Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
Really? Caught collecting more data than supposed to? Got even one example, just one that it's true? No?
Same as illegal return policy I guess. Perhaps litigator wife can fight that battle for you.....or maybe you are just lying yet again, mr. Zero credibility faker advocate. Tsk, Tsk.

Becareful what you wish for. What's this below? Not one but two examples where you were caught recording such things as drivers license numbers! So what's that lie again? You say you only record name and address and don't record any other information, because you say the computer system doesn't have the capacity to record any extra information ? Really? Liar liar canadian tire.

Two examples that says otherwise. What's that? I'll even name the stores involved as it's in the public record. In fact CT was ordered to purge all recorded drivers license information, including drivers license numbers What's that sound I'm hearing? The sweet sound of STFU. How about betting on it before you make any more claims concerning the law, seeing as how you're that well informed.

ALBERTA
INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER
Report of an Investigation into the Collection and Retention
of Personal Information


Rick Arsenault Enterprises Inc., (Canadian Tire Associate Store 419)
and Ken Rice Retailing Inc., (Canadian Tire Associate Store 428)
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
I thought CT said they weren't doing anything illegal with getting our private information for returns and exchanges. I guess they got in another lie. I'm doing my shopping else where.
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
Becareful what you wish for. What's this below? Not one but two examples where you were caught recording such things as drivers license numbers! So what's that lie again? You say you only record name and address and don't record any other information, because you say the computer system doesn't have the capacity to record any extra information ? Really? Liar liar canadian tire.

Two examples that says otherwise. What's that? I'll even name the stores involved as it's in the public record. In fact CT was ordered to purge all recorded drivers license information, including drivers license numbers What's that sound I'm hearing? The sweet sound of STFU. How about betting on it before you make any more claims concerning the law, seeing as how you're that well informed.

ALBERTA
INFORMATION AND PRIVACY COMMISSIONER
Report of an Investigation into the Collection and Retention
of Personal Information


Rick Arsenault Enterprises Inc., (Canadian Tire Associate Store 419)
and Ken Rice Retailing Inc., (Canadian Tire Associate Store 428)

I can hear the excuses already "No we don't do anything illegal but ..."

Next thing they'll INSIST that information is safe and that no private information ever got out lol.
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
They can't even get that right lol. Who would feel safe with their private information that no one else has, except the banks and government?

Here it is again en englais

Canadian Tire Embroiled in Privacy Rights Scandal | Ledjit

And there they were going on and on about sony being hacked, and just how much safer their systems were. They make Sony sound kinda smart given that these guys couldn't even dispose of paper that had their customers information on it that everybody can read. Must be a gold mine for identity thieves lol. Customers still feel safe and sound giving over your private information to them for a return or exchange?
 

CT Me / Lawguy

Posted by an unregistered user
I hope you read that report in detail, it covers some very interesting points.

1) One store of the two mentioned were in fact guilty of recording a drivers license number. - I do not support this practice, clearly a wrong by the store!! Admitted wrong by the dealer you may note.
2) the second store did not have a drivers license number on file
3) The investigator agrees, retail council of canada agrees that the collection of name, phone number and address is reasonable and that viewing a Drivers License or studenty ID to verify the information is absolutely reasonable.
4) The computer returns system was re-designed in December of 2005 to ensure that there was no field of entry for Drivers license numbers or personal information.

So...yes the store did violate the rules 6 years ago.
and the most important part of all, as per my recent postings THERE IS NO FIELD OF ENTRY FOR DRIVERS LICENSE NUMBER OR PERSONAL INFORMATION SINCE THE NEW RETURNS SYSTEM HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED! Yes I'll yell it, because i've said it many times, and now a Government Investigator has concurred that this is the case. Again I thank you for providing links to official documentation that proves my points.

Is your information safe? You bet it is! Just don't put your credit card number into playstation online gaming... that could cost yoU!

So you can take your liar liar canadian tire and your stfu - and you can have yourself a great day!
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
I hope you read that report in detail, it covers some very interesting points.

1) One store of the two mentioned were in fact guilty of recording a drivers license number. - I do not support this practice, clearly a wrong by the store!! Admitted wrong by the dealer you may note.
2) the second store did not have a drivers license number on file
3) The investigator agrees, retail council of canada agrees that the collection of name, phone number and address is reasonable and that viewing a Drivers License or studenty ID to verify the information is absolutely reasonable.
4) The computer returns system was re-designed in December of 2005 to ensure that there was no field of entry for Drivers license numbers or personal information.

So...yes the store did violate the rules 6 years ago.
and the most important part of all, as per my recent postings THERE IS NO FIELD OF ENTRY FOR DRIVERS LICENSE NUMBER OR PERSONAL INFORMATION SINCE THE NEW RETURNS SYSTEM HAS BEEN IMPLEMENTED! Yes I'll yell it, because i've said it many times, and now a Government Investigator has concurred that this is the case. Again I thank you for providing links to official documentation that proves my points.

Is your information safe? You bet it is! Just don't put your credit card number into playstation online gaming... that could cost yoU!

So you can take your liar liar canadian tire and your stfu - and you can have yourself a great day!

I know the report, I figured you didn't as you were proven a liar again as you've claimed, over and over again that THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A FIELD OF ENTRY FOR DRIVERS LICENSE NUMBER OR PERSONAL INFORMATION, EVER!!! And you were so sure that NONE existed. Well there you go. Big lie on your part and proven a liar yet again. So now you're telling the public what ? That the private information that was taken from their drivers license was ok and that NOW they can trust you after telling that lie?? Did you read the report fully? Here's a few key areas of the report which you conveniently don't mention AHEM!

[17] It further follows that the Calgary store contravened section 7(2),
since an organization cannot require someone to consent to collection of
personal information that is not necessary.

[10] Section 7(2) of PIPA is also relevant to this case. It provides as
follows:
An organization shall not, as a condition of supplying a product or
service, require an individual to consent to the collection, use or
disclosure of personal information about an individual beyond what
is necessary to provide the product or service.

Isn't that what, we the consumer advocates have been saying all along??? It just goes to show you CT -Aholè what's written down in the legislation is the law. And that your interpretation is self serving and erodes the intention of consumer protections and IS NOT THE LAW!
I see that you've also quietly dismissed the other links on the Canadian Tire privacy scandal in Quebec and mentioning the other privacy case in BC! So convenient of you. So yeah have a big cup of STFU liar liar Canadian Tire.
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
They can't even get that right lol. Who would feel safe with their private information that no one else has, except the banks and government?

Here it is again en englais

Canadian Tire Embroiled in Privacy Rights Scandal | Ledjit

And there they were going on and on about sony being hacked, and just how much safer their systems were. They make Sony sound kinda smart given that these guys couldn't even dispose of paper that had their customers information on it that everybody can read. Must be a gold mine for identity thieves lol. Customers still feel safe and sound giving over your private information to them for a return or exchange?

So who should I sue if my info was used in identity theft and cost me thousands in this case? Anyone, anybody? CT expert, who should you say I sue?
 

Angry CT Guy

Posted by an unregistered user
So who should I sue if my info was used in identity theft and cost me thousands in this case? Anyone, anybody? CT expert, who should you say I sue?

Not sure. It happened 6 years ago and corrections long ago made....not even sure if there were lawsuits back then. I'm sure you could ask top litigator wife....she would know if that wasn't a LIE.....lol
 

CT Challenger

New member
I know the report, I figured you didn't as you were proven a liar again as you've claimed, over and over again that THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A FIELD OF ENTRY FOR DRIVERS LICENSE NUMBER OR PERSONAL INFORMATION, EVER!!! And you were so sure that NONE existed. Well there you go. Big lie on your part and proven a liar yet again. So now you're telling the public what ? That the private information that was taken from their drivers license was ok and that NOW they can trust you after telling that lie?? Did you read the report fully? Here's a few key areas of the report which you conveniently don't mention AHEM!

[17] It further follows that the Calgary store contravened section 7(2),
since an organization cannot require someone to consent to collection of
personal information that is not necessary.

[10] Section 7(2) of PIPA is also relevant to this case. It provides as
follows:
An organization shall not, as a condition of supplying a product or
service, require an individual to consent to the collection, use or
disclosure of personal information about an individual beyond what
is necessary to provide the product or service.

Isn't that what, we the consumer advocates have been saying all along??? It just goes to show you CT -Aholè what's written down in the legislation is the law. And that your interpretation is self serving and erodes the intention of consumer protections and IS NOT THE LAW!
I see that you've also quietly dismissed the other links on the Canadian Tire privacy scandal in Quebec and mentioning the other privacy case in BC! So convenient of you. So yeah have a big cup of STFU liar liar Canadian Tire.

Good summary of the CT lies on this topic.

Also consider this statement:

"2) the second store did not have a drivers license number on file"

Ok, so nothing was left in the system by the time the investigators showed up. But that doesn't prove that additional information hadn't been previously collected (as the complainant said), and then erased before the investigators started looking. After all, there was a place to enter this data: "one screen in the merchandise return system allowed for the collection of D/L or other ID numbers".

Also, something new to add to the "CT Lies List":

"3) The investigator agrees ... that the collection of name, phone number and address is reasonable"

Sounds so convincing, doesn't it? But it's just not at all true, because the investigator wrote, "I will consider only the collection, recording and retention of D/L numbers".

True to their word, the investigator offered no opinion on this topic.

Nice lie, Crappy People!

Here's another CT Lie:

"4) The computer returns system was re-designed in December of 2005"

Really? The report says that, huh? Well, let's have a look at the actual report, shall we?

"Canadian Tire Corporation Limited, in consultation with the CTDA, is in the process of redesigning the merchandise return computer program."

So, yet another CT lie. The report clearly does not say that "the system was re-designed".

What evidence has been produced to demonstrate that the redesigned program no longer accepts "the collection of D/L or other ID number"?

Has any report of a follow-up audit been posted here? No, not even close.

Has a screen image of the new screens been posted here? No, the Crappy People have vehemently refused.

So, are Canadian consumers supposed to simply take the word of the Crappy People, who have just been caught telling even more lies today, on this same topic?

No, it's going to take something more convincing than just the word of proven liars.

Nice job, Crappy People!

Nice job, Stores #419 and #428!

Yes, very credible, indeed!
 

CT Challenger

New member
It's not hard to imagine Angry CT Guy's fury at their latest lies being exposed.

I imagine the response will include "Faker advocate posts", "Don't forget to donate" and "600 sucks sites."

Maybe with a "your litigator wife is a liar" thrown in.

Yes, Angry CT Guy is always so insightful, LOL!
 

Angry CT Guy

Posted by an unregistered user
Can't/won't comment because I haven't been a dealer for that long. Was before my time, so no collection of DL from me or my staff. When you can show me it's not legal to VIEW the info, let me know.
Until then, keep trying hard to be credible.....it's fun to watch! I can just picture the vein popping in your neck...lol
 

Angry CT Guy

Posted by an unregistered user
It's not hard to imagine Angry CT Guy's fury at their latest lies being exposed.

I imagine the response will include "Faker advocate posts", "Don't forget to donate" and "600 sucks sites."

Maybe with a "your litigator wife is a liar" thrown in.

Yes, Angry CT Guy is always so insightful, LOL!

Of course!

It's so easy to discredit faker advocates. Part stories, opinions, lies. It wasn't me who said my wife was a litigator, yet no litigation to be found on any of these, apparently, illegal claims. Just wondering out loud why not? I mean, it's a good question, if you want any credibility. But you aren't credible....that's been proven time and again.
So someone with common sense would have to question why bitch on an open forum, with a donate button, and hundreds of similar sites with donate buttons.
Why not take some REAL action.....you know, contact W5, or Ellen Roseman, or use litigator wife's expertise, or get BBB to acknowledge illegalities, or Consumer Affairs, or any other REAL advocate.
Truth is, you can't because it would be so easily be debunked.
Nice try though....hope the hangover isn't too bad.
 

CT Challenger

New member
"I imagine the response will include "Faker advocate posts", "Don't forget to donate" and "600 sucks sites. Maybe with a "your litigator wife is a liar" thrown in."

... faker advocates ... lies. It wasn't me who said my wife was a litigator ... an open forum, with a donate button, and hundreds of similar sites with donate buttons ....

Can I call em' or what!

LOL hilarious!

When the defenders of his beloved store are proven to be so wrong, so many more times, Angry CT Guy really isn't able to generate many other phrases.

So funny to watch!
 

Angry CT Guy

Posted by an unregistered user
"I imagine the response will include "Faker advocate posts", "Don't forget to donate" and "600 sucks sites. Maybe with a "your litigator wife is a liar" thrown in."



Can I call em' or what!

LOL hilarious!

When the defenders of his beloved store are proven to be so wrong, so many more times, Angry CT Guy really isn't able to generate many other phrases.

So funny to watch!


Well of course it's easy to call the FACTS. Anyone can see them.
No answers though, No trying to protect you're minimal credibility, No and Know nothing.
And for me? No surprise.
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
I find the Canadian Tire owners comments, or the ones claiming to be appalling. I'm offended that they still see women in subservient roles " your wife would be sewing your clothes from bulk fabric!!!" Women are capable, and certainly are becoming more and more influential in senior roles. Maybe not at CT where it still reeks of a good old boys play group as I suspect.

I'm chuffed to bits the man defended his wife and set the record that she's her own person and makes her own money in a top profession. Now what do we get from the CT men? We get more twists and stupidity from them on what was originally said. How sad that they have to stoop so low to malign her and women in general with "litigator wife's expertise". Do you mean that because she's a woman that her opinion, her expertise won't matter in civil/ corporate settings? Your posts, your attitude, your lack of professionalism in these matters leave a lot to be desired.

As a female university student I aim to reign in male chauvinistic tendencies in corporations like CT as too much energy and money has been wasted on such behaviour, instead of seizing opportunities before you. After all, if any of you guys have paid attention at all during the last shareholders meeting your numbers, your people, your CEO said that 20% of your customers drive 80% of sales. From the way you sound, you're acting like a bunch of goons who are destined to fail. So be it.

I for one will not shop or buy from you and have set my sights higher.
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
Can't/won't comment because I haven't been a dealer for that long. Was before my time, so no collection of DL from me or my staff. When you can show me it's not legal to VIEW the info, let me know.
Until then, keep trying hard to be credible.....it's fun to watch! I can just picture the vein popping in your neck...lol

Nobody here said VIEWing the info...Your problem was that you did more than just VIEW didn't you. You got in trouble for taking down info from peoples drivers license. You denied it and challenged anybody to prove otherwise. Now you've got egg all over your face dillhole, and proved a liar. CT lies so easy to disprove.
 

Guest-0276

Posted by an unregistered user
Of course!

It's so easy to discredit faker advocates. Part stories, opinions, lies. It wasn't me who said my wife was a litigator, yet no litigation to be found on any of these, apparently, illegal claims. Just wondering out loud why not? I mean, it's a good question, if you want any credibility. But you aren't credible....that's been proven time and again.
So someone with common sense would have to question why bitch on an open forum, with a donate button, and hundreds of similar sites with donate buttons.
Why not take some REAL action.....you know, contact W5, or Ellen Roseman, or use litigator wife's expertise, or get BBB to acknowledge illegalities, or Consumer Affairs, or any other REAL advocate.
Truth is, you can't because it would be so easily be debunked.
Nice try though....hope the hangover isn't too bad.

You see customers, you see why more and more of us don't shop there! You can't trust them at all. Those programs have shown that they will stoop to any level to make a buck from you. Just easier to walk across the parking lot to walmart or any other store for that matter.
 
Top