



That being said, I wouldn't eliminate an Alberta tenant based on reluctance to provide a SIN. I would never provide my SIN to anyone unless absolutely necessary, and I would be an excellent tenant - in part because I am responsible with my money and my priceless personal information.



I understand, however, how different Ontario is and there I would be inclined to take the chance of refusing a good tenant in order to reduce the risk of getting a bad one.

 

[MosaicRentals]

Thats how I think when I am considering application... what is wrong with this applicant, what is the risk factor, stability, family situation, smokers, pets, my gut feeling and If I had to what could I sieze? And if I want to seize or garinshee wages I would need the SIN for a more effective result. But the absolute and most effective protection for a Landlord is get it in black & white! I have a very long and detailed lease that requires several areas that must be signed, I take pictures of EVERYTHING, everything I say or do is reiterated in a letter, I keep an "events" log for each Tenant and everything & contact I have with them is dated and noted. Some might think this is excessive but I do not believe you can do to much to protect the property or the interest of the owner. Besides, you just now the very thing you do not write down will come back to bite you in the.... well you get the picture.

 

[MosaicRentals]

Actually you are required to supply your SIN to be paid interest on all bank/trust accounts income. The "man" wants his share. I don't believe the argument is flawed, the problem may lie in that the Act contradicts itself in the sections I quoted. Or they do not give thought to the fact that we are required to pay interest as directed by the RTA.

 

[Sherilynn]

The "man" gets his share regardless. The security deposit should be held in an interest-bearing account "in trust," but my bank won't set up a pooled trust account because I am not a realtor or property management company or lawyer. However, as long as I am holding only security deposits in the account, it really doesn't have to be a pooled trust.



This means that it is an interest-bearing account in my name only. I pay tax on the interest earned. If I ever had to pay interest to my tenant, then that interest paid would counterbalance the interest earned. It is then up to the tenant to pay taxes on his own earnings.