Search

A man contacted us after getting no response to a complaint about his local Chief Building Official.

A woman renting a basement apartment sought our help after a municipal construction crew broke a water pipe near her unit, flooding her apartment and damaging her belongings.

We helped a man who waited more than a year to hear back from his municipality about purchasing a portion of the laneway behind his house.

A mall developer told us that local councillors were interfering with the development of her project, but she believed the municipality did not have a code of conduct or integrity commissioner.

A mother and adult daughter, both ODSP recipients who live together, complained to us about a mixup after the daughter successfully applied for ODSP for herself from a different office than the one where her mother was a client.

A man whose shelter allowance was terminated by the ODSP without notice complained to us after his case worker did not respond to several email messages.

We helped sort out a case of mistaken identity between the FRO and a man who could not insure his house because a writ was registered in his name for unpaid support obligations – even though it was his brother who actually owed support arrears.

A man contacted our office after the FRO issued an order to garnish his Old Age Security payments and his federal pension, according to a court order from 1982.

A woman who was owed more than $17,000 in spousal and child support came to our Office for help in liaising with FRO officials.

An ODSP recipient complained to us about the Social Justice Tribunal of Ontario’s decision on her eligibility for the ODSP’s Work-Related Benefit.

We referred a man to the right internal complaint mechanism at the Office of the Children’s Lawyer so he could voice concerns about delays in receiving documents and in setting his court date, all of which resulted in added legal costs for him.

A man serving weekend time in jail who required anxiety medication three times a day sought our help because the correctional facility would not give him his medication on Saturday mornings when he arrived, or on Sunday evenings before he left.

We helped a woman from Manitoba who had struggled for six months to get Legal Aid Ontario to recognize her approval for legal aid in a custody case in Ontario.

A woman who broke her collarbone before she was sent to jail complained to us that she had been waiting for eight days for a sling for her arm.

Ombudsman’s Message - The value of independent oversight In many organizations, an Annual Report is a showcase of numbers, an illustrated balance sheet that carefully quantifies success, growth and value. As I present my third Annual Report as Ontario’s Ombudsman, I can see evidence of all of those things, but they are not easily quantified or reduced to a set of figures.

The Ombudsman received a complaint about a meeting of council held on May 22, 2018.

My Office received a complaint about a special meeting of council for the Township of Tehkummah held on May 15, 2018.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that a non-council member motioned to move into closed session during the Township of Russell’s special meeting on April 19, 2018.

The Ombudsman received a complaint that council for the Municipality of Northern Bruce Peninsula inappropriately met in closed session on January 22, 2018 to discuss notice of an application for absolute title under the Land Titles Act for a property located within the municipality. The meeting was closed under the personal matters exception. The Ombudsman found that matters discussed during the closed meeting did not fit within the exceptions to the open meeting rules. 

We received complaints that the Town of Petrolia held meetings that did not comply with the open meeting rules when it discussed a proposal by the YMCA in camera on September 11 and October 25, 2017, and when it discussed an individual in closed session on November 14, 2017. The Ombudsman found that a presentation given by the YMCA to council on September 11, 2017 did not fit in any of the exceptions to the Act. He found that a discussion that followed the presentation fit in the exception for labour relations or employee negotiations. The Ombudsman found that the discussion on October 25, 2017 also fit within the exception for labour relations, and that the discussion on November 14, 2017 fit within the exception for personal matters about an identifiable individual.