Opening an account, which ID is needed? | General financial discussion | Discussion forum

I have found it has become standard to be asked for two pieces of ID for most purposes, to the point where, when I recently had to go to RBC about being added to an account, I automatically offered both photo ID and credit card.

In Ontario, it is not permitted,legally, to ask people for their health card as a form of ID, due to privacy considerations - to the point where, if you offer it, you will often be told that it can't be accepted. Same should be true in QC, where consumers generally have better protection than in other provinces. I do find that sometimes the people asking for ID are not too familiar with the actual requirements and seem to make them up. Good for your spouse for being wise enough and confident enough to stare them down on this! I imagine most people just succumb, and so the practice continues.

If forced to give over the health card (which I doubt would happen, push come to shove), tape over the number. They don't need to see the number. The sticky part of post-itTM can be trimmed for this purpose.

Suggestions for possible action: Complain to the branch manager and up through the banking ombudsman process, complain to the Privacy Commissioner (federal? provincial?), ask your MPP/MLA for legislation banning use of health card for ID (might work as a private members' bill if not endorsed by party in power), prevail upon the medical profession to take a stance against it.

As I understand it, what CRA is interested in is whether the meds are legitimate "prescription drugs" or whether they are more in the category of OTC supplements etc.
I don't know if there is an issue with the particular format your pharmacist uses for receipts - perhaps that could be improved? - but I agree that it's none of their business what the scripts are specifically. All they need to know is that a doctor prescribed them and they are in the formulary. I suppose there could be some issues with things like VitaminC, which can easily be purchased over the counter but which some physicians will prescribe and pharmacists will fill as such.

In my personal view, anything that is prescribed or recommended by a registered regulated health professional should be accepted as a medical expense. And that would include naturopaths and acupuncturists, who are registered, in Ontario at least.
A good pharmacare programme, which is less expensive overall, would eliminate a fair number of these issues.

After dragging its heels for many years, Ontario finally introduced a photo-ID card for non-drivers, which looks very much like a drivers's licence. Unfortunately, it has to be renewed every five years and you have to pay for it every time. On the other hand, citizenship cards, which are also accepted as photo ID, are only issued once and do not have to be renewed. This is unfair. All Canadians should be on equal footing.

so, I think what you're saying, Norman, is that nobody can get a photo-ID citizenship card now. However, I don't think it's true that a Canada-born citizen could ever get a plastic citizenship card. The major reason Ontario was persuaded to create the photo-ID card for non-drivers is precisely because there was nothing else available in an era which increasingly required photo-ID, and this was creating a lot of problems for people.

Ontario also phased out the Senior Citizens ID card, which could be used for various things including drugs paid for by the provincial health insurance. People just a few years older than I still have them, but I can't remember if they have photo; I think not. I think this must have been when they brought in the photo-ID cards for non-drivers, which can't be as widely used as the old seniors cards could be.
The net result seems to be a concerted effort to ensure that everybody has to pay a periodic fee to be able to identify themselves in future. Should be a tax-deductible expense at the very least as it's just about impossible to live without it.

Question for Saver-Mom: Do QC health cards show the SIN? Ontario''s do not. If they don't show it, then seeing it would not have provided them with what they said they were looking for, so perhaps they were just incompetent.

Fascinating. I wish I'd known about this when it was still available. Got any other secrets we should know about now?

Saver-Mom said
For same reason I am fighting Revenue Canada who demand to know the names of my medications, rejecting the pharmacy receipt that purposely leaves off names of meds for privacy sake.  

As already noted, CRA has a right to know about medications via DIN numbers to validate eligible medical expense deductions. Same as any other receipts used to claim expense deductions. I had to be able to show receipts for my expense account claims as well with my corporate employer.

Saver-Mom said
He offered the driver’s licence and was told that was not enough!!
Medicare card allows access to private medical information now that medical files are being compurtised, so no business of a bank, in my opinion. For same reason I am fighting Revenue Canada who demand to know the names of my medications, rejecting the pharmacy receipt that purposely leaves off names of meds for privacy sake.  

If it was not expired and a Canadian driver's license, that would be enough to cash a Government of Canada cheque as a non-customer of the bank. Unfortunately, a second piece proving his name would be all that he'd to provide. A print of his Notice of Assessment would work well for this. Alternatively, a debit or credit card with his name on it, provided it's not expired as well. More details here.

If he has no second piece and you currently bank there, you can vouch for him as a "personal reference". A written letter is not required. At HSBC, we simply noted "Personal Reference" in the second type and indicated the "vouching customer's" HUB base number (or "customer profile" number, the last three digits of the transit followed by a hyphen and six digit HUB number) and, optionally, linked that other customer's HUB base number under "relationships". 🙂

If they refused to open the account, this is one of those cases I told Loonie about in another thread where the bank, legally, must present him with a form letter denying the account opening. If they failed to do this, and you wanted to, you can report this to the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada. What would happen is that financial institution would typically receive a formal "warning" or "note". No actual monetary penalties would result unless it was a chronic offender in this area. 🙂

Cheers,
Doug

Loonie said
If forced to give over the health card (which I doubt would happen, push come to shove), tape over the number. They don't need to see the number. The sticky part of post-itTM can be trimmed for this purpose.

If required, I generally prefer to offer my health card as opposed to a provincial ID card, but that's just me. Nowhere can they "force" you to give it up, though. The best regulator is actually FCAC in this case. If the bank refused to open the account, it had to have given him a form letter (and documented it in their internal recordkeeping), just like refusing to cash a government cheque. If they didn't get a letter, and/or the bank has no internal recordkeeping of same, then that's grounds for a formal "warning" from FCAC, should the client choose to complain. Bear in mind, though, the bank will not like that and, in the end, blame it on the account manager to "save face" and the account manager may be reprimanded even though it could be a systemic problem. 🙁

Cheers,
Doug

Loonie said
Question for Saver-Mom: Do QC health cards show the SIN? Ontario''s do not. If they don't show it, then seeing it would not have provided them with what they said they were looking for, so perhaps they were just incompetent.  

If the bank only needs the SIN for income tax reporting purposes, a card is not required. It can be spoken or he could show a recent T-slip or Notice of Assessment. 🙂

They can only ask for it for income tax reporting purposes, not require it for ID. And, you have a right to refuse to give it up but, not doing so may subject to annual $50 (I think?) penalties from CRA if they wish to impose it.

Cheers,
Doug